772

Capitalists and social darwinists literally shaking and crying rn rule (lemmings.world)

submitted 8 months ago by kay@lemmings.world to c/196@lemmy.blahaj.zone

70 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[-] insomniac_lemon@kbin.social 29 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

There likely could be other benefits to them sharing such as:

when there is more than they can use, particularly that the mushroom does not like in their environment
producing more leaves is likely highly beneficial for the mushroom, for shade both living and fallen, nutrients and cover with fallen leaves.

Similar for the tree, but also mushrooms are recycling minerals from dead material.

I don't know if there'd be "stingy" trees (aside from vastly different nutrient needs), I could see it more of miscommunication or having too much difference with language/biologic pathways. EDIT: Also I gotta imagine that giant trees don't even bother counting it for mushrooms so long as they aren't stressed. Sugar water is in the grid, take as much as you want.

[-] gibmiser@lemmy.world 12 points 8 months ago

I bet you chestnut trees are stingy little assholes. Prickly fucks.

[-] VikingHippie@lemmy.wtf 4 points 8 months ago

At first, I read that as you accusing them of being a stingy asshole chestnut tree and I was about to inform you that you were in fact talking to a lemon, not a tree 😄

[-] wildginger@lemmy.myserv.one 4 points 8 months ago

Trees that rely on myco networks usually only get giant because of previous myco networking bonds, which funnel excess nutrients between not just the fungi but also other trees within the system. And depending on the involved species, this sometimes includes multiple plant species exchanging nutrients.