View Single Post
  #2   Report Post  
Old 20-05-2009, 06:00 AM posted to sci.bio.botany
[email protected] plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com is offline
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by GardenBanter: May 2008
Posts: 104
Default not a thorough experimentation, Monique bulbs and planting depth



monique wrote:
There is some interesting information out there, and this is
experimentation, not hearsay. Some bulbs *do* pull themselves to the
required depth:

http://www.physorg.com/news115908314.html

M. Reed


--- quoting from that reference ---
Leopold mused, "I have some lily bulbs that were in the ground for
nearly a decade, and I was astonished to find the bulbs moved
themselves over a foot into the ground!". The research findings may
help commercial and amateur gardeners in their quest for more
effective bulb planting and growing techniques.
--- end quoting ---

That was a good research report Monique, but it was too biased of an
experiment
to that of only one hypothesis --- contractile roots and not looking
at other possible
locomotions.
It did not exclude other possible "better explanations". The Cornell
team used
vermiculite ( I thought it was banned because of asbestos containing
hazard) but
vermiculite is a very easily movable medium. So the Cornell team has
biased
reporting because of a lack of testing in clay soil. To the other
hypothesis that
the action and reaction of shoots and leaves moving upwards would tend
to move
the bulb downwards.

So the Cornell team needs to repeat the experiment open to other
hypothesis and
not just a singular hypothesis upon entering the experiment --- that
the roots are
contractile.

It maybe the case that there are two locomotions driving bulbs
deeper-- one of
contractile roots but a second one of action-reaction of leaves
shooting upwards.
And the factor of the soil involved because if a clay soil is involved
contractile roots
may have a tough time of getting deeper.

The Cornell team mentioned that alot of other plants have the ability
to move deeper
and some of those do not have bulbs involved. So it maybe the case
where two
hypotheses are in action and for which the Cornell team failed to have
"other hypotheses"
under experimental test.

I do not doubt their results, only complaining that they have too
narrow of a test
window, and not allowing for other factors such as leaf motion upwards
and the
factor of the soil type, so that a clay soil may prevent contractile
roots from making
the bulb go deeper but that the leaf upward motion may just penetrate
through the
clay layers.

Archimedes Plutonium
www.iw.net/~a_plutonium
whole entire Universe is just one big atom
where dots of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies