// Twitter Cards // Prexisting Head The Biologist Is In: December 2018

Monday, December 31, 2018

Biology of Fire


Fire is a part of the natural world. Like everything else in the natural world, living systems have evolved to survive, use, or even require fire. We may have a special relationship with fire, but we're not the only ones with an important relationship with fire. When it's in our control, we see it as a constructive force. When it's out of our control, we see it as a destructive force. And rightfully so, because it's both.



View from above of neighborhood after a wildfire as burned through. Buildings are burned to ground, but taller coniferous trees remain intact.
Cropped from image at article.
The recent Camp Fire in California was dramatically destructive, turning much of the community of Paradise into ash. The scale and speed of the destruction was greater than anything in living memory. Over a pair of days, the fire jumped from one building to the next like a living thing. It raced throughout the city, destroying everything as it went. Thousands of people were displaced. There are numerous harrowing tales of narrow escape. Far too many people suffered horrific deaths. In another place and another time, the stories would be handed down through the ages until they became epic sagas.

The trees didn't notice.



The trees remaining standing among all the destruction led some to believe in conspiracy theories. That the buildings were intentionally burned down. That the horrors and escapes were all fiction. That some hidden government agency murdered all those who died. How could all those buildings have burned and missed burning the trees?

Animals can run or hide. Plants have to deal with what comes there way. So. How did they do it?

The trees that so clearly survived this horrific fire had evolved in an environment that included fire. They have thick fire-resistant bark and they shed their lower branches once they get tall enough. They're adapted to survive the sort of ground fire that destroyed Paradise-CA. (Well, the adults are adapted to survive. Any juvenile trees would have been taken out, but the adults will make more.) The structures we built there were not adapted to survive such a fire. Maybe in the future we'll have building codes appropriate to environments where such fires are possible.



So. The trees are adapted to survive fire. Do any plants -use- fire?

I'd have to travel a bit to see a really good example of this. In Australia there is a type of grass in the genus Triodia that is called Spinifex. (There is a different genus of grass with the name Spinifex, so... I got nothing.) During the dry season the grass become so incredibly flammable that it is almost guaranteed that any large area of the grass will burn every few years. The fires burn hot enough to kill off trees and many other plants. The Spinifex survives and readily regrows from underground stems and seeds resting in the soil. Effectively, the grass uses fire to kill off its competition.

Many other grasses seem to have adapted to use this strategy to greater or lesser degrees, but the evidence isn't always so clear-cut.



Ok. The trees survive fire. The grass uses fire. Do any plants -need- fire?

Another tree, the Jack Pine, often definitely needs fire. Its cones are gummed up with so much hard resin that they can't open to release their seeds until they've been burned by a fast, hot fire. After a fire the seeds are able to rapidly germinate into an environment with much less competition. As well, with the reduced level of fuel, the seedlings will likely be protected from another fire until they're large enough to survive it like the adults do. Without fire, the Jack Pine (and other species with serotinous cones/fruit) cannot reproduce. In the absence of some helpful humans who might crack open the cones with power tools, the trees absolutely need fire.



There are numerous fire-adapted ecosystems around the world, with amazing and diverse species that survive, use, and/or need fire for their continued existence. Though plants can't get out of the way of a fire, they're not the only ones with such intricate relationships with it. Animals and fungi deal with fire too. Those sound like later blog posts. Stay tuned.


References:

Monday, December 24, 2018

Mathematical Recreations : Ramanujan's Nested Radical 4

I've previously discussed an interesting math problem posed by Srinivasa Ramanujan way back in 1911.

Over the last three posts on the topic, I've explored my thoughts about this problem and then proved there are an infinite number of valid solutions (any value greater than three).

Since then I've been trying to figure out how to prove all values less than three are not valid solutions. I haven't figured out how to do this yet, but I have figured out how to prove a subset of values are not valid solutions. Any trajectory which reaches zero will then pass to less than zero and be invalid. I might formalize this statement once I've figured out if it can help me finish the overall solution. It might just be a blind alley...



I haven't found anyone else working this problem in the way I have been. The closest I've found has been some comments below a YouTube video where a user talked about calculating through trajectories like I have been. They didn't suggest any sort of general solution to the problem, however.

I did find a mathematical paper using Ramanujan's solution to the problem as part of the title. The authors and reviewers of the paper assumed Ramanujan was correct and didn't test their assumption. I'm considering writing them a letter...


References:

Monday, December 17, 2018

Seed Banks

The largest seed collections are multi-national affairs, backing up national seed collections for large numbers of crop varieties and wild species.
Svalbard Global Seed Vault. The Svalbard global seed vault is designed as a backup for national seed banks. It protects crop biodiversity against regional (and potential global) catastrophes of natural or man-made origin. The facility is protected from many problems that can impact national seed banks by its extreme isolation. Dug into a mountain on an island well north of the Arctic circle, the extreme persistent cold helps to preserve the seeds stored there even with complete power failure. Nations retain ownership of the seeds they store in the global vault. After some event has damaged their local seed banks (or whenever they choose), they can request their seeds back from the vault. Nobody else is given access to the seeds unless the owning nation allows it.
Millennium Seed Bank Partnership. This organization has the goal of banking seeds from 25% of the world's bankable wild species. (Some plant species produce seeds that can't be preserved in a dry state. These have to be preserved through active growth instead of banking.) They focus on species from mountain, dryland, coastal, and island environments that are the most vulnerable to climate change. They also focus on wild relatives of crop species. Their seed collection is used for research, for conservation/restoration projects, and as a back-up for local seed banks (much like Svalbard).
Their overall goal is preservation. Stored crop varieties and species will be maintained (usually in cold storage) in their current form, skipping through time without experiencing any evolutionary changes.



On a smaller scale are local seed lending libraries. Such a library operates by providing seed to members of their local community at the start of the year, then receiving seeds back from those gardeners (that had success) for distribution in the next year. Some growers will ensure their plants are isolated and produce "pure" selfed seed to return to the library. Other growers won't realize they might need to do anything and will occasionally produce hybridized seed to return to the library. Over the scale of many years, the plants that grow from these seeds will be continuously changing. They will be adapting to the local environment and the tastes/favors of the growers contributing seeds back to the library.

Though such a localized variety may have always had the (hypothetical) name "Tomato Alpha", it will be a distinct variety from the "Tomato Alpha" that has been preserved in the seed banks. The common name being applied to what have become multiple different localized varieties will lead to confusion that makes it difficult for people to know what seeds they've received. (This sort of confusion is now seen in tomatoes called "Brandywine".)

Seed lending libraries can't effectively keep an eye out for hybrids (or mistaken identity) in their seeds (nor should they, as this is necessary for developing localized varieties), but they can minimize confusion by ensuring their name is attached to every seed they distribute. "Tomato Alpha, library #1 strain" will be distinct from "Tomato Alpha, library #2 strain" or "Tomato Alpha" (from a seed bank).



Part of my seed-saving philosophy says it is very important for people to save seeds from the plants they grow because it will put incorporate their goals and desires into the future of the plant. This is well captured by the seed lending libraries. I also appreciate the importance of preserving varieties the way the seed banks do because it maintains genetic diversity which can otherwise be easily lost. So, what should we do about the issue of single names coming to refer to multiple varieties?

My personal seed library includes seeds from a variety of sources. I record the variety names for seed that I buy and I'll continue to use the name for seeds I've saved as long as the plants match what the variety is supposed to be. I actively look for hybrids in my garden. If they're interesting, I'll save seeds from them, and then from some of their progeny (etc.). None of these seeds belong to the starting variety, so they get labeled with a description of what the mother plant looked like (since I don't know the daddy) as well as if I know they're F1, F2, etc. Eventually over a several seasons I'll get a better idea of what I want them to be. At the same time their genetics will be stabilizing as they get a better idea of what they want themselves to be. Eventually we'll come to some sort of agreement. I might give them a name at that point, or I might just wait until they tell me what their name is. It might take a while.


References: