3.9 C
Thursday, April 2, 2020
Home News Plant Cuttings Experiments versus real-world studies

Experiments versus real-world studies

Experiments, with the aspiration to undertake investigations in a controlled way that permits analysis and interpretation, are one of the cornerstones of modern science. But how valid are they at showing us what goes on ‘out there’ in the real world?

Baby kissing mirror image
Photo: roseoftimothywoods/Flickr

I’m sure those of an experimental science persuasion will say they are great, and the only way to really understand the complex natural situation. OK, but really, how valid are they at showing us what goes on in nature? Arguably, the only way to find out is to do an … experiment, which is what Maria Grazia Annunziata et al. did.

Some background: Illumination from the sun in the natural environment varies throughout the day, often fluctuating irregularly e.g. due to cloud cover, and with gradual shifts in dark and light at dawn and dusk. Plants in controlled environments, on the other hand, are exposed to constant irradiance during the day and experience abrupt light–dark transitions. How does plant metabolism compare between the two illumination regimes? Analysing a variety of metabolite profiles of their experimental organism – Arabidopsis thaliana (and don’t get me started on how relevant is this weedy crucifier as a model for each and all of the estimated 369,400 species of flowering plants!) – Annuunziata et al. revealed that carbon and nitrogen metabolism differed significantly between sunlight and artificial light conditions.

Cautious in their conclusion – as befits true scientists – they suggest that the variability of sunlight within and between days could be a factor underlying these differences, and that results obtained from plants grown with artificial lighting* might not be representative of natural conditions.**

Case closed: artificial [aka experimental/controlled] is not natural. I’ve always been deeply suspicious of studies that use plants sown in sterilised soil. In the real world – outside the lab/controlled environment facility/growth room – it’s been long-established that approx. 80 – 90% of plants have mycorrhizal associations (although the fraction is probably closer to 82%). I.e. real-world plants do not grow in sterile rooting media (and aren’t found in nature as a single species divorced from contact and interaction with other organisms). How valid or relevant are those experimental studies? Answer: Not at all(!)

* Their data did however suggest that energy-efficient LED [light-emitting diode] lighting is an acceptable alternative to fluorescent lights, which must give some comfort to somebody (and not just those who sell LEDs!).

** It should be noted that in this investigation, ‘natural’ was considered to be plants growing in a greenhouse (albeit one that was naturally illuminated…).

Nigel Chaffeyhttps://www.bathspa.ac.uk/our-people/nigel-chaffey/
Nigel is a botanist and was a full-time academic at Bath Spa University (Bath, near Bristol, UK) until 31st July, 2019. As News Editor for the Annals of Botany he contributed the monthly Plant Cuttings column to that august international botanical organ (until March 2019). He remains a botanist and is now a freelance plant science communicator who continues to share his Cuttingsesque items with a plant-curious audience. In that guise his main goal is to inform (hopefully, in an educational, and entertaining way...) about plants and plant-people interactions.



Comments are closed.

Latest Articles

Most Popular

10 Plants Used to Spice up Sex

It's well-known that plants can affect how the brain works. Take the right plant in the right dose and you can have an altered...

The Garden Jungle by Dave Goulson

(or Gardening to Save the Planet) On my every growing to-do list is create...

Amazing moss and how to identify it

If I told you that during a 200m walk down a suburban London street I saw 13 different species from one group of organisms,...

X-ray dose limits for microscopy lower than we thought

Subtle damage to hydrated tissue occurs at a far lower dosage than previously thought, and may be difficult to recognize.

Recent Comments