Plants may not be honest when sending signals to other plants, according to a new study. Instead of warning each other of dangers, plants may either hide signs of distress or even lie about a non-existent danger.
"Plants can gain a benefit from dishonest signaling because it harms their local competitors, by tricking them into investing in costly herbivore defence mechanisms," lead author Thomas Scott, an evolutionary theoretician at the University of Oxford, said. "Our results indicate that it is more likely that plants will behave deceptively toward their neighbours, rather than altruistically."
Previous research found that if a plant is attacked by a herbivore or a disease, neighboring plants can increase their defenses by such activities as making themselves poisonous or unpalatable to insects or herbivores threatening them. To do so, however, these plants have to expend significant amounts of energy and so won’t do it unless absolutely necessary.
A study published January 21 in the journal PNAS suggests that from an evolutionary perspective, it doesn’t make sense for plants to warn others of dangers because plants must compete with each other for sunlight and nutrients. The study investigated whether the signals plants send may be for other reasons than just to be helpful.
The researchers found that it is more advantageous for plants to “lie” about an attack and trick neighboring plants into wasting precious defense resources when there is no reason to do so.
Plants are able to communicate with each other by means of a huge underground fungal network connecting their roots. Known as the mycorrhizal network or “wood wide web,” it is used by 80% to 90% of all plant species to transmit information. The fungi form partnerships with plant roots, the plants receiving nutrients and the fungi receiving food from the plants.
The research team proposed two possibilities as to why it seems plants may send out distress signals. First, it could be merely an involuntary signal the plants can’t suppress but that nearby plants can “eavesdrop on.” Or it could be the fungi in the mycorrhizal network which is what may be warning of an attack because it benefits the network if all plants are protected.
"It could be beneficial for fungi to monitor their plant partners, to detect when one plant has been attacked, and then warn the other plants to prepare themselves," Scott said. "This could be beneficial for fungi because it helps them to protect their plant partners from herbivores and pathogens.”
Comments: What this article appears to be saying is that plants may not want to help each other out because they want to keep all the good stuff for themselves, and they would like other plants to waste their resources preparing to attack a dangerous nonexistent opponent. Instead, it is the fungi, that are not plants, which can come to the rescue by warning plants of dangers. This is because fungi need the plants and vice versa.
As usual, secular scientists see everything through evolution-tinted glasses. Yet, could natural selection and mutations have created the ingenious fungal network? How could plants and fungi have survived before such a network evolved? And could brainless plants have evolved the ability to trick their neighbors into wasting their resources? Do plants think and make plans like humans do?
Plants do not have souls, so they can’t be accused of sinning for things which scientists claim is deception. They were created as food for humans who have been given the ability to overcome most attempts by plants to protect themselves–poisons and bitter tastes being exceptions.
Mycorrhizal networks are just one more example of divine design. They are far too complex to have evolved without an intelligent designer.
Many plants are good food for human bodies, but there is a better food for our souls–Jesus Christ. Jesus provides us the spiritual food and water we need to get us to heaven, if we “eat and drink” them.
“Jesus answered her, “If you knew the gift of God and who it is that is saying to you, ‘Give me a drink,’ you would have asked him, and he would have given you living water.” (John 4:10)
By Warren Krug
**************************************
Want to be automatically notified each time there is a new post? Just email your request to wkrug@lutheranscience.org.
****************************************
QUESTION OF THE DAY
How long can it take for a falling snowflake to reach the ground?
It can take as long as an hour to hit the ground.
Source: Peter Schriemer, “In Good Shape,” Kids Answers [January-March, 2025], page 9.
****************************************
No comments:
Post a Comment