We are slowly learning that
plants do communicate information and do make decisions. A huge amount of this activity takes place in
the plants root space. Recall that the
root system typically matches the mass of the above ground mass.
This all supports research into protocols
that take advantage of this behavior for agriculture.
For instance, using so called
hills rather than rows promises to be far superior as a growing method simply
because it assures maximum communication between the plants.
The traditional three sisters mixed
corn and beans in a hill with the odd squash plant thrown in to provide weed
suppression. Obviously the beans
provided nitrogen.
At present, that is the only
clever combination that I know of and it would be good practice to reestablish
it, provided there is a way to mechanize the laying down of the hills
themselves. It certainly should be
applied in the family garden and perhaps we need to think out a lot of other
prospective combinations. The nitrogen
equation alone needs to be better exploited.
Any given hill for any particular
plant type can be set with a core of peas or beans to do that. Instead of growing radishes and beets and carrots
in rows, we set them in the borders of hills that also have peas or beans at
its core.
Then of course, while we are at
it, we throw in a handful of biochar to help eliminate leaching. Have to get that pitch in there.
Heard it on the grapevine: The secret society of plants
29 March 2011 by Ferris Jabr
The botanical underground is a social network of powerful alliances and
nepotism. Decoding its messages could lead to radical change in farms and
forests
Every autumn swarms of dusty grey moths engulf the mountainside birch
forests of northern Scandinavia , laying their
eggs on twigs so that, come springtime, the newly hatched larvae can feast upon
budding leaves. It looks like a battle that the trees, with no natural
defences, are doomed to lose, but some have a secret weapon. They form an
alliance with a neighbouring plant, a kind of rhododendron, borrowing wafts of
its volatile insecticides as a sort of olfactory camouflage. "This kind of
interaction has never been observed in the field before," says Jarmo
Holopainen at the University of Eastern Finland in Kuopio , who made the discovery ( New Phytologist, vol 186, p 722). His study is one
of the latest to demonstrate the unexpectedly complex relationships between
plants
We've known for some time that plants respond to one another, but only
now are we realising how subtle and sophisticated their interactions can be.
Plants continually eavesdrop on each other's chemical chatter - sometimes
sympathetically, sometimes selfishly. Some plants, like the Scandinavian
rhododendron, assist their neighbours by sharing resources. Others recognise
close relatives and favour them over strangers. And at least one parasitic
plant homes in on its host's telltale chemical scent (see
"Scent of a victim").
"Plants don't go out to parties or to watch the movies, but they
do have a social network," says Suzanne Simard, a forest ecologist at the University of British
Columbia in Vancouver ,
Canada .
"They support each other and they fight with each other. The more we look
at plant signalling and communication, the more we learn. It's really
incredible."
Since the development of time-lapse photography, it has been possible
to document the dances and scuffles in densely populated plant communities:
saplings on the forest floor compete for space to stretch their roots and
shoots; fallen trees provide young ones with nourishment; vines lash around
desperately searching for a trunk they can climb to reach the light; and
wildflowers race each other to open their blooms in springtime and compete for
the attention of pollinators. To truly understand the secret social life of
plants, however, you must look and listen more closely.
A good place to start is underground in the rhizosphere - the ecosystem
in and around plant roots. Beneath the forest floor, each spoonful of dirt
contains millions of tiny organisms. These bacteria and fungi form a symbiotic
relationship with plant roots, helping their hosts absorb water and vital
elements like nitrogen in return for a steady supply of nutrients.
Now closer inspection has revealed that fungal threads physically unite
the roots of dozens of trees, often of different species, into a single
mycorrhizal network. These webs sprawled beneath our feet are genuine social
networks. By tracing the movement of radioactive carbon isotopes through them,
Simard has found that water and nutrients tend to flow from trees that make
excess food to ones that don't have enough. One study published in 2009, for
example, showed that older Douglas firs
transferred molecules containing carbon and nitrogen to saplings of the same
species via their mycorrhizal networks. The saplings with the greatest access
to these networks were the healthiest (Ecology, vol 90, p 2808).
As well as sharing food, mycorrhizal associations may also allow plants
to share information. Biologists have known for a while that plants can respond
to airborne defence signals from others that are under attack. When a
caterpillar starts to munch on a tomato plant, for example, the leaves produce
noxious compounds that both repel the attacker and stimulate neighbouring
plants to ready their own defences.
Yuan Yuan Song of South China Agricultural
University in Guangzhou and colleagues investigated whether
similar chemical alarm calls travel underground. They exposed one group of
tomato plants to a pathogenic fungus and monitored the response in a second
group connected to the first via a mycorrhizal network. The diseased plants
were sealed inside airtight plastic bags to prevent any communication above
ground. Nevertheless, the healthy partners began producing defence chemicals,
suggesting that the plants detect each other's alarm calls via their mycorrhizal
networks (PLoS One, vol 5, p e13324).
Another recent discovery, one which may be connected with Song's
finding, is that some plants recognise members of their own species and
apparently work together for the common good. Amanda Broz of Colorado State
University in Fort Collins paired spotted knotweed plants
inside a greenhouse either with other knotweeds or with blue bunchgrass. She
then simulated an attack by spraying them with methyl jasmonate, a chemical
many plants release when wounded. The knotweed's response depended on its
neighbours. When growing near members of its own species, it produced leaf
toxins to boost its defences. But it chose to focus on leaf and stem growth
when its neighbours were bunchgrass (BMC Plant
Biology, vol 10, p 115).
Such discrimination makes sense because, in the knotweed's native
environment, dense clusters of a single plant tend to attract large numbers of
insects to an all-you-can-eat buffet. So cooperating with other knotweed plants
helps stave off an attack. However, when knotweed is surrounded by bunchgrass,
a better strategy is to leave defence to its neighbours and concentrate on
aggressive growth - which might also help explain why knotweed is such an
effective invasive species.
Broz's research was published just last year, and it remains unclear
how knotweed, or any other plant, could be recognising members of its own
species. However, one instance of a plant with family values has been more
thoroughly explored.
In a landmark paper published in 2007, Susan Dudley from McMaster University
in Ontario , Canada , reported the first case of
plants recognising and favouring their kin (Biology Letters, vol 3, p 435). Her studies of American
sea rocket, a scraggly weed that grows along the shorelines of the Great Lakes,
showed that a plant potted with an unrelated individual did not hesitate to
spread its roots and soak up as much water and nutrients as it could. However,
when Dudley planted sea-rocket siblings in the
same pot, they exercised restraint, taming their eager roots to better share
resources. Siblings and strangers that grew near each other but did not share
pots showed no differences in root growth, indicating that sea rocket relies on
underground chemical signalling to identify its kin. They don't seem to be
using mycorrhizal networks, though.
In subsequent research with Meredith Biedrzycki from the University of Delaware
in Newark , Dudley
discovered that the signals take the form of "exudates" - a cocktail
of soluble compounds including phenols, flavonoids, sugars, organic acids,
amino acids and proteins, secreted by roots into the rhizosphere. How these
indicate relatedness is still a mystery, though (Communicative & Integrative Biology, vol 3, p 28).
In the past few years, kin recognition has been discovered in other
plants, including the botanical "lab rat" Arabidopsis and a
kind of Impatiens called pale jewelweed. This has led some botanists
to argue that plants, like animals, are capable of kin selection - behaviours
and strategies that help relatives reproduce. Kin selection has an evolutionary
rationale because it increases the chances that the genes an individual shares
with its relatives will be passed to the next generation, even if altruistic
behaviour comes at a cost to one's own well-being. "There's no reason to
think plants wouldn't get the same benefits from kin selection that animals
do," says Dudley .
Recognising siblings and restraining one's growth in response certainly
looks like kin selection, but that still leaves the question of whether such
interactions also improve the survival prospects of related plants. Research by
Richard Karban at the University of California , Davis ,
goes some way to answering that.
Karban studied a desert shrub called sagebrush, which emits a pungent
bouquet of chemicals to deter insects. When he clipped an individual plant's
leaves to simulate an attack, he found that it mounted a more robust defence if
it was growing next to its own clone than if its neighbour was unrelated.
What's more, for a period of five months afterwards, the neighbouring clones
suffered far less damage from caterpillars, grasshoppers and deer than did unrelated
neighbours (Ecology Letters, vol 12, p 502).
Studying kin selection and other plant interactions doesn't just
improve our knowledge of basic plant biology and ecology. "There are a lot
of people really interested in it, because it's not just an intellectually neat
puzzle," says James Cahill at the University
of Alberta in Edmonton , Canada .
"There are many potential applications, especially for agriculture."
One obvious area is in companion planting - the strategic positioning
of different crops or garden plants so they benefit one another by deterring
pests, attracting pollinators and improving nutrient uptake. This ancient
technique, which traditionally relies on trial and error and close observation,
can be highly effective. For example, beans fix nitrogen that boosts growth in
some other plants, and when Europeans arrived in America in the 15th century, they
discovered that Native Americans used corn as a natural trellis for bean
plants. Our modern understanding of plant interactions suggests we could find
new, more subtle and potentially beneficial relationships, which could help us
overcome a major drawback of modern monoculture farming. Since a single
pathogen can wipe out an entire crop of genetically similar - and therefore
equally vulnerable - plants, farmers make heavy use of pesticides. But instead
of picturing an endless stretch of corn or wheat, imagine something more like a
jungle of diverse species that work together above and below ground.
Breeding cooperation
Cahill has another idea. "Fertilisers aren't always spread
evenly," he says. "Maybe we could breed plants to cooperate more
effectively with their neighbours to share fertiliser." Meanwhile, Simard
thinks the recent discoveries about mycorrhizal networks have implications for
both agriculture and forestry. Hardy old trees should not be removed from
forests so hastily, she says, because saplings depend on the mycorrhizal associations
maintained by these grandparent trees. She also suggests that farmers should go
easy on fertilisation and irrigation because these practices can damage or
destroy delicate mycorrhizal networks.
Clearly, we do not yet have all the information we need to start
deploying such tactics. "What we want to do next is develop more advanced
techniques to watch roots grow, to really see what they do with each other and
how they interact in space," Dudley says.
She also wants to figure out what genetic factors control plant interactions
and look at how they change survival and reproduction. "The molecular
aspects are perhaps the most challenging," she adds, "but we have
made some big leaps."
The idea that plants have complex relationships may require a shift in
mindset. "For the longest time people thought that plants were just
there," says Biedrzycki. "But they can defend themselves more than we
thought and they can create the environment around them. It turns out they have
some control over what is going on through this chemical communication."
Passive and silent though plants may seem, their abilities to interact and
communicate should not come as such a shock. "Some incredibly simple
organisms - even one-celled organisms - can recognise and respond to each other,"
says Broz. "Why is it so bizarre to think that plants could have this same
kind of ability?"
See gallery: "Plants that
act like people"
Scent of a victim
Many of the social interactions of plants seem to involve a form of
sharing or cooperation mediated by chemical signals. However, some chemical
communication is far from benevolent, as research on a parasitic vine called
dodder has found.
Dodder contains almost no chlorophyll - the green molecule that allows
plants to produce sugars from sunlight, water and carbon dioxide. Instead,
after sprouting as a leafless tendril, it searches for a victim into which it
sinks its nozzles and sucks out the sugary sap. "We knew how it creates
nozzles and gets resources from the host, but nobody knew how dodder found its
host," says Consuelo De Moraes at Pennsylvania
State University
at University Park .
Some plants identify neighbours by sensing sunlight refracted off their
leaves, but time-lapse video suggests that dodder uses a different technique.
The footage shows that when the tendril searches for a host it twirls about
like a snake tasting the air. Could it be searching for a chemical, wondered De
Moraes?
To test this idea, she and her colleagues hid a variety of plants
around a corner from a dodder tendril. If the vine were really using chemical
sensing to find its victims, it should be able to home in on its hosts using
the volatile chemicals they naturally produce.
That is exactly what they found. In fact, dodder even showed dietary
preferences based on the different airborne chemicals, almost always choosing
succulent tomatoes over twiggy wheat, and favouring healthy hosts by avoiding
the chemicals given off by damaged plants (Science, vol 313, p 1964). "Not only does dodder use
chemical cues to find a host," says De Moraes, "it can distinguish
between hosts of different qualities. It knows which plants are healthier and
goes after them."
1 comment:
I always thought there was more going on down there! Seeing what cattails did with arsenic made the concept of animate a little thin. I wonder if they tell "human jokes".
Post a Comment