Thread: tree points
View Single Post
  #29   Report Post  
Old 19-09-2008, 05:54 AM posted to rec.gardens
Billy[_5_] Billy[_5_] is offline
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by GardenBanter: Jul 2008
Posts: 503
Default tree points

In article
,
Chris wrote:

On Sep 17, 8:56 pm, Billy wrote:
In article ,



"symplastless" wrote:
"Chris" wrote in message
...
On Sep 16, 6:57 pm, "symplastless" wrote:
"Chris" wrote in message


...
On Sep 14, 7:40 pm, "symplastless" wrote:


Thank you for your input.


Chris show me one per. table that identifies elements as nutrients.


--
Sincerely,
John A. Keslick, Jr.
Consulting Tree Biologistwww.treedictionary.com
andhttp://home.ccil.org/~treeman
Watch out for so-called tree experts who do not understand tree
biology.
Storms, fires, floods, earthquakes, tornado's, volcanic eruptions and
other
abiotic forces keep reminding humans that they are not the boss.


The table I mentioned above (the one in Campbell & Reece) has is
titled "Plant Nutrients" and it has two columns. The first is divided
into two subsections, titled macronutrients and micronutrients.
Nitrogen, for example, is listed as a macronutrient. The second column
is titled, "Form available to plants." When we look there, we see the
(macro)nutrient nitrogen is available not as N or even N2, but only as
NO3- or NH4+. So the plants cannot absorb elemental nitrogen (the
common atmospheric form of which is N2) but they must get their
nitrogen as either nitrate or ammonia.


Note the difference between humans and plants here. Human nutrients
are commonly listed (and I have taught nutrition as well as General
Biology) as energy, protein, carbohydrate, lipid, water, minerals, &
vitamins.


God help your students. So what kind of energy are we talking here,
kinetic or potential?


Excuse me? Um, first off, energy is not so simplistic, I am afraid.
There are more kinds of energy than kinetic or potential- you know
that, right? There's thermal energy, and electromagnetic radiation
(like X-rays) neither of which can be classified as kinetic or
potential energy.


Let's see. Thermal energy requires a gradient, that is to say high
energy to low energy, in order to function. Allowing an object in a
high energy state to go to a lower energy state. That is called potential
energy. And you must have heard of Erwin Schrödinger and wave mechanics.
Can you say photon? Sure you can. It can be treated as a wave or a
particle. So what is all this crap? My response was to John, who has a
biology book but doesn't understand the terms in it. The science
vocabulary is as different from normal English as the legal vocabulary
is.

But the answer to your question, of course, is that it's chemical
energy. Chemical bonds retain energy, and breaking those bonds
releases the energy. Lipids contain more of those bonds, and more high-
energy bonds, than do carbohydrates or proteins, hence there are more
Calories/gram in fats than in the other two nutrients.

Hydrocarbons are basically hydrogen and carbon with a greater percentage
of carbon to be oxidized than carbohydrates, which already contain
oxygen, or proteins which have oxygen and nitrogen comprising part of
their weight. Where are you going with your sneering stupidity?

The most dangerous form of malnutrition goes by the acronym PEM, for
protein-energy malnutrition. In PEM we see a deficiency both in
essential amino acids and in caloric intake. In children this leads to
kwashiorkor- the poor kids with the hugely swollen bellies (a result
of an inability to move liquids back into the blood), and in adults it
manifests as marasmus, or wasting, where we see the body mobilizing
lean muscle tissue for energy. But note the name- "energy
malnutrition". Yes, energy is classified by nutritionists as a
nutrient. You're welcome to check any nutrition textbook.

Synonyms for protein-energy malnutrition and related keywords:
protein-energy malnutrition, PEM, protein-calorie malnutrition,
kwashiorkor, marasmus, starvation, hunger, poor diet, nutritional
deficiency.

Sorry Chris, counselors, or medical practitioners, nutritionists may be
but they aren't biologists, chemists, or physicists. Just because some
of them may use a term to define a condition doesn't mean that the term
is based in the hard sciences. The term may have meaning to them but is
meaningless to the greater scientific community.


Chris


Chris




Define element


define nutrient


define food


Define wise.
--

Billy

Bush and Pelosi Behind Bars
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9KVTf...ef=patrick.net
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1016232.html
--

Billy
Bush and Pelosi Behind Bars
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9KVTf...ef=patrick.net
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1016232.html