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

Forests around Chernobyl aren’t decaying properly (2014)

smithsonianmag.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 169 posts

Re: Forests around Chernobyl aren’t decaying properly (2014)

#81

Post by dekhn »

digging wrote: post #54
dekhn wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That didn't sound too right for me (but my biology knowledge is dated at this point) so I read the relevant section from that page. It concludes wiht: """The delayed fungal evolution hypothesis is controversial, however, and has been challenged by other researchers, who conclude that a combination of vast depositional systems present on the continents during the formation of Pangaea and widespread humid, tropical con…

In general, it's mind-blowing to travel back in Earth's history and realize there were tens or hundreds of millions of years where strategies that are commonplace today had never been tried before (or they'd tried too early and failed). It makes one wonder, what will be the strategies of future life which no creature has yet evolved? Can we even imagine it?

it's also mind blowing to know that there are things which really haven't changed in over a billion years, yet still do just fine. How did my bio prof say it? "Bacteria are like the race cars of the biological world. They don't win by having the best strategy, they win by rate of duplication and acquisition."

Re: Forests around Chernobyl aren’t decaying properly (2014)

#82

Post by plugin-baby »

irrational wrote: post #77
gambiting wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it's almost guaranteed that bacteria eating plastics will proliferate globally at some point, we've put so much of this stuff in the environment and it's just free energy ready to be consumed if your digestive system knows how.

Where did the Tupperware go?! Will we have to develop antibacterial plastics to combat this for stuff we don’t want eaten, yet?

Maybe we can just add some broad-spectrum antibiotics into the standard plastic mix.

Re: Forests around Chernobyl aren’t decaying properly (2014)

#83

Post by throwawaylinux »

dekhn wrote: post #81
digging wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In general, it's mind-blowing to travel back in Earth's history and realize there were tens or hundreds of millions of years where strategies that are commonplace today had never been tried before (or they'd tried too early and failed). It makes one wonder, what will be the strategies of future life which no creature has yet evolved? Can we even imagine it?

it's also mind blowing to know that there are things which really haven't changed in over a billion years, yet still do just fine. How did my bio prof say it? "Bacteria are like the race cars of the biological world. They don't win by having the best strategy, they win by rate of duplication and acquisition."

Are there species of bacteria that are substantially unchanged in a billion years?

Re: Forests around Chernobyl aren’t decaying properly (2014)

#84

Post by cdash »

Beldin wrote: post #60
rtkwe wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most of the exclusion zone is pretty low levels of radiation so I'm not sure how effective those are other than that they're an elevated background level. The FDA says 10 kGy is used for actual sterilization. Most of the zone is https://www.fda.gov/food/irradiation-food-packaging/overview... .

There are 365×24 = 8760 hours in a year. So after 1 year and 52 days, we've crossed this threshold - at current levels. So: thoroughly sterilised, if the FDA isn't totally off.

No, that dose needs to happen in a short amount of time to apply.

Re: Forests around Chernobyl aren’t decaying properly (2014)

#85

Post by Konohamaru »

dekhn wrote: post #31
jonplackett wrote: post #29

Weirdly, there was actually a period of history where this was normal. During the Carboniferous period 300 million years ago trees just fell over and lay there because nothing had evolved to decay them yet. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carboniferous

That didn't sound too right for me (but my biology knowledge is dated at this point) so I read the relevant section from that page. It concludes wiht: """The delayed fungal evolution hypothesis is controversial, however, and has been challenged by other researchers, who conclude that a combination of vast depositional systems present on the continents during the formation of Pangaea and widespread humid, tropical con…

This is good news. The idea of the delayed fungal evolution hypothesis was this:

"Before trees grew wood that was unable to rot and so became coal but after fungus came now wood is ruined and it's impossible to make coal again."

Understanding that coal formation is a reversible process and that a new agent didn't permanently ruin the process, is a sigh of relief.

Re: Forests around Chernobyl aren’t decaying properly (2014)

#86

Post by jvanderbot »

gambiting wrote: post #72
digging wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In general, it's mind-blowing to travel back in Earth's history and realize there were tens or hundreds of millions of years where strategies that are commonplace today had never been tried before (or they'd tried too early and failed). It makes one wonder, what will be the strategies of future life which no creature has yet evolved? Can we even imagine it?

I think it's almost guaranteed that bacteria eating plastics will proliferate globally at some point, we've put so much of this stuff in the environment and it's just free energy ready to be consumed if your digestive system knows how.

And suddenly plastics won't be the sterile, durable wonders that they are. We are living in The golden age of plastics, folks.

Re: Forests around Chernobyl aren’t decaying properly (2014)

#87

Post by gleenn »

gambiting wrote: post #72
digging wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In general, it's mind-blowing to travel back in Earth's history and realize there were tens or hundreds of millions of years where strategies that are commonplace today had never been tried before (or they'd tried too early and failed). It makes one wonder, what will be the strategies of future life which no creature has yet evolved? Can we even imagine it?

I think it's almost guaranteed that bacteria eating plastics will proliferate globally at some point, we've put so much of this stuff in the environment and it's just free energy ready to be consumed if your digestive system knows how.

I've definitely already heard of plastic-eating bacteria. They already have bugs eating it now too

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/dec/14/bugs-acr...

Re: Forests around Chernobyl aren’t decaying properly (2014)

#88

Post by ramraj07 »

jvanderbot wrote: post #86
gambiting wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it's almost guaranteed that bacteria eating plastics will proliferate globally at some point, we've put so much of this stuff in the environment and it's just free energy ready to be consumed if your digestive system knows how.

And suddenly plastics won't be the sterile, durable wonders that they are. We are living in The golden age of plastics , folks.

Things degrade wood too, doesn't make it useless.

Re: Forests around Chernobyl aren’t decaying properly (2014)

#89

Post by gleenn »

jvanderbot wrote: post #86
gambiting wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it's almost guaranteed that bacteria eating plastics will proliferate globally at some point, we've put so much of this stuff in the environment and it's just free energy ready to be consumed if your digestive system knows how.

And suddenly plastics won't be the sterile, durable wonders that they are. We are living in The golden age of plastics , folks.

I don't think they'll get through metal and certainly not glass for a long time.

Re: Forests around Chernobyl aren’t decaying properly (2014)

#90

Post by lazide »

throwawaylinux wrote: post #83
dekhn wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

it's also mind blowing to know that there are things which really haven't changed in over a billion years, yet still do just fine. How did my bio prof say it? "Bacteria are like the race cars of the biological world. They don't win by having the best strategy, they win by rate of duplication and acquisition."

Are there species of bacteria that are substantially unchanged in a billion years?

No way to know for sure. But many bacteria today look very similar to what little bit of maybe fossils we might have.
Post reply on HN