On One Hand

October 21, 2009

How Life Transforms the Earth: Evolution on a Global Scale

Filed under: Uncategorized — ononehand @ 12:59 pm

I started thinking about this when I read an MSNBC article, cited below, about the way the evolution of blooming plants allowed the Amazon Rainforest to expand significantly in size because their leaves give off more humidity than other plants. The concept that scientists touched on is much broader than the vasculation of angiosperms – that living things change climate, and that evolution sparks changes that continuously expand the biosphere by creating a reciprocal relationship between organisms and their environment.

Most of us are familiar with the concepts that drive evolution and adaptability – that species with traits or features that allow them to thrive do thrive, populating the landscape, while species with traits that are not as well-adapted remain rare or go extinct. That’s why almost all the organisms we see in the wild are tough and well-adapted evolutionary “winners,” and while species come and go, life itself is nearly impossible to kill off.

But equally importantly, life has a tendency to bring other life with it; a successful new species creates a food source and shelter for other species to evolve or move in. Over billions of years, the net effect of this has been to expand the biosphere to cover the entire planet with increasing numbers of living things.

In the beginning of life on Earth, a few single-celled organisms stuck to the gentle shores of balmy, salty seas, while the rest of the planet was as barren and desolate as Mars or the Moon. The oceans filled with microorganisms first, aided by the mobility that sea currents provide but still few and far between. Early photosynthetic bacteria began to colonize into Stromatolites, forming grainy pillows of mud and sediment that dotted tropical coastal areas and are still visible today in some places, both in active growth and ancient fossils.

Left: Stromatolytes. Right: Red moss, a primitive, rootless plant that requires humid conditions.

When plants adapted ways of storing water or sucking it out of damp soil, significant numbers of species were able to move out of semi-submerged swamps and live on hills and plains. Early plants stayed within a few miles of the coast, places that are now known as marshes, cloud forests and coastal rainforest. But over time a few pioneers crept out onto continental interiors, and gradually evolved to larger sizes, for the first time making visual impact on the landscape on a global scale.

It was only recently in the timeline of life that an observer from space would see continents turn green with forests and grasslands. Deserts were quite barren until plants developed advanced strategies for storing water, allowing rocky, sandy places like the Mojave Desert to become littered with cactus and Joshua trees, dry grasses and woody shrubs with massive underground root systems. The establishment of consistent greenery, even if not as lush as a forest, allowed herbivores to move in, followed by predatory species, fungi, bacteria and other scavengers.

If you look at the kinds of plants that exist in Earth’s most difficult environments, you find that they are dominated by angiosperms – blooming plants – which emerged during the time of the dinosaurs and are recent introductions to Earth’s biosphere. It is hard to imagine ferns and cycads – Earth’s early plants with weak root systems and a strong preference for humid climates – growing comfortably in the desert or the arctic. Grass, a type of angiosperm and very recent development in the plant kingdom, was absent until about the time that dinosaurs went extinct, and now dominates semi-arid and arid areas. Before 65 million years ago, landscapes now covered in grass would be filled, instead, with caked dirt and only occasional greenery.

Grass changed the environment not only by introducing a food source for animals, but by taming it with extensive root systems. Grass has a dramatic, Earth-changing effect of controlling erosion, turning sand dunes into hills and muddy river banks into pastures. Dead grass decays and fertilizes sandy soil with water-absorbent organic material, which makes the land fertile. The systemic change of the landscape allows other drought-tolerant trees to begin growing, benefiting even some of the species that are less well-acclimated to the landscapes grass species take over.

Left: Grass taming a sandy area. Right: Grass dominating a semi-arid climate

Other angiosperms formed symbiotic relationships with bacteria in their roots to turn Nitrogen in the air into usable fertilizer. This is known to help other surrounding plants thrive, and has been used by farmers to benefit crops. The concept of crop rotation takes advantage of one species’ assistance of another, using nitrogen-fixing plants like alfalfa or clover to enrich soil for grass crops like wheat or corn.

A recent study has shown that blooming plants also humidified entire regions to make continental rainforests possible. Angiosperms, with advanced root and circulatory systems, are so good at finding water and pumping it into themselves that evaporation from their leaves humidified the air and generated new rains. Those rains invited millions of species to move in. Ferns have about a fifth of the leaf veins that blooming plants like ficus trees and avocados have, so weren’t able to humidify the air in the same way. But when ferns adapted the ability to grow in shady places beneath trees or cling to rainforest tree trunks themselves, they benefited greatly from the expanding biosphere, and developed their own ways to contribute to it. Again, it was a new evolutionary development that allowed places like the Amazon Rainforest to cover half a continent with green.

Clouds form over the Amazon Rainforest. Water evaporates from tree leaves, facilitating
cloud formation, at a faster rate than even the warm ocean does.

Even what we see as “primitive” kinds of species continue to evolve. Mosses don’t have roots or the ability to store water, but by developing the ability to survive freezing, they were able to begin growing on mountain tops and arctic tundra between rocks and logs, provided the area is moist with melting snow. Moss is known to be a pioneer species itself since it does not need soil, but produces soil when it dies and decays, allowing other plants to grow.

The way a species can make room for other species to thrive – as well as our understanding of it – is increasingly complex. Also increasing is the hostility of environments that diverse ecosystems cover with life. There is life beneath the ice in Antarctic, in abandoned nuclear reactors, and covering undersea volcanic vents. Animal species have long been learning to thrive in human environments, turning urban parks and sewers into thriving ecosystems.

If we see human beings as part of this system, greenhouses and irrigated farms are examples of one life form improving things for another. When there’s snow on the ground outside, the potted plants in my bedroom are certainly glad to have their human-built, adapted environment. Sure, ecology leaves room for the idea that one species can royally screw up an ecosystem for many others – even driving itself to extinction by overpopulating itself or overtaxing its food source – and doesn’t suggest that every species’ impact on the environment is “good.” (Evolution doesn’t see things in terms of “good” or “bad,” just working and not working.)

But humans are part of the principle nonetheless; we bring water to deserts and pass through tunnels blasted through solid rock. If we are able to seed Earth’s life on artificial space stations, the moon, or even other planets, isn’t this, too, an example of Earthly life facilitating its own expansion and filling inhospitable areas?

Expansion and adaptation will continue with or without human influence. It is easy to predict that evolutionary trends that have led to today’s green planet will only continue into the future. If a complex plant evolved to grow in ice or snow, it would turn huge tracts of arctic land into shrubland. As more desert species evolve, a landscape that gets only five inches of rain a year doesn’t seem so dry. Maybe the brown areas on the Earth we see in satellite images will be filled with shades of green in 50 million years.

Perhaps scientists will someday be able to use this concept to determine how long life has existed on a planet as humans begin to explore space. A planet that seems hospitable but only has life forms growing in specific areas is new, and a planet utterly covered in organisms has been experiencing the processes of life for billions and billions of years. Either way, it is obvious that this planet is experiencing somewhat of an unlimited expansion of its own, and that the natural world has its own way of unconsciously creating and organizing itself towards growth.



  1. Not to be depressing, but read “Rare Earth,” the authors mention life on this planet doesn’t have a lot of time left because plants doing the co2/o2 exchange thing will not be able to work much longer (well for another 200 million years)– and it has nothing to do with global warming, it’s just the planet’s chemistry and relationship to the ever powerful increase from the Sun. Once the plants go, nothing much will be left.

    Comment by telemann — October 21, 2009 @ 8:40 pm | Reply

    • I don’t really find the Rare Earth hypothesis to be compelling as an indication that the Earth’s ecosystem is headed for collapse, since everything in observable science determines the biosphere to be robust and expanding. Beyond that, the hypothesis awfully speculative to grant it any merit, since it isn’t testable and there are a dozen other directions someone could run with its tenets.

      What I am saying is essentially the opposite of the Rare Earth hypothesis, which insists that the expansion of life is just a coincidence and there’s nothing intrinsic to it that allows it to work out its own adaptability. I tend to think that living things work towards a self-sustaining system and unconsciously create an environment they do better in.

      I would find it to be a rather suspicious coincidence that after 4.5 billion years of Earth’s existence and 2.5 billion years (and maybe more) of known life, humans just happened to be on the very pinnacle before collapse. Seems rather anthropocentric if you ask me. We won’t ever know until (and if) we find life on other planets how robust life is and whether the whole universe is wired for it, or if life on Earth is just an incredibly fortunate thing (which is the Rare Earth hypothesis’ claim), but whether it is common or not, I think we can determine some very clear things about life on Earth. Can organisms adapt to a gradual change that takes place, not all at once, but over 200 million years? That’s an awfully long time seeing as how 200 million years ago the most advanced animals were reptiles and 2 incredibly transformative mass extinctions would pass until today.

      The Rare Earth thing is interesting, but it’s totally a “what if” kind of concept.

      Comment by ononehand — October 21, 2009 @ 8:57 pm | Reply

      • Well the theory about life on this planet doesn’t have a lot of time left anyway isn’t unique to that book “Rare Earth” they just mentioned in passing. Other scientists talk about this too. Eco diversity is already decreasing and has been for many millions of years it seems.

        Comment by telemann — October 21, 2009 @ 9:00 pm

      • “Eco diversity is already decreasing and has been for many millions of years it seems.”

        Did you even read the entry?

        This is a chart of the number of families of species on earth through time:

        Does that really look like a decrease?

        Comment by ononehand — October 21, 2009 @ 9:21 pm

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

Create a free website or blog at WordPress.com.

%d bloggers like this: