Science in Small Bites
Part One: The dying hearts of old-growth trees, what they harbor, and why we should care.
In this issue of For Your Consideration, we’ll delve into a recent scientific discovery about the heartwood of old-growth trees. Then we’ll look at a new personality type, the otrovert.
There is a philosophical thought experiment that we are all likely familiar with: “If a tree falls in a forest and no one is around to hear it, does it make a sound?” Some new research on trees poses the question: “What happens to the unique microbiome that thrives in the heart of old-growth trees when we no longer have trees that are hundreds of years old?”
Humans have more in common with trees than just limbs and trunks; we both support and benefit from the presence of bacteria. There are trillions of bacteria in our bodies, more than the total number of cells in our entire body.
We have co-evolved with bacteria, viruses and fungi that have been on Earth for millions, if not billions, of years. These microscopic squatters that make up our microbiome are responsible for functions such as digestion, vitamin production, assisting our immune system and mitigating the risk of disease. Maintaining a healthy microbiome is crucial to our overall health, which can be achieved through the consumption of probiotics, prebiotic foods and regular physical activity. Most of us are aware of this.
But what about trees?
The outer layers of trees consist of bark and two types of tissue, xylem and phloem, which form the tree’s vascular system. The xylem serves as a conduit for water and minerals to travel from the roots to all parts of the tree, including the leaves. Phloem transports sugars (food) produced by the leaves through photosynthesis to all parts of the tree, including the roots, where connections are formed with mycelium (fungi).
Within this complex system are trillions of bacteria, archaea and fungi; much like the human microbiome. Some of these tiny residents are beneficial, while others can damage the tree.
When trees die and fall to the ground, you may have seen downed trunks festooned with fungi, insects and other invaders out for a meal. All of these diverse lifeforms perform the crucial process of decomposition, which adds nutrients to the forest floor and its residents, both terrestrial and subterranean.
Heart rot affects trees when microbials, including fungi, archaea, and a plethora of bacteria, many still unidentified, infect the heartwood of a tree. These invaders enter the heart of the tree when it is wounded or loses limbs. That said, the tree can continue to live for many years because the outer layers, including the bark, phloem and xylem, continue to provide it with nourishment.
Eventually, however, the interior wood rots away and the tree becomes hollow. A key point to note about this process is that scientists did not fully understand the range of species and their functions until relatively recently.
The problem, as such, is that the old-growth trees are dwindling as I am writing these words. That means the unique microbiome in the interior of aging trees could be lost forever. The greater loss would affect wildlife that depend on the microbials, insects, and the shelter they provide to mammals and birds. As a result, biodiversity is threatened.
There is so much for us to learn about the world around us. It is the scientists, including foresters, biologists, bacteriologists and Mycologists, who will make discoveries that could save our forests. And when we save trees, we are helping to save our planet.
Part Two: If you’re not an introvert or an extrovert, then what are you?
Barbra Streisand begins a popular song with, “People who need people are the luckiest people in the world.” Well, Barbra, it really depends on what you mean by “need.”
Several months ago, this column featured a series on hermits and recluses, in which we not only discussed the lives of those who choose to live in near-total isolation from other humans, but also explored the personality types of such individuals.
From my research into these loners, I realized that we humans are not always willing to be part of society as we generally know it. These few who seek solitude do not always have the same personalities; some, like Richard Proeneke, who lived in the Alaskan wilderness for more than 30 years, were open to visitors and even enjoyed their occasional company. Others, like Christopher Knight, who lived in the backwoods of Maine, had only one short interaction with a hiker in his 27 years of solitude.
My point? We do not all have the drive or need to be part of a group, to share the beliefs and ideology of society, or to be part of the tribe; yet, they thrive in being independent. These people fall into a new personality classification, otrovert, a term coined by the psychiatrist and author Rami Kaminski.
I’m sure everybody knows the terms introvert and extrovert, and I further assume you are familiar with the fact that an introvert is focused on internal thoughts and feelings, rather than social interactions. Contrast that with an extrovert who is predominantly focused on social interaction and is generally outgoing and confident in group or social situations.
But what about those, and I count myself among them, who best thrive with independent thought and action? They do not thrive in echo chambers and are not at all comfortable being part of a group or tribe. Otroverts find their most meaningful connections outside of the tribe; they are at their best in one-on-one interaction.
In Kaminski’s book, The Gift of Not Belonging, he describes an otrovert as “Those who don’t feel the obligation to merge with the identity of others, Kaminski goes on to add, “We are all born as otroverts, before the cultural conditioning of childhood cements our affiliations with various identities and groups.”
Kaminski points out that an otrovert may very well get involved with a group, but, as he says, “They may move through the group, but are not dissolved by it. Disinterest in group membership and assimilation is not a psychological problem – it is simply a personality type that has not been recognized before.”
Society, as a whole, may ridicule otroverts as non-conformists, or not, God forbid, a “Team Player.” That may very well be, but that is the “gift” Kaminski refers to in the title of his book. “Otroverts,” says Kaminski, “are not a flaw in design, but a design of itself.”
In a recent article in the science journal New Scientist, Kaminski concludes, “History is full of independent thinkers who are not emotionally dependent on any group and can therefore see the fanaticism of a ‘hive’ mind long before most people do: George Orwell comes to mind.”
“Sadly, it often seems that people need to emerge from the ashes of self-destructive groupthink before they realize that individual thinkers can be right. Perhaps we can learn from otroverts that, while there are many reasons to praise community, we should also be aware of its darker side – tribalism.”
So, fellow otroverts, and others who prefer not to be guided by groupthink, I applaud you. But let us not form a group with rituals, uniforms, pledges or logos.
“We can think critically and make decisions independently.
Ken Springer
ken1949bongo@gmail.com
“Protect science for science protects us.” KLS
