7 ms·
Who says we should save it? Perhaps having 47,000 clones with zero genetic diversity has resulted in a population that is unable to adapt, especially vs. speci
by aeternus 8y ago
Who says we should save it?
Perhaps having 47,000 clones with zero genetic diversity has resulted in a population that is unable to adapt, especially vs. species with more genetic diversity.
Why does this population deserve saving rather than allowing new populations to grow & flourish?
- yellowapple 8y agoMaybe cool things are worth saving?
- Sileni 8y agoThe tree is too big to fail? That's it. I'm done with 2018.
- village-idiot 8y agoThis was the thing that made you give up on 2018? You’re tougher than I.
- kevinh 8y agoCouldn't you make this argument about all endangered species?
- nine_k 8y agoMost endangered species are not clones, they usually have at least some genetic diversity to build on.
- Fomite 8y agoNot a clone. Single organism.
- gameswithgo 8y agoyes and I'm sure he does.
- aeternus 8y agoI'm just thankful those old cyanobacteria weren't environmentally conscious. None of these modern Eukaryotic species would be around if they hadn't happily 'polluted' the entire planet with oxygen.
- honkycat 8y agoYou're a fucking idiot and your argument is fucking dumb. Shut up and go outside you worthless troll.
- dang 8y agoWe ban accounts that post like this, regardless of how wrong or annoying another comment is. Indeed, you've broken the site guidelines not only by being uncivil, but by feeding a troll. Could you please review https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and not post like this to HN? The idea here is: if you have a substantive point to make, make it thoughtfully; if you don't, please don't comment until you do.
- 1000units 8y agoI enjoyed his argument.
- ligand 8y agoPerhaps because as the article states, Pando is considered a keystone species, because of that, if Pando ceases to exist, it will take species dependent on it with it. While as you say other organisms will fluorish, we must consider the change in biodiversity and not just abundance
- adamrezich 8y ago>we must consider the change in biodiversity and not just abundance Why?
- dragonwriter 8y ago> Perhaps having 47,000 clones It's not 47,000 clones, that's off by 46,999. It's one organism.
- xj9 8y ago> The grove of 47,000 quivering aspen trees in Utah is being diminished by mule deer, foraging cattle and human mismanagement. any forest would eventually die off under these conditions. it has little to do with Pando being one organism or many.
- jessaustin 8y agoSome forests would have access to evolution via natural selection, but this forest does not. One possible result of selection would be to favor variants that had more bitter compounds in new leaves, to discourage browsing.
- chc 8y agoAnd yet those forests with access to natural selection are also destroyed by human agriculture.
- AnarchoYeasty 8y agoYeah evolution doesn't happen that quickly or effectively.
- zhynn 8y agoIt's one organism with 47k appendages. This is my opinion and I stand by it. There's probably way more to learn from Pando than we think, don't delete data that you don't understand.
- Bjorkbat 8y agoSame reason for preserving any other thing in nature. It's interesting enough that some might say that the heaviest known organism is a natural treasure, just like the tallest Redwood, or the oldest Joshua Tree, or Bald Eagles, or entire national parks and forests. Even conservation done in the name of something as practical as ecological sustainability ultimately boils down to preserving a slice of nature that we collectively treasure and value. We kill groves of trees all the time and most of us never think about. It's the nature of our modern society. This mass of trees has a name though. We kill it, and present and future generations won't have another Pando to enjoy. Personally, I don't like the part of me that says we should kill natural treasures to preserve the economic interests of ranchers, but that's just who I am. It's up to us as a society to decide what kind of creature we want to be and what we want to be driven by.