Can you give an explanation to why trees live longer?
Why trees live longer?
Live longer then what?
...
If longer then humans then i guess mostly cuz they are plants and have completelly different structure then humans...
heh.. hehe ;p
...
If longer then humans then i guess mostly cuz they are plants and have completelly different structure then humans...
heh.. hehe ;p
Ideally, trees are the perfect machines. They have the ability to create and process there own food. They do not have to rely on foraging for other food sources. All they need is water, sun, and nutrients from the soil.
The only reason that trees eventually die off if they are not harmed by animals, mother nature, or human construction is that as trees grow taller and thicker, it makes getting food go where they need to be a lot more difficult. Gravity starts to work against them. At least something like that. It's been a while since I've had to do anything with plant biology.
The only reason that trees eventually die off if they are not harmed by animals, mother nature, or human construction is that as trees grow taller and thicker, it makes getting food go where they need to be a lot more difficult. Gravity starts to work against them. At least something like that. It's been a while since I've had to do anything with plant biology.
They do eventually get old and die, but it takes a long time; most trees don't live that long. When they do die, they do so just like humans; they get various diseases and die from them. (For a tree, fungus and bugs would qualify as diseases). The reason they live so long is that they have a slower metabolism. They do everything very slowly, including aging.
The life expectancy of trees is different for every species; a 200 year old oak could be considered relatively young, while a cherry loral (spelling?) grows much faster, but dies much sooner.
The life expectancy of trees is different for every species; a 200 year old oak could be considered relatively young, while a cherry loral (spelling?) grows much faster, but dies much sooner.
Ive never seen a tree age, like a animal, they are usally killed.
I think the metoblism has some thing to do with it, with the added effect of the way that they make food.
some of the oldest living life forms are sugar makers (plant-like)
I think the metoblism has some thing to do with it, with the added effect of the way that they make food.
some of the oldest living life forms are sugar makers (plant-like)
The answear is gene.
trees live a long time because of their more effecent cell structure, easy food supply, and lack of essential organs.
see, unlike animals, trees dont have livers, or stomachs or brains, that if one is disfunctional, the creature is dead. however, trees have many roots, and many leaves, and many branches so they are way less fragile
see, unlike animals, trees dont have livers, or stomachs or brains, that if one is disfunctional, the creature is dead. however, trees have many roots, and many leaves, and many branches so they are way less fragile
tree lives more than humans
because they dont have nervous system coordinating their body
their whole body works independently
and the thing is that they can cope with the regular change in environment
because they dont have nervous system coordinating their body
their whole body works independently
and the thing is that they can cope with the regular change in environment
| sarapicoazul wrote: |
| Can you give an explanation to why trees live longer? |
Better yet, why do fruit flies live shorter? It's just how it is, stop asking to many questions or you'll die faster... than a tree... than an average human...
| QrafTee wrote: |
| Better yet, why do fruit flies live shorter? It's just how it is, stop asking to many questions or you'll die faster... than a tree... than an average human... |
Technically speaking (all other variables excluded) he'll live longer than you since his inquisitive nature is less stressful on his nervous and immune systems than your apparent nature...
Just a thought
As far as aging, one of the theorized causes of aging is concerned with cell growth (not necessarily metabolism). Each time a cell reproduces, the telomere (a repeating sequence of non-coding DNA at both ends of the strand) is cut slightly shorter due to the actual physical process of DNA replication. Once the strand has been replicated enough times the telomeres are depleted and the actual coding sequence of the DNA is cut shorter making the DNA incomplete, and rendering the new cell a mutant (to say in the least), if not dead. It is believed that aging is at least partially due to this process, because once you get old you start to have fewer and fewer cells that can actually replicate themselves and when your current cells die off, nothing can replace them...
Since trees have a relatively slow growth rate, and a slower death rate of the cells they have than we, this theoretical effect is greatly reduced. As noted the trees that grow faster, as well as the diseased trees tend to die younger, because the faster growing trees squandered their replications and the diseased lost their replicating cells
see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telomeres for more details on telomeres
can you explain why we live shorter?
I planted a couple trees in the back garden and neither of them made it beyond 14 years. One was killed by boarers... just like the animals killing the young. The other was likely a poor choice on my part. I learned later that the tree I picked had a short life span.
One of the posts above said it best... its in the genes. Its not that trees live exceptionally long... not all types do live longer the life expectancy for humans. But many do.
What is more interesting... is what about things make life span longer or shorter. Is it related to size? Environment? Other factors?
One of the posts above said it best... its in the genes. Its not that trees live exceptionally long... not all types do live longer the life expectancy for humans. But many do.
What is more interesting... is what about things make life span longer or shorter. Is it related to size? Environment? Other factors?
metabolisim
why do sea turtles live so long? why do parrots live so long? why do fruit flys live so short?
some trees live longer than other trees. i think that this is based on metabolism. all life takes a slightly different aproach to survival but it is all based on birth, growth, reproduction, death.
so i suppose it comes down to the fact that some organisms are quicker f**kers than others hehehhe
why do sea turtles live so long? why do parrots live so long? why do fruit flys live so short?
some trees live longer than other trees. i think that this is based on metabolism. all life takes a slightly different aproach to survival but it is all based on birth, growth, reproduction, death.
so i suppose it comes down to the fact that some organisms are quicker f**kers than others hehehhe
It's because they drink they drink their ovaltine. But seriously its because their are less diseases to affect their health, and their lifesource is the earth, so they will die once the Earth dies. lol 
If one looks at different types of life, one can see some trends. Bacteria are "immortal," not having any particular maximum lifespan (though of course many of them get killed all of the time from different causes other than aging). From insects to dogs, most animals live less long than humans, though there are some exceptions. The very longest lived species tend to be continuously growing, suggesting that the process of continuous growth even in "old age" may help renew them. Speaking of another factor, the right kind of reduced calorie diet causes much lifespan extension in studies on rats (see here).
Indeed, in general, less active species are particularly likely to have long lifespans, such as turtles that can live for centuries. Still, that is clearly not the only factor. Some think there are seven causes of human aging as listed here, described as "the set of accumulated side effects from metabolism that eventually kills." The subject is quite complicated, and subject to some research as better knowledge could be relevant to developing treatments for life extension in humans; medically, it would be ideal if people could avoid ending up nursing homes as often in their 60s, 70s, and 80s but rather someday be a little more like one other mammal: Balaena mysticetus, the bowhead whale, which has a 210-year maximum lifespan despite being relatively active (reference). Other animals living exceptionally long include urchins and rockfish, though those are far simpler than mammals.
Trees are relatively simple organisms with a relatively slow metabolism probably helping limit the rate of damage over the years, also continuously growing, so, as the preceding suggests, those may be part of the factors involved. I see a couple of posts by others in this thread already implied part of what I have said here.
You might find the article titled Some Animals Age, Others May Not: What Nature Tells Us About Aging here to be of interest, as the author compares quite a number of species.
Indeed, in general, less active species are particularly likely to have long lifespans, such as turtles that can live for centuries. Still, that is clearly not the only factor. Some think there are seven causes of human aging as listed here, described as "the set of accumulated side effects from metabolism that eventually kills." The subject is quite complicated, and subject to some research as better knowledge could be relevant to developing treatments for life extension in humans; medically, it would be ideal if people could avoid ending up nursing homes as often in their 60s, 70s, and 80s but rather someday be a little more like one other mammal: Balaena mysticetus, the bowhead whale, which has a 210-year maximum lifespan despite being relatively active (reference). Other animals living exceptionally long include urchins and rockfish, though those are far simpler than mammals.
Trees are relatively simple organisms with a relatively slow metabolism probably helping limit the rate of damage over the years, also continuously growing, so, as the preceding suggests, those may be part of the factors involved. I see a couple of posts by others in this thread already implied part of what I have said here.
| dooble.doodles wrote: |
| What is more interesting... is what about things make life span longer or shorter. Is it related to size? Environment? Other factors? |
You might find the article titled Some Animals Age, Others May Not: What Nature Tells Us About Aging here to be of interest, as the author compares quite a number of species.
hmmm.. well its because of the biochemistry.. the electron transport chain in animals doesnt have AOX protein (alternative oxidase)..plants use an alternative respiratory pathway involving this Aox.. this leads to lot of cycles and branches in the bichemical cycle that differs from animals.. there is a deeper study on this cycle.. if you are interested in the technical details, then drop a mail in rsurya786@gmail.com .. have fun.. 
Montressor is probably the closest so far, with cell reproduction rates, telomere reduction and the like... though some trees do have exceptional growth rates as well (even some of the longer lived species). Part of it has to do with their life-history traits and metabolism, and the differing life strategies employed by animals versus those employed by plants (as mentioned, there are some very long lived bacteria, also fungi and monerans).
Let's stick with longer lived species, and ignore the fast growing more ephemeral trees.
Many trees (plants really) produce far more food than they need to metabolize to live; this lets them allocate some of this energy into building and maintaining body structure. They allocate more resources into repairing and maintaining tissue than they allocate to growing larger or reproducing. Animals, on the other hand, spend more energy for basic metabilism than they allocate for tissue maintenance and animal cells are more fragile than plant cells. Also more of the animal body is composed of actively living cells. While cell turnover contributes to telomere loss at a rapid rate in animal cells (the telomere cannot be rebuilt, except by a couple cells, ie. germ line cells and cancerous cells), add that to higher metabolism and less efficient methods of acquiring nutrients, and you can expect a shortened lifespan.
Also, very little of a tree is actually living tissue. The roots, leaves and the thin layer of cambium between the bark and wood are the only refuges of living cells. Wood is, by and large dead. It's used in the passive transport of water and sugars, but is just dead structure.
Don't for a second believe that trees don't have many diseases to attack them; they have a multitude and are pretty constantly under attack by various bacteria, fungi, animals, etc. They also suffer from the same sorts of genetic and cancerous issues other complex organisms do. Just because they don't cough doesn't mean they're not ill. Though, as someone mentioned, their non-centralized anatomies generally mean that many diseases are localized and the tree can continue functioning (though hindered).
Let's stick with longer lived species, and ignore the fast growing more ephemeral trees.
Many trees (plants really) produce far more food than they need to metabolize to live; this lets them allocate some of this energy into building and maintaining body structure. They allocate more resources into repairing and maintaining tissue than they allocate to growing larger or reproducing. Animals, on the other hand, spend more energy for basic metabilism than they allocate for tissue maintenance and animal cells are more fragile than plant cells. Also more of the animal body is composed of actively living cells. While cell turnover contributes to telomere loss at a rapid rate in animal cells (the telomere cannot be rebuilt, except by a couple cells, ie. germ line cells and cancerous cells), add that to higher metabolism and less efficient methods of acquiring nutrients, and you can expect a shortened lifespan.
Also, very little of a tree is actually living tissue. The roots, leaves and the thin layer of cambium between the bark and wood are the only refuges of living cells. Wood is, by and large dead. It's used in the passive transport of water and sugars, but is just dead structure.
Don't for a second believe that trees don't have many diseases to attack them; they have a multitude and are pretty constantly under attack by various bacteria, fungi, animals, etc. They also suffer from the same sorts of genetic and cancerous issues other complex organisms do. Just because they don't cough doesn't mean they're not ill. Though, as someone mentioned, their non-centralized anatomies generally mean that many diseases are localized and the tree can continue functioning (though hindered).
I think that xylem tension problems can also lead to death/weakening in large old trees. A colleague of mine has evidence that pines die when they get too large, and that there is a tradeoff in fast growth vs. long lifetimes (with genetic variation to match).
Also (Ankhanu I'm sure you know this), comparing plant cell reproduction to animal cell reproduction is like comparing apples and oranges. As animal embryos develop, each cell among the hundreds of cells in the embryo has a specific fate (some cells become the liver, others the nose, etc.). Turning the embryo into a fetus, and a fetus into an adult organism, only takes a relative handful of divisions of each of those cells. Each cell in a full grown animal is only dozens of cell divisions away from the original zygote (except in certain tissues with really high or low rates of cell turnover). Repeated cell divisions increases the chance of DNA damage, and tumors and other disease can result. Many scientists think that accumulated DNA damage is what weakens us as we age.
For plants, it's totally different. Plants grow from meristems. The cells that get made stick around without ever reproducing again. Instead, a line of cells at the end of a growing shoot (or in a cylinder around the outside of the wood of a tree), divides to produce the new cells. The new cells at the end of the shoot become the new meristem, and make more cells. The new cells at the bottom of the meristem stay there and develop into the new tissue. The meristem is like a moving front of growth, constantly making new cells that become the new meristem. But away from the meristem in the mature part of the plant there's no cell division. That means that the cells at the end of the growing end of a large tree could be trillions of generations old, as opposed to dozens or hundreds for many types of animal cells. Somehow, plants seem to avoid problems with DNA damage. It's a bit of a mystery.
Like Ankhanu says, I bet most of it has to do with simple physiology, both at the cell level and the organism level, but it's hard to understand unless you know more about how trees and animals work.
Also (Ankhanu I'm sure you know this), comparing plant cell reproduction to animal cell reproduction is like comparing apples and oranges. As animal embryos develop, each cell among the hundreds of cells in the embryo has a specific fate (some cells become the liver, others the nose, etc.). Turning the embryo into a fetus, and a fetus into an adult organism, only takes a relative handful of divisions of each of those cells. Each cell in a full grown animal is only dozens of cell divisions away from the original zygote (except in certain tissues with really high or low rates of cell turnover). Repeated cell divisions increases the chance of DNA damage, and tumors and other disease can result. Many scientists think that accumulated DNA damage is what weakens us as we age.
For plants, it's totally different. Plants grow from meristems. The cells that get made stick around without ever reproducing again. Instead, a line of cells at the end of a growing shoot (or in a cylinder around the outside of the wood of a tree), divides to produce the new cells. The new cells at the end of the shoot become the new meristem, and make more cells. The new cells at the bottom of the meristem stay there and develop into the new tissue. The meristem is like a moving front of growth, constantly making new cells that become the new meristem. But away from the meristem in the mature part of the plant there's no cell division. That means that the cells at the end of the growing end of a large tree could be trillions of generations old, as opposed to dozens or hundreds for many types of animal cells. Somehow, plants seem to avoid problems with DNA damage. It's a bit of a mystery.
Like Ankhanu says, I bet most of it has to do with simple physiology, both at the cell level and the organism level, but it's hard to understand unless you know more about how trees and animals work.
| QrafTee wrote: | ||
Better yet, why do fruit flies live shorter? It's just how it is, stop asking to many questions or you'll die faster... than a tree... than an average human... |
Well that's a pretty goofy outlook. What's the purpose of having a functioning brain if you don't ask questions and attempt to reason answers?
I think that human life is shorter than for the trees because the humans have brain and several organs (heart being often the most problematic one) that malfunction with age.
If a human would be composed only of flesh and bones without the organs inside (a bit smilar to a tree) then he would live longer but life wouldn't be very interesting, isn't it?
If a human would be composed only of flesh and bones without the organs inside (a bit smilar to a tree) then he would live longer but life wouldn't be very interesting, isn't it?
Plants have organs... they're just not the same organs that animals have.
| Ankhanu wrote: |
| Plants have organs... they're just not the same organs that animals have. |
Not in the same way that animals have either, as evidenced by some plants' ability to grow an entire new plant from just a tiny cutting of the original plant.
Some animals can do that too.
a tree has a completley different body structure than a human so you cannot compare the two age differences....200 years to a tree might be equivalent to 70 years of a human
I'm not sure how the average lifespan of trees compares with the average life of humans. Trees appear to be a more diversified category compared to the human species. I had a friend in England who I hear is still alive and he's 106 and apparantly completely "compes mentis", I think his wife departed only a few years ago. There combined ages are (were) well over 200.
This a best example, by living ecofriendy one can live long
| chasbeen wrote: |
| I'm not sure how the average lifespan of trees compares with the average life of humans. Trees appear to be a more diversified category compared to the human species. I had a friend in England who I hear is still alive and he's 106 and apparantly completely "compes mentis", I think his wife departed only a few years ago. There combined ages are (were) well over 200. |
Trees vary. Some fast growing trees like birches live less than a century in the wild because they can't compete with larger, stronger, slower trees like maples. In people's yards they may only live a few decades because they tend to get sick and weak as they get old. This is a problem for aspens, too. You may notice that aspens in peoples yards tend not to live very long before succumbing to pests and diseases. However, aspens are among the worlds oldest complex organisms, because they maintain colonies vegetatively through roots (a stand of aspens is actually a single organism). Aspen colonies may be thousands of years old. Single trees can also be quite old. Many forest trees live hundreds of years, and some live thousands of years (typically trees growing in really harsh environments). It's hard to say what kills trees in nature. They may succumb to disease, fire, pests, or competition from other trees before dying 'naturally,' but I think some trees do simply die of old age. That could take a long time (500-1000 years ?), though, even for run-of-the-mill trees.
in humans, life is determine is to how long can we sustain cell division.. our life status starts to deteriorate when cell division stop.. maybe in trees, cell division happens longer and slower than to us.. what do you think?
Probably because they can adapt to lots of climates, that's why they live longer.
trees live longer because they have free supply of food, have no organ system and have no need for locomotion which is a really energy hungry process. Their metabolism is much simpler than higher level organisms and above all they have a regenerative power..
Ohh i know the answer!!!!!!!!
don't read any other, thats right, none of the other replies!!!
herez the answer:
Becase they dont have marriage!!!
don't read any other, thats right, none of the other replies!!!
herez the answer:
Becase they dont have marriage!!!
| Keran wrote: |
| Live longer then what? |
The universe...
... which was, according to biblical scholars, created in 4004 BC. The oldest tree found to date (http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2008/04/080414-oldest-tree.html) began growing around 7,500BC.
Maybe that means god is a christmas tree?
| Quote: |
| Through simulations of the bit string model for biological aging, we reproduced the observed feature of trees and some species of fish of high maximum lifespans if fertility increases with age. Our results provide an additional evidence for the importance of the mutation accumulation theory from biological aging. This paper can give a few insights
Why trees live longer? Authors: de Menezes M.A.1; Racco A.; Penna T.J.P. Source: Physica A, Volume 233, Number 1, 15 November 1996 , pp. 221-225(5) Publisher: Elsevier |
Tell me if you need the above paper
Tree does live longer than human becoz they do not need to go to work 
Trees are chilling whole day long
No stress at all, their biggest problem is when a kid wants to make a treehouse. They are used to boredomm so they dont die of it.
They dont have to go to work
They dont have to go to school
They dont have to search food because its almost always there when they need it
There are my visions
No stress at all, their biggest problem is when a kid wants to make a treehouse. They are used to boredomm so they dont die of it.
They dont have to go to work
They dont have to go to school
They dont have to search food because its almost always there when they need it
There are my visions
Hey guys
does that mean that doing work makes you live less
I guess you are wrong
Have you ever thought what kind of work the trees do
Have you heard of the red wood tree that can take water from the soil deep below and transport it to the top of its canopy
The trees are stationary and have no mobility and yet they resist every invasion from ant to viruses and still live they don't go doctors for flu and cold and yet they live long
Please try and be a little scientific and logical in your posts
does that mean that doing work makes you live less
I guess you are wrong
Have you ever thought what kind of work the trees do
Have you heard of the red wood tree that can take water from the soil deep below and transport it to the top of its canopy
The trees are stationary and have no mobility and yet they resist every invasion from ant to viruses and still live they don't go doctors for flu and cold and yet they live long
Please try and be a little scientific and logical in your posts
| yagnyavalkya wrote: |
| Hey guys
does that mean that doing work makes you live less I guess you are wrong Have you ever thought what kind of work the trees do Have you heard of the red wood tree that can take water from the soil deep below and transport it to the top of its canopy The trees are stationary and have no mobility and yet they resist every invasion from ant to viruses and still live they don't go doctors for flu and cold and yet they live long Please try and be a little scientific and logical in your posts |
Uhm how is this
Trees dont have stress, they have no brain.
They dont have a heart whichs have to beat every sec.
Sometimes moving something weakens it
And humans are also immune for many viruses. For example the flu
When Columbus went to South America he and his seaman took the flu with them without knowing. The Hispanics were immune for it but many many Indians died. (I dont know how many but I believe over 1 million or over 100k)
and dont forget, some trees dont live longer than humans
Because tree is not animal . Tree is simple .
a difficult question. I think it is difficult to answer. you can answer by analyzing the people in question. but it can not completely recreate the good reasons. have many things for which we are still mysteries. a tree can live longer than a human. because it can not have life like us. you say about life by yourself. always busy and many things to enjoy. must always work with often several hours a day . . the human body are limited by bear. perhaps so that we risk to meet life and often less. vice versa. when a tree was born and raised all the same places. life is always just fixed. always repeat the cycle. the activities of conservation and it is not as complex human beings. ^ ^. the humor that I talk about this issue can be. Trees do not work and survive as humans. because the no longer living
it's just the way they evolved.. their whole cycle of life is completely different than other organisms in that it is much slower... for example, a human fully matures in roughly 20 years where as a tree fully matures in roughly 80-100+ years..
because tree support the world but human destroy !
Through simulations of the bit string model for biological aging, we reproduced the observed feature of trees and some species of fish of high maximum lifespans if fertility increases with age. Our results provide an additional evidence for the importance of the mutation accumulation theory from biological aging
because trees are not need to move! They only in one place!
Related topics
 |