Squirrels Accurately Predict Bumper Harvests

New Scientist ^ | 12-21-2006 | Roxanne Khamsi

[No.6]

MSU bump.

[metmom]

By producing very few cones some years, the trees starve their seed predators, giving themselves an evolutionary advantage.Oh they do? They have this figured out?

Let me rephrase that last line. The antecedent wasn't clear.

By producing very few cones some years, the trees starve their seed predators, giving themselves an evolutionary advantage. Oh they (the trees) do? They (the trees) have this figured out? Trees can decide to *starve out* the seed predators? Even if trees could decide to do this, to what point? How would their seeds be scattered?

As Mrs. VS pointed out in post 30, a bounce and a roll don't go very far; even on a hill. They'd choke themselves out eventually anyway. If the trees are going to do anything, one would think they'd decide to produce huge bumper crops every year to ensure the survival of the tree rats in order to make sure there's plenty of tree rats to spread their seeds far and wide.

I'm not disputing the scientists finding a connection between a bumper seed crop and an extra litter of squirrels in the same year. It's the stupid comments made by them that are the embarrassment. It's the speculation with no basis that's not even consistent with itself. Saying the squirrels can *predict* a bumper crop and then saying they might be responding to visual clues. If they were going to predict, it would be before the visual clues. Responding is not predicting.

My thoughts would be that the visual clues trigger a reproductive response somehow. Or maybe that it's that since food is so easy to obtain, they have time for other pursuits.

[VeritatisSplendor]

My guess is that when the trees are going to produce a bumper crop, there is possibly more sap and more sugar in the sap (some squirrels actually concentrate sap by gnawing grooves in the south side of the tree and lapping up the sun-evaporated sap) and certainly more buds which the the squirrels eat. So, more food in early spring, more babies.

And almost certainly, an increase in plant hormones which might affect the squirrels. Visual cues seem less likely - "hey, honey, did you see all those buds? Let's do it again!"

Quark, you don't have to be anti-science or anti-evolution to find this article foolish - from a natural selection perspective it doesn't make a whole lot of sense.

Mrs VS

[Creationist]

By producing very few cones some years, the trees starve their seed predators, giving themselves an evolutionary advantage.

And evolutionist believe this, a tree (an organism without intelligence or conscience thought) decides to starve the squirrel, which probably is a propagator of the tree by the moving and dropping of the nut.

But in true evolutionary form we must say the squirrel figured out how to predict the seed harvest before the tree was able to starve the squirrel into extinction, God could not have designed the tree and the squirrel to live one from the other.

[RunningWolf]

The squirrels have known all along what the scientists are just now figgering out.

It seems that the squirrels will give us much better predictive results for a lot less cash outlay and general trouble. And I doubt the squirrels will be employing the ACLU as a front for any subversive intent to gut the core values of America like some 'scientists' do in the name of 'pure science'.

Let me guess, Next science will develop a new insulator that looks and acts like a leaf. Someone will have a PHD in leaf insulator technology. If he says anything about evo, anything he says that gives more certitude to the myth of evolution will be added to the 'mountain of evidence' supporting it /sarc>

W.