196

16224 readers

3935 users here now

Be sure to follow the rule before you head out.

Rule: You must post before you leave.

^other^ ^rules^

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

770

Capitalists and social darwinists literally shaking and crying rn rule (lemmings.world)

submitted 8 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

69 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 17 points 8 months ago (12 children)

That fungus would eat the tree if it had the abiliry

[–] [email protected] 26 points 8 months ago (5 children)

Don't ascribe motivations to biological processes.

That fungus wouldn't eat the tree because it doesn't eat the tree. There are tree eating fungi but that is not one of them.

That fungus is proof of cooperation being mutually beneficial and evidence of how "altruism" works out in favor of the cooperators.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (4 children)

There are tree eating fungi but that is not one of them.

Based on what?

According to my quick research, symbiotic fungus doesn't fruit unless the tree is in trouble. That tree seems fine, so then the fungus probably isn't good for the tree

[–] [email protected] 12 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Where on earth are you researching to come to that conclusion? Mushrooms overwhelmingly fruit based on climatic conditions. If the weather is right, they fruit. And it is well established that mycorrhizal fungi are good for the trees and other plants they have symbiotic relationships with, which is why fungal inoculation is becoming increasingly popular. It's also why they are called symbiotic, and not parasitic.