Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Scientists successfully breed corals to improve their heat tolerance

phys.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 155 posts

Re: Scientists successfully breed corals to improve their heat tolerance

#141

Post by blindriver »

adamc wrote: post #135
blindriver wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Based on what expertise?

What expertise do I need? Lots of coral is dying. It isn't right next to healthy coral. How do you think the fish are going to migrate? And those other coral reefs aren't empty. As for the effect of coral bleaching on fish, you can google it and I've definitely read about it before, seen ecologists talk about it, etc. The expectation is that it will reduce the number of fish significantly.

You need a lot more expertise than just uneducated guesses before you say something is "very very unlikely."

https://scripps.ucsd.edu/news/central-pacific-coral-reef-sho...

Re: Scientists successfully breed corals to improve their heat tolerance

#142

Post by carapace »

Vecr wrote: post #138
carapace wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Multicellular lifeforms are the machinery that microbes build to improve homeostasis. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaia_hypothesis

I think the theory is doubtful. Sounds too outcome oriented/group-selection-y.

Are you at all familiar with the work of Michael Levin et. al.?

E.g. "What Bodies Think About: Bioelectric Computation Outside the Nervous System"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RjD1aLm4Thg

Re: Scientists successfully breed corals to improve their heat tolerance

#143

Post by ASalazarMX »

simianparrot wrote: post #117
slibhb wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Scientists "performing miracles" is humanity caring for the planet. Ask yourself why you (apparently) prefer degrowth to this.

Depends. Do we know the ecosystem impact of corals that are more heat tolerant? Do we understand the evolutionary biological reasons why they aren't? Maybe it's not a problem, or maybe it is, like with so many other things we've messed with in the name of acceptable science (at the time) until we realize ecosystems are not that simple to model. I'm not saying we shouldn't do research like this. But it is not an autom…

I'd prefer if we didn't tamper with ecosystems, but the reality is that our current civilization doesn't have the incentives to stop global warming (even less revert it) without major catastrophes that allow some politics and business leaders to appear as saviors instead of traitors.

We don't know the future impact of these modified corals, but we know it will be catastrophic if they disappear. IMO it would be worse to let the corals simply die.

Re: Scientists successfully breed corals to improve their heat tolerance

#144

Post by ASalazarMX »

goda90 wrote: post #116
joshtbradley wrote: post #106

I find it tragic that it’s easier for scientists to perform miracles than it is for humanity to care for the planet. I understand the issue is complex, fraught with incentive, and has disparity between the developed and undeveloped world. But if the outcome is a clear collective benefit, why don’t we do it? More practically. What will it take to create a world where humanity can align to help ourselves?

Lots of people care. But 1 person caring usually doesn't do much. That person might be able to make some choices that reduce their impact on the planet, but the effect is miniscule and the effort they have to put in might be immense. Asking billions of people to consciously choose a harder life to hopefully prevent an issue they might not be seeing in front of their eyes on a daily basis, is a really big ask. It need…

During COVID confinement, I was hopeful home office would stay. The vast majority of office jobs don't need people sat at a specific location, home office alone reduced the carbon footprint of every major city. A rare instance where personal change significantly benefits both the environment and our lives.

I'm painfully aware that the home office is much more harder to secure than regular office, but it seems like efforts to improve it have stalled since de pandemic.

Re: Scientists successfully breed corals to improve their heat tolerance

#145

Post by EasyMark »

andrewmutz wrote: post #3

Perhaps a dumb question, but wouldn't we expect the rise in ocean temperatures to be cause nature to be doing this selective breeding right now?

There’s a difference between guided selection and natural selection, guided will Greatly increase the odds of survival for the selected selection criteria, and humans have been doing it for thousands of years. While it can lead to monoculture issues itself. Normally global warming and cooling takes thousands of years giving plenty of time to adapt but humans are changing that to decades

Re: Scientists successfully breed corals to improve their heat tolerance

#146

Post by keepamovin »

empath75 wrote: post #5
keepamovin wrote: post #2

Not sure this is a good idea. What if the disappearance of corals at higher temps is part of a natural regulation system for Earth, where if they are artificially preserved, homeostasis will be perturbed? In general I am against these ecosystem engineering type projects: because the systems are so complex, we do not understand them, and we cannot test in isolation.

There is no natural regulation system for the earth, and the earth makes no attempt at homeostasis. It has been tipped over into states almost completely inhospitable for then-existing life more than once.

There is. It's chemistry and physics, even basic reactions have equilibria. There's multilayered homeostasis mechanisms interacting around the world. It's a large part of weather. You should read up on it, it's interesting.

Re: Scientists successfully breed corals to improve their heat tolerance

#147

Post by keepamovin »

bee_rider wrote: post #11
keepamovin wrote: post #2

Not sure this is a good idea. What if the disappearance of corals at higher temps is part of a natural regulation system for Earth, where if they are artificially preserved, homeostasis will be perturbed? In general I am against these ecosystem engineering type projects: because the systems are so complex, we do not understand them, and we cannot test in isolation.

Of course there’s no engineered homeostasis to mess up on Earth. There might be a general tendency toward homeostasis: lots of, in some generalized sense “mass” and “momentum” in the system, and a tendency for species to die off by consuming all their resources and running out of places to put their byproducts. But that seems more likely to be something that humans fall afoul of, not coral, which seems more like an a…

I think you need a larger picture - think system theory, and think about multiple overlapping equilibrium biochemical reactions going on all the time. Even in your own body to maintain homeostasis. That's scaled up on a global scale.

How key are coral? Do you know? If you don't you probably shouldn't mess with it. Heh! :)

Re: Scientists successfully breed corals to improve their heat tolerance

#148

Post by keepamovin »

tejohnso wrote: post #7
keepamovin wrote: post #2

Not sure this is a good idea. What if the disappearance of corals at higher temps is part of a natural regulation system for Earth, where if they are artificially preserved, homeostasis will be perturbed? In general I am against these ecosystem engineering type projects: because the systems are so complex, we do not understand them, and we cannot test in isolation.

> I am against these ecosystem engineering type projects: because the systems are so complex, we do not understand them How about humans pumping tens of billions of tons of CO2 into the atmosphere every year? Are you against that ecosystem engineering type project? Because it's happening. And it's having severe consequences. And it seems it's not going to stop. So people are trying to look into ways to attempt to mit…

There's a step change difference between industrial exhaust and changing the source code of a 'program' in the Earth system. We can alter our industrial practices, as they are within our control. Once a GM organism gets out, it could be like an out of control program running rampant on your servers. It's too much power to wield while we don't have the knowledge.

I'm not saying we shouldn't attempt to modulate our effects on the environment, I'm saying let's not make it worse doing so. So we should be strategic in the tactics we employ.

Re: Scientists successfully breed corals to improve their heat tolerance

#149

Post by bee_rider »

keepamovin wrote: post #147
bee_rider wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of course there’s no engineered homeostasis to mess up on Earth. There might be a general tendency toward homeostasis: lots of, in some generalized sense “mass” and “momentum” in the system, and a tendency for species to die off by consuming all their resources and running out of places to put their byproducts. But that seems more likely to be something that humans fall afoul of, not coral, which seems more like an a…

I think you need a larger picture - think system theory, and think about multiple overlapping equilibrium biochemical reactions going on all the time. Even in your own body to maintain homeostasis. That's scaled up on a global scale. How key are coral? Do you know? If you don't you probably shouldn't mess with it. Heh! :)

They are already being messed with, we’re killing them.

Re: Scientists successfully breed corals to improve their heat tolerance

#150

Post by r00fus »

slibhb wrote: post #109
joshtbradley wrote: post #106

I find it tragic that it’s easier for scientists to perform miracles than it is for humanity to care for the planet. I understand the issue is complex, fraught with incentive, and has disparity between the developed and undeveloped world. But if the outcome is a clear collective benefit, why don’t we do it? More practically. What will it take to create a world where humanity can align to help ourselves?

Scientists "performing miracles" is humanity caring for the planet. Ask yourself why you (apparently) prefer degrowth to this.

A banal false dichotomy. Pushing for lower CO2 methods of energy generation and transport is not "degrowth".
Post reply on HN