While researching for one of WUWT’s previous posts by Caleb Shaw, which is a must read essay on the simple things that can explain tree ring records to scientists that have never actually touched the tree or understood its local growth environment, I came across this photo of two larch trees in the Kotuykan river area of Siberia, not far from the Yamal peninsula. The photographer stated that an accompanying scientist who is familiar with the region named the two trees “Tyranny and Freedom” because of the differing situations they had been exposed to.
The question: which of the two trees below is the oldest?
The researchers write:
Forest ecologist Slava Kharuk called this a picture of tyranny and freedom. The trees are growing at the top of a mountain in the Siberian Traps. The climate at the location is near the limit of the coldest temperatures larch trees can tolerate. The smaller of the two trees in the foreground is many centuries older than the bigger tree.
Dr. Kharuk describes the tree on the right as living under the tyranny of colder climates of the past. It grew slowly: its form is twisted, its needles are sparse, the diameter is small, and it is not very tall. The younger tree has grown, he says, under the freedom of recent, milder climates. It is shooting up tall, straight, and full. It grows a relatively large amount each year, which results in a larger trunk diameter. (Photograph by Jon Ranson.)
In the cold Siberian climate, trees reproduce slowly. These larch cones document three years of growth. The lightest, reddish cones in the foreground are this year’s cones, which are forming and have not yet released their seeds. The medium-brown cones are from last year’s growth. The darkest brown cones are fully open and spent, yet still hang tenaciously on the tree. (Photograph by Jon Ranson.)
The harsh climate of Siberia is a challenging one for Larch trees. The photo shows the fates of several trees. A tree without bark or branches leans across the center of the photo. This tree died centuries ago, but the frigid climate has kept it from decaying. In the foreground, a tree that broke at the trunk and toppled managed to survive: a side branch grew into a vigorous new tree. In front and to the right of the “reborn” tree is a small dead tree that still has branches and bark. It is an ancient tree that died recently. In its last years, it put energy into making seed. Pinecones from the previous two years still cling to its branches. (Photograph by Jon Ranson.)
Source: NASA Earth Observatory, Siberia 2008 Kotuykan River Expedition
===
While the notion of temperature differences being the driver for the trees “Tyranny and Freedom” might be valid:
Dr. Kharuk describes the tree on the right as living under the tyranny of colder climates of the past. It grew slowly: its form is twisted, its needles are sparse, the diameter is small, and it is not very tall. The younger tree has grown, he says, under the freedom of recent, milder climates.
Without looking at all of the growth factors, one can’t be certain what is the true reason for growth difference. One tree might have better access to water or more nutrients available to it. We just don’t know, anything pinning a cause without a thorough investigation of the tree health and soil is simply speculation.
The idea posed by Caleb Shaw in this previous post seems to be well illustrated by these photos:
The bristlecone records seemed a lousy proxy, because at the altitude where they grow it is below freezing nearly every night, and daytime temperatures are only above freezing for something like 10% of the year. They live on the borderline of existence, for trees, because trees go dormant when water freezes. (As soon as it drops below freezing the sap stops dripping into the sugar maple buckets.) Therefore the bristlecone pines were dormant 90% of all days and 99% of all nights, in a sense failing to collect temperature data all that time, yet they were supposedly a very important proxy for the entire planet.
So in the case of larch trees in Siberia, how much of the time are they recording temperature? Without the proper metadata from Briffa telling us where these trees were situated, figuring out the response of trees like the now famous YAD06 is a tall order. Even with the metadata, when you find such wide variations in tree response growing next to one another, it isn’t much help. The only thing that can help is a large sample size so that individual responses like what we see in the core, YAD061, are statistically minimized in total impact.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Wouldn’t you think that if the main problem of ‘tyranny’ was that it began its life in cooler climes, then why did it grow so distorted looking? To me, with all the branches growing off to the right of the tree, it looks more like what has been brought up before on wuwt (growing under a much taller tree, on its left in this case) or perhaps starting life out with in some very windy conditions. Tyranny kind of reminds me of some of the trees you see on the coast, with most of the branches on the aft side of the winds. Are winds a big factor in this part of Siberia?
The effort of science includes observation. It seems [snip – wrong scientist] is willing to omit information and substitute extrapolation. We can’t tolerate a sample size of 1. The plural of anecdote is not data. If we have millions of acres of trees, we need samples spread over the area also.
Tyranny is, of course, much older. 8<)
Freedom is a relatively new concept, and even it might not last much longer.
The younger tree seems to grow with vigor. Lets say that proves increased CO2 is measuribly beneficial. Had the earlier tree been flushed with increased CO2, it would have thrived. It is obvious my conclusions are supported by facts also. Look at the 2 trees.
Speaking of trees i couldn’t help but laugh at this mystified expert :
“Maple trees in mid-Michigan have begun turning colors about three weeks early, said Bert Cregg, professor of horticulture and forestry at Michigan State University. But no one is “quite sure what’s going on yet” with the trees, he says. Possible causes could include the accumulation of stress from previous dry years or some type of fungus or boring pest, Cregg said.”
Article here: http://www.freep.com/article/20090929/NEWS05/909290330/1322/Maple-trees-welcome-fall-3-weeks-early
I’m no expert but…maybe it’s just getting colder earlier than it has in recent years?
I just had to laugh.
Seriously, look at the high desert trees (brislecone pines for example) in the American Southwest. Short, twisted, scraggly. But living far longer than anything else known.
Trees growing in gentler, easy climes such as the southeast pines pass on in much less than 200 years. Growing straight up and quickly.
Even the Japanse bonsai trees are twisted and stunted (deliberately) in their long lives, and are not left to grow freely or easily in straight vigorous paths with plentiful nutrition and large areas for root nutrients.
Well by looking at the picture it seems that the top of the main trunk was broken off at some point when the tree was young. This will cause a number of smaller, thinner branches to slit out from that point and grow upward. Nothing unusual here, I see this all the time.
It would seem the direct effect to growth due to increased CO2 in the latter half of the twentieth century has been measured in these two trees…. It is the extra CO2 that has caused the better growth…. not increased temp….
It might be that Slava Kharuk’s calling is to poetry and not science.
Let’s admit Earth has been warming since the end of the last glaciation, say about 17,000 years ago, with some warming and cooling along the way. Or using the LIA as a more recent event, Earth generally has been warming since then. Still, in the last 100 years the two foreground tress and the many background trees in the photo would have shared the same temperatures. Are we to believe that only one tree experienced climatic ‘tyranny’?
I planted two dozen Ponderosa Pines. Most are straight and tall. One repeatedly sends up two competing tops. I cut one out each year and now it is too tall for me to do that. It will now grow that way. Another is about the same height as its neighbors but has misshapen limbs. Someone suggested I take a cutting and send it to a lab for analysis. I haven’t done that so I do not know why it is not a normal looking tree. But while I can’t say what is wrong, I think I can say it is not suffering from “living under the tyranny of colder climate(s).
I do believe many comments in recent weeks have offered explanations that go well beyond the available data. I have no problem with speculation or poetry. Keep in mind that neither are science.
I suspect that the difference in growth between the two trees is not related to climate. Though I hesitate to make conclusions since the rest of the setting (outside the picture) is not shown, it appears that Tyranny has been starved of nutrients or moisture while Freedom is well nourished. By virtue of its age, the older tree has proved itself a survivor. A survivor would tend to take full advantage of any changes in climate that occurred.
The main thing this confirms is that trees are not uniform, even when close together. So as Henry chance (above_ states, a sample of 1 is not representative.
AJC (19:14:27) :
Well by looking at the picture it seems that the top of the main trunk was broken off at some point when the tree was young. This will cause a number of smaller, thinner branches to slit out from that point and grow upward. Nothing unusual here, I see this all the time.
——————————————————–
I think you may be right AJC… It has split into two main branches. An elk, bear or heavy snow load has snapped off the top when it was smaller.
Not sure how you post pictures here, but on my own site I put up a picture of two trees planted the same day, that have dramatically different growth histories, and where one is now substantially higher than the other.
One would think, looking at them, that the larger was considerably older than the smaller, but they were planted at the same time, and many years ago were the same size.
I would hope trees are growing at a faster rate in the last 50 years because they have more food (CO2).. CO2 is the basic energy source for all green plants.
A recent study in Norway claims that pine trees are growing %15 faster due to the higher levels of CO2 in the atmosphere.
I just love your randomly-generated Google ads. The main Google ad for this entry reads:-
[b]Chainsaw Training Qld
Internationally qualified training for all levels call now 0437734836
trainingfortrees.com.au[/b]
I also love the way the word “McCullough” slides off the tongue…… maybe we need to fire up the McCullough, and rip into these bloody trees that have been used to confound the populace.
With the credibility of tree cores pretty much shot (as thermometers in any case) should we go back to more reliable methods of forecasting like Punxsutawney Phil? At least he has been accurate 39% of the time:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Punxsutawney_Phil
Those of us with gardens (not pots) will have noticed seedlings planted at the same time growing at different rates even though water and sunlight access seems the same,it is odd as the commercial growers seem to get it right.
My feeling is that the availability of the correct trace elements in correct soil moisture ph makes a big difference. I remember lectures by the Canberra Forestry people stressing how the commercial Pinus Radiata plantation here are stunted unless B and Mn are applied when they are seedlings.
My notes are long lost but a web search of trace elements seems to lean towards research showing trees as a marker of industrial pollution. I found one by Richter and Heine that looked at trace element uptake as a factor of size…a quote….
” Tree uptake of B and Mn from mineral soil greatly outpaced resupplies from atmospheric deposition, mineral weathering, and deep-root uptake. (2) Extractable Zn and Cu changed little during forest growth, indicating that nutrient resupplies kept pace with accumulations by the aggrading forest. (3) Oxalate-extractable Fe increased substantially during forest growth………”
Here, as with our P.Radiata, B and Mn seems crucial for growth and may be the elements above others that are easily depleted.
Tyranny and Freedom, although physically close may have very different access to the correct trace elements needed for optimum growth.
Also beware genetic difference, a whole hidden world even in plants.
There are studies about this.
The metadata on every tree should include it’s genetic profile.
John F. Hultquist (19:23:35) : ,
Your comments make me think of another reason for tree size variation. Sexual reproduction means that each tree ‘produced ‘ this way is slightly different from others of the same species even though, to us, they look the same in form.They can express that difference in height.
I remember an important criticism of selecting the tallest, most healthy trees to fell in old forest logging is that it leaves the weaker specimens behind to reproduce.
Tree size in a ‘Climax’ community could be a way of selecting out the weaker ones to be left behind in the understory and as a result, they have slower reproduction rate.
If only the environmentalists would focus their efforts on this problem.
Do jet planes really leave that much pollution behind them, enough to make the whole sky cloudy and gray all day as their emissions fan out, and giving off enough pollution to block out the sun? I see it quite frequently when I look up during the day.
I notice here in SW Florida on random days, planes leaving what looks like long lines of cocaine behind them in all kinds of criss cross patterns which then fan out to ruin what would have been a beautiful sunny day. Surely there cannot be that much airline passenger traffic over our area, we are a 700 mile long peninsula. What then could be the possible cause of all this? We sell Sun here in south Florida, but there really is not that much to sell anymore due to this problem.
Dr. Kharuk describes the tree on the right as living under the tyranny of colder climates of the past…The younger tree has grown, he says, under the freedom of recent, milder climates. It is shooting up tall, straight, and full…We just don’t know, anything pinning a cause without a thorough investigation of the tree health and soil is simply speculation…..The idea posed by Caleb Shaw in this previous post seems to be well illustrated….
After reading the scientists view and Caleb’s it’s ‘well illustrated’ why regular folks don’t pay much attention to scientists.
p.s. I am meaning scientists in general, not about all scientists. Anthony, Roy Spencer, others like, I’m not talking about you. 🙂
Maybe the one tree just has a parasite of some kind.
That would be to simple
Notice all the green on the surface under the strong tree? I don’t see any such green under the other trees. Was that tree fertilized?
Deborah (19:10:03) :
“Maple trees in mid-Michigan have begun turning colors about three weeks early,” said Bert Cregg, professor….no one is “quite sure what’s going on yet”
I think both the leaf color changing early and early cold are related to the sun. The sun has been quiet since very early 2007 (you probably already knew that about the sun though).
And I can understand why you laughed!! You know the truth, and the truth set you free!! 🙂
p.s. have you seen the fall colors in Michigan? One of the most beautiful things in the world!
Sorry but someone has to do it:
There is unrest in the forest,
There is trouble with the trees,
For the maples want more sunlight
And the oaks ignore their pleas.
The trouble with the maples,
(And they’re quite convinced they’re right)
They say the oaks are just too lofty
And they grab up all the light.
But the oaks can’t help their feelings
If they like the way they’re made.
And they wonder why the maples
Can’t be happy in their shade.
There was trouble in the forest,
And the creatures all have fled,
As the maples scream “Oppression!”
And the oaks just shake their heads
So the maples formed a union
And demanded equal rights.
“The oaks are just too greedy;
We will make them give us light.”
Now there’s no more oak oppression,
For they passed a noble law,
And the trees are all kept equal
By hatchet, axe, and saw.
It seems that many posters missed the last line of the first paragraph under the picture of the two trees. Tyranny is; MANY CENTURIES OLDER than Freedom.