Who has the right & authority to Name Nature ??? (& What's up with Species?)

Anybody else have a Love/Hate Relationship with Taxonomy and Taxonomists ??? 😒

To answer this question in the Post's title, People Do! 😉

Image - Psychology Today

No really, it's true. People have that right. Well, just suppose half the people believe what is said at Genesis 2:19-20 where Man is given the assignment of naming the animals, birds, seas creatures, etc. Then of course there is the present day secular gang who adamantly insists there is no God and deem it their responsibility not only to name, but classify Nature. And voila, we now actually have two opposing ideologically driven sides who are surprisingly on the same page with something. Who woulda thunk it ? 😲 Yeah I know, but like I've always said, both sides are the mirror image of each other. Much to the irritation of the Sciencey gang of course. 😉 Giving common names to living things can run into the hundreds of names on a single organism alone, given all the various languages, cultures, ethnicities and historical civilizations over centuries, etc. One of the strategies that was supposed to simplify things and fix the confusion so that identity of a specific living organism could be universally assured worldwide was to provide scientific names in Latin. Okay that made sense, as long as all peoples agree. But I've found long ago that not even that works. Which brings me to some other puzzling terms & labels in english like, "species," "sub-species," "speciation," "breeds," "races," "cultivators," "hybrids," etc, etc, etc. Different terms, but ultimately in each instance still require all the same mechanisms for which provide changes. How many of you know that there can be upwards of 16 different definitions for the word "species" and that there is no universally accepted answer among scientists and other researchers ??? How many knew there are such things as different species of molecules, chemicals, etc ??? How many of you knew that there is no universally accepted idea on what accounts for "speciation" (which refers to the formation of new and distinct species in the course of evolution) ??? Take a long hard look at our natural world going down hill and you'll soon realize that science clearly does NOT know everything about Nature as they promote themselves as the only authorized keepers of knowledge & truth. I'll provide more examples of more things that bug on this subject down below.

Image - Amazon

But first, Biologist Carol Kaesuk Yoon, who wrote the book, "Naming Nature," which delved into the historical tensions between evolutionary biology and taxonomy. Carl Linnaeus (1707-1778) was the Swedish botanist, physician and zoologist, who formalised the modern system of naming organisms called binomial nomenclature. But even Linnaeus struggled in the eighteenth century to define this sciencey word/term "Species" in light of living things tendency to change (mutate) over time while still relying on the usual imperfect human gut felt intuitiveness & common materialistic propensity with making purely visual judgments by mere outward appearances. Later as taxonomy modernized by moving into the laboratories, the results appeared counterintuitive to humanity’s innate predisposition for order in the world. In otherwords things became more muddled and fuzzier than previously thought. But by conceding scientific authority to taxonomists, Dr Yoon then argued, that mankind contributes to their own alienation from nature. No surprise here since the average human being has been indoctrinated into allowing the credentialed (politics, religion, business, scientists, etc) to do all their intellectual thinking, research and personal study for them and accept blindly whatever makes their own personal worldview feel good.

People are no longer interested in going outdoors. It's as if they've been possessed by some alien force, we'll call technology and social media. Who needs a real life when you can have a virtual life with 100s of make believe friends. If they want to see Nature then they Tech companies invented Pinterest, Google Plus, Facebook, etc. They can look at all those pretty doctored up photographs with no titles or description. I'm just not that way, I've got to find out things for myself and verify that they are true. I can't just take some narrator's (David Attenborough, Robert Redford, etc) word or ideological take on the subject. Take my biggest pet peeve here on plant classification manipulation.

What the heck is up with all these Plant Name changes ? 😕

Image - Pacific Horticulture

My number one interest is how we've come by the names given to plants (& how we classify them), since plants are the biggest influence regarding my love and passion for nature. Over the past few years there has been some major upheavals in the scientific name change department. This photo above of a California shrub from my home town is known commonly as Deerweed (Acmispon glaber), but it was formerly known as (Lotus scoparius). Other reclassifications have taken place. Cupressus stephensonii, the species known as Cuyamaca Cypress, which is endemic to the Southern California county I come from, San Diego, has also been reclassified as Hesperocyparis stephensonii. And the list of reclassifying is endless. Rather than rant on this subject anymore, here is an article in Pacific Horticulture: "Why Plant Names Change" which provides a fascinating account on why there have been so many changes. The interesting thing is that it just begs more questions. Take a look at a few of these questions below from a Nursery industry business perspective when it comes to things being labeled accurately that would be of great interest to the home gardener, professional landscaper, and commercial farmer.

The Future of the Taxonomy of Cultivated Plants

"In agriculture and horticulture, at least 80% of taxonomic problems are related to the cultivar. In particular, questions such as (a) “Am I really dealing with a new cultivar?” (b) “To which species does a cultivar belong?” (c) “How can I recognize a cultivar phenotypically, especially if it is a hybrid?” and (d) “Does the cultivar-group system always work?” continually impact on the work of those dealing with the classification and naming of cultivated plant material."

(Source) 

Okay, those are common sense logical questions anyone would ask. Now in this same link above and just below the the abstract which I've partially quoted here above, the article also brings up yet another term to further muddle an already challenging task of separating things into scientific ordered categories and that was the subheading title here:

IS THE INTEREST IN CULTONOMY EQUALLY DIVIDED? 

Cultonomy ??? Yes, Cultonomy focuses more on the classification of cultivated plants or 'cultivators' using only few classification categories. Still, what we really are discussing here are varieties of the same "kind" *cough-cough* "species" of wild parent plant and the various well known vegetable varieties we all know and love from the grocery store. Even though we would never come close to guessing that the varieties listed below all come from the same single cursed invasive parent Mustard plant many gardeners, landscapers, conservationists curse, we should still be amazed at the great "variety" that has resulted from a single plant. The other thing that should impress is the massive amount of informational content within the this wild Mustard plant's DNA for which the epigenetic mechanisms play a major role in accessing Apps, Files, Programs, etc (formerly known as Junk DNA) by turning on or off switches in genes allowing a certain gene or combination of genes to be expressed in various specific ways. 

Whaaaaat ??? You mean all those veggies come from one common ancestral plant we call wild mustard ? Yup it's true! So how is all this possible ? Well, apparently, about 2500 years ago, Brassica oleracea was solely a wild plant that grew along the coast of Britain, France, and other countries around  the Mediterranean. That wild form which still exists today as do other familiar ones known as wild mustard which looks like the one here in the photo to the right and is also a well known weed to most Western Home Gardeners. Yup, this plant has taken over many parts of the southwestern United States on slopes which were once chaparral and especially coastal sage-scrub covered. But what's interesting is that the change within this plant are itself incredibly fascinating. And more incredible are the mechanisms within the genetics (epigenetics) which allow such changes to occur. These changes occur whether dumb luck by changed environmental cues which created the changes or whether they were intelligently directed by humans. Which leads us to more questions. If intelligent humans can purposefully direct and choose for changes in plants and we label to result as a "cultivator" or "variety," how come we don't label (bare with me here) them different species, brees or races ? Why not call different humans "cultivators" (since two intelligent people can make an intelligent choice to have children) or maybe "breeds" like we do with animals ? So we can call we humans collectively a "species," but would different races be "sub-species" ??? Amazing how nonsensical things can become when you layout in the open ? 

You see, nobody here is arguing there is no change out there in Nature, but rather what exactly are the mechanisms for change and why do we humans label things the way we do. I mean is it really dumb luck or rather incredibly amazing complex responses within an organism's genetic makeup to outside environmental cues, purposed or otherwise which result in these changes ??? And why do these changes created by the same mechanisms really constitute all these different labels like a "Species" ??? "Sub-Species" ??? New "Breed" ??? New "Variety" ??? New "Cultivator" ??? Or ????????? 😕 A while back in 2016, there was an article in National Geographic about the change of feather colour in a bird known as Northern Flickers. It was noticed that some yellow Northern Flickers were sporting feathers which were mysteriously changing to a reddish-orange plumage and the theory was that the western Red-Shafted Northern Flickers were mating with the eastern Yellow-Shafted Northern Flickers creating the orange variety. But both these birds live so far apart from one another. So how did this change happen without such cross breeding ??? It was discovered that in some areas the yellow variety of Northern Flickers were eating the red berries of an introduced non-native invasive Honeysuckle. Whatever was in the pigment (rhodoxanthin) within the berries of the Honeysuckle, it had an effect on the colouration of the plumage. It's kind of like when a person eats or drinks too much carrot juice and their skin can turns a bit yellow orange, otherwise known as Carotenosis. 😲 Still, no one has yet placed a new species label on such an effect. At least I've not yet heard of an Orange Flicker species label. But the Northern Flicker story is fascinating and illustrates part  of what makes or causes changes to occur. Here is what Matt Chew, Research Professor of Arizona State University, commented on to the Auduban Society about the term they used, "invasive" (Matt hates this term with a passion).

"The basic finding here is that flickers that eat honeysuckle berries transport rhodoxanthin to their feathers, and ornithologists finally figured that out. Ockham's razor should have been applied to this morphological problem long ago, and at last a simple, obvious solution was recognized. But it's embedded here in a pretty thick matrix of nativist ideology." (Source - Auduban)

Matt Chew referred to William of Ockham (Ockham's Razor) who taught that entities should not be multiplied without necessity. Seriously, dumb luck is said to always be King in creating change. The Science textbooks have always told us that changes over long deep time through random unplanned purposeless mutations (copying errors) coupled with Natural Selection (A label invented for an idea that says randomly generated variation, would be poorly designed (i.e., hindering reproduction capability) and wouldn't get propagated) are what give us different successful species. Except of course when it doesn't work that way. There are numerous well known evolutionary icons out there which are said to illustrate speciation. Darwin's Finches, Stickleback Fishes, Ciclid Fishes, Blind Cave Fish, Peppered Moths (now we have peppered snakes), etc. On the subject here of the Peppered Moths, the classic story goes like this. The peppered moths went from being mostly light-colored to being mostly dark-colored during the industrialization of 19th-century Manchester, England. The phenomena was called “industrial melanism,” and they attributed this to natural selection. The theory went,  that dark-colored moths were supposedly better camouflaged on coal soot polluted-darkened tree trunks and this is what likely helped them to survive predatory birds who couldn't see them. But then later after air quality improved because of clean air legislation in the mid-20th century, the lighter-colored moths became more common again. We are told this is how new species develop. I once had conversation with guy who insisted this is how speciation works. You couldn't convince this guy otherwise. I gave him an illustration of an Earth populated with human beings, half the population being white people and the other half black people. I said what if something caused all the white population of people to be killed off and totally eliminated, this does not mean that suddenly all the black population become a new species. They're still human. Like water off a duck's back folks. And you will still find this story in most all of the biology textbooks teaching this icon of Darwinian evolution. 

Images - Eawag/David Marques

Here's another example above with these three-spine sticklebacks which were introduced to Lake Constance in Switzerland around 150 years ago (a blink of an eye in evolutionary terms). Since then, the fish have apparently begun splitting into two separate types: one that lives in the main lake (pictured above left, female top, male in breeding colours below), and the other that lives in the streams that flow into it (above right). So I guess if the environmental field changes, as in the case of Stickleback fishes, Darwin's Finches, Peppered Moths, Blind Cavefish, etc, all which seemingly changed overnight when the environmental changes occured dramatically, it just question begs why would it occur 10,000 times faster within one or two generations on certain occasions when we were told it took 1000s or millions of years for the lucky development to happen in the first place ??? For example there have been experiments which have shown blind cavefish acquired functional eyes and eyesight in one generation of cross breeding with other different cave fish. They've now discovered that the loss of eyes in fish living in dark Mexican caves was not due to genetic (copying error) mutations, but rather due to genetic regulation or what we call epigenetics. Specifically, methylation of key development genes which originally repressed the eye expression, but which the later experiments revealed could be reversed to express once again the eyesight program. So to bring things up to a level of nonsense again for illustrative purposes, why don't we call blind humans another species ??? I know I know. Matt Chew also hit on another interesting point:

"Importantly, no one has ever justified calling plants "invasive" by any scientific method. That's because it isn't a scientific claim. Although widely endorsed and regularly deployed, it is an egregious metaphor, intended to incite negative sentiment. It is a powerful figure of speech, being used to indoctrinate, not educate. Codified into laws and regulations, it supports a significant chemical biocide industry."

Yup, sure enough, the term "invasive" being used here is a human construct and implimentation of the term really only helps to serve certain specific industrial science business interests for killing an unwanted evil invader. (plant, animal, bird, fish, whatever) 😒 So the manufacture of and use of terms can be used to manipulate meaning and justify a religious belief, polictical strategy, environmental agenda, etc. But now what about these Northern Flickers ???

Image - Michael S. Quinton, National Geographic Creative

Two uniquely different birds, same "kind" or "species" of the Northern Flicker. The one above is northern yellow-shafted flicker with normal coloration flying out of its nesting hole. The red-shafted northern flicker below lives in western North America, far from where the new strangely red-orange northern yellow-shafted flickers live. So for the yellow-shafted northern flicker, “you are what you eat” has proven freakishly true. They ate red berries and pigment changed feather colouration. Same could be said of identical human twins separated at birth. Both live and grow up under radically different environments and although both have identical DNA, the outward appearance & changes can be dramatic. See and watch the video:

How does Epigenetics work ??? 

Image - Michael S. Quinton, National Geographic Creative

The Religious Icon Known as Tree of Life

Illustration - NewtonsApple.org

You may remember from your school science textbooks that iconic Tree of Life proposed by scientists to explain the origin of every living thing ? Classification and labeling within this tree was supposed to hold so much promise in our understanding of life, where it all came from and how it all works. Except that something happened along the way in how we now understand things. With the field of genetics getting past that facricated roadblock called Junk DNA, we've discovered multiple amazing things about the way the genomes of life work and operate and it has dashed many old long cherished scientific myths. For example this iconic Tree of Life no longer looks like a tree, but rather a messy tangle of a black widow spider's web. Now there is more confusion rather than clarity and those begging questions that come along with it. Once again, Matt Chew exposes some uncomfortable flaws with word semantics.

"Words matter. Invasion is a coordinated, purposeful activity. It isn't just a way of expressing how we feel about something showing up where we didn't expect it. To demonstrate that honeysuckle is invading, we need to show that honeysuckle knows where it is, knows there is somewhere else to be, knows how to get there, and intends — as a species, mind you — to take and occupy territory that it does not presently control. Not an easy array of tasks."

Good point on the real meaning of this word/term invasive within the context of blaming an organism for planning, scheming, knowingly intending to accomplish something selfishly evil as any sentient being would do. Unfortunately for the promoters, plants are not sentient beings. To utter such words could actually be considered heretical to Darwinian thinking. But getting back what Matt Chew said about using words/terms being utulized for one's personal agendas:

"a powerful figure of speech, being used to indoctrinate, not educate. Codified into laws and regulations."

It's Matt's words here which inspired me to write about a subject of terminology being used in Science for promoting political, religious or business agendas. A website I sometimes follow, but only rarely comment on is A NEW CENTURY OF FOREST PLANNING. The site for me holds some mild interest with regards to forest management and ecosystem health. Generally there is some interesting discussion on practical management of National Forests which includes a wide array of uses by the public for recreation and commercial usages. The site is often used as a platform of debate between two competing ideologies with opposite worldviews, mostly between a handful of the same regular characters. One side championing Timber Industry business interests and the other Environmental Industry business interests. A post was introduced back on March 1st 2018 by the site's Admin, Sharon, who brought up some outstanding points on what exactly qualifies as a unique species. The subject was about Extinction on the National Forests. If anyone is familiar with the Environmental Movement's tactics on how they go about getting what they want, you'll understand they first need to locate and find a specific subject (animal, bird, amphibian, reptile, plants, etc) to champion and save from extinction. This is where the fuzziness and muddled nature of the definition shell game (word semantics) with regards Species comes into play. In the New Century article on extinction about species in National Forests, an example was provided on a rare "species" *cough-cough* "variety" or "sub-species" of the San Gabriel Mountains Blue butterfly (Plebejus saepiolus aureolus) and this lawsuit was going forward to punish and hold accountible the US Forest Service who apparently allowed this critter to go extinct. Or so we are led to believe. The accusasions came from none other than the Center for Biological Diversity. This professional environmental business organization is known for it's talent in a gaming strategy called, "Sue & Settle." Nobody plays it better than they do.

Greenish Blue Plebejus saepiolus (Boisduval, 1852)

This isn't to minimize the importance of conserving and saving unique animals or plants on Earth, but rather when something is said to go extinct, is it really extinct given the information we now have on genetics or is this just a ploy ? Have these environmental folks actually searched every square hectare of land area to see if it may reside elsewhere ??? Take this butterfly example. What made it distinct from all other butterflies of this same species ??? Was it's unique differences something similar to the dietary changes in the Northern Flicker ??? Or was it some other environmental anomaly which actually made it break off from other butterflies of it's "kind" - "family" - "species" - whatever ??? Interestingly it was never proven or actually listed as a species, but at best seemed to be a "sub-species." An article came out last month (March 2018) in the online journal, Daily Mail, which provided a number of bullet points on this present species crisis and the sixth extinction. It wasn't exactly helpful in enlightening the public about how science defines species. And it was extremely mysterious in informing the public how they arrived at their conclusions. Again, just more murkiness. Here are a few relevant bullet points on the subject of species as they used the term in the article. 

• "Two species of vertebrate, animals with a backbone, have gone extinct each year"

My Thoughts: The definitions of what exactly constitutes the process of speciation is a mess and lacks clarity in my view. Matt Chew's reference to the deliberate use of the term "invasive" as being politically useful is the same here regarding species going "extinct." In this case, environmental groups will use specific terms which are especially useful for fundraising more money from followers or their political allies who have access to government coffers. But if we apply the above bullet point to the discussion at Forest Policy Planning site, who gets to decide that life forms like the San Gabriel Mountains Blue butterfly (Plebejus saepiolus aureolus) was a species and it went extinct ??? We don't have clarity on what species really means and in the case of this butterfly, it was wasn't exactly classified as a separate species, but at best a sub-species. So when the Center for Biological Diversity says that they have “gone extinct,” how do they know that these butterflies did not simply mingle in with the larger population of the same kind of butterfly somewhere else where they may have hybridized and later separated ??? I’m not trying to make light or fun of the situation here, but just what exactly we are talking about when it comes to species ??? Who'd like to read a fun Butterfly naming species story ??? 

Florida Museum photo by Kristen Grace

In the above photograph,Tom Emmel displays the set of Cyllopsis tomemmeli that he collected as a 17-year-old in 1959, but suddenly today almost 60 years later it is given a name as a new species. But is it really a new species or variety of the same kind of organism ?? Who knows, but the article is interesting and should create more questions about how we arrive at conclusions:

FloridaMuseum: New butterfly species discovered nearly 60 years after it was first collected

• "There are an estimated 8.7 million plant and animal species on our planet"

My Thoughts: How exactly did they arrive at all these numbers and stats, especially before today's genome mapping tools came out ??? And if these genome mapping tools were used, what were the cutoffs used for determining a new species ??? How exactly are they made & determined ??? Are they applied specifically or broadly across the board ??? It's a lot like reading other science articles with all these deep time dates dealing with millions or billions of years. Mainly we have to take it on faith that the researchers know what they are doing for no other reasons than because they are said to be credentialed.

• "About 86% of land species and 91% of sea species remain undiscovered"

My Thoughts: How do they know what has or hasn't been discovered and that these percentages are correct ??? I can't do that, so how can they do that ??? I mean these numbers are so specific, but what really is the underlying foundation for them ??? The real percentage numbers could be higher or lower, but how would they even know ??? This reminds me of another dubious science discipline, Astrobiology, and something I read in an online site about extraterrestrial life being out there somewhere in the universe.

“We know there are exterrestrial aliens out there, we just haven’t found evidence for them yet”

If you want to read more of this, here is the link to the DailyMail Online sixth extinction article (HERE). Oh and one final bullet point from the article about this mystical future event alluded to about the coming Sixth Extinction. 

• "Earth is enduring the sixth mass species extinction which is plunging the planet into 'global crisis', scientists have warned."

My Thoughts: Today, Science has become the head of a modern day doomsday cult. They fingerpoint at the rest of humanity for the present climate change and never once accept or attribute blame to themselves for leading mankind down this path through their own inept scientific understanding and technology built on such ignorance. Traditionally in the past, we've all known of these various oddball religious groups who were often labeled as Doomsday Cults. But now appears the present secular belief system has caught up and have created their own version of a modern day academic Doomsday group think. You cannot read anything these days without this incessant love affair with the celebrated Sixth Extinction. I'm not minimizing the dire downward trend of the planet's ecological health. But I have no need of a scientific paper to tell or inform me that things are changing out in Nature everywhere across the globe for the worse. Take note below of an area of Switzerland, where Trachycarpus fortunei (Chinese Fan Palm) is spreading on the southern side of the Alps in moist forests and building self-sustaining populations.

Image - Vinvent Fehr

Here is a video from the photographer of this photo above

Trachycarpus fortunei (Chinese fan palm) spreading in southern Ticino

There's really nothing more here to explain about the ongoing continual mass confussion of life classification on the part of the Scientifically credentialed. One day proper classification of all living things will come about, but not at the hands of the present Scientific Orthodoxy. I believe scientists have only barely scratched the surface about the informational content of DNA and the infathomable future potential possibility for providing further future change which can give mankind interesting observations for all eternity. I believe that most of the past extinct creatures are in a sense probably still with us today in one form or another. My last post on the extinction of Megafauna well illustrates that many are still with us. Remember the extinct Giant Ground Sloths, well we still have Sloths that exist today, just not giant ones. Remember those Mammoths and Mastodons ??? Yes, these are also gone, but remember scientists have found that the frozen fossil DNA is actually the same almost identical DNA that still exists in today's African & Asian Elephant populations and that at one time they all interbred with one another. If future environmental conditions improve and go back to what they were when Earth was heavily vegetation from Pole to Pole, then the possibility of their gradual return could be a reality. Who knows. Of course we'll need another type of major climate shift. What about Dinosaurs ??? Remember Juarassic Park's sick Triceratops ??? Did it strike anyone else as to the uncanny similarity in it's skin, legs and feet, face, etc to present day Rhinos ??? While many have proposed Rhinos come from a type of Triceratops, I'm going way out on a "Just So Story" limb here and propose that Triceratops actually came from Rhinos. Is it really all that far fetched ??? I know, the Triceratops looks so much more elaborate and complex in it's development. But so does Cauliflower, Broccoli, Cabbage, Brussel Sprouts, Kale and Kohlrabi when you compare them to their unremarkable lowly weed parent plant the wild mustard (Brassica oleracea). Maybe like the exotic more spectacular looking cultivators, the various Triceratops were also the dead end hybrids of Rhinos. Pay close attention to this spellbinding talk in the video below, as paleontologist Jack Horner tells us the story of how iconoclastic thinking revealed a shocking secret about some of our most beloved dinosaurs.

So it turns out that many of these different dinosaur species fossil discoveries, were never new species after all, but were mere adolescence of the adults. Go figure! 😊 See how easy it is to create a just so narrative ??? Like Jack Horner said, Scientists love to name things. He also said Scientists have egos. Let's face it, there's a lot of fame, glitter and glory out there to be acquired if one can get their name up in lights for a new discovery. Also, future funding and notoriety are great motivation drivers to taxonomic exuberance. Believe it or not, most Evolutionary Biologists admire and follow Rudyard Kipling's lead in this "Just So Storytelling" tactic all the time, so I would encourage you to please read the Wiki article link below on Mr Kipling's Just So Stories children's book. Be careful folks about what and who you're donating your hard earned money to for scientific research. Species ? 😏

Wikipedia

"Just So Stories" by Rudyard Kipling

No need for any references, you've got enough to chew on, think about, meditate and ponder on for a while 😉

“Sure, you can name a tree, categorize it, safely identify it. But that tree exists, living the fullness of its quiet life, even if in its long history no man ever stood before it and labeled it "Pine." It knows itself already and mysteriously encounters the sun each day, nameless.” Ivan M Granger (poet)

Snap, Crackle & Pop!, Rumor Has it that the Lightning gods make the Mushrooms (truffles)

File Under: "Peer-Review" - "Settled Science" - "Science-Based" & that holiest of holies - "Scientific Consensus"

Image: greekboston.com

The ancient Greek god Zeus (Roman god: Jupiter) was the incomparable, supposedly the first of the all the other gods and an exceptionally formidable figure of the Olympians. The name Zeus signifies “splendid” or “sky.” Often alluded to as the sky god who controlled lightning (regularly utilizing it as a weapon) and thunder. For years scientists have called the unexplained phenomena of Lightning and Thunderstorms triggering the abundant appearance of truffles after such rainfall events as nothing more than ancient myths or fables propagated by the both Greek and Roman philosophers. In the middle east the Bedouin peoples have for centuries collected the white Desert Truffles after thunderstorms and same with many nomadic peoples of Africa who collect the Kalahari Truffle which colonizes a shrub of the Rock Rose family after thunderstorms. So there is indeed evidence from many historical eras and cultures from around the globe, but as usual our modern world's intellectuals view such accounts as nothing more than anecdotal evidence. So what is anecdotal evidence ? Anecdotal evidence is a term they apply to a story account which regard as unreliable or hearsay. Where there may be only one or a few anecdotes presented in the story, it is then assumed that there is a large chance that the narrative may be unreliable due to biased cherry-picked observations. I've always found the expression, "anecdotal evidence" to be used by intellectuals when they find themselves  incapable of explaining any mysterious phenomena. It's yet another sort of default answer taken from their debate toolbox. In other words in their small Hypothesis Myopia worldview, if a well known respected scientist has researched and written a paper about it, and if this paper has not been "peer-reviewed", and if it has not been published in a respected "science-based" journal, and only if it has been accepted by a "scientific consensus", only then should anyone consider it "settled science." Well, I beg to differ and in my 3 decades of experiencing I always counted on this amazing this phenomena when going out to collect such mycorrhizal truffles which was always fruitful after such monsoonal rainfall events in the summer. And I might add in the same exact locations year after year for a couple of decades. But this doesn't mean that both Greeks and Romans were wrong about what they saw either, just perhaps in the way they went about in explaining the reasons behind what they saw would be odd. I mean, viewing a thunderstorm as a war between gods throwing lightning bolts at each other isn't really scientific is it ? Here is what writer, Anna McHugh of the website, "Crazy About Mushrooms", had to say about those Greek & Roman stories.

"According to some Greek authors, this great god Zeus hurled “mushroom seed” to earth on lightning bolts, which explained the sudden appearance of fruiting fungi after storms. The Romans similarly assumed that mushrooms and thunderstorms were inexplicably linked, and most Roman-era writers who attempted to explain mushroom biology noted that thunderstorms were critically important in the life cycle of fungi. As history informs us, the Roman Empire followed that of the fractionalized Greek world power. As with so many other things, the Romans also looked to the Greeks for an understanding of fungi (truffles), and Roman literature related to mushrooms leans heavily on Aristotle’s Natural Histories, which classified mushrooms as plants with invisible seeds. Other Greek writers called mushrooms “sons of the gods,” because they appeared mysteriously in the wake of thunderstorms and caused much puzzlement to the curious and clever Greek thinkers of the 4th and 3rd centuries BCE.

(Source)

Interestingly, another individual by the name of Robert Gordon Wasson (1898-1986), an Ethnomycologist [I didn't even know there was such a thing], wrote this about some written historical accounts of thunderstorms being associated with mushrooms.

"Lightningbolt and Mushroom"

"The inquirer who turns to Littre to learn about truffles, on reading the entry under truffe, comes upon a nugget of curious information that certainly fails to catch his attention. It seems in certain regions of France (presumably there where truffles abound) the country folk in thundery weather are wont to say, Voild un ban temps pour les truffes, 'What fine weather it is for truffles!' Why in thun- dery weather? Not when it rains, mind you, but when it thunders. Nothing in Littre alerts the reader to the mystery that here lies hidden. The saying of these French rustics seems to be one of the surviving traces in Europe of a belief that reaches back in time deep into prehistory and in space wherever Eurasians or their descendants have lived. It is the end of Ariadne's thread that we propose to follow far and to a far-reaching end." 

"Pliny the Elder declared that truffles were disposed to grow in the time of autumnal rains, and above all (in the full-bodied Elizabethan translation of Philemon Holland) 'if the aire be troubled and disquieted with many thunders: during that season there will be good store of such Mushromes, &ic, especially (I say) if it thunder much': 

'De tuberibus haec tradwitur peculiariter: Cumfuerint imbres autumnales, ac tonitrua crebra, tune nasci, & maxime e tonitribus.' [Hist. Nat., bk 19:37]

When Philemon Holland around 1600 rendered tuberibus, 'truffles', by 'mush- romes', the word 'truffle' and the plant it represents were as yet unknown to the English-speaking world. Juvenal wrote of the longed-for thunder in springtime [sic] that replenishes the table with truffles: 

'Post hunc tradentur tubera, si ver tune erit et facient optata tonitrua cenas maiores.' [Satire V: 116-118]

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Possible Explanation for what may be happening by Tom Volk

Tom Volk, Professor of Biology at the University of Wisconsin - La Crosse, had an excellent scientific explanation for why he believes storms with lightning and thunder trigger the growth of mycorrhizal truffles. His explanation came from another page on his website where the subject titled: "Terfezia and Tirmania, Desert Truffles (terfez, kama, p/faqa) Delicacies in the sand or manna from Heaven?" In this article he mentions the associations between a couple of ecto-mycorrhizal species with plants of various the Rock Rose desert or Mediterranean shrubs (family Cistaceae). He stated that this may also provide an explanation for folklore shared by Bedouins in the Israeli Negev and truffle hunters in Morocco, claiming that truffles will grow where lightning strikes during thunderstorms. So it was nice that he mentioned the folklore of Bedouins who for centuries may have been eye witnesses to this intriguing phenomena as well as African Bush peoples and Australia's Aboriginals, but here he provides a possible explanation as quoted below:

A possible explanation by Lightning triggering Truffles

"Absorption of nitrates by the plant is enhanced considerably by the truffle, because the truffle’s mycelia and ascocarps reduce nitrate at a much higher rate than the rootlets of the plant alone. This is believed to play an important role in the release of spores. It may also provide at least a partial explanation for the persistent observation made by desert truffle collectors that strong lightning during rainy thunderstorms in fall will bring out the truffles in large quantities during the spring. Nitrogen is an abundant element. About 80% of the air is nitrogen. Inorganic nitrogen may exist in the free state as nitrite (NO2-), nitrate (NO3-), or ammonia (NH3+). It can also exist in the free state as a gas (N2). During a rainstorm accompanied by lightning, a very high electrical potential is discharged instantaneously, and nitrogen can be dissociated to nitrogen atoms or nitrogen free radicals. The atoms and free radicals can form nitrogen compounds with water molecules, which include hydrogen, oxygen, and nitrogen atoms. These compounds are water soluble and are dissolved in the water drops surrounding them, which in turn carry them down to the ground. The hydrogen-nitrogen-oxygen compounds have ionic nature, and can easily form potassium salt, natrium salt, and other cationic metal salts once they hit the ground where these metal cations selling truffles in the open market.  photo courtesy of M.M. Mirrehare available. Some of these nitrogen-hydrogen-oxygen metal salts are effective fertilizers. Those could be present in much higher concentrations in the soil after massive lightning and thunder rainstorms have occurred. It is known that fungi require nitrogen compounds in order to initiate fruiting. Maybe the persistent claim made by many local collectors that truffles abound in the areas hit by strong lightning and thunder rainstorms, has a scientific base. The Bedouins of the Negev even call desert truffles ‘the thunder fungus’."

(Source)

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Tom Volk's - "Dog Turd Fungus"

Image: Tom Volk

I can hear you thinking, "This is the most beautiful Fungus of the Month ever...." Well maybe not, but this month's fungus is useful and appealing in many other ways.  I can still remember the first time I saw this fungus in nature. I was on one of the Alexander H. Smith Lake States Forays in the early 1990's (way back in the last century...) with other midwestern mycologists, and a jokester grad student found this fungus. He thought he had found some dog droppings, and, trying to make a joke, he brought it on the end of a stick to his professor, saying, "Look at the nice fungus I found for you." However the joke was on the student, because he had actually found Pisolithus tinctorius! Ever since then I have called it the dog turd fungus. I have also seen it called "dead man's fist" (not dead man's fingers), dyemaker's false puffball, and simply "dyeball." In my experience, this fungus can most commonly be found growing associated with conifers (or occasionally oaks) in areas that are very sandy or otherwise have very poor soil. Pisolithus tinctorius is widely distributed throughout North America and other continents, and I have personally seen it in Wisconsin, Mississippi, northern California, Florida, and Massachusetts. It's always a fun find and can be very abundant in some areas. Maybe you can play some tricks on your mushroom hunting companions if you find it.

(Source)

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

How Tom Volk's 'Dog Turd Fungus' was a turning point in my understanding of the  importance of Mycorrhizae in 1983

Image: Cheryl Dean (Deep Canyon Blog)

Image: Mine (2014) Julian, Ca

The photograph above is the Hamilton Creek Canyon area east of Anza Valley California. This is taken from a pullout on Hwy 74. What first intrigued me back in 1981 when I first move up into the San Jacinto Mountains and in particular this canyon, was it's rugged fractured rocky geology with almost no soils and the masses of huge Pines and Oaks which inhabited this area. Like most people who were schooled in the 1970s with conventional practices of industrial agriculture and landscaping, I had only really heard slight reference and/or rumor of the incredible mutualism which existed in the natural world's plant communities. Going back to Hamilton Creek Canyon, I was curious how those huge trees were able to exist on what appeared to be an impossible landscape. Both sides of the Canyon walls are made up of this same sterile looking rocky geology. Climbing up these canyon sides was a challenge as the rocks easily dislodge and slippage was often. At a couple of points where I dislodge larger rocks, I noticed on the undersides where numerous white fungal strands of an ectomycorrhizal fungi were everywhere underneath this Martian looking landscape. That was my first huge clue that the rumors were correct. Further up along the tops of the ridges I found my first answers in 1983 where truffle examples of a fungi called Pisolithus tinctorius were all over the place. They look identical to the example I took a photo of in 2014 on my last visit to California you see in the picture above right. The truffles when fully matured and dry look like stones. What I noticed was that they were always associated near and around all Oaks (Scrub, Interior Live, Engelmann, etc) and Pines (Coulter, Jeffrey, Parry, etc). They were also always abundant a month after the first summer monsoonal rains came up from Mexico and more so than Springtime.   

Image: Mine (2014) Julian Ca, next to US 25¢ coin for scale

Back in those days I was pretty much on my own. There was no internet to easily type in key words and/or phrases into a Google search bar and obtain an instantaneous plethora of numerous references to mycology. You either went to the library or consulted an expert on the phone or in person, but it was tough even back  then if you were ignorant of all the terminology used by the experts. Also back then most of the scientific papers were mostly available to other researchers, not really the public. There were no inoculum producing companies in existence and they would be more than a decade away. So trial and error on my part was the norm. Mostly I'd open up the dried powdery chocolate brown puffballs and mix the spore powder in the soils when planting any trees and shrubs. In those days I had no clue of PT Mycorrhizal fungi being host specific to only certain types of trees and shrubs. I had no understanding of the differences between ecto & endo mycorrhizas. But once the 1990s came with the opening of the internet, all sorts of information doors opened up regarding mycology. But not much info on the Thunderstorm and truffle formation phenomena. Mostly if it was referenced at all it was usually in a negative derogatory put down of being nothing more than a myth, fable or something of folklore found only in a Farmer's Alamanac believed on by anti-science Luddites. No matter, my successes with Pine and Oak inoculation, though crude at first was successful. And when I collected them, it was a mere two or three weeks after major monsoonal thunderstorms.

But it was this personal observation of numerous truffles emerging from the soils near oaks and pines after first several monsoonal season thunderstorms that gave me the hint there may be something to this so-called folklore. In fact more so than the appearance of the Springtime truffles. Over the years I identified the best places for truffle appearance and would collect a few weeks after the first storms appeared. Like amazing clock work there they always were. I'd wait for some time because with these truffles you want them dried out and cured so to speak. What I wanted was the dried truffles with spores, not the fresh ones with white flesh underground which are edible. On that edible note, I've observed squirrels and soils insects like Sow Bugs and Earwigs eating these PT mycorrhizas which were almost always half ripened. You will often find a dried truffle above ground still growing below ground with the new white flesh. This strategy seems to encourage hungry living things to dine on them while being coating with spores to carry to newer locations. Of course if broken, they will also spread spores into the wind. The PT truffles have a chocolate brown powder which has an aroma reminiscent of English Toffee or Caramel. Caution should always be used in trying not to breath any spores of any kind as they can have an effect on the lungs. This has been noted in the past with many mushrooms and I'll post a link in the references on this below.

forestryimages.org

Everyone should know that this is just one of 1000s of varieties of fungi which benefit plants. Specifically I have always found this one on the fringes of the forests in the hotter drier regions. There are however several unique varieties of Pisolithus all over the globe with uniquely developed characteristics for those regions. I've never really found it in old growth forests, but that's not to say it isn't present there or in other habitats, but I've just never collected it in such environments. Dr Donald Marx of Plant Health Care Inc (PHC) said of all the species of mycorrhizal fungi, this particular PT fungi is the best at old mining site rehabilitation and reforestation. Indeed, I have always found it doing well on the fringes of forests and in areas where tree movement creeps into the chaparral. The region of the southwestern United States benefits by it's presence. It increases water and nutrient uptake by 200%, although some have said as much as 800%. Still, 200% isn't bad. My experience on my property is that when I inoculated pines I've planted on my property (believe it or not most always in Summer), the first occurrence of the truffle on the pines was a small thumb sized truffle like the one you see in the picture at the right here. Other than that there usually will be no other noticeable change observed on the plant. Now I say usually because that doesn't mean that is the rule. I'm just saying that the first month after truffle formation at the base of the small seedling or sapling after I've inoculated, I've just never personally noticed any improvement in growth. But there may well be other circumstances where growth and vigor is immediate. What you will notice are a couple of other important things that following Spring. First. The leaves of Oaks or needles of Pines will always be huge and stem growth from buds often shoot out a foot of new growth. This happened to me a year prior to selling my property in 2001. In 1988 I brought down a meter tall Black Oak (Quercus kelloggii) sapling from the town of Idyllwild to the north in the higher elevation country which I had rescued from a Highway road cutout slide one winter when the rains were heavy. I immediately planted it in an out of sight spot on my property's heavy chaparral plant cover. The first two years it did very well, but thereafter it did poorly and I forgot about it. I never inoculated at time of planting because I was rushed and just in a hurry. Mostly I forgot I had it and periodically every couple years I'd stumble across where I planted the tree. The growth of stems at the end of the 1990s was at best one inch off each bud of central leader and side branches per year. Leaves were a mere inch long and the tree just struggled to survive. The summer prior to my leaving I was out inoculating with (PHC) Tree Saver Injectable on other plants, when I again stumbled upon this Black Oak I had planted and forgotten. So I thought what's to lose. I'll post a picture and link about this PHC product in the references below. In my opinion, this specific product is the best on the market for Pisolithus tinctorius colonization, but I'll explain why at the bottom. But after boring several 2 or 3 inch deep holes in the short drip area around the Black Oak and deeply watering, abouta month later the same thumb nail sized truffles appear as per habit at the base of this Oak Sapling. However, the following Spring the effect on growth was both shocking and outstanding. I was blown away and could have kicked myself as to why I did not do this a decade earlier. The central leader and all major branch bud stems grew over a foot in growth length and the leaves were huge with some being 7 inches in length or more. My only regret back then is that I never took before and after photos with a camera. Second. The other observation was that the fungal strands moved underground several meters from the new trees I inoculated and colonized had overwinter already establish the wild scrub oaks which prior to that Spring were also struggling and rangy looking with sparse foliage. The trees were loaded with large leaf foliage and also had truffle emergence on the outside of their driplines as well that same Spring. This debunks the so-called insistence that there is no reason to inoculate because the spores are just out there somewhere in the air and will find the tree roots. It's a farce for anyone to insist this. People can experiment on their own and test out their own applications, but take before and after photos. The entire experience can be satisfying and rewarding. Again, I will post a deeper explanation below in the references and explain what the list of ingredients do within the mycorrhizal mix from (PHC). 
Now take special note of one last scientific take on evidence and innovation of biomimetic application of devices created for mushroom and truffle farms in copying what Nature does with soil fungi through the effects of lightning and rainfall during thunderstorms. This article comes from Cornell University's Mushroom blog. And I have every confidence that some Professors out there who will consider the Cornell University researchers and employees at as anti-science Luddites for even considering this subject. Much the way Harvard Yard researchers and landscape maintenance employees were put down for using a microbial based compost teas for landscape care and dumping all synthetics in favour of this new holistic method and successfully since 2008. They've saved 1000s of dollars a year in the process.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

image: Cornell University

Here is an article from the Cornell University Mushroom blog where this phenomena is intelligently addressed and technological innovations designed to replicate electrical shock to damp soils on truffle farms which have proven to double the amount of truffles or mushrooms on those farms. For anyone who already farms for those underground truffles or above ground mushrooms, then this article and the information it contains will be of great interest for you. So here is a reprint of that Cornell Blog article published in 2013.

"The farmers of Japan say thunderstorms are good luck– they make the mushrooms grow.1 And mushrooms and thunderstorms are partners in folklore all over the world. The ancient god Soma may even have been a mushroom himself. In the book, Soma: Divine Mushroom of Immortality, Gordon Wasson2 argues that Amanita muscaria, the classic red or yellow fly agaric, is the identity of the mysterious Soma, god of the RgVeda, a sacred collection of ancient Vedic Sanskrit hymns. These hymns are some of the world’s oldest religious texts, and from them we know Soma is “the child of the thunderstorm”. Is Soma really a mushroom? Are mushrooms the children of thunderstorms? Read on."

"Science, alas, has had little to say about mushrooms and thunderstorms. Until now. Recently, scientists in Japan have demonstrated a link between lightning and prolific mushroom fruiting. Although their interest in lightning and mushrooms is not driven by a religious quest, their research may inadvertently shed light on an ethnographic mystery."

"In Japan, mushrooms are particularly coveted for their delicious, nutritional, and medicinal qualities and demand is outstripping supply. But now scientists are finding ways to harness the power of electricity to increase mushroom production. Can you imagine farms where man-made lightning bolts strike the ground and induce large flushes of mushrooms? Well, this is what scientists in Japan are doing."

"Today, shiitake (Lentinula edodes), buna-shimeji (Hypsizygus marmoreus), eryngii (Pleurotus eryngii), and matsutake (Tricholoma matsutake) mushrooms are high value health foods in Japan.1,3 Matsutakes now sell for $439 U.S. dollars a pound. Before you think you might get rich by growing some, you must consider that these are ectomycorrhizal mushrooms that only grow symbiotically with their pine tree hosts, so the world’s harvest is entirely collected from the wild. Although harvest of these mushrooms in Japan peaked at 12,000 metric tons in 1941, harvest declined to 34 metric tons in 2005, not due to lack of demand but due to many threats to these red pine forests, including a pine wood nematode infestation that has been wreaking havoc in these ecosystems.3 People want more mushrooms. Let’s harness the power of lightning."

"The use of direct current (DC) electric fields on living tissue is not a new idea, but has a long and contentious history. Even back in 1985, when Robinson wrote a review of the topic, he was able to find 8 reliable reports involving plant cells and 4 on animal cells responding to DC fields. The reports ranged from growth of neurons towards the negative electrode to a “healing” response of wounds. Many of these observations seem to have been dismissed as “laboratory curiosities,” unlikely to have much real world application. In Japan, though, electrical stimulation has been used in the production of Shiitake, Buna-shimejo, and eryngii mushrooms for almost half a decade. And this technology doesn’t seem to be limited to mushrooms, as farmers are also using electromagnetic field technology in the production of tomato, lettuce, strawberry, and some ornamental plants."

Below is the schematic drawing of the SPLG is from Figure 2 in Islam and Ohga’s interesting 2012 paper.

"The results were yields of matsutake mushrooms just about double the yields in unzapped control plots. A monstrous flush came two weeks after the pulse and a second one nearly as large 3 weeks after. But it wasn’t just the quantity that increased, the quality, as measured by weight and size of individual matustake mushrooms also showed dramatic increases: Harvests from the zapped plots were, on average, almost 70% heavier then controls. If you thought mushrooms were magical all on their own, the combination of mushrooms and electricity might knock your socks off."

"Fungi are mysterious things and the mechanism by which electrical stimulation promotes mushroom fruiting is still not much understood. Perhaps the mushroom mycelium is responding to an apparent threat of death by redoubling its reproductive efforts? Many electrifying questions remain. Like: how does the zapping affect forest trees? Can the high fruiting rates be sustained without damaging the mushroom-tree symbiosis? When’s the next thunderstorm due in my neighborhood?"

"In the meantime, if you feel like experimenting (safely, of course) with mushrooms and electricity, you might want to check out this intriguing post about a New York City mycophile who grew his mushrooms amid Jazz music, artificial fog, and static electricity. Or, next time you go in the woods foraging for mushrooms, look for trees recently struck by lightning. Who knows what you will find. Maybe you will even have an encounter with the god Soma, child of the thunderstorm."

An Assortment of Cornell University's
Reading References

1. S. Tsukamoto, H. Kudoh, S. Ohga, K. Yamamoto, and H. Akiyama, “Development of an automatic electrical stimulator for mushroom sawdust bottle,” in Proceeding of the 15th Pulsed Power Conference, pp. 1437–1440, Monterey, Calif, USA, June 2005 

2. R.G. Wasson. “Soma: Divine Mushroom of Immortality.” 1968. 

3. F. Islam and S. Ohga, “The response of fruit body formation on Tricholoma matsutake in situ condition by applying electric pulse stimulator,” ISRN Agronomy, vol. 2012, Article ID 462724, 6 pages, 2012. doi:10.5402/2012/462724 

4. K. R. Robinson, “The responses of cells to electrical fields: a review,” Journal of Cell Biology, vol. 101(6): 2023–2027, 1985. 

5. S. Tsukamoto, T. Maeda, M. Ikeda, and H. Akiyama, “Application of pulsed power to mushroom culturing,” in Proceedings of the 14th IEEE International Pulsed Power Conference, pp. 1116–1119, Dallas, Texas, USA, June 2003. 

6. W. R. Adey, “Biological Effects of Electromagnetic Fields,” in Journal of Cellular Biochemistry 51:410-416. 1993. 

7. S. Ohga and S. Iida. “Effect of electric impulse on sporocarp formation of ectomycorrhizal fungus Laccaria laccata in Japanese red pine plantation.” J. Forest Res. 6: 37-41. 2001. 

(Source Cornell University)

Finally, the western scientific discipline of mycology (and other science related fields) has long disregarded this supposed relationship between lightning storms and truffle or mushroom formation. Either it has been chalked up to be nothing more than superstitious nonsense, in the view of modern man's agricultural obsession with industrial science, or else it is mistaking correlation for causation (accusation of it being anecdotal evidence), as they claim it's nothing more than the same rainstorm which created the lightning and thunder which also delivered the rains that woke up the mycelium from its slumber and provoked the mycorrhizal  fruiting bodies. Hopefully people will reject the ongoing scientific arrogance and go outdoors for themselves and see whether this phenomena is true or not. By all means experiment and have fun doing so. This post is a collection of articles and writings on the phenomena of Lightning of Thunderstorms triggering the emergence of Mushrooms and Truffles along with my own past experiences with this incredible phenomena when collecting these fungal fruits are meant to provide a condensed resource of information on the subject. As always with any of my posts, I'll periodically update as newer research appears in the science news feeds. It's my hope that everyone finds this compilation of subject materials invaluable, because you won't get this from the conventional Academic sources which are shackled to corporate business interests. I've never bought into the assertion, assumption or conjecture that the lightning in the atmosphere changes theg aseous nitrogen into something water soluable and therefore the water from Thunder Storms is like a kind of Miracle-Gro for plants. I've tested all manner of trying to create super solutions to stimulate growth and nothing close to what Thunderstorm water has on the effects pf plant growth. FACT - It's all about physics and the restructuring of water molecule structure size into something far smaller and energized. I'll write more about that on another page. You'll be amzaed. 😍

 Update 2018

High-Voltage Methods for Mushroom Fruit-Body Developments

Update 2020

Stimulatory growth effect of lightning strikes applied in the vicinity of shiitake mushroom bed logs

(Courtesy: EricABCAT/CC BY-SA 4.0 - 2020)

Lightning seed: shiitake mushrooms growing on a log

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Some Fun Reading References

Tom Volk: Lightning and the Truffle (Desert Truffles)

National Geographic: Lightning Makes Mushrooms Multiply

Modern Mechanix: "Tiny Thunderbolts Help Mushrooms Grow (Apr, 1923)"

Some Precautions on avoiding breathing the Truffle or Mushroom Spores

CDC: Respiratory Illness Associated with Inhalation of Mushroom Spores -- Wisconsin, 1994

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Some things to seriously consider about Plant Health Care Inc's  product PHC® Injectable for Trees & the list of ingredients within and what they do.

Plant Health Care Inc - PHC® Injectable for Trees

I've read several of the articles by internet Sciencey Guru types whose sole purpose in life on the Net appears to be debunking perceived or imaginary gardening and landscape myths about the uselessness of soil inoculation. I've already mentioned the "Spores are everywhere out in the Air" dogma by the Scientific Orthodoxy, but there is far more. Often I've seen criticism & demonizing of many of the other ingredients which are also present in many mixes. Here are a few and what they are for. Take the list of ingredients on the package of PHC® Injectable for Trees in the picture above.

PHC® Injectable for Trees - Ingredients List

The ectomycorrhizal lest contains a single species and the is Pisolithus tinctorius (1.78 Billion spores/Lb Pisolithus tinctorius). I have no idea how the count these spores. Next they list four VA Endomycorrhizal (VAM) Fungi (each @ 20,000 spores/Lb). Next they list six species of beneficial soil bacteria in the mix (each @ 4 billion cfu/Lb). Most of the criticism I've read about the ingredients list are these others which I'll talk about a few. First off, none of this is any type of fertilizer for the plant, which is often what I have rad from critics which in actuality exposes their true ignorance. So let's take a few of them.

SOIL/PLANT AMENDING INGREDIENTS

15.8% Humic acids (derived from Leonardite)

Anyone know what humic acids are which are derived from Leonardite ? For the purpose of this discussion, these humic acids are included within the mix not as a fertilizer as they are present to stimulate the plant's root growth and in particular those tiny root hair. In order for germination of the spore to take place, the root tip with end cap must have active growth and actually touch the spore for germination to be triggered. Next, what is Leonardite ? Leonardite comes from coal fields, especially brown Coal which is a lower grade coal and otherwise known as Lignite. These products were formed by the decomposition of organic plant material. Most all of it was created during the Earth's massive extinction even (irrespective how one wish to spin or fairytale that event) where ancient forests and other dense plant community ecosystems were scoured from the surface of the earth being thrown together and immediately buried with tonnes of sedimentary debris, much like the action of a volcanic lahar which bulldozes everything in it's path and buries it at the end of the flow with tonnes of mineral fill. Leonardite is the further degraded and refines part of Lignite (comes from the term "Lignin" which is what gives wood it's strength).

0.2% Formononetin

Doesn't sound like much, but the Flavonoid, Formononetin, stimulates the mycorrhizas to activity on their hosts. Only a trace is necessary for the desired effect of hormonal stimulation, much the way a mere trace of BisPhenol-A contamination has on a developing fetus with major endocrine disruption. Here is a link on it's importance to potato plants and mycorrhizal effectiveness. 

Influence of a flavonoid (formononetin) on mycorrhizal activity and potato crop productivity in the highlands of Peru

---------------------------------------------------------------------

MICROBIAL NUTRIENTS - 68.9%

11.2% Soluble seaweed extract (derived from Ascophyllum nodosum)

Seaweed or Kelp extract are another target of critics who say it does nothing as a fertilizer for plants, hence the criticism on compost teas which contain this product. Again for all those critics out there, this is never professionally meant as a plant fertilizer, but rather as the subtitle here suggests, it's a microbial stimulant. This is to stimulate the microbial community into action for the benefit of feeding and caring for their host plants. 

0.2% Yucca plant extract (derived from Yucca shidigera)

While you may find many who will describe this on the internet as a feed for plants, it's main purpose here while encouraging the microbial community, is also a great replacement surfactant to the petroleum and other synthetic surfactants presently used in Agricultural spraying of any kind (insecticides, herbicides, fungicides, fertilizers, etc). Plant Health Care sells the Yuccah quarts and gallons. The recommendation is use in all spray and/or injection applications as a wetting agent and soil penetrant (allows mycorrhizal spores to also move easier within soil pores). Keep in mind that this product I'm describing above is actually an injectable to be used in an actual injection machine. Try mixing any fungal spores with water and see what happens. They float on the surface. This is why such products as Monsanto's Roundup is loaded with synthetic surfactants to allow the Glyphosate to completely emulsify within the water or it would float on the surface. The surfactants used in Roundup however are dangerous to aquatic environments, so the Yuccah version is meant as an ecological replacement. So the next time you read about negativity of soil inoculents being worthless and the other ingredients are having no effect, understand that these self-promoting intellects have probably never done their thorough homework on them despite what they spew in type.

PHC Yuccah Wetting Agent & Soil Penetrant  

Periodically come back and look for updates