Encontrei este artigo na internet; está em Inglês, mas vale bem a pena lê-lo:
The Secret Life of Trees: The Astonishing Science of What Trees Feel and How They Communicate
Trees dominate the world’s the oldest living organisms. Since the dawn of our species, they have been our silent companions, permeating our most enduring tales and never ceasing to inspire fantastical cosmogonies. Hermann Hesse called them “the most penetrating of preachers.” A forgotten seventeenth-century English gardener wrote of how they “speak to the mind, and tell us many things, and teach us many good lessons.” But trees might be among our lushest metaphors and sensemaking frameworks for knowledge precisely
because the richness of what they say is more than metaphorical — they
speak a sophisticated silent language, communicating complex information
via smell, taste, and electrical impulses. This fascinating secret
world of signals is what German forester Peter Wohllebenexplores in The Hidden Life of Trees: What They Feel, How They Communicate (public library). Wohlleben chronicles what his own experience of managing a forest in
the Eifel mountains in Germany has taught him about the astonishing
language of trees and how trailblazing arboreal research from scientists
around the world reveals “the role forests play in making our world the
kind of place where we want to live.” As we’re only just beginning to understand nonhuman consciousnesses,
what emerges from Wohlleben’s revelatory reframing of our oldest
companions is an invitation to see anew what we have spent eons taking
for granted and, in this act of seeing, to care more deeply about these
remarkable beings that make life on this planet we call home not only
infinitely more pleasurable, but possible at all. But Wohlleben’s own career began at the opposite end of the caring
spectrum. As a forester tasked with optimizing the forest’s output for
the lumber industry, he self-admittedly “knew about as much about the
hidden life of trees as a butcher knows about the emotional life of
animals.” He experienced the consequence of what happens whenever we
turn something alive, be it a creature or a work of art, into a
commodity — the commercial focus of his job warped how he looked at
trees. Then, about twenty years ago, everything changed when he began
organizing survival training and log-cabin tours for tourists in his
forest. As they marveled at the majestic trees, the enchanted curiosity
of their gaze reawakened his own and his childhood love of nature was
rekindled. Around the same time, scientists began conducting research in
his forest. Soon, every day became colored with wonderment and the
thrill of discovery — no longer able to see trees as a currency, he
instead saw them as the priceless living wonders that they are. He
recounts:
Life as a forester became exciting once again. Every day
in the forest was a day of discovery. This led me to unusual ways of
managing the forest. When you know that trees experience pain and have
memories and that tree parents live together with their children, then
you can no longer just chop them down and disrupt their lives with large
machines.
The revelation came to him in flashes, the most eye-opening of which
happened on one of his regular walks through a reserve of old beech tree
in his forest. Passing by a patch of odd mossy stones he had seen many
times before, he was suddenly seized with a new awareness of their
strangeness. When he bent down to examine them, he made an astonishing
discovery:
The stones were an unusual shape: they were gently curved
with hollowed-out areas. Carefully, I lifted the moss on one of the
stones. What I found underneath was tree bark. So, these were not
stones, after all, but old wood. I was surprised at how hard the “stone”
was, because it usually takes only a few years for beechwood lying on
damp ground to decompose. But what surprised me most was that I couldn’t
lift the wood. It was obviously attached to the ground in some way. I
took out my pocketknife and carefully scraped away some of the bark
until I got down to a greenish layer. Green? This color is found only in
chlorophyll, which makes new leaves green; reserves of chlorophyll are
also stored in the trunks of living trees. That could mean only one
thing: this piece of wood was still alive! I suddenly noticed that the
remaining “stones” formed a distinct pattern: they were arranged in a
circle with a diameter of about 5 feet. What I had stumbled upon were
the gnarled remains of an enormous ancient tree stump. All that was left
were vestiges of the outermost edge. The interior had completely rotted
into humus long ago — a clear indication that the tree must have been
felled at least four or five hundred years earlier.
How can a tree cut down centuries ago could still be alive? Without
leaves, a tree is unable to perform photosynthesis, which is how it
converts sunlight into sugar for sustenance. The ancient tree was
clearly receiving nutrients in some other way — for hundreds of years. Beneath the mystery lay a fascinating frontier of scientific
research, which would eventually reveal that this tree was not unique in
its assisted living. Neighboring trees, scientists found, help each
other through their root systems — either directly, by intertwining
their roots, or indirectly, by growing fungal networks around the roots
that serve as a sort of extended nervous system connecting separate
trees. If this weren’t remarkable enough, these arboreal mutualities are
even more complex — trees appear able to distinguish their own roots
from those of other species and even of their own relatives. Art by Judith Clay from Thea’s TreeWohlleben ponders this astonishing sociality of trees, abounding with
wisdom about what makes strong human communities and societies: Why are trees such social beings? Why do they share food
with their own species and sometimes even go so far as to nourish their
competitors? The reasons are the same as for human communities: there
are advantages to working together. A tree is not a forest. On its own, a
tree cannot establish a consistent local climate. It is at the mercy of
wind and weather. But together, many trees create an ecosystem that
moderates extremes of heat and cold, stores a great deal of water, and
generates a great deal of humidity. And in this protected environment,
trees can live to be very old. To get to this point, the community must
remain intact no matter what. If every tree were looking out only for
itself, then quite a few of them would never reach old age. Regular
fatalities would result in many large gaps in the tree canopy, which
would make it easier for storms to get inside the forest and uproot more
trees. The heat of summer would reach the forest floor and dry it out.
Every tree would suffer. Every tree, therefore, is valuable to the community and
worth keeping around for as long as possible. And that is why even sick
individuals are supported and nourished until they recover. Next time,
perhaps it will be the other way round, and the supporting tree might be
the one in need of assistance. […] A tree can be only as strong as the forest that surrounds it. One can’t help but wonder whether trees are so much better equipped
at this mutual care than we are because of the different time-scales on
which our respective existences play out. Is some of our inability to
see this bigger picture of shared sustenance in human communities a
function of our biological short-sightedness? Are organisms who live on
different time scales better able to act in accordance with this grander
scheme of things in a universe that is deeply interconnected? To be sure, even trees are discriminating in their kinship, which they extend in varying degrees. Wohlleben explains:
Every tree is a member of this community, but there are
different levels of membership. For example, most stumps rot away into
humus and disappear within a couple of hundred years (which is not very
long for a tree). Only a few individuals are kept alive over the
centuries… What’s the difference? Do tree societies have second-class
citizens just like human societies? It seems they do, though the idea of
“class” doesn’t quite fit. It is rather the degree of connection — or
maybe even affection — that decides how helpful a tree’s colleagues will
be.
These relationships, Wohlleben points out, are encoded in the forest canopy and visible to anyone who simply looks up:
The average tree grows its branches out until it
encounters the branch tips of a neighboring tree of the same height. It
doesn’t grow any wider because the air and better light in this space
are already taken. However, it heavily reinforces the branches it has
extended, so you get the impression that there’s quite a shoving match
going on up there. But a pair of true friends is careful right from the
outset not to grow overly thick branches in each other’s direction. The
trees don’t want to take anything away from each other, and so they
develop sturdy branches only at the outer edges of their crowns, that is
to say, only in the direction of “non-friends.” Such partners are often
so tightly connected at the roots that sometimes they even die
together.
Art by Cécile Gambini from Strange Trees by Bernadette PourquiéBut trees don’t interact with one another in isolation from the rest
of the ecosystem. The substance of their communication, in fact, is
often about and even to other species. Wohlleben describes their
particularly remarkable olfactory warning system:
Four decades ago, scientists noticed something on the
African savannah. The giraffes there were feeding on umbrella thorn
acacias, and the trees didn’t like this one bit. It took the acacias
mere minutes to start pumping toxic substances into their leaves to rid
themselves of the large herbivores. The giraffes got the message and
moved on to other trees in the vicinity. But did they move on to trees
close by? No, for the time being, they walked right by a few trees and
resumed their meal only when they had moved about 100 yards away. The reason for this behavior is astonishing. The acacia trees that
were being eaten gave off a warning gas (specifically, ethylene) that
signaled to neighboring trees of the same species that a crisis was at
hand. Right away, all the forewarned trees also pumped toxins into their
leaves to prepare themselves. The giraffes were wise to this game and
therefore moved farther away to a part of the savannah where they could
find trees that were oblivious to what was going on. Or else they moved
upwind. For the scent messages are carried to nearby trees on the
breeze, and if the animals walked upwind, they could find acacias close
by that had no idea the giraffes were there.
Because trees operate on time scales dramatically more extended than
our own, they operate far more slowly than we do — their electrical
impulses crawl at the speed of a third of an inch per minute. Wohlleben
writes:
Beeches, spruce, and oaks all register pain as soon as
some creature starts nibbling on them. When a caterpillar takes a hearty
bite out of a leaf, the tissue around the site of the damage changes.
In addition, the leaf tissue sends out electrical signals, just as human
tissue does when it is hurt. However, the signal is not transmitted in
milliseconds, as human signals are; instead, the plant signal travels at
the slow speed of a third of an inch per minute. Accordingly, it takes
an hour or so before defensive compounds reach the leaves to spoil the
pest’s meal. Trees live their lives in the really slow lane, even when
they are in danger. But this slow tempo doesn’t mean that a tree is not
on top of what is happening in different parts of its structure. If the
roots find themselves in trouble, this information is broadcast
throughout the tree, which can trigger the leaves to release scent
compounds. And not just any old scent compounds, but compounds that are
specifically formulated for the task at hand.
The upside of this incapacity for speed is that there is no need for
blanket alarmism — the recompense of trees’ inherent slowness is an
extreme precision of signal. In addition to smell, they also use taste —
each species produces a different kind of “saliva,” which can be
infused with different pheromones targeted at warding off a specific
predator. Wohlleben illustrates the centrality of trees in Earth’s ecosystem
with a story about Yellowstone National Park that demonstrates “how our
appreciation for trees affects the way we interact with the world around
us”:
It all starts with the wolves. Wolves disappeared from
Yellowstone, the world’s first national park, in the 1920s. When they
left, the entire ecosystem changed. Elk herds in the park increased
their numbers and began to make quite a meal of the aspens, willows, and
cottonwoods that lined the streams. Vegetation declined and animals
that depended on the trees left. The wolves were absent for seventy
years. When they returned, the elks’ languorous browsing days were over.
As the wolf packs kept the herds on the move, browsing diminished, and
the trees sprang back. The roots of cottonwoods and willows once again
stabilized stream banks and slowed the flow of water. This, in turn,
created space for animals such as beavers to return. These industrious
builders could now find the materials they needed to construct their
lodges and raise their families. The animals that depended on the
riparian meadows came back, as well. The wolves turned out to be better
stewards of the land than people, creating conditions that allowed the
trees to grow and exert their influence on the landscape.
Art by William Grill from The Wolves of CurrumpawThis interconnectedness isn’t limited to regional ecosystems.
Wohlleben cites the work of Japanese marine chemist Katsuhiko Matsunaga,
who discovered that trees falling into a river can change the acidity
of the water and thus stimulate the growth of plankton — the elemental
and most significant building block of the entire food chain, on which
our own sustenance depends.
Comments
Post a Comment