I'm still wondering about the New Yorker video back there. It may well be chemical but I'm fascinated by how the plant knows which direction to "cast" in order to grab the pole. Also how the second plant knows that the pole is now occupied and starts casting around for another (which isn't there) before abandoning the effort.
I'm also wondering, Steve001, why you thought it necessary to start off your first response with a snipe at the other posters. You could have proposed your perfectly reasonable explanation without that.
(2017-08-19, 08:30 PM)Kamarling Wrote: [ -> ]I'm still wondering about the NYT video back there. It may well be chemical but I'm fascinated by how the plant knows which direction to "cast" in order to grab the pole. Also how the second plant knows that the pole is now occupied and starts casting around for another (which isn't there) before abandoning the effort.
Looking at the New Yorker article by Michael Pollan, it seems that Stefano Mancuso, who provided him with the time-lapse videos, thinks plants may be able to use echo-location:
http://michaelpollan.com/articles-archiv...ent-plant/
I haven't read it, but here's a paper co-authored by Mancuso, entitled "Acoustic and magnetic communication in plants: Is it possible?":
https://www.researchgate.net/publication...t_possible
When I was young, I worked at a golf course. Around the number three tee box a row of Aleppo pines had been planted to mitigate the damage caused by errant shots, to near by houses. What drew my attention was that the tree's were all growing away from the tee box at a very severe angle. They rather gave the impression that they were none to happy about doing forced duty as backstops.
" consider all my remarks biased unless otherwise noted "
(2017-08-19, 08:58 PM)Kamarling Wrote: [ -> ]In the video linked by Laird (The New Yorker Magazine).
The phrase "people in glass houses" springs to mind.
True it is a bias, but its not a glass house.
(2017-08-19, 05:00 PM)Steve001 Wrote: [ -> ]I only asserted what is known. The creosote plant for one. Look up allopathic interaction in plants. All plants don't. The point I am making is not to first look for metaphysical explanations.
I think you mean allelopathic:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allelopathy
cheers
So some biases are more ....i don't know robust perhaps?
Than other biases???
(2017-08-20, 04:13 PM)Bucky Wrote: [ -> ]I think you mean allelopathic:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allelopathy
cheers
Having read that page, I'm not sure that Alleopathy would actually explain the "Crown Shyness" phenomena. Yes, it seems to have the effect of creating space by inhibiting the germination of nearby plants or even restricting the growth (as in height) of such plants but it doesn't seem to explain how it maintains a two foot (or whatever) gap precisely following the contour of its own extremities.
That is not excluding the possibility that some chemical in the leaves, for example, might be detected by a neighbour thereby halting growth in that direction, but is there research on that?
(2017-08-21, 12:27 AM)Kamarling Wrote: [ -> ]Having read that page, I'm not sure that Alleopathy would actually explain the "Crown Shyness" phenomena. Yes, it seems to have the effect of creating space by inhibiting the germination of nearby plants or even restricting the growth (as in height) of such plants but it doesn't seem to explain how it maintains a two foot (or whatever) gap precisely following the contour of its own extremities.
That is not to say that some chemical in the leaves, for example, might be detected by a neighbour thereby halting growth in that direction, but is there research on that?
Isn't the article research? Here's a hypothesis. Perhaps the particular trees exude a chemical from their leaves and other trees have chemical receptors that are able to pick up those chemicals. When a tree senses a certain concentration they stop growing in that direction.