4 ms·
The Columbian Exchange continues! One question about the article: why do they say "technically extinct" and not just "extinct"? I also wonder---if we get ches
by pc2g4d 10y ago
The Columbian Exchange continues!
One question about the article: why do they say "technically extinct" and not just "extinct"?
I also wonder---if we get chestnuts back up to their 19th-century numbers, what species will suffer as a result? Similarly to how coyotes are suffering from the reintroduction of gray wolves. I'm fine with attempting to restore the previous equilibrium, but it's good to be aware of all the consequences.
- panglott 10y agoWell, American chestnut grew on upland sites with thin soil in oak-hickory forest. Many of the surviving trees are on inaccessible mountain slopes and other places unsuitable for agriculture. After they died, the canopy space was overtaken by oak, hickory, tuliptree, and other native trees. The chestnut was so populous because it simply overwhelmed the other trees with seed production. In terms of wildlife, there is no downside: the chestnut produces a larger mast than oak/hickory, and it produces every year instead of biennially. Its nut is starchy rather than oily. Chestnuts simply produce more food for humans and wildlife than the forest can otherwise. Its loss was simply a huge loss for the ecosystem.