On Sun, 15 Aug 2004 14:08:29 +0100, Alan Gould
wrote:

That does not
alter the fact that on this planet non-plant life is wholly dependent
upon plant life,

Bacteria and microbes which feed upon manganese deep underground or
the searingly hot acids emitted from volcanic fissures on the sea bed
might argue with that.

but not vice-versa.

So the loss of pollinating insects, rodents, bats, primates and birds
to which certain plants have adapted specifically will not have any
adverse effects upon those plants then? There are hundreds if not
thousands of plants that have adapted to very specialised pollinators
and if those pollinators disappear, then so do the plants. A widely
known example is the Yucca which flowers prolifically here in the UK,
but cannot set seed since the moths which assist with the flowers'
pollination are not present amongst our fauna and could not exist in
our climate. If those moths disappeared in their native habitat, so
would the Yuccas eventually.

Many valuable tropical species (my favourites the bananas come quickly
to mind, but there are many more) are bat pollinated. Wipe out the
bats (and they are becoming highly endangered in many regions) and the
plants disappear. No, you are wrong, there is a powerful necessity
for co-existence for without one there will not be the other. You
cannot make such sweeping statements that plants can exist without
animals, because ultimately flowering plants are dependent upon animal
life.
Dave Poole
Torquay, Coastal South Devon UK
Winter min -2°C. Summer max 34°C.
Growing season: March - November