This is interesting because one of the places where I walk has a few of these trees or stumps, and I was always curious about them. Are they dead? Are they alive? They seem to be both at once.
Edit- I don't really see them in many places, but there's one forest that i walk my dog through that has a lot of them. The one I cut wasn't from there though.
Some trees don't give a fuck if you cut them down as long as you leave the roots. My in laws have a jacaranda bush that was once a tree. The cut the tree down but left the stump for whatever reason and it's sprouted branches and leaves and even flowered.
American chestnuts despite being virtually extinct in the wild continue to live. They'll send out sprouts from their trunks live for awhile before the blight kills back the sprout, creating an endless cycle.
*carbon. The water and nutrient it could supply on its own. What its lacking is LEAVES and therefore photosynthesis and therefore carbon pulled from the air. But this post is cool! Very interesting find.
I know Aspens are like that. What we see above ground as a grove of Aspen trees is actually one organism that is a root system underground that sprouts "trees" above.
I fuckin love Aspens! Beautiful, gorgeous little fucks! We use them as landmarks from a distance of where we can stop on a hike and they’ve never let me down with a beautiful campsite somewhere near (not under/within them as there’s usually not enough room in between, just seems to work out for us). Happy vibin, pretty little god damn sexy trees. Shit
I truly am no expert on plant biology. But i would presume the living tree has actually sort of subsumed the corpse-stump of the other tree, using it to gather more water, and in turn supplying it with the nutrients it can still make through photosynthesis. Again, I don't know anything, but that's more metal at the very least.
I once saw a tree that had fallen off a cliff and planted itself upside down in the ground. Then branches started sprouting off from the roots now on top. And all the previous branches changed direction halfway. I should go back and take a pic, it was impressive.
Doesn't matter if you're right or wrong, only that you used your deductive and critical thinking skills, tempered by humility and not arrogance and/or ego!
It's kinda the opposite, if memory serves. Root networks provide nutrients to saplings that are prevented access to sunlight by mature trees, letting them grow to maturity.
The Wood Wide Web theory has actually been heavily exaggerated by popsci media that ran with something that sounded good - the authors of the original study actually said the evidence didn't support anything close to what was being made of it.
There is a book called the hidden life of trees that you might enjoy, but to give a very brief statement, forest trees are often interconnected (soil level) with each other and able to “communicate” somewhat with others.
Trees will support one another, with the caveat being they can communicate with this network. We aren’t sure if this process occurs completely through fungus or something else, but we do know an artificially created forest cannot “communicate” like a traditionally grown one.
Idk if it's the case with all trees(probably not?) But we have trees here where you'll see what looks like a cluster of many of the same kind of tree, but it's all actually the same tree, just with more than one trunk
Thought the same thing! Roots of the stump remained so water shouldn’t be the problem. Or did they join together before it was cut down? I don’t know how much time a tree stump has carbohydrate stores for but I’d guess it is less time than it would take for the other tree to know they can just absorb it for the extra roots.
If they're trees of the same genetic descent - and a species that does such things - it's not unlikely that roots grow together and eventually connect - we actually use that mechanism in certain decorative things where multiple trees are woven together into a pattern.
Some species can also sprout multiple trees from the same root system.
There is no intent, through - they aren't bartering water for nutrients in any way we would understand it. There is just now twice the water and nutrients
being pulled from the ground into the circulatory system, enabling the one that still has leaf coverage (in this case) to grow more branches and leaves to convert those nutrients into sugars they both can use - and it's not unlikely that the stump will eventually sprout it's own branches and leaves again.
Sorta? It’s more that they have fused into one organism so if one is almost completely dead the other one can keep it going until it’s able to be more self reliant.
My main question would be "will the stump continue to grow", not including leaking water, sap, and bark material (which idk, but i think is also a liquid secretion that hardens into bark)
It'll probably keep growing wider/thicker, maybe add an inch or so on top because of the same mechanism, the top has basically become a side now; but the parts that make a tree grow taller/longer have been removed. Trees grow from their tips, and they don't naturally form new tips in old areas of the tree.
Douglas firs don't normally do that on their own, though where both trees are damaged, it could happen by chance. The same processes that keep them from parasitizing each other would normally prevent that.
That said, they are known to share nutrients through a partnership with fungal networks. But that doesn't seem to be what's happening here.
It's entirely possible they're misusing the word grafting. It's an artificial process, but I'm not sure what the point would be to cutting a tree > 2
They naturally do that. A lot of tree varieties do at least. The largest living single organism is considered to be a 5 mile patch of Aspen trees all connected by their roots. It's name is Pando.
Some do, but my understanding from some cursory googling is that Douglas firs generally don't fuse unless both trees are damaged. They do commonly share nutrition, but that is usually through a fungal network.
Iirc correctly from my bio classes, it's actually not uncommon for some kinds of trees (and other plants!) to naturally link up. For example, if a tree in the middle of a dense forest drops some seeds which sprout, then the "mother" tree will support the saplings, because they might not get enough light for photosynthesis to occur until they reach significant height, which they won't do unless someone else supplies them with the energy they need to GET that tall. In which case, it's not like us
grafting a branch we took off one tree onto a different one, but the end result is still tree A and tree B being connected and supporting each other. Or in this case, tree A and the stump of tree B.
I would assume that the way it works is: The plants growing into each other, but neither is really effected because plants as kind of closed circuts, having moisture and nutrients flow circularly throughout the whole body. But if one gets damaged, and that circut is interrupted, then a host plant might be able to hijack the circut so to speak, and damaged plant becomes part of the host's circut/ whatever the plant equivalent of a circulatory system is.
I won't pretend to be an expert on the matter - it was one unit of a fairly low-level bio class eons ago! I just thought it was neat so I still remember a bit. For a full grafting, I think you're right that they both need to be damaged so there's somewhere they can "heal" into a connected spot, but the stump wouldn't need much from the other tree - if the root system is intact, it can get its own water and nutrients, it just needs some help for photosynthesis until it can sprout new leaves.
Mostly it's the use of the word 'grafted' that makes me thing it was intentional. Not sure why you would, though, it's not like the remaining tree would need help to survive. Entirely possible the word's being misused.
ifixlasers42
I’ve seen this movie
StarBug
I’ve seen this movie. Something something facehugger.
C141Clay
"Quaid... Start the reactor."
ButteryBiscuitBass
I've been called this a few times!
zanarchy805
Just wait till you see a redwood stump.
T3sl4co1l
Or log. Once that baby roots? Boom, solar shoots.
BadPunsAplenty
Yo, Shorty's with me.
iamthecomet
Jesus Christ my family sucks.
nubblebun
This is interesting because one of the places where I walk has a few of these trees or stumps, and I was always curious about them. Are they dead? Are they alive? They seem to be both at once.
ohfudgecicles
Does it have phantom branch syndrome?
coastalfoundhound
I see those all the time. I cut a big one off and took it home and knocked the bark off. Beautiful swirls underneath,
AreaResident
I like how it looks like it is full of swirly screaming souls
scottynotfromstartrek
This kills the stump
coastalfoundhound
Edit- I don't really see them in many places, but there's one forest that i walk my dog through that has a lot of them. The one I cut wasn't from there though.
ComoSeIguana
originfoomanchu1
It's kind of the other way round the luging tree is using the stump to leach nutrients etc.
Grimmrog
The biggets known lifeform is an entire wood made of thousends of trees being the same tree.
brainkandle1
Using the mycelium network for comms!
AnyRandomBob
Pando! A 5 mile wide grove of Aspen trees.
Spidey209
Looks like they soaked the wood in some wood.
DeadyBearr
Some trees don't give a fuck if you cut them down as long as you leave the roots. My in laws have a jacaranda bush that was once a tree. The cut the tree down but left the stump for whatever reason and it's sprouted branches and leaves and even flowered.
SuperPickle17
American chestnuts despite being virtually extinct in the wild continue to live. They'll send out sprouts from their trunks live for awhile before the blight kills back the sprout, creating an endless cycle.
ShadeMeadowsArt
Fascinatin'~
Fengor
Can't fool me. I know Ent dick when I see it.
wpfp976
Murrdogg
I like this post
SilentSecretMan
I just flushed a few living tree stumps
IAmTheToastyOhs
/gallery/0Kc1kQ1
IMustGrowUpReally
Was anyone rooting for you?
saucE90
sindail
Same, but mine exploded into a million pieces first
DaveSamsonite
I read that as "fisted" the first time.
Harryteeters
Boondangle40
That's a hard No dawg
rijstewafels
Are you Groot?
QuigleyDownUnder
You're not a captain by chance?
Rkfinecake
It's creepy when the roots shoot up at you as you flush. I just laugh and say "Bye, stinker!"
vegivamp
... Only to find out it wasn't a sinker?
Rkfinecake
Nah it goes down saying "I'ma clog your pipes!' And every single time, they do. Every. Single. Time. And I always pinch it into threes.
OneMoreLime
And the mycelium homies facilitating that communication
apatternlanguage
*carbon. The water and nutrient it could supply on its own. What its lacking is LEAVES and therefore photosynthesis and therefore carbon pulled from the air. But this post is cool! Very interesting find.
Fulustreka
👏🏼👏🏼👏🏼
RainbowFlerken
Awe, it saved its tree friend
SkyHighInc
Neat
JustANerdInTheWorld
This is me at parties.
Ryebread91
How come stumps don't grow back to trees but also don't decay?
MagnumRadhard
Hedwig And The Angry Inch
Jlh19
Are Douglas firs the ones where its actually like the trees are one organism?
3rdoption
I know Aspens are like that. What we see above ground as a grove of Aspen trees is actually one organism that is a root system underground that sprouts "trees" above.
Jlh19
Thank you. I couldn't remember what kind of tree was like that
derrymerbles
I fuckin love Aspens! Beautiful, gorgeous little fucks! We use them as landmarks from a distance of where we can stop on a hike and they’ve never let me down with a beautiful campsite somewhere near (not under/within them as there’s usually not enough room in between, just seems to work out for us). Happy vibin, pretty little god damn sexy trees. Shit
acinonyxjubatus
Pando <3
Traquaire
Reminds me that albino redwood exist!
/gallery/HNwPieq
5omeWhiteGuy
I truly am no expert on plant biology. But i would presume the living tree has actually sort of subsumed the corpse-stump of the other tree, using it to gather more water, and in turn supplying it with the nutrients it can still make through photosynthesis.
Again, I don't know anything, but that's more metal at the very least.
jesuisgur
I once saw a tree that had fallen off a cliff and planted itself upside down in the ground. Then branches started sprouting off from the roots now on top. And all the previous branches changed direction halfway. I should go back and take a pic, it was impressive.
TZO2k15
Doesn't matter if you're right or wrong, only that you used your deductive and critical thinking skills, tempered by humility and not arrogance and/or ego!
It's incredibly refreshing to see!
InitHello
It's kinda the opposite, if memory serves. Root networks provide nutrients to saplings that are prevented access to sunlight by mature trees, letting them grow to maturity.
vegivamp
The Wood Wide Web theory has actually been heavily exaggerated by popsci media that ran with something that sounded good - the authors of the original study actually said the evidence didn't support anything close to what was being made of it.
InitHello
Today I TIL. Have an upvote.
intrepidsea
There is a book called the hidden life of trees that you might enjoy, but to give a very brief statement, forest trees are often interconnected (soil level) with each other and able to “communicate” somewhat with others.
Trees will support one another, with the caveat being they can communicate with this network. We aren’t sure if this process occurs completely through fungus or something else, but we do know an artificially created forest cannot “communicate” like a traditionally grown one.
Northstar219
Idk if it's the case with all trees(probably not?) But we have trees here where you'll see what looks like a cluster of many of the same kind of tree, but it's all actually the same tree, just with more than one trunk
stewgru
Thought the same thing! Roots of the stump remained so water shouldn’t be the problem. Or did they join together before it was cut down? I don’t know how much time a tree stump has carbohydrate stores for but I’d guess it is less time than it would take for the other tree to know they can just absorb it for the extra roots.
Santorrr
Yeah, used the other one for parts
vegivamp
If they're trees of the same genetic descent - and a species that does such things - it's not unlikely that roots grow together and eventually connect - we actually use that mechanism in certain decorative things where multiple trees are woven together into a pattern.
Some species can also sprout multiple trees from the same root system.
There is no intent, through - they aren't bartering water for nutrients in any way we would understand it. There is just now twice the water and nutrients
vegivamp
being pulled from the ground into the circulatory system, enabling the one that still has leaf coverage (in this case) to grow more branches and leaves to convert those nutrients into sugars they both can use - and it's not unlikely that the stump will eventually sprout it's own branches and leaves again.
FlaminkoFactor
Yours is a more metal, therefore more valid, explanation.
sagejosh0
Sorta? It’s more that they have fused into one organism so if one is almost completely dead the other one can keep it going until it’s able to be more self reliant.
5omeWhiteGuy
My main question would be "will the stump continue to grow", not including leaking water, sap, and bark material (which idk, but i think is also a liquid secretion that hardens into bark)
TypicallyVigo
It'll probably keep growing wider/thicker, maybe add an inch or so on top because of the same mechanism, the top has basically become a side now; but the parts that make a tree grow taller/longer have been removed. Trees grow from their tips, and they don't naturally form new tips in old areas of the tree.
BishlamekGurpgork
It says their roots were grafted. It sounds like this was something someone decided to do.
brainkandle1
Nah they joined together underground on their own
BishlamekGurpgork
Douglas firs don't normally do that on their own, though where both trees are damaged, it could happen by chance. The same processes that keep them from parasitizing each other would normally prevent that.
That said, they are known to share nutrients through a partnership with fungal networks. But that doesn't seem to be what's happening here.
It's entirely possible they're misusing the word grafting. It's an artificial process, but I'm not sure what the point would be to cutting a tree > 2
BishlamekGurpgork
> and grafting its root system to another, it's not like the tree left will need more help to survive.
AnyRandomBob
They naturally do that. A lot of tree varieties do at least. The largest living single organism is considered to be a 5 mile patch of Aspen trees all connected by their roots. It's name is Pando.
BishlamekGurpgork
Some do, but my understanding from some cursory googling is that Douglas firs generally don't fuse unless both trees are damaged. They do commonly share nutrition, but that is usually through a fungal network.
NeynasGhost
Iirc correctly from my bio classes, it's actually not uncommon for some kinds of trees (and other plants!) to naturally link up. For example, if a tree in the middle of a dense forest drops some seeds which sprout, then the "mother" tree will support the saplings, because they might not get enough light for photosynthesis to occur until they reach significant height, which they won't do unless someone else supplies them with the energy they need to GET that tall. In which case, it's not like us
NeynasGhost
grafting a branch we took off one tree onto a different one, but the end result is still tree A and tree B being connected and supporting each other. Or in this case, tree A and the stump of tree B.
BishlamekGurpgork
Mother trees are normally sharing nutrients through mycorrhizal fungi, if I'm not mistaken. Is that incorrect?
My understanding is that typically both trees need to be damaged for an actual fusion to occur.
5omeWhiteGuy
I would assume that the way it works is:
The plants growing into each other, but neither is really effected because plants as kind of closed circuts, having moisture and nutrients flow circularly throughout the whole body. But if one gets damaged, and that circut is interrupted, then a host plant might be able to hijack the circut so to speak, and damaged plant becomes part of the host's circut/ whatever the plant equivalent of a circulatory system is.
NeynasGhost
I won't pretend to be an expert on the matter - it was one unit of a fairly low-level bio class eons ago! I just thought it was neat so I still remember a bit. For a full grafting, I think you're right that they both need to be damaged so there's somewhere they can "heal" into a connected spot, but the stump wouldn't need much from the other tree - if the root system is intact, it can get its own water and nutrients, it just needs some help for photosynthesis until it can sprout new leaves.
BishlamekGurpgork
Mostly it's the use of the word 'grafted' that makes me thing it was intentional. Not sure why you would, though, it's not like the remaining tree would need help to survive. Entirely possible the word's being misused.