backtop


Print E-mail del.icio.us 46 comment(s) - last by twenty39.. on Oct 23 at 4:46 AM


Scientists have discovered that tree growth appears to be spurred by increased amounts of Galactic Cosmic Rays (GCRs).  (Source: Sigrid Dengel)
Turns out a little radiation is good for you -- if you're a tree at least

Scientists often see the need to confirm what we already know.  For example, every 11-year-old (or 41-year-old) comic book fan living with their parents knows radiation makes organisms grow bigger and stronger.  However, for those who don't read comics or have hyperactive imaginations, that presumption turns out to be somewhat true -- for trees at least.

A new study from the University of Edinburgh provides evidence that cosmic rays play a greater role in stimulating tree growth than any other local climate factor -- including precipitation and temperature.

Professor John Grace of the university's Institute of Atmospheric and Environmental Science and his graduate students, Sigrid Dengel and Dominik Aeby, made the intriguing discovery when studying rings on freshly harvested spruce trees.  The trees were specially harvested in 2006 from the Forest of Ae in Dumfriesshire, Scotland, by Forest Research, the research branch of the UK's Forestry Commission.  The trees sections were immediately frozen after harvest to prevent shrinkage.

Scientists then scanned the 53-year old trees, which were planted in 1953.  What they found was that like most trees there were variations in growth rates by year.  What frustrated scientists was that yearly temperature and precipitation showed minor correlations, but not to the extent they were seeing.  There was some other factor also inducing growth.

That factor, it turns out, appears to be Galactic Cosmic Rays (GCRs).  NASA describes GSRs as follows:

Galactic cosmic rays (GCRs) come from outside the solar system but generally from within our Milky Way galaxy. GCRs are atomic nuclei from which all of the surrounding electrons have been stripped away during their high-speed passage through the galaxy. They have probably been accelerated within the last few million years, and have traveled many times across the galaxy, trapped by the galactic magnetic field. GCRs have been accelerated to nearly the speed of light, probably by supernova remnants. As they travel through the very thin gas of interstellar space, some of the GCRs interact and emit gamma rays, which is how we know that they pass through the Milky Way and other galaxies.

Apparently they also make for great tree growth.  In years which received the most rays, the trees grew the most.  Describes Ms. Dengel, "We were originally interested in a different topic, the climatological factors influencing forest growth.  The correlation between growth and cosmic rays was moderately high, but the correlation with the climatological variables was barely visible."

The researchers were initially reticent to touch the topic as rays are influenced by solar cycles, a common topic of discussion among global warming skeptics, and thus unfortunately a subject of some scientific stigma.  Now they're thrilled about the unusual findings. 

It is unclear how exactly the radiation benefits plant growth.  It may operate either through an indirect environmental affect, such as raising cloud cover ever so slightly, which leads to better rates of photosynthesis (counterintuitively, diffuse light is better for trees).  Another possibility is a direct mechanism, such a radiation hormesis, a theory that low levels of radiation help protect organisms against harmful mutations.  Both theories are quite controversial.

The new research is reported in the New Phytologist.



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Interesting questions now
By JediJeb on 10/21/2009 1:44:33 PM , Rating: 5
Would this mean that the use of tree rings to verify climate conditions would not be very accurate?

If so, how does this affect the tables of climate conditions predating the use of thermometors?

Are trees the only thing affected in this way?

Other than solar wind, is there anything that affects the amount of galactic cosmic rays reaching the earth's surface?

Just some things to think about I guess.




RE: Interesting questions now
By amanojaku on 10/21/2009 2:00:57 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
Would this mean that the use of tree rings to verify climate conditions would not be very accurate?
Correct, if it can be proven that the amount of GCRs reaching the surface is variable, which it is, as proven by the research. It was pointed out that the 53 years' worth of research was initially inconclusive until the discovery of the GCR effect.
quote:
If so, how does this affect the tables of climate conditions predating the use of thermometors?
Current studies are not even accurate, as evidenced by the number of people who question them, so why would old studies be? Even thermometers are not accurate. Compare a mecury, alcohol and electronic thermometer to each other and you'll see different results. Scientific thermometers are much more accurate, but they aren't always perfect.
quote:
Are trees the only thing affected in this way?
Maybe. GCRs are dangerous, usually.
quote:
Other than solar wind, is there anything that affects the amount of galactic cosmic rays reaching the earth's surface?
The atmoshpere, our shield. Or condom, if you view the Earth as an ovum and the GCRs as spermatozoa.


RE: Interesting questions now
By JediJeb on 10/21/2009 2:28:01 PM , Rating: 3
So it would seem that this shows there are even more unknown variables in the study of climate than we already are trying to plug into equations. Makes trying to simplify it down to a few human controlable factors rather difficult.


RE: Interesting questions now
By amanojaku on 10/21/2009 2:44:02 PM , Rating: 3
Hence the global warming confusion. The problem with humans is we think in terms of human lifespans and influence, which doesn't account for the vast majority of climate changes, like the ice ages and warm periods.


RE: Interesting questions now
By JediJeb on 10/21/09, Rating: -1
RE: Interesting questions now
By spacemec on 10/22/2009 3:44:20 AM , Rating: 2
"Cosmic Rays Do Not Explain Global Warming, Study Finds"

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/12/08121...


RE: Interesting questions now
By niva on 10/21/2009 6:14:27 PM , Rating: 2
Cosmic Rays are extremely dangerous to humans, there are scientists who suggest that many cancers are caused due to cosmic rays.

Coincidentally, while the atmosphere does give us some shielding against cosmic rays, the bulk of our defense comes from the sun and especially solar wind. For a GRC to reach the Earth the chances of it colliding with basic slow moving radiation and breaking up or at least slowing down are much higher before it even reaches the Earth.

I personally think this scientific study brought up in the article above is bogus. I can't think of any positive effect GRCs could have on trees other than burning straight through them.


RE: Interesting questions now
By OpenGLJourneyman on 10/21/2009 3:04:49 PM , Rating: 2
Theory:

There is an 11 year solar cycle. During the minimum (which we are currently at) the most GCRs reach the Earth. At the maximum, the fewest. Would probably say that the solar minimum and maximum probably influence tree growth more than GCRs. Since a GCR hit on something the size of computer only occurs rarely (monthly ?)

So basically trees grow the most when we are at our solar minimum.


RE: Interesting questions now
By JediJeb on 10/21/2009 5:14:49 PM , Rating: 2
Interesting, as that would tend to mean that trees grew fastest in the last 200 years during the Maunder Minimum which also correlated to the period known as the Mini Ice Age. Does anyone know if that is what the records show?


By slashbinslashbash on 10/21/2009 11:35:28 PM , Rating: 2
Interesting you should ask.... supposedly the reason for the high quality sound of Stradivarius violins is that the wood used in them was grown during the Maunder Minimum.

"After examining the violins with X-rays, the researchers found that these violins all have extremely consistent density, with relatively low variation in the apparent growth patterns of the trees which produced this wood."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stradivarius

The article also says that some think this is due to *slower* growth than normal. From the AP article cited on Wikipedia:

"Grissino-Mayer developed a 500-year chronology, from 1500 to the present, for 16 high-elevation forests of larch, spruce and pine in five countries from western France to southern Germany. He discovered an unprecedented period of slow growth from 1625-1720 characterized by compact, narrow tree rings."

http://www.usatoday.com/tech/news/2003-12-01-strad...


RE: Interesting questions now
By wookie1 on 10/22/2009 2:12:20 AM , Rating: 2
In addition to the approximately 11 year cycle, there are several others as well. I believe that there is a 22 year double-cycle, and a 178 year cycle, and some other longer cycles as well. Planetary orbits seem to modulate the solar cycles as gravity pushes the sun around. The late Theodor Landscheidt studied this carefully and used it to predict El Nino, La Nina, and droughts.


RARRRR!
By Motoman on 10/21/2009 1:43:30 PM , Rating: 5
MANGROVE SMASH!




RE: RARRRR!
By amanojaku on 10/21/2009 1:45:41 PM , Rating: 3
LOL

I was thinking "Now they just have to figure out how to use GCRs to grow that OTHER type of wood."


RE: RARRRR!
By tastyratz on 10/21/2009 1:53:07 PM , Rating: 5
I sense a new angle of approach in the most "cutting edge" spam.

r@di ...,,,ation en|-|@n<3d Viagr@@!!!!!


RE: RARRRR!
By therealnickdanger on 10/22/2009 8:53:40 AM , Rating: 2
Wait... are you referring to "down there"? Rays that can actually increase the size of "that certain part of the male body"? That sounds like some sort of miracle drug! I'll bet that they've probably already sold over 1 billion capsules already!


Scientific Stigma?
By Denigrate on 10/21/2009 3:14:19 PM , Rating: 2
"The researchers were initially reticent to touch the topic as rays are influenced by solar cycles, a common topic of discussion among global warming skeptics, and thus unfortunately a subject of some scientific stigma. Now they're thrilled about the unusual findings."

Scientific stigma? It's only a stigma among those who want to exclude all variables that cause climate change aside from evil humans.




RE: Scientific Stigma?
By Alexvrb on 10/21/2009 4:25:38 PM , Rating: 2
I was thinking the same thing. It's only a stigma because it shows data that is "an inconvenient truth" for "climate change" activists. The scientists themselves were probably just initially worried they'd get their funding cut if they reported something that didn't help fuel the climage change agenda. Probably had to check with the higher-ups first.


RE: Scientific Stigma?
By JediJeb on 10/21/2009 5:30:29 PM , Rating: 4
There should never be a stigma for reporting raw scientific data no matter what affect it may have on the study.

As a chemist reporting results of possible contamination to the EPA I would be fired for filtering data because it did not fit what the supposed result was believed to be, and worse if found that the data was manipulated with malace I could server jail time. Data should be provided as is, with the supporting information as to how it was aquired and any quality control/quality assurance information to back it up. Unexplained variations in data should also be reported and documented and if the outlier data points are rejected that must also be documented as to what the data was and why it was rejected. If your data is found to be tainted, it does nothing to prove your conclusions. It is better to show the real data and explain why you would reject it than to try to recover your credibility if someone finds the rejected data later on.


RE: Scientific Stigma?
By Schrag4 on 10/22/2009 10:06:38 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
As a chemist reporting results of possible contamination to the EPA I would be fired for filtering data because it did not fit what the supposed result was believed to be, and worse if found that the data was manipulated with malace I could server jail time.


Really? The EPA doesn't like leaving out data that doesn't conveniently line up with their pre-concieved notions?

http://www.dailytech.com/EPA+Officials+Claim+Agenc...


RE: Scientific Stigma?
By JediJeb on 10/22/2009 11:56:51 AM , Rating: 2
Only if they make the decision to leave it out I guess. What I report is what industries discharge into lakes and rivers and what is contained in Drinking Water. Also contamination around Super Fund waste sites back when that program was in full swing. If that data was ever taken to court, which ours never was but some other labs had to deal with, then if they could prove you left something out or didn't document it correctly you could be charges with providing false data to the government. We always made sure to cover our behinds by documenting every little detail just in case.


cosmic rays > clouds > rain > tree growth
By mattclary on 10/21/2009 4:26:13 PM , Rating: 2
Doesn't the theory go that cosmic rays cause more cloud cover? And couldn't more cloud cover be associated with more rain? And more rain might mean more tree growth?




RE: cosmic rays > clouds > rain > tree growth
By JediJeb on 10/21/2009 5:04:30 PM , Rating: 2
Possibly, but the study also says they found little connection between the amount of rain and the growth per year.


By geddarkstorm on 10/22/2009 1:16:52 PM , Rating: 2
I would think relative humidity is far more important, and wonder if they looked at that.

Plant growth is generally limited by CO2 uptake more than anything else. And CO2 uptake is controlled by how fast the plant loses water to the atmosphere. And that is controlled by the relative humidity.


All hail the Mighty Oak.
By SlipDizzy on 10/21/2009 3:31:35 PM , Rating: 5
I, for one, welcome our new bark-covered overlords.




zomg
By Randomblame on 10/21/2009 4:09:04 PM , Rating: 2
It's clobbering time!




RE: zomg
By RamarC on 10/21/2009 8:31:10 PM , Rating: 3
finally! a true nerd who knows the Fantastic Four (and thus the Thing) were spawned by cosmic rays. the Hulk was spawned by gamma rays.

mick... your geek card is on the verge of being revoked!


Backyard Maple
By eetnoyer on 10/22/2009 12:53:03 AM , Rating: 2
All I know is that the maple we planted in the back yard when we bought this house 7 years ago grew ridiculously faster this year compared to any previous. It must have added about 4 to 5 feet in height.

I would be interested to know if the trees during the beginning of the Maunder minimum initially grew more rapidly due to more favorable factors, then eventually curtailed growth on a long term basis due to an overwhelming decline in temperature.

Anecdote: I recently had cause to look at my usage history from our electric provider and found that for the year to date (through the end of September), we used 3 KWh/day less than in 2008. Interestingly, the reported average daily temperature for our location was 65F as compared to 68F last year.




RE: Backyard Maple
By JediJeb on 10/22/2009 11:59:08 AM , Rating: 2
I know also that this year my garden grew much faster. Huge peppers and zuchini. Maybe there is something to it.


Steroids & Cosmic Rays
By hiscross on 10/21/2009 9:42:15 PM , Rating: 2
I can see it know, some famous athlete gets caught taking cosmic rays. That athlete excuse would be the Sun caused it.




Missing the point
By twenty39 on 10/23/2009 4:46:24 AM , Rating: 2
As usual, the 'I'm right, you're wrong' argument over the climate misses the most important point about the theory of MMGW. The concept that the world's poorest people can't use the oil and coal they possess to generate their own electricity, coupled with the demonisation of capitalists who could put the necessary infrastructure in place to make it happen, is tantamount to ecologically-driven genocide. While such an economic surge would re-create all of the social injustices of the Industrial Revolution, this danger pales in comparison next to the suffering poverty causes to millions who have no hope of ever ending it without the trade capitalism brings. Whenever this issue is finally settled, the West will have to answer for its false dogmas and the countless lives it has blighted and prematurely ended. PS. I'm a centre-right, lardy-arsed, white Anglo-Saxon male from England.




Counter-intuitive?
By HercDriver on 10/21/09, Rating: -1
So glad
By FITCamaro on 10/21/09, Rating: -1
RE: So glad
By amanojaku on 10/21/2009 3:07:10 PM , Rating: 4
GCNs are not from our sun. In fact, GCNs may not originate from the normal fussion process that fuels stars, although no one can accurately determine the source(s). What IS known is that whatever creates them is more powerful than anything we know.

This kind of research is important because it may explain many things, or nothing at all. It would be funny as hell if the tax dollars you complain are being spent on carbon credits, vehicle emmissions reduction, etc... would be eliminated by the discovery that global warming has an extraterrestrial source.

It would be even funnier, and a tragedy, if this radiation has worse effects than we know. Of course, ignorance is bliss.


RE: So glad
By OpenGLJourneyman on 10/21/2009 4:43:13 PM , Rating: 5
Based on the user name, you are a U.S. citizen right? I don't think one penny of your money went to the University of Edinburgh.

Or did you not actually read the article?


RE: So glad
By ClownPuncher on 10/21/2009 4:44:05 PM , Rating: 2
You didn't even read the article before becoming bitter!


RE: So glad
By BruceLeet on 10/21/09, Rating: 0
RE: So glad
By PandaBear on 10/21/2009 6:02:13 PM , Rating: 2
No, he is a [b]Republican[/b].


RE: So glad
By niva on 10/21/2009 6:06:15 PM , Rating: 2
BOLD FONT FAIL


RE: So glad
By SiliconAddict on 10/21/2009 6:04:48 PM , Rating: 4
Fuck you. Not all Americans are idiots. Just enough to make the rest of us do a lot of facepalming. Remember. A majority of the dipshits in this country can't even find Iraq on a map. (A Poll in '06 found 63% of young adults couldn't find Iraq.)


RE: So glad
By Omega215D on 10/21/2009 4:48:04 PM , Rating: 1
No, Trees are Flintstone's kids and with Flintstone's vitamins they're big and strong... and growing.


RE: So glad
By AlexWade on 10/21/2009 4:50:42 PM , Rating: 3
Actually, this study is a correlation to Michael Mann's tree-ring hockey stick temperature graph. Mann claimed to be able to prove global temperatures took a hockey stick look by using tree rings from a place in Siberia. Steve McIntyre from climateaudit.org had been trying for several years to get Mann to release his data; all sorts of excuses were made even though Mann was legally required to release his data. Eventually, McIntyre got the data and showed that Mann cherry-picked tree rings to get the desired result. Using Mann's methodology and using all of the available tree ring data, there was no hockey stick. For more information, go to this link.
http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=7168

This study confirms that tree rings cannot reliably be used to gauge global temperature.


RE: So glad
By RamarC on 10/21/2009 8:27:34 PM , Rating: 2
wasn't that study released about the time (the other) Michael Mann redid Miami Vice? maybe the climate guy and the movie guy got their documents/scripts mixed up when sharing some cosmic-ray-enhanced ganja... yeah mon.


RE: So glad
By SiliconAddict on 10/21/2009 5:55:14 PM , Rating: 1
So glad the people who inhabit the internet are stupid enough to not know the difference between visible light, and cosmic rays. Where else would we go to point and laugh at such idiots. We should send these people back to 6th grade and pay attention in their science class. Well they are at it they might also want to pay attention in their gov class and learn what Communism is. Seeing that misused all over the place as well.
Hell with it. I think a baseline SAT should be given to America. Those who don't pass have to go back to high school.


RE: So glad
By Alexstarfire on 10/21/2009 9:22:01 PM , Rating: 2
No wait, better idea. Put them on the show "Are you Smarter than a 5th grader?" and watch them get pwned. That should be sufficient punishment.

I will say that after watching the show and playing the mobile game that there are some questions I know I didn't learn during elementary school, and I'm only 22. There were a fair few that I couldn't remember because they aren't that important, like all the types of clouds and such, but at least I knew that I was taught them at one point.


RE: So glad
By PresidentThomasJefferson on 10/21/2009 6:12:33 PM , Rating: 1
FitCamaro, do u have a science education beyond 3rd grade? Galactic cosmic rays is NOT sunlight.. u seem to be only simplistically educated in science & economics(repeating simplistic libertarian economics myths based on outdated economic models).. also, it's not 'we' since as another poster stated, University of Edinburgh is actually a British university so u're taxes had nothing to do with their research (just like your taxes had nothing to with the invention of the MRI (co-invented by British univesity & gov Uni of Chicago), nor discovery of insulin(gov university in Canada), nor invention of genetic engineering/biotechnology (invented by professors/scientists at gov UCSanFrancisco, UCBerkeley as well as private Stanford with gov grants).. nor the invention of the internet (invented by fathers of the internet Vint Cerf & Kahn (it took them 10+ yrs to invent/develop I.P. protocols) starting in 1973 developed as they were gov UCLA professors/scientists) & finished in 1983 --all under gov funding...

P.S. The world wide web/HTML browswers were invented by British gov scientist Tim Berners-Lee (who was also working at European gov research body CERN circa 1989) who then made his HTML broswer free & taught others how to make their own for free based on his broswers (Firefox, Opera, Internet Explorer, etc were all based on Tim Berners-Lee's software/operate code that he made available to everyone for free for the benefit of all mankind)


RE: So glad
By Regs on 10/21/2009 8:59:50 PM , Rating: 2
This is coming from some one who does not realize substituting the word "you" with the letter "u" does not believe has a negative impact on their argument.


"When an individual makes a copy of a song for himself, I suppose we can say he stole a song." -- Sony BMG attorney Jennifer Pariser














botimage
Copyright 2009 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki