The Secret Life of Trees: The Astonishing Science of What
Trees Feel and How They Communicate
“A tree can be only as strong as the forest that
surrounds it.”
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 Wohlleben explores in The
Hidden Life of Trees: What They Feel, How They Communicate
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.llustration by Arthur Rackham for a rare 1917
edition of the Brothers Grimm fairy tales
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.
Wohlleben 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.
But 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 second.
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.
This 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.
In the remainder of The
Hidden Life of Trees, Wohlleben
goes on to explore such fascinating aspects of arboreal communication as how
trees pass wisdom down to the next generation through their seeds, what makes
them live so long, and how forests handle immigrants. Complement it with this
wonderful illustrated
atlas of the world’s strangest trees and
an 800-year visual history
of trees as symbolic diagrams.
BY MARIA POPOVA
No comments:
Post a Comment