Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Boy what clickbait! :)

"red alder ... through its symbiotic relationship with nitrogen-fixing bacteria"

That's more like it. No such thing as a nitrogen-fixing tree, as far as we know; only micro-organisms perform nitrogen fixation.



Its not clickbait, its just efficient language. We have a symbiotic relationship with bacteria in our gut but don't explicitly distinguish it every time we refer to human digestion.

Actually this article and study is not intending to reveal anything new about how trees and other plants fix nitrogen (using microbes). It is revealing that the symbiotic arrangements (far from entirely understood) also cause the breakdown and release of scarce nutrients from rocks, enabling increased growth and building soil fertility over time.


We wouldn't say that a people perform some very specific, detailed process that is attributed to gut bacteria. E.g. "humans break down oligosaccharides".

Digestion, as such, is a concept independent of gut bacteria.


Peas and legumes 'fix nitrogen' using the same mechanism.

Dairy farmers produce milk, gardeners grow plants, I brew beer.

Creating a situation where something you want to happen, happens, generally means attributing the thing to whoever set the situation up.


"Nitrogen-fixing" is a very specific term: it refers to the chemical process by which nitrogen is drawn from the atmosphere.

A dairy farm produces milk, but it doesn't lactate. Gardeners do not photosynthesize.


What's the general term that you would prefer everyone to use then?


I've given this a few minutes of thought. Basically, the situation is that some bacteria take nitrogen from the atmosphere and then spew out ammonia and related compounds, which are taken up by the roots of the symbiotic plants. I would call this "fertilization" (in the agricultural sense).


But then it becomes ambiguous whether you're talking about fertilising the tree, or the tree fertilising something else. Perhaps self fertilising? But that sounds like reproduction.

And that's assuming we're living in a world where you can petition the World English Language Governing Body to make the necessary changes to the language.

But for better or worse that body doesn't exist so we are stuck with what we've got, and at the moment people talk about nitrogen fixing plants, so if you want to communicate with people, you need to use those terms.

That isn't clickbait, that's just making sure a headline doesn't turn into an off topic essay.


> whether you're talking about fertilising the tree, or the tree fertilising something else.

Of course, I would say that the tree is being fertilized or receiving fertilization, not that it's fertilizing.

The effect of the bacteria can be replaced by animal waste, decaying biological matter, or the application of a commercial fertilizer.

> self fertilising

That would be false and absurd; it means that the plant is decomposing in order to feed itself.

> and at the moment people talk about nitrogen-fixing plants.

Not people who can pass a fifth grade science exam. Nothing to do with English usage. "Nitrogen-fixing credit card" is grammatical English.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: