3 ms·

I think the title is misleading. The lightning strike isn't itself good for those trees. It just eliminates competition for resources by killing less resilient

I think the title is misleading. The lightning strike isn't itself good for those trees. It just eliminates competition for resources by killing less resilient surrounding plants and trees.

rocqua 2y ago
It actually helps the tree by killing parasitic vines. Based on just the parasites, it could be beneficial to the tree to get hit directly compared to only nearby trees dying.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
ceejayoz 2y ago
So... it winds up being good for the trees?
- crazygringo 2y ago
  No. Lightning striking the tree is bad. It damages it, full stop. Lightning striking the trees surrounding it is good, because it kills them, and it gets more resources and grows more. But the two events tend to happen together, because lightning hits several trees at once. So the title is, indeed, incorrect. It's confused about which trees are being hit, and which trees are benefiting. Obviously the best-case scenario for the tree is to have lightning strike next door, killing neighboring trees with no damage whatsoever to yourself.
  - ceejayoz 2y ago
    Working out damages muscles, but it's still good for you, the organism as a whole, as the end result of that process is positive. In this case, it really is good for the trees, to the point where they may have evolved to encourage the strikes: > The trees may have even evolved to act as lightning rods. > But in 2015, while working in Panama, Gora and his colleagues came across a Dipteryx oleifera tree that had survived a strike with little damage — even though the jolt had been strong enough to blast a parasitic vine out of its crown and kill more than a dozen neighboring trees. > “Seeing that there are trees that get struck by lightning and they’re fine was just mind blowing,” Gora recalled. Over time, the team encountered other D. oleifera trees thriving after getting hit, so they decided to take a closer look. > “These data provide the first evidence that some trees benefit from being struck by lightning,” the authors write. Or, as Gora puts it, “It's better off for a Dipteryx oleifera tree to be struck than not.”
    - crazygringo 2y ago
      Nope. "with little damage". That's damage. "It's better off for a Dipteryx oleifera tree to be struck than not" -- because its neighbors will be struck and killed. Not because it got struck. The article presents zero evidence that being struck by lightning has any direct beneficial effects. It's not like how muscles grow back stronger. It's more like, a horrible disease maimed you and killed your neighbors, but now you can eat better because you're raising crops in their backyards. But the disease didn't make you healthier! At least this is according to the facts the article presents.
      - ceejayoz 2y ago
        Not all damage is bad. Callouses on our feet are useful damage. Vining plants need branches to break off to promote new vining. Deciduous trees drop their leaves. Humpback whales do belly flops to dislodge parasites. Evolving to be more likely to get struck by lightning means they're freed of parasitic vines more frequently. That's beneficial damage.
        crazygringo 2y ago
        You're confusing two different kinds of damage. There is the kind that makes you stronger or more adapted -- muscles, callouses. Then there's the kind that's just bad. Injuries, the flu, stress. Lightning is the second kind. The tree doesn't get stronger. The tree doesn't adapt. It just gets damaged. If someone whacks me on the head so I get concussed, but kills a bee in the process about to sting me, are you going to say that whacking me on the head was "beneficial damage"? That would be crazy. Sure it's helpful that some vines get killed. That's something separate from the damage caused by the lightning to the tree. The tree is still damaged from it, in the bad way.
      - jessekv 2y ago
        Is sharpening a knife damaging it? It gets a bit philosophical I suppose.
    - ASalazarMX 2y ago
      > The trees may have even evolved to act as lightning rods. Scientists: Let's get near these dangerous lightning rod trees to study them!
- raffael_de 2y ago
  I interpret the title as that the tree itself is benefiting from it. Like your example with exercise which causes damage but increases fitness by "over"healing. But that is impacting the training person itself. While in the tree case the tree probably suffers from the lightning strike and also doesn't experience a fitness increase - just the surrounding plants all wither more than the benefiting tree. So, given this line of thinking - I find the title misleading. From that perspective it probably isn't misleading to everybody.
  - momojo 2y ago
    You're right. "Getting hit by lightning is good for some tropical trees, since it can withstand the strike, but its competition cannot" might be the more verbose but complete title.
aaron695 2y ago
[dead]

I think the title is misleading. The lightning strike isn't itself good for those trees. It just eliminates competition for resources by killing less resilient surrounding plants and trees.

rocqua 2y ago

It actually helps the tree by killing parasitic vines. Based on just the parasites, it could be beneficial to the tree to get hit directly compared to only nearby trees dying.

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

ceejayoz 2y ago

So... it winds up being good for the trees?

crazygringo 2y ago
No. Lightning striking the tree is bad. It damages it, full stop. Lightning striking the trees surrounding it is good, because it kills them, and it gets more resources and grows more. But the two events tend to happen together, because lightning hits several trees at once. So the title is, indeed, incorrect. It's confused about which trees are being hit, and which trees are benefiting. Obviously the best-case scenario for the tree is to have lightning strike next door, killing neighboring trees with no damage whatsoever to yourself.
- ceejayoz 2y ago
  Working out damages muscles, but it's still good for you, the organism as a whole, as the end result of that process is positive. In this case, it really is good for the trees, to the point where they may have evolved to encourage the strikes: > The trees may have even evolved to act as lightning rods. > But in 2015, while working in Panama, Gora and his colleagues came across a Dipteryx oleifera tree that had survived a strike with little damage — even though the jolt had been strong enough to blast a parasitic vine out of its crown and kill more than a dozen neighboring trees. > “Seeing that there are trees that get struck by lightning and they’re fine was just mind blowing,” Gora recalled. Over time, the team encountered other D. oleifera trees thriving after getting hit, so they decided to take a closer look. > “These data provide the first evidence that some trees benefit from being struck by lightning,” the authors write. Or, as Gora puts it, “It's better off for a Dipteryx oleifera tree to be struck than not.”
  - crazygringo 2y ago
    Nope. "with little damage". That's damage. "It's better off for a Dipteryx oleifera tree to be struck than not" -- because its neighbors will be struck and killed. Not because it got struck. The article presents zero evidence that being struck by lightning has any direct beneficial effects. It's not like how muscles grow back stronger. It's more like, a horrible disease maimed you and killed your neighbors, but now you can eat better because you're raising crops in their backyards. But the disease didn't make you healthier! At least this is according to the facts the article presents.
    - ceejayoz 2y ago
      Not all damage is bad. Callouses on our feet are useful damage. Vining plants need branches to break off to promote new vining. Deciduous trees drop their leaves. Humpback whales do belly flops to dislodge parasites. Evolving to be more likely to get struck by lightning means they're freed of parasitic vines more frequently. That's beneficial damage.
      - crazygringo 2y ago
        You're confusing two different kinds of damage. There is the kind that makes you stronger or more adapted -- muscles, callouses. Then there's the kind that's just bad. Injuries, the flu, stress. Lightning is the second kind. The tree doesn't get stronger. The tree doesn't adapt. It just gets damaged. If someone whacks me on the head so I get concussed, but kills a bee in the process about to sting me, are you going to say that whacking me on the head was "beneficial damage"? That would be crazy. Sure it's helpful that some vines get killed. That's something separate from the damage caused by the lightning to the tree. The tree is still damaged from it, in the bad way.
    - jessekv 2y ago
      Is sharpening a knife damaging it? It gets a bit philosophical I suppose.
  - ASalazarMX 2y ago
    > The trees may have even evolved to act as lightning rods. Scientists: Let's get near these dangerous lightning rod trees to study them!
raffael_de 2y ago
I interpret the title as that the tree itself is benefiting from it. Like your example with exercise which causes damage but increases fitness by "over"healing. But that is impacting the training person itself. While in the tree case the tree probably suffers from the lightning strike and also doesn't experience a fitness increase - just the surrounding plants all wither more than the benefiting tree. So, given this line of thinking - I find the title misleading. From that perspective it probably isn't misleading to everybody.
- momojo 2y ago
  You're right. "Getting hit by lightning is good for some tropical trees, since it can withstand the strike, but its competition cannot" might be the more verbose but complete title.

aaron695 2y ago

[dead]