Bamboo plants are known for their rapid growth, with some species reaching up to 91 cm (3 feet) in just one day. This impressive growth rate is due to the fact that bamboo produces 35 times more oxygen than trees and consumes more carbon dioxide than any other plant, helping to reverse the effects of global warming. However, bamboo can also induce negative impacts on biodiversity and ecological functions.
Bamboo plants are easy to grow, attractive canes with evergreen foliage, and are best planted in spring in sun and moist but free-draining soil. They can be invasive when grown in favourable conditions, such as a sheltered, mild location with fertile, moisture-retentive soil. Inter-cropping crops should not be heavy consumers of soil nutrients, as they will retard bamboo growth.
The growing season, typically during the monsoon months, can damage young and emerging shoots and retard future growth of clumps. Bushfires destroy young bamboo plants and retard the growth of established bamboo plants. However, unlike many other tree species, bamboo helps retain moisture in the soil and retards competitive weeds while it is getting started.
Some larger species of bamboo focus their energy underground in the first few/several years, then, when the root system can support it, new rhizomes grow. The chemical in walnut that kills other plants is called juglone, which breaks down quickly when exposed to air or water, so sawdust may not be the best choice. Even an individual plant that suspends growth of new culms and foliage for the exclusive production of flowers may die.
In summary, bamboo plants have a remarkable growth rate, making them a valuable resource for preserving biodiversity and ecological functions.
📹 GROW LUCKY BAMBOO IN WATER💚💚// LUCKY BAMBOO BEST INDOOR PLANT// #shorts
SOME IMPORTANT POINTS (IF YOU WANT TO GROW LUCKY BAMBOO ON WATER) 1. USE FILTERED WATER 2. CHANGE …
What is the disadvantage of bamboo?
Bamboo that spreads and escapes from your yard can cause ecological problems, as many species are invasive exotic plants that crowd out native plants and threaten biodiversity. Containing spreading bamboo can be expensive and complicated, and may not be worth pursuing for many homeowners. Experts recommend burying thick 60-mil polypropylene or fiberglass about three feet deep and leaving another two inches above the soil to inhibit surface spreading.
Morgan Judy of Clemson University Cooperative Extension suggests creating a solid barrier made of concrete, metal, or pressure-treated wood at least 18 inches deep around the bamboo. These barriers should stop shallow bamboo rhizomes from spreading, but closely monitor the area for escaping shoots, especially during the early summer peak growing season. Taking bamboo removal seriously may take years and vigorous effort, and many homeowners with bamboo-loving neighbors complain about the persistent regrowth of escaped shoots.
Does bamboo regrow when cut?
Bamboo, a renewable resource, can be harvested sustainably due to its ability to stimulate growth by unfurling new leaves. These leaves create more energy for the roots, promoting the growth of new shoots. Bamboo’s rapid growth rate is due to its carbon sequestration potential, which can be up to 1. 78 tonnes of CO2 per clump per year when managed intensively. This is 10 times faster than that of woody trees. Additionally, dense bamboo roots form a water barrier, protecting crops from rising water tables and filtering organic matter, including soil nitrogen.
This has led to some scientists exploring bamboo as a sustainable wastewater treatment option. Overall, bamboo’s potential for sustainable growth and environmental benefits make it a promising resource for sustainable agriculture.
What is the disadvantage of lucky bamboo?
Lucky Bamboo is toxic to cats and dogs due to its calcium oxalate crystals and saponins, which can irritate the oral cavity and digestive tract. These substances can cause oral swelling, loss of appetite, vomiting, diarrhea, and depression. If you suspect poisoning, contact your vet immediately. To prevent Lucky Bamboo poisoning, keep toxic plants out of reach, place toxic plants in hanging planters or a fenced-off space, and grow pet-friendly plants. Keep your greenery away from your pets.
What are the disadvantages of bamboo trees?
Bamboo that spreads and escapes from your yard can cause ecological problems, as many species are invasive exotic plants that crowd out native plants and threaten biodiversity. Containing spreading bamboo can be expensive and complicated, and may not be worth pursuing for many homeowners. Experts recommend burying thick 60-mil polypropylene or fiberglass about three feet deep and leaving another two inches above the soil to inhibit surface spreading.
Morgan Judy of Clemson University Cooperative Extension suggests creating a solid barrier made of concrete, metal, or pressure-treated wood at least 18 inches deep around the bamboo. These barriers should stop shallow bamboo rhizomes from spreading, but closely monitor the area for escaping shoots, especially during the early summer peak growing season. Taking bamboo removal seriously may take years and vigorous effort, and many homeowners with bamboo-loving neighbors complain about the persistent regrowth of escaped shoots.
Will bamboo regrow when cut?
Bamboo does not regrow when cut at the top of the cane, but instead produces new leaves to support its root system. Cutting at the base of a culm results in regrowth as the cane replaces itself over time, making it an ineffective method for eliminating the plant. Design expertise is provided in your inbox, including inspiring decorating ideas, beautiful celebrity homes, gardening advice, and shopping round-ups.
Does bamboo grow infinitely?
Clumping bamboo, also known as Pachymorph, are non-invasive types with dense, compact root systems. They are commonly grown in Maryland, with Fountain Bamboo being the main genus. Leptomorph, on the other hand, are fast-spreading bamboos with culms spaced further apart. Mature running bamboo colonies create forests of growth, with rhizomes able to run indefinitely unless damaged at the growing tip.
New culm growth occurs in spring, lasting 6-12 weeks between March and May. Growing culms extend like a telescoping rod, reaching their full height during their first year (30 ft. or more for a mature running bamboo).
How damaging are bamboo roots?
Bamboo, a fast-growing plant, can cause problems for homeowners due to its ability to break through tarmac, grow beneath patios, and cross boundaries, potentially leading to conflict with neighbors. Additionally, its roots can spread into homes through cracks or weak mortar. As awareness of these issues is relatively recent, there are no statutory controls for ‘running’ bamboos. In Scotland, some bamboo species may fall under the Wildlife and Natural Environment (Scotland) Act 2011, but this legislation may only apply where bamboo is impacting wild habitats.
Is bamboo actually environmentally friendly?
Bamboo, a carbon-negative plant, effectively reduces the concentration of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere by absorbing carbon dioxide during its growth.
Will a bamboo stalk grow roots?
Bamboo, a thick, woody grass, is commonly used in furniture and flooring, as well as in gardens as ornamental plants or privacy barriers. It can be propagated using cuttings from the culms or rhizomes. The tool used depends on the thickness and heartiness of the bamboo. Thin bamboo can be cut with a sharp knife, while heartier bamboo may require a handsaw. Before using any tool, sterilize it with household disinfectants like diluted bleach or rubbing alcohol. If using bleach, dilute it with water, using 1 part bleach for every 32 parts water.
Does anything grow faster than bamboo?
Bamboo is the fastest-growing plant on Earth, with the capacity to grow up to 35 inches per day, or 1. 5 inches per hour for the faster species. During its initial growth phase, it grows at a rate of approximately 0. 025 inches per minute.
Is bamboo plant good or bad for you?
Bamboo plants are a popular indoor plant due to their air quality improvement, stress reduction, and productivity enhancement. They are easy to care for, offer numerous benefits, and can thrive in various conditions. Bamboo plants belong to the grass family and are known for their fast growth and durability. They can grow up to 91 cm in a single day, making them one of the fastest-growing plants globally. Bamboo plants are also highly resilient, able to withstand extreme temperatures and weather conditions. Popular names include Lucky Bamboo, Ribbon Plant, Dracaena Sanderiana, and Friendship Bamboo.
📹 How & Why Earth Went From Purple to Green (Twice!) | GEO GIRL
Did you know that Earth used to be purple?! Actually, there were TWO periods in Earth’s history during which it likely looked more …
Hey guys! I thought I should mention that yes, I kinda sorta stole this article idea from pbs eons haha, but this article is not meant to repeat what they’ve said or discredit their article in any way. I actually made this article because I felt like there was more to discuss on this topic and I hope that my article complements their article by providing additional background and information about the potential second purple earth event! So I hope you enjoy, and if you are interested in checking our pbs eons’ article on purple earth I highly recommend it! -> youtu.be/IIA-k_bBcL0
Rachel, I’m a postdoc in geosciences (more specifically, in seismology) at Northwestern University, and found your website less than a week ago. I’m absolutely amazed by the extremely high-quality content you have. I’ll probably watch all of your articles! 😁 Your website is, by far, the best I’ve ever seen on geosciences! Congratulations on the amazing work you have been doing by teaching so well! If you intend to become a professor (well, actually, you already are 😊), you will be an amazing one! Fortunately, now we have YouTube to spread the kind of high-quality content such as yours to the four corners of the world! 😃
Our body uses energy from the sun in the process of creating Vitamin D, I guess that would be phototrophy as well! Actually the history of the production of Vitamin D goes all the way back to early photosynthesizers, with the possibility that they made it as a sort of natural sunscreen to protect sensitive molecules inside. It’s a bit of a rabbit hole itself haha
Thank you for mentioning that we have retinal pigments in our eyeballs at around 11:48. I was getting confused why this purple pigment was called “retinal” until then. I had to look that up: It’s the light-sensitive compound that detect light in our eyes – hence “retina” – and our body produces it by breaking down Vitamin A. I was wondering what the connection to microbes was! I learned some biology today!
Wow, thank you for covering this topic. The metabolic diversity of prokaryotes is fascinating to me. I watched the eons article on this topic, but it left me feeling that I wanted more details, so this is exactly what I was hoping for. Also I feel like one time the website it’s okay to be smart did a article about purple sulfur bacteria but I can’t for the life of me find it. So this was exactly what I needed.
Wow, this is super fascinating! I really appreciate these in-depth lecture-type articles on (astro)biology and geology, and I’m probably gonna spend the next few hours binging your articles! By the way, I’m the author of the purple planet image you used in your article and thumbnail. No worries though, because I actually feel pretty honored that a random 4-year-old SpaceEngine screenshot of mine made it into a YouTube article of all things! Anyways, keep up the good work! 😀
Point to note from a once-upon-a-time biophysics student: thermodynamics dictate that energy absorption by phototrophic organisms must ultimately be balanced by ability to radiate heat i.e. it has to run hotter to colder else there’s no work to be done. Chlorophyllic life, by absorbing photon at the red and blue end of the spectrum, are optimally emitting waste heat using wavelengths at which our (oxygen enhanced) atmosphere is very transparent. The rhototans, in absorbing the mid-enrgy but most prevalent photons could only dump heat as reddish or blueish photons, neither of which traverse our (oxygen-enriched) atmosphere.
Your website plays a pivotal role in transforming people’s understanding of nature and the world around us. It serves as a catalyst for the EVOLUTION of mental comprehension, contributing to a deeper and more enriched understanding of our surroundings. Thank you for fostering knowledge and enlightenment! On behalf of ALL of humanity, Thank You!!! ;o)
Great article, thanks! I appreciate the level of detail you go into. I’m a sucker for charts and figures. So purple earth occurred before the GOE, yes? If that’s the case, then would earth’s dull rocky landmasses be surrounded by a ring of purple shallows, with the oceans full of green iron sulfate? That would be a cool looking planet.
first of, first time perusal and very interesting stuff (most of which i knew other than the fact the earth was once purple o_o)… secondly, I LOVE POWERPOINTS. also, no shame in taking ideas from PBS Eons – you have your own take and approach (and it seems lovely) – but they also have some of the best content. 😂
Hi Rachel, it is nice of you to come up with this explanatory article on Purple Earth. It would be a sequel to the Pale Orange Dot Earth (3.8 to 2.5 Ga) – Source: NASA, in your Physical Geology Playlist: youtube.com/watch?v=wTega6334Cw&list=PL69bBhmsrgfv67R9zy9qBDDhaxxuKYfnD&index=8 . It reminds us that Earth does not look as it is now (blue and green) but has evolved through time.
I’ve seen research on plants’ color and the rate of energy absorption across the spectrum suggesting that green is an evolutionary choice to forgo the intense, volatile middle of the spectrum and instead opt for the stability of red and blue wavelengths to generate more reliable output. It follows (or precedes) quite neatly that the first adopters would use a less efficient, higher risk/reward but more accessible chemical pathway and that the organisms we see are descendants and optimisers of that lottery’s winners.
Well yet another explanation why complex life evolved so late on Earth! Makes us wander if perhaps on other planets it could have met better conditions early on and evolved way earlier. So fascinating to imagine a Phanerozoic eon that is 2 billion years old or more instead of one just 540 million years old like it was the case on Earth!
An interesting excursion into a subject I know next to nothing about – thank you for enlightening me. One thing I’m slightly puzzled by at the moment (well, sort of two things): 1. Where did early retinal-based phototrophs get their organic carbon? (Which other organisms?) 2. Where did the first oxygenic photosynthesisers get their carbon dioxide?
Hi Rachel! I’ve become a fan of your vids. You give lots of info. For example, I have always tried to find how dense were the Carboniferous forests. And you explain this in your article about this period. Please, make a vid about THE AZOLLA EVENT. Was it true or is it pure speculation? Can a single plant produce an extinction event in an era where there were lots of hervibores that could specialize to control it’s expansion?
Rachel: What if Earth wasn’t the only planet that experienced this purple phase? What if this hypothesis might give us insight into potential life on exoplanets…and if the purple earth hypothesis is correct and there was a dominance of purple organisms in the early Earth, then might we be able to find another planet that’s at an earlier stage of evolution of the planet, where the purple pigments might have dominated?
Just came across this for the first time and this was fascinating. I’m an exoplanet atmosphere modeler but my office mate thinks about the Archean and I love trying to picture how incredibly bizarre Archean Earth must’ve looked. I’ve also heard it suggested that the skies would have been orange due to methane hazes, the land, such as there was, would’ve mostly been black due to the lack of oxidization or land based life, and the oceans might have been green due to all the dissolved unoxidized iron Is it right to imagine that the purple phototrophs would’ve mostly been in stromatolite colonies in shallow seas? So now basically I’m picturing a ocean world filled with green seas, dotted with black volcanic islands surrounded by purple lagoons, lit by orange smoggy skies?
Comment about info at 5:50– I’m not Geogirl so it may be wrong! Phototaxis is when a whole organism moves toward the light. Phototropism (just one h) is when something turns toward the light, like Helianthus, the sunflower, and phototrophy (2 h’s) is something getting energy from light. I love your website!!
One of the main genes involved in retinal transport in vertebrate eyes is actually “stolen” from bacteria. Turns out that every once in a while some bacterial plasmids accidentally make their way into our DNA through horizontal transfer (meant for other bacteria of the same species), and over time we’ve accumulated hundreds of bacterial genes that turned out to be useful. It might turn out with further research that retinal production itself was stolen from bacteria at an even earlier point in eukaryote evolution—our mitochondria were originally bacteria after all.
In my opinion there are two problems with the hypothesis: 1. Chemical analysis of the oldest rocks shows that the atmosphere of the early Earth was very inert and there wouldn’t have been an abundant source of organic carbon on the 3.7 Ga which makes it more likely that the first phototrophs were producing vs consuming organic carbon. 2. Although the retinol based pigments absorb more light on the surface you have to remember that the first organisms lived in water and one of the chlorophyll absorbance peaks is in the blue light range (the wavelengths that can penetrate the furthest in water). This is going to be even more important on the early Earth when the top mixing layer of the oceans would have been inundated with intense UV light.
Water absorbs lower frequencies of light faster than higher frequencies. (At 9 meters there is so little red light that blood appears to be blackish green because green and blue light are still available.) So chlorophyll’s ability to absorb blue light would enable those organisms with it to undergo phototrophy at a deeper depth than the Retinol based organisms. And since the Retinol based organisms would view the Chlorophyll based organisms as “a source of organic carbon” that would come in very handy. Being able to absorb red light was just a convenient side effect because red just happens to be twice the wavelength of blue.
Great article glad i found your website 😍. Maybe the co2 levels had abit to do with the changes but the other thing certain light spectrums trigger growth characteristics in plants. In general, blue light spectrums encourage vegetative and structural growth and red light promotes flowering, fruit, leaf growth, and stem elongation.🤔
It seems like animal life evolved from retinal based phototrophes because we still have retinals in our eyes, which may be a lagacy holdover from early evolution. If this is true, proto-animals switched over to resperation to take advantage of the oxygenation event. Perhaps study into mycology could shed light on this point, since fungi seem to resemble the hypothetical precursers to animal life.
Fascinating. Always wondered why plants reflect reflect away the green part of the spectrum. So you say they choose a different part of the spectrum from the purple bacteria to be able to compete – by finding a different ecological niche, so to speak. But that is not so clear. It’s not like purple bacteria use up all the purple in the world. Only makes sense if both kinds of bacteria are all bunched up together, literally living on top of each other and filtering the light that reaches those below. That is the implication of your theory. I would think each would stick to their own neighbourhood, where they are born, raised up, and die. In that case there is enough spectrum for all – at least until the plants killed off the purple bacteria by poisoning the atmosphere with oxygen.
I’m not sure of the reasoning behind chlorophyl-based photosynthesis evolving because earlier life forms did not use green light. There was an old joke about the cathedral in Munich: “Why does it have two clock towers?” Answer: ” In case somebody is looking at the other clock.” Did they somehow compete for photons?
I wonder if it was actually thrice. Many plants also have anthocyanins, these are purple pigments that absorb sunlight in conditions too cold for chlorophyll to function. The best example is when trees change color for fall and many of them are red/purple. I once had a corn/maize plant that grew to be completely purple when I was 10 and it completely changed my life. I waiting for a space movie where they land on another planet and it’s plant life is purple. I’ve had this thought for years because it just makes sense.
Under sunlight, green leafs are cooler than purple leafs, because the light spectrum peaks in the green region. High temperature would mean higher evaporation of water, lower efficiency of many pathways, and more to repair (consuming energy). That may explain why plants keep reflecting green light even though green-consuming retinol is much less abundant than it used to be.
Interesting about the eye absorbing light in retinal photosynthesis. The particular blue hue of the sky has a psychological effect on us giving us a feeling of well being. The lack of it for an extended time like winter periods gives some people today seasonal affective disorder (SAD) as an evolutionary adaptation. In the depths of winter in the ice age feeling like “seizing the day” and “making it all happen” by going outside in the freezing blizzard winds with no food, big game migrated away for the winter would likely mean a dead ice age man. Feeling like doing nothing is exactly the best strategy at such a time.
Not sure if it could be considered phototropy, but us humans do produce neurochemicals and vitamins from sunlight. So we are not that dissimilar to plants/phytoplankton. And yes, our eyes process sunlight better than our skin does. To be honest, I personally believe there is a correlation between the usage of UV blocking sunglasses and the rise in depression/anxiety disorders.
Very good presentation. It is fascinating to hear about the molecules that has enabled our cells to manipulate energy (the source of life). In eukaryote cells mitochondria are the next evolutionary step on this path and pathology i mitochondria have been identified as the basis of many causes disease. Your hypothesis on the boring billion is interesting. I think the Black Sea has this kind of chemistry. The Black Sea being a fresh water lake before 7000 BC, became connected til the Mediterranean by earth quakes and salt water flowed into the lake. But fresh water kept coming from the great rivers keeping the Black Sea as a fresh water lake on the surface (200 m) and saltwater below the halocline. The chemistry of FeS makes the Black Sea black. It is also interesting that in the straits of Bosporus fresh water flows out at the surface, but saltwater flows in a a depth of 30-50 m, keeping the Black Sea salty.
Do you know how they got the hydrogen gradient on the original purple ones. If I remember right modern photosynthesis goes chlorophyll lenses create electric current then proteins use the electric current to do electrolysis to create a hydrogen gradient then the hydrogen gradients used by proteins to recharge ATP then sugar is bombarded by ATP and CO2 to make more sugar. I got the impression the second purple ones used hydrogen sulfide electrolysis instead of water electrolysis for a hydrogen gradient. So I’m curious what the first purple ones used as a hydrogen source for the hydrogen gradient for ATP?
The more I hav learned about stromatolites, the more Im certain of my hypothesis about them being the origin of the rose rocks that are very common here In Oklahoma where I am from and live. When I saw what they look like when alive I thought, I hav definitely seen that pattern somewhere before and it is rose rocks. Stromatolites that lived in the shallow sea that once covered this part of the country are now our state rock
Great article with clear explanations. Does the evolution of different photosynthetic strategies have any relationship to the brightening of solar radiation over time? Solar luminosity was about 30% less intense when the Earth formed and has increased over time. Did early photosynthetic mechanisms need to capture more of the spectrum due to this lower intensity? Was the rise of chlorophyll-based mechanisms possible because more energy was later available at the upper and lower portions of the visible spectrum?
Decades ago one of my lecturers in biophysics researched purple sulphur bacteria. Actually, they were probably purple non-sulphur bacteria, as he had a large hot room with demi-johns containing magnetic stirrers and this purple, cloudy stuff, with bright lights shining on them. It didn’t look very anaerobic! Anyway, sulphur, non-sulphur, they were definitely purple! {:o:O:}
You can see how the long chains for passing hydrogen along them allow for greater complexity of configuration. The purple stuff’s energy generating mechanism has to operate close to the cell wall. Photosynthetic organisms may not have to operate under that restriction. The production of oxygen as a side benefit is more probable in something more complex. Evolution could be more successful if things like producing oxygen don’t have to be the point of some focus. We need to give them room enough for them to be random, not possessed of some purpose. Then, once in place, the very idea of them becomes embedded. They remain, even if they amount to giving oxygen away, not reusing it somehow.
I thought absorbing more energy would translate into increased functionality, meaning the retinol-based plants would be the autotrophic or more autotrophic plants. However, in subsequent articles, you have said that anaerobic metabolism is less energetic than aerobic, and the chlorophyl plants are the ones using the oxygen. I think a big part of this story is the mobility; being able to produce your own organic carbon rather than having to remain tied to the source.
I was really tickled – one of those epiphanous moments – by learning how phototaxis flips from positive to negative phototropism in some plants after fertilization. One of those ‘sense through the lens of evolution’ times. I just hope that I’m not mistaken in extending this phenomenon to climbing vines.
If retinal-based phototrophs were also heterotrophs, where do we think the organic carbon that they consumed came from? Perhaps from the very first organisms, which I would guess utilized chemical or thermal energy in the ocean. I don’t know, but it’s fun to speculate. Thank you for producing great articles!
Thanks for another excellent article. You seem to answer questions that arose earlier regarding the use of color as a potential bio-signature of exoplanets. Also, maybe I should look into panels for a greenhouse which transmit blue and red light (purple) while blocking the energetic green light. The interior of my greenhouse has a very energetic temperature right about now in the summer midday. Seems like the tomatoes love it though. Thanks
One question that I had while perusal this article is why organism that use chlorophyll haven’t since evolved different-pigmented chlorophyll that absorbs green light (after they out-competed retinal phototropes, leaving that absorption niche in the light spectrum open). If it’s possible for red-and-blue-absorbing chlorophyll to evolve into green-absorbing chlorophyll (and the small yellow-wavelength absorption peaks of bacterial chlorophyll shown at 15:30 suggest it might be), and that would be advantageous for the organisms that use it, it seems like 2.5 billion years must be enough time for that mutation to occur and spread. So maybe that means it’s not actually advantageous then? Maybe red-and-green-absorbing chlorophyll is actually more optimal. Maybe the first photosynthetic organisms would have evolved to use that pigment of chlorophyll anyway, regards of whether green-absorbing retinal phototropes were dominant in the initial environment or not. I looked up that question on Quora (why chlorophyll doesn’t absorb green), I noticed two points/claims answers people gave that might support that hypothesis: 1. In warmer climates, being able to reflect green light and therefore stay cooler may be an advantage to some photosynthetic organisms. 2. In practice, the amount of photosynthesis that organisms can perform is capped by things other than the amount of light they can absorb (the example of water availability was given), so theoretical organisms that used green-absorbing chlorophyll wouldn’t be able to make use of the additional light they absorbed; they might just instead be able to absorb the same amount of light with fewer chlorophyll molecules.
The sun has a peak in the number of photons that it emits at about 500 nm (599.6 Thz). The chlorophyll B absorbs light at about 475 nm (631 Thz). This “blue” light is more energetic than the “green” light. I am wondering if this difference might make sense based on quantum mechanics. The light is used to “kick” electrons up into a higher energy level. This can only happen if the energy of the light and the energy needed to kick the electrons up are identical. The difference in energy of the photons at the 500 nm and 475 nm is roughly 5%. The peak of sun light happening in the “green” part of the spectrum would suggest that plants would have evolved to be purple. The counter to this is that maybe the slightly higher energy “blue” photons can penetrate water better and have an energy that is closer to the specific energy needed to excite the electrons of the chlorophyll. This sounds like the makings of a good science experiment.
Lots of very interesting stuff, but one thing didn’t make sense to me, re: co-evolution. I am thinking of the case of a low-hanging tree, grabbing the light that hits down low, where the tall trees don’t have leaves. This works because the tall trees do not occupy that physical space. But here we are talking about different wavelengths, all of which (presumably) hit the earth more or less equally in all places. Or is that the solution? That some places were less occupied by the purples because there was less of their preferred wavelength of light getting through the atmosphere there?
The nori I grew on the coast of Maine is a red algae. As it grows intertidal, when exposed and drying its deep burgundy color is seen. Nori is typically Pyropia yezoensis – formerly Porphyra y. from Greek ‘purple’. I wonder if the purple obtained from Murex snails in Tyre came through the predation of algae eaters. Imperial color. We must admire stromatolites; I wish them well. Unrelated is a thing I heard,… the occasional hydrocarbon floating in space gives the universe a strawberry odor… ?
I’ve often wondered if Mars’s red “rusty” color is seen by some people as a biosignature for the presence of free oxygen? After all, wasn’t it until the GOE when the banded (red/black) iron oxides (hydroxides) appeared on the surface of the earth. In other words, can iron sulfides react with water – in the absence of oxygen – to give “red” iron oxides? But then, why don’t we see banded iron formation older than the GOE on earth? (I remember putting a piece of pyrite or markasite into a jar with water and leaving it there for some days – some “rusty” brown sludge evolved, but then there was access to atmospheric oxygen and bacteria most probably were present too.) Thanks a lot for your articles and all the effort you put in. But as in all good science with every questions answered two more pop up… !
Photosynthesising pigments need to have an inherent colour or they will do nothing, because of the nature of what a photosynthesising pigment is. So plants 🌱 don’t have a ton of options. Though, there are a bunch of unrelated anoxygenic photo-synthesisers, some of which are purple. You just don’t usually notice them because of how tiny they are. Their dominance has not really gone away. Anoxygenic photosynthesis seems easier to evolve 🧬 and since photosynthesis is a very useful ability it makes sense for it to stick. Though not always as the organism’s only way to make energy, as that is a big lifestyle change and a lot of the time pointless.
Even though it is reasonable to assume there was a time, when mostly purple bacteria populated the earth. However, does that actually mean, that the earth was purple? Right now, the earth is blue and green – blue because of the water, which is independent of what bacteria grow in the oceans, and green because of the plants on land, again not because of green bacteria. So based on that, one would have to assume, that there were much more purple bacteria back then in the oceans than there are now green bacteria and algi, and even a thick purple bacterial overgrowth of the land to make the land purple. Was all that actually the case, or is the term “purple earth” in science just a phrase to refer to earth when there were barely any organisms doing photosynthesis?
If there is energy available today that is not used by chlorophyll and knowing that “life finds a way” would make me think that the reason we don’t find more organisms that use those frequencies today is because the chemistry is impossible due to a lack of source material necessary for it and/or the presence of antagonist materials like oxygen. Knowing what we know about chemistry, could we bioengineer an organism that uses those frequencies (green light) sustain itself in our current environment?
Is it possible to compete for particular spectra of light? Like, plants clearly compete for light, but it’s a bit of an all-or-nothing game, isn’t it? The green spectrum light wasn’t passing directly through the retinol-based lifeforms, was it? Or is the implication here that they reflected enough light to enable the chlorophylls?
Any chance you can consult on countering the Gulf Stream/of Mexico accelerated heating, due to shipping fuels drastic reduction in CO2 ‘cloud seeding’? I believe it was 2020 where the law went into effect that resulted in amplified solar effects into these AMOC critical regions. We can simply spray ocean/seawater into the sky to ‘geoengineer’ similar effects; but I’d like to see overlapping solves for Saharan Dust minimizing hurricane production, and potential brine production from Thorium Reactors now in production that may be able to be substituted for ocean/seawater. Oh, and if you can throw in some ‘purple chemistry’ to rebuild coral reefs, that would be cool 🙂
What the ??! PURPLE?! That’s one of my favorite colors! The color purple! So weird and cool. I’m wearing my new Hoka purple and green shoes 👟 for the first time on my morning run today. They match early and current Earth. I admit I love being matchy-matchy. And weird. So thank you for this amazing message! ❤ On a more serious note, I’m using this info in my new book on the natural laws of symbolic meaning in the universe. 💁♀️🍆💜☯️🕉️
0:16: 🌍 The Earth may have been purple at some point in its history due to early photosynthetic organisms. 3:10: 🌱 Chlorophyll absorbs light in a region that is not the strongest output of the sun, while bacteria rhodopsin absorbs the opposite wavelengths. 6:29: 🌱 The absorption of light by different pigments in phototrophs and photosynthetic organisms results in different absorption properties. 9:57: 🌍 The evolution of phototrophs based on retinol and chlorophyll pigments suggests a co-evolutionary history in response to available wavelengths of light. 12:46: 🔬 Halo archaea may have evolved in anaerobic conditions and later developed the ability to use oxygen for metabolism. 15:58: 🌊 Low oxygen levels in some parts of the ocean and abundance of sulfide supported by sulfate-reducing bacteria and violet sulfur bacteria. 19:13: 🌱 The evolution of aquatic plants led to the development of non-vascular plants on land, which eventually allowed for the evolution of terrestrial animals. Recap by Tammy AI
This adds up to the mess it should be planning a time travel trip. I am not sure how time travel would work yet. If I travel in time, would I be in the same place in space we are now? The sun moves, so we would end up far away from solar system. But let us guess we end up in a Earth centered coordinate system, so will it be a surface sync coordinate for arrival or will it be a sideral coordinate? If we arrive with a surface sync system continents would be where they used to be, so you better arrive in the air, preferrably above the clouds, because you do not want to arrive inside a volcano or on a chemical pool, or something not friendly. Preparing for the camping day must be terrible because you need to prepare for extremely hot or cold conditions. You need to prepare for changes in radiation exposure, and also for all weathe conditions. And that includes higher tides as the Moon was closer, and probably even supervolcano eruptions if you had the bad luck of finding near one.
Not sure if I buy the green uses unused spectrum hypothesis unless there is mechanism where the purple is above green (layered) and literally filters out all of the relevant wavelengths. Sorry for using such a poor scientific description of what I’m querying but I wanted to do it in as few words as possible and I’m sure you get what I’m saying.
Thank you for creating & sharing this! I think, we humans also do use phototrophy in our biology to some degree: under warm conditions, id est in summer, I’ll have to eat less food than in winter, otherwise I’ll grow noticeably (in circumference). BTW some other warmblooded vertebrates, who too don’t hibernate, like European elk, can adjust their core temprature way down during winter, so they don’t have to eat more, whilst still being active.
Interesting that the lifeform with the most efficient electromagnetic absorption spectrum does not dominate. There is an argument to be made here about how efficiency in and of itself does not necessarily equate to fitness with regard to survival and proliferation. I imagine it incentivizes sedentary behavior where inefficiency motivates competition and movement. More complex behaviors require more complex apparatus for processing experience. I’m not an evolutionary biologist though. Or has the solar spectrum shifted over time such that, at some point, cyanobacteria no longer experienced a benefit from their species of photosynthesis? How does the sun’s current emission compare to that of three-billion years ago?
So, retinal-based organisms behave somewhat like mitochondria? Retinal in our eyes are kind of phototrophy. The light kinks the molecule transporting electron to release signal molecules to simulate neurons. This occurs only in low light levels, allowing us to have (low) vision even at light levels of below that of trigger value of cone and rods. (Not an expert).
Omgosh imagine being the team of Terrans in 2571 being like, “Your Most High Council, we must commit funds to an expeditionary force to Enceladus to take surface cores! No, those were ice cores, we did determine that there is or was life down there, and we need to know what became of it!” . #ProjectStrix #MarineMechanics #TerranIntelligence #AdeptasSororitas
Maybe only a difference in spheres’ nomenclature; but my understanding of phototropy/photosynthesis seems to be the opposite of yours. Humans photosynthesise vitamin D for example; but I wouldn’t list us as phototropic (because we do not derive even a significant minority of our energy from light (except second hand)).
no they wouldn’t they use green because it’s more stable source of light, less energy but through stable stream not because they needed to avoid ends of spectrum they probably had enough time to now be able to utilise also these other wavelengths but they didn’t use it, meaning it’s worse option i showed ignorance forgetting it’s opposite but i won’t edit comment because the sense is still valid
What you are saying is that Earth was once planet Psychlo? And those aliens didn’t come from another planet… But instead were time travelers? We need a sequel… XD Edit: I am guessing the youtube crowd is too young to get this movie reference: Battlefield Earth. The alien invaders home world, Psyclo, is purple. 😆
Thank you for the article! But I do have a problem; Not being a native English speaker, I would have liked being able to read your lips, like a deaf person. Could you make the “your self picture” just a little bigger please? YouTube’s/ Google’s sub texts are so horrible wrong sometimes. I can not rely upon using that.
Euler’s magical-functional judgement of superimposed frequency-amplitude objectives at Entanglement here-now-forever, is the bio-logical emerging phenomenon of Singularity-point epicycles in Spinfoam-pulse Totality that is the inside-outside presence of probabilistic Panspermia, holography-quantization of Eternity-now pure-math relative-timing motion.
10:33 – Gotta stop you there. You’re speaking as if the light was a resource which was getting used up…and diversification happened because there was only so much light in one frequency range to go around….but there was plenty of light in the other frequencies. That makes no sense (unless the color of the sun shifted…which is possible…but then we’re talking about diversification because the frequency range was reduced….but this has nothing to do with competition). When plants are competing for light, they grow higher or block the competition or pull the competition down. Plants don’t care what color their competition uses (or if what’s blocking their source of light is even competition or just a building), they just know they’re being blocked and find a way to grow towards more light. If they were competing for light, they’d be looking for an open, unblocked area and they’d compete by going places the others couldn’t follow…light range be damned. The best way to compete with the retinal based life (which is likely what happened) is the chlorophyll based life made themselves harder to consume and so it became a game of the retinal based life to feed on each other and reduced their own populations while the chlorophyll based life increased in population and diversification.
Hmm…before I could update the timing of events (Purple Earth-Green Earth-Purple Earth-Green Earth) there’s an inconsistency to be addressed. You mentioned in article geochemical proxies suggest oxygenic photosynthesizes appeared by ~3 to 2.9 Ga, including the GOE at ~2.4 Ga but chart by Zhao et al, 2023 suggested oxygenic photosynthesis started ~3.7 Ga ago. So, what should it be? Any idea? Is it possible at this time to decide on this – oxygenic photosynthesis started ~3.7 or ~3 Ga ago?
No I will not make out with you. Did ya hear that this girl wants to make out with me in the middle of class. You got Chlorophyll Man up there talking about God knows what and all she can talk about is making out with me. I’m here to learn, everybody, not to make out with you. Go on with the chlorophyll. -Billy Madison
Is it easier said then done for terriforming a planet with lots of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere to be breathable by just planting lots of plants lots plants to take in that and release oxygen to terriform? Or is this one thing but not the only thing that needs to be done? Planting a lot of plants and watering them time to time alone can’t work or can it?