Guestimating ages of trees through fungi

[RobArb]

Here's one for you Geriit apologies if i have missed the answer in one of your posts, i do try to read everything but sometimes things get missed:blush:

 

Anyway, another thread on veterans and ages of trees got me thinking about something else....

 

Can you guestimate? the age of a tree by using your TSSE format to see what fungi are about and at which point of the "lifecycle" they are showing, therefore identifying the age of the tree e.g.

 

 

If there was an oak that lived to 900, in these years at different stages of the trees lifespan, does it follow a timeline in accordance with the TSSE?

 

[First 300 years - Certain fungi only ]

[ Species 1 ]

[ Species 2 ]

[ Species 3 ]

[ Species 4 ]

[ etc ]

[

[

[second 300 years - Different fungi ]

[ Species 5 ]

[ Species 6 ]

[ Species 7 ]

[ Species 8 ]

[ etc ]

[

[

[Third 300 years - New types of fungi ]

[ Species 9 ]

[ Species 10 ]

[ Species 11 ]

[ Species 12 ]

[ etc ]

 

 

Do certain types of fungus only appear at a certain time, is it as simple as this or am i just wittering?

[Tony Croft aka hamadryad]

Here's one for you Geriit apologies if i have missed the answer in one of your posts, i do try to read everything but sometimes things get missed:blush:

 

Anyway, another thread on veterans and ages of trees got me thinking about something else....

 

Can you guestimate? the age of a tree by using your TSSE format to see what fungi are about and at which point of the "lifecycle" they are showing, therefore identifying the age of the tree e.g.

 

 

If there was an oak that lived to 900, in these years at different stages of the trees lifespan, does it follow a timeline in accordance with the TSSE?

 

[First 300 years - Certain fungi only ]

[ Species 1 ]

[ Species 2 ]

[ Species 3 ]

[ Species 4 ]

[ etc ]

[

[

[second 300 years - Different fungi ]

[ Species 5 ]

[ Species 6 ]

[ Species 7 ]

[ Species 8 ]

[ etc ]

[

[

[Third 300 years - New types of fungi ]

[ Species 9 ]

[ Species 10 ]

[ Species 11 ]

[ Species 12 ]

[ etc ]

 

 

Do certain types of fungus only appear at a certain time, is it as simple as this or am i just wittering?

 

essentialy your not far of the mark, but it is more complicated.

 

it is a theory that is validated within the wild, many fungi are ONLY found on ancient trees in historic parks due to the long long time the habitat has been allowed to develop without disturbances.

[Tony Croft aka hamadryad]

it is for this reaon that to secure biodiversity and species richness that i and many others fiercley defend the security of ancient woodlands and MORE importantly the soil fauna

[Fungus]

Can you guestimate? the age of a tree by using your TSSE format to see what fungi are about and at which point of the "lifecycle" they are showing, therefore identifying the age of the tree e.g.

If there was an oak that lived to 900, in these years at different stages of the trees lifespan, does it follow a timeline in accordance with the TSSE?

 

[First 300 years - Certain fungi only ]

[ Species 1 ]

 

[second 300 years - Different fungi ]

[ Species 5 ]

 

[Third 300 years - New types of fungi ]

[ Species 9 ]

 

Do certain types of fungus only appear at a certain time, is it as simple as this or am i just wittering?

 

Yes, you can, as long as one takes the tree species specific life cycle and the succesion of generalistic and/or tree species specific macrofungi in its natural habitat under "normal" conditions as a starting point.

However, succesion starts with the generalistic and/or tree species specific ectomycorrhizal pioneer symbionts kicking off at and "breast feeding" the seedlings of the tree from point zero and ends with the final phase, in which generalistic symbionts provide "terminal care" for the terminal "patient" and facilitate its last reproductive attempts. In other words, there is a care system present from the cradle to the grave.

The same goes for the successive phases saprotrophic macrofungi go through and for the biotrophic and/or necrotrophic parasitic macrofungi, that operate as proces accelerators, intervening once the tree gets sick and/or old and instead of being the "sugardaddy", becomes a parasite of its ecosystem, which can cause the entire tree species specific ecosystem to collaps.

Edited September 6, 2011 by Fungus

[Daniël Bos]

I know very little about fungi, but to me this sounds the same as trying to tell a person's age by what illnesses they have/have had?

You can get dementia in your 30's but my 92 year old grandmother is sound of mnd and cycles 5k every day. Would the same not go for trees, an element of luck combined with the circumstances in wich it lived wich are as different as human lives?

[Fungus]

I know very little about fungi, but to me this sounds the same as trying to tell a person's age by what illnesses they have/have had? You can get dementia in your 30's but my 92 year old grandmother is sound of mnd and cycles 5k every day. Would the same not go for trees, an element of luck combined with the circumstances in wich it lived wich are as different as human lives?

 

Daniel,

I don't think your comparison of humans with trees is valid. Attributing human traits to trees is a form of anthropomorphism.

Trees have no brain, nervous system, conscience or free will, they are predetermined by their species specific characteristics and life cycles and don't have a choice as to acting "sensibly" or abiding to the rules of "healthy" behaviour.

They just can follow tree species specific strategies or "rules of engagement" and react to the "good" and "bad" things happening to them within the limitations of the tree species they belong to.

Compared to human life, tree life is fairly simple. A birch doesn't need to be equiped to react to an invasion of the mycelium of Piptoporus quercinus, just as an oak doesn't need to be able to defend itself against an attack of the mycelium of P. betulinus.

In this sense, humans have the disadvantage of having to be able to defend themselves against any disease humans and lots of other mammals can catch and/or die from.

Edited September 6, 2011 by Fungus

[Fungus]

And to add some more considerations concerning the differences between humans, animals and trees :

- trees are not capable of "spontaneous behaviour", they are predetermined by their tree species specific genetic traits and a restricted repertoire that "permits" them to react to outside influences, i.e. they are not in control of their own ecosystem, in which the fungal mycelia are the interfaces, go betweens or intermediaries linking together the entire ecosystem,

- trees are immobile : once a seed is germinated and a seedling starts its newborn life, the tree is fixated to a territory it can't leave to look for greener pastures, so it has to live and cope with whatever the circumstances and the by the environment determined changes are for the rest of its life with only little possibilities to (in time) adapt to them,

- trees can not find shelter or build a roof over their head/crown to protect themselves, i.e. their leaves and especialy their extremely vulnerable embryonic tissue (cambium), which in some tree species only is covered with a thin layer of bark, against air pollution (acidification, nitrification) and "winged" (birds, insects) or otherwise airborn (spores, virus, bacteria) parasites, so they have to rely on defense systems, that are predominately "loaded" with weapons produced by other organismes (assimilation, mycorrhizal fungi) then themselves,

- for their water and nutrients supply, trees highly depend on other locally present organisms participating in the soil food web, such as mycorrhizal symbionts associating with their root system, which implicates, that when the symbionts are killed by an outside vector, which is not under control of the tree and its ecosystem, the tree goes without food and "medication" (antibiotics, fungicides) needed to survive, for which it can't compensate by going to a GP or the drugstore or by having surgery to remove the tumor or canker,

- for their reproduction (DNA), trees need phosphorus and nitrogen, which for the greater part or only can be obtained through intervention of the mycelia of mycorrhizal symbionts,

- most urban trees are not originally endemic, they "kick off" and "quick start" at a nursery and after being uprooted and replanted, live the life of a "displaced person" or "fugitive", who has "lost its roots" and has to rely on a poorly developed ecosystem, only some generalistic locally indigenous mycorrhizal symbionts and lots of indigenous parasites are part of.

[Tony Croft aka hamadryad]

And to add some more considerations concerning the differences between humans, animals and trees :

- trees are not capable of "spontaneous behaviour", they are predetermined by their tree species specific genetic traits and a restricted repertoire that "permits" them to react to outside influences, i.e. they are not in control of their own ecosystem, in which the fungal mycelia are the interfaces, go betweens or intermediaries linking together the entire ecosystem,

- trees are immobile : once a seed is germinated and a seedling starts its newborn life, the tree is fixated to a territory it can't leave to look for greener pastures, so it has to live and cope with whatever the circumstances and the by the environment determined changes are for the rest of its life with only little possibilities to (in time) adapt to them,

- trees can not find shelter or build a roof over their head/crown to protect themselves, i.e. their leaves and especialy their extremely vulnerable embryonic tissue (cambium), which in some tree species only is covered with a thin layer of bark, against air pollution (acidification, nitrification) and "winged" (birds, insects) or otherwise airborn (spores, virus, bacteria) parasites, so they have to rely on defense systems, that are predominately "loaded" with weapons produced by other organismes (assimilation, mycorrhizal fungi) then themselves,

- for their water and nutrients supply, trees highly depend on other locally present organisms participating in the soil food web, such as mycorrhizal symbionts associating with their root system, which implicates, that when the symbionts are killed by an outside vector, which is not under control of the tree and its ecosystem, the tree goes without food and "medication" (antibiotics, fungicides) needed to survive, for which it can't compensate by going to a GP or the drugstore or by having surgery to remove the tumor or canker,

- for their reproduction (DNA), trees need phosphorus and nitrogen, which for the greater part or only can be obtained through intervention of the mycelia of mycorrhizal symbionts,

- most urban trees are not originally endemic, they "kick off" and "quick start" at a nursery and after being uprooted and replanted, live the life of a "displaced person" or "fugitive", who has "lost its roots" and has to rely on a poorly developed ecosystem, only some generalistic locally indigenous mycorrhizal symbionts and lots of indigenous parasites are part of.

 

and all this information SHOULD be standard, one day it will be

[Daniël Bos]

And to add some more considerations concerning the differences between humans, animals and trees :

-1-trees are not capable of "spontaneous behaviour", they are predetermined by their tree species specific genetic traits and a restricted repertoire that "permits" them to react to outside influences, i.e. they are not in control of their own ecosystem, in which the fungal mycelia are the interfaces, go betweens or intermediaries linking together the entire ecosystem,

- 2-trees are immobile : once a seed is germinated and a seedling starts its newborn life, the tree is fixated to a territory it can't leave to look for greener pastures, so it has to live and cope with whatever the circumstances and the by the environment determined changes are for the rest of its life with only little possibilities to (in time) adapt to them,

- 3-trees can not find shelter or build a roof over their head/crown to protect themselves, i.e. their leaves and especialy their extremely vulnerable embryonic tissue (cambium), which in some tree species only is covered with a thin layer of bark, against air pollution (acidification, nitrification) and "winged" (birds, insects) or otherwise airborn (spores, virus, bacteria) parasites, so they have to rely on defense systems, that are predominately "loaded" with weapons produced by other organismes (assimilation, mycorrhizal fungi) then themselves,

- 4-for their water and nutrients supply, trees highly depend on other locally present organisms participating in the soil food web, such as mycorrhizal symbionts associating with their root system, which implicates, that when the symbionts are killed by an outside vector, which is not under control of the tree and its ecosystem, the tree goes without food and "medication" (antibiotics, fungicides) needed to survive, for which it can't compensate by going to a GP or the drugstore or by having surgery to remove the tumor or canker,

- 5-for their reproduction (DNA), trees need phosphorus and nitrogen, which for the greater part or only can be obtained through intervention of the mycelia of mycorrhizal symbionts,

-6- most urban trees are not originally endemic, they "kick off" and "quick start" at a nursery and after being uprooted and replanted, live the life of a "displaced person" or "fugitive", who has "lost its roots" and has to rely on a poorly developed ecosystem, only some generalistic locally indigenous mycorrhizal symbionts and lots of indigenous parasites are part of.

 

All valid points Gerrit, and thanks for taking the time to explain yourself. I still think a method like that would be highly subjective to the live said tree has lived.

 

1 Surely because trees are not in (complete) control of their surrounding ecosystem they are subjected to what they find themselves seeded/planted in. Will this not mean that individual specimens have quite different paths trough life.

 

2- As trees are indeed immobile, this could mean that an oak that was unable to walk away from it's neighbours in favour of a better place to live could have a whole different set of associated organisms than it's cousin in the middle of an empty field?

 

3- Does that not give a large element of chance? Tree A got infected after having been scratched a lot by grey squirrels, tree B didn't and even if their entire lives before that even had been identical, the rest of their lives will be entirely differen?

 

4- I never meant to anthropomorphise, I just find it easier to explain and understand things through analogies. I was merely trying to explain that although people (and trees) may live the same lives, under the same circumstances, there is a large element of chance or luck involved in life. One perso/tree gets hit by lightning 3 times, another one never does. Would the same not go for the varying stages of fungal growth associated with trees, some just get luckier than others?

 

5- Great info thanks. Is that similar to a humans digestive system then, where the microfauna keep you alive by processing the food you eat into stuctures and substances that can be assimilated by the body?

 

6- I didn't think this suggested method was limited to urban trees? Maybe such a method would work better in an urban environment due to the reasons you mentiond, but would an urban environment not also make it much harder as most urban trees are affected by human activity resulting in fungal activity?

 

 

Did you have any exciting finds after the recent storms? My parents (who farm on het Bargerveen), had a few trees down but nought serious.

[Fungus]

1. I still think a method like that would be highly subjective to the live said tree has lived.

2. Surely because trees are not in (complete) control of their surrounding ecosystem they are subjected to what they find themselves seeded/planted in. Will this not mean that individual specimens have quite different paths trough life.

As trees are indeed immobile, this could mean that an oak that was unable to walk away from it's neighbours in favour of a better place to live could have a whole different set of associated organisms than it's cousin in the middle of an empty field?

Does that not give a large element of chance? Tree A got infected after having been scratched a lot by grey squirrels, tree B didn't and even if their entire lives before that even had been identical, the rest of their lives will be entirely differen?

I was merely trying to explain that although people (and trees) may live the same lives, under the same circumstances, there is a large element of chance or luck involved in life. One person/tree gets hit by lightning 3 times, another one never does. Would the same not go for the varying stages of fungal growth associated with trees, some just get luckier than others?

3. Is that similar to a humans digestive system then, where the microfauna keep you alive by processing the food you eat into stuctures and substances that can be assimilated by the body?

4. I didn't think this suggested method was limited to urban trees? Maybe such a method would work better in an urban environment due to the reasons you mentioned, but would an urban environment not also make it much harder as most urban trees are affected by human activity resulting in fungal activity?

 

Did you have any exciting finds after the recent storms? My parents (who farm on het Bargerveen), had a few trees down but nought serious.

 

Daniel,

1. I'm not pretending nor aiming at describing the individual life of a single tree, I'm assessing, monitoring, analyzing and documenting the life cycle of an endemic tree species and its ecosystem in its original habitat under as "normal" as possible natural circumstances to derive information from, that is useful for the management of planted forests and urban trees.

2. For this I refer to general or contextual system theory, which takes the following principles as its starting point :

- every individual organism is part of a context, all context's can be divided into a hierarchy of context's, the higher up the hierarchy, the more complex a context becomes and the more levels and meta (= micro, meso, macro) levels can be distinguished

- in analyzing an outcome of interaction between organisms, the "here and now" is more important than the history of the lifes of the participants

- the functioning of individual participants of a(n) (eco)system can only be understood from the rules and the processes - without beginning or end - with positive feedback stimulating development and negative feedback inhibiting development of the system and its participants

-the characteristics of an individual are not to be seen as just being a trait of the organism, but as the characteristics of an individual within, influencing and influenced by its actual context and system, which is in a kalibrated temporary equilibrium or homeostasis, i.e. an either positive or negative balance situation in the current course of within system context's life events

- the principle of non-additionality (Gestalt), assuming that the characteristics of an entirety are influenced by, but can not be derived from its constituting parts, in other words, the whole or entirety is more than the sum of its parts and a part is influenced, but not completely determined by the whole, as f.i. an orchestra is more than fifteen musicians playing a symphony, which will never be performed the same way again

- the principles of multicausality and equifinality, meaning that a system can reach the same end stadium from completely different starting points, or the same course of events in the life of one individual can lead to completely different outcomes in the life of another, and the outcomes of a life of one individual can not be derived from sharing the same course of life events with another individual, as all individuals are as well unique and a "product" of their own life cycles within their own (eco)systems

3. To a certain extent comparable, but for the greater part not simular.

4. No, it is not, it's the other way around. I just meant to say, that the poor life circumstances of managed and often damaged urban trees and its effects on the vitality and life expectation of the trees, only can be understood and explained if one goes back to their natural habitats to gather information on their tree species specific ecosystems.

 

If you mean last week's storm, no, I didn't, this time the damage was mainly confined to the north western and south eastern provinces.