Article Author: Tom Christopher Title: "Can Weeds Help Solve the Climate Crisis?" - originally published in the New York Times on 29 June 2008 Note: Ziska's research was also included in this USDA report on the impact of climate change on agriculture
Summary:
A weed is something growing where you don't want it to. At best, the impact of climate change on plants is not well understood.
A common thing heard in these parts is that CO2 will make crops grow faster.
Well - if so, it will probably have that impact on weeds, too.
Currently, weeds cost U.S. farmers about 12 percent of their harvest,
an estimated annual loss of $33 billion. USDA researcher Lewis Ziska has found that elevated carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere dramatically increase weed growth. Not only did the weeds grow much larger in hotter, CO2-enriched plots but they also produced more pollen. Even more alarming was the way that the increased heat and CO2 accelerated and perverted the succession of species within the plots.
CEP selected the excerpts and added the emphases in bold below. The original article is seven web pages, but well worth reading in full (we can't reproduce it in full here - only excerpts).
*****************
By comparing three sites — an organic farm in western Maryland, a park
in a Baltimore suburb and the one by the inner harbor — Ziska planned
to study three circumstances: the present (on the organic farm), the
mid-century future as predicted by the climate-change panel (in
Baltimore) and something in between (the suburban site). He took soil
from the organic farm, which already contained seeds of 35 common
weeds, and with it created uniform beds at each of the sites, urban,
suburban and rural, so that the growing medium and weed population
would be the same throughout. What happened over the next five growing seasons surprised even him.
Not
only did the weeds grow much larger in hotter, CO2-enriched plots — a
weed called lambs-quarters, or Chenopodium album, grew to an impressive
6 to 8 feet on the farm but to a frightening 10 to 12 feet in the city
— but the urban, futuristic weeds also produced more pollen.
Even
more alarming was the way that the increased heat and CO2 accelerated
and perverted the succession of species within the plots. Typically, a
cleared area in the Eastern United States, if left to itself, returns
to native woodland. This process varies with the site and
circumstances, but in its archetypical form fast-growing annual weeds
cover the soil first, playing the role of what ecologists classify as
“pioneer plants.” These gradually give way to longer-lived perennial
weeds, which are in turn replaced by shrubs and trees.
In the
natural version of this process, the pioneers and their successors are
species indigenous to the area, and the woodland’s restoration takes
decades. But what Ziska observed in his urban plots was ecology on
amphetamines, a nearly completed succession to trees by the end of five
years, with a domination by invasive weed trees of the most troublesome
sort: ailanthus, Norway maples and mulberries...
Weeds are already very well adapted to living with human society, and especially with agriculture. We've even accidentally bred them to be stronger and more resistant to our efforts to eradicate them.
Simply
put, any plant, if we dislike it, becomes an intruder in our landscape
and so a weed. Arguably, then, there was no such thing as a weed until
mankind developed the need to discriminate, which came with the
development of agriculture in the Neolithic era, around 9,000 B.C.
In
fact, many of the wild grains like red rice or wild oats that are among
our most troublesome agricultural weeds today were valued food sources
until we graduated from the hunter-gatherer stage of our existence.
Much
has been made of our scientific triumph in breeding modern crop plants
from those wild ancestors. The transformation of an east Asian wild
grass (red rice) into the crop that provides 20 percent of humanity’s
caloric intake is extraordinary. What generally goes unrecognized,
though, except among weed scientists, is the extent to which we also
made weeds what they are.
Coexistence
with mankind has given rise to the sort of tough plants that flourish
despite the worst we can do — hoeing, pulling, burning and, more
recently, spraying the fields with herbicidal chemicals. Weeds have
adapted to every means we used to exterminate them, even turning the
treatments to their own advantage.
Attacking
a Canada thistle (actually of Eurasian origin and a regular entry in
“worst weeds of North America” lists) with hoe or plow, for example,
may destroy the plant’s aboveground growth but leaves the soil full of
severed bits of fleshy root, each of which may sprout a new plant.
As weeds have grown stronger and more genetically diverse, crops have moved in the opposite direction. The more diverse a plant is, the better it will be able to cope with climate change.
A
result of this history is that crops and weeds embody diametrically
opposed genetic strategies. Over the centuries, we have deliberately
bred the genetic diversity out of our crop plants. Creating crop
populations composed of clones or near clones was an essential step in
achieving higher yields and the sort of uniform growth that makes
large-scale, mechanized cultivation and harvesting possible.
Because weed populations live as opportunists, however, they must
include individuals with the ability to flourish in whatever type of
habitat we make available. They also need diversity to cope with the
wide range of punishments we inflict. A patch of Canada thistles, if it
is to survive when the farmer switches from hoeing to herbicides, must
include individuals that develop a resistance to the chemicals over
time.
Weed
populations that lacked the necessary genetic diversity faded from our
fields, lawns and waste places; historians of agriculture can cite many
such casualties.
The
survivors are an astonishingly plastic group of plants... “When you
change a resource in the environment,” Ziska said recently, sitting in
his compact office, “you are going to, in effect, favor the weed over
the crop. There is always going to be a weed poised genetically to
benefit from almost any change.”
...
What he and his colleagues have found, he said, is that weeds benefit
far more than crop plants from the changes in CO2 and that the
implications of this for agriculture and public health are grave.
Tests
with common agricultural weeds like Canada thistle and quack grass
found them more resistant to herbicides when grown in higher
concentrations of CO2, making them harder to control. Ziska
hypothesizes that this may be a result of faster growth; the weeds
mature more rapidly, leaving behind more quickly the seedling stage
during which they are most vulnerable. This promises to be an expensive
problem for farmers, who will have to spend more on chemicals and other
anti-weed measures to protect their crops. (Herbicides already cost
farmers more than $10 billion annually worldwide.)
But
enhancing CO2 levels, Ziska has found, not only augments the growth
rate of many common weeds, increasing their size and bulk; it also
changes their chemical composition. When he grew ragweed plants in an
atmosphere with 600 p.p.m. of CO2 (the level projected for the end of
this century in that same climate-change panel “B2 scenario”), they
produced twice as much pollen as plants grown in an atmosphere with 370
p.p.m. (the ambient level in the year 1998). This is bad news for
allergy sufferers, especially since the pollen harvested from the
CO2-enriched chamber proved far richer in the protein that causes the
allergic reaction. Poison ivy has also demonstrated not only more
vigorous growth at higher levels of CO2 but also a more virulent form
of urushiol, the oil in its tissue that provokes a rash. The basic issue is that carbon dioxide and climate change give a big growing advantage to invasive species.
... These are plants that evolved outside a local or regional ecosystem but
were at some point released into it, typically by human action. Some
invasives, like cheatgrass, arrived as hitchhikers and stowaways;
others, like kudzu, were introduced deliberately. (A Japanese species,
kudzu was planted by state and federal agencies to control soil erosion
throughout the Southern states in the 1930s and ’40s.) In any case, the
invasive plant species share a quality of aggressive, explosive growth
in their new homes and the ability to outcompete the native vegetation
of forests, grasslands and wetlands — areas that we are accustomed to
think of as outside the sphere of human influence....
Is there a bright side? Possibly.
... Developing techniques for managing weeds in a time of global climate
change will be essential to the world’s agricultural future, and the
U.S.D.A. researchers, though they have been starved of essential
financing, lead the world in this field. (There is one exception, Ziska
admits; his Web searches have revealed that marijuana growers have an
amazingly detailed knowledge of how CO2 enrichment affects their crop.
But as Ziska points out, they don’t publish in scientific journals.)
Possession of this expertise could be a great economic asset to the
United States, both for the protection it could provide to our own
harvests and as an intellectual export that is sure to be much in
demand in other countries.
Ziska says that he worries about mankind’s ability to feed itself in
a fast-changing future. Paradoxically, it is weeds, he says, that can
provide solutions. They have helped us deal with lesser crises in the
past. When diseases and pests overwhelmed our domesticated food crops,
it was to their wild relatives — plants that mankind has been battling
for millennia — that plant breeders turned. Because weeds have more
diverse genomes, it is easier to find one with the proper genetic
resistance to a given threat — and then to create a new hybrid by
breeding it with existing crops. An answer to the Irish potato blight
of 1845-6 was eventually found among the potato’s wild and weedy
relatives; a wild oat found in Israel in the 1960s helped spawn a more
robust, disease-resistant strain of domesticated oats. Weedy
ancestors of our food crops, Ziska predicts, will cope far better with
coming climatic changes than their domesticated descendants. Coping,
after all, is what weeds have always done best. As last year’s climate-
change panel report, Climate Change 2007, made clear, we have already
set in motion far-reaching and unstoppable changes in regional
temperatures and precipitation and in the composition of our
atmosphere. No matter what actions we take, these changes will continue
for decades. If we are to avoid disaster, experts agree, we will need
to be tenacious but flexible, ready to identify and exploit any
opportunity in what will be a challenging, even hostile situation. In
this new world that we have made, weeds, our old adversaries, could be
not only tools but mentors.
|