Scientists stunned by 'remarkable' phenomenon found in trees threatened by deadly disease: 'Our new findings give us new hope'
A glimmer of hope has emerged for Britain's beloved ash trees. According to a new study published in Science, some wild ash trees are becoming genetically resistant to the deadly ash dieback fungus.
Researchers are calling the development a "remarkable" example of evolution in real time, according to The Guardian.
The disease, caused by the invasive fungus Hymenoscyphus fraxineus, has wiped out millions of trees across the United Kingdom and Europe and is projected to kill up to 85% of nonresistant ash trees, costing the U.K. an estimated £15 billion (about $20 billion).
But new DNA analysis of ash saplings growing after the fungus' arrival reveals subtle genetic shifts that are helping younger trees survive in infected forests.
"Our new findings give us new hope," said professor Richard Buggs of the Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew, and Queen Mary University of London. "Through the death of millions of ash trees, a more resistant population of ash is appearing."
One ash tree can produce up to 10,000 genetically unique seeds per year, providing numerous opportunities for natural selection.
Researchers found that saplings growing through fungus-laden leaf litter were more likely to survive if they carried certain genetic variations, confirming Charles Darwin's theory that countless small changes can fuel major evolutionary leaps.
This isn't just good news for the trees; it's a win for communities, public health, and local biodiversity.
Ash trees are vital to woodland ecosystems, supporting diverse insect and bird species. They also play an important role in purifying the air and capturing and storing carbon, a gas that contributes to rising global temperatures when released into the atmosphere.
Protecting the trees means cleaner air and a safer future for local communities.
Do you think America does a good job of protecting its natural beauty?
Definitely
Only in some areas
No way
I'm not sure
Click your choice to see results and speak your mind.
While researchers say that human support may still be needed through selective breeding or gene editing, they're optimistic about what this breakthrough means for conservation science.
Similar inspiring stories, such as the evolutionary adaptation of old-growth forests and new strategies to protect trees from diseases, show that resilient ecosystems can thrive when science and nature work together.
Professor Richard Nichols of Queen Mary University London added, "We are watching evolution happen and what's remarkable is that it's happening so quickly, in a single generation."
"The findings highlight how vital it is to support natural regeneration in woodlands, furthering our understanding of how to best manage our ash woodlands," said Rebecca Gosling of the Woodland Trust.
Join our free newsletter for good news and useful tips, and don't miss this cool list of easy ways to help yourself while helping the planet.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Human teeth evolved to fit our diet
As humans, one of our biggest evolutionary advantages is our chompers. Our combination of molars, canines, and incisors help us to consume a diverse and omnivorous diet, unlike many other animals. This dramatically expands the available menu for energy sources, and thus increases nutritional options and the chance of survival. But according to a study published on July 31 in the journal Science, our early hominin ancestors' desire to bite off more than they could literally chew is the likely reason for our dental evolution. The findings come from a team led by researchers at Dartmouth College, and offer the human fossil record's first known evidence of what's known as behavioral drive—the tendency for a species to develop routines that are helpful for their survival before their physiology evolves to meet these demands. 'We can definitively say that hominins were quite flexible when it came to behavior and this was their advantage,' anthropologist and study lead author Luke Fannin said in a statement. Fannin explained that anthropologists often discuss hominin behavioral and morphological changes as if they evolved in tandem with one another. Instead, his team's analysis indicates that early human behavior was its own evolutionary force—one with large implications for our physical and dietary journey. Fannin and colleagues reached their conclusions by examining multiple sets of fossilized teeth from various hominin and primate species, starting with one of our distant relatives from 3.9 to 2.9 million years ago called Australopithecus afarensis. Researchers were particularly interested in their levels of graminoids, the carbon and oxygen isotopes left behind from eating grasses and sedges. They also looked at fossil teeth from two extinct primate species who were contemporaries of A. afarensis—huge terrestrial monkeys that looked similar to baboons called theropiths, as well as smaller herbivorous monkeys known as colobines. The team discovered that while A. afarensis, theropiths, and colobines all initially preferred a diet heavy in insects, fruits, and flowers, they started shifting to the tougher, graminoid-heavy sedges and grasses 3.4 to 4.8 million years ago. However, these changing palettes came at least 700,000 years before their teeth and digestive systems optimized for the vegetation. Then, about 2.3 million years ago, hominin teeth began exhibiting significantly smaller amounts of oxygen and carbon isotopes. According to researchers, this implies that the era's human ancestor—Homo rudolfensis—lessened their grass intake for oxygen-depleted water. They offered three possible theories for this. In one scenario, H. rudolfensis simply drank far more water than other primates and African animals. Another hypothesis is that they adopted behavior similar to today's hippopotamuses, spending their days submerged in water and eating at night. The explanation most consistent with early-human behavior, however, is that the hominins started harvesting underground, carbohydrate-rich plant parts like tubers and bulbs. The latter argument tracks with a species rapidly growing in physical size and numbers. Energy-rich plants were everywhere, they didn't fight back like prey, and were more nutritious. At this point in history, ancient humans were also beginning to form stone tools that made searching for underground plants even easier. 'We propose that this shift to underground foods was a signal moment in our evolution,' Fannin said. 'It created a glut of carbs that were perennial—our ancestors could access them at any time of year to feed themselves and other people.' According to study senior author Nathaniel Dominy, one of anthropology's remaining 'burning questions' is 'What did hominins do differently that other primates didn't do?''This work shows that the ability to exploit grass tissues may be our secret sauce,' he said. Solve the daily Crossword
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Remarkable News in Potatoes
The Atlantic Daily, a newsletter that guides you through the biggest stories of the day, helps you discover new ideas, and recommends the best in culture. Sign up for it here. The annals of evolutionary history are full of ill-fated unions. Many plants and animals can and do sometimes reproduce outside of their own species, but their offspring—if they come to be at all—may incur serious costs. Mules and hinnies, for instance, are almost always sterile; so, too, are crosses between the two main subspecies of cultivated rice. When lions and tigers mate in zoos, their liger cubs have suffered heart failure and other health problems (and the males seem uniformly infertile). For decades, evolutionary biologists pointed to such examples to cast hybridization as hapless—'rare, very unsuccessful, and not an important evolutionary force,' Sandra Knapp, a plant taxonomist at the Natural History Museum in London, told me. But recently, researchers have begun to revise that dour view. With the right blend of genetic material, hybrids can sometimes be fertile and spawn species of their own; they can acquire new abilities that help them succeed in ways their parents never could. Which, as Knapp and her colleagues have found in a new study, appears to be the case for the world's third-most important staple crop: The 8-to-9-million-year-old lineage that begat the modern potato may have arisen from a chance encounter between a flowering plant from a group called Etuberosum and … an ancient tomato. Tomatoes, in other words, can now justifiably be described as the mother of potatoes. The plant experts I interviewed about the finding almost uniformly described it as remarkable, and not only because dipping fries into ketchup just got a little more mind-bending. Potatoes represent more than the product of an improbable union; they mark a radical feat of evolution. Neither of the first potato's parents could form the underground nutrient-storage organs we call tubers and eat in the form of sweet potatoes, yams, and potatoes. And yet, the potato predecessor that they produced could. Tubers allowed the proto-potato plant to flourish in environments where tomatoes and Etuberosum could not, and to branch out into more than 100 species that are still around today, including the cultivated potato. It's as if a liger weren't just fertile but also grew a brand-new organ that enabled it to thrive on a vegan diet. Scientists have spent decades puzzling over potatoes' origin story, in large part because the plants' genetics are a bit of a mess, Ek Han Tan, a plant geneticist at the University of Maine who wasn't involved in the study, told me. Researchers have struggled to piece together the relationships among the 100-plus potato species found in the wild; they cannot even agree on exactly how many exist. And when they have tried to orient the potato in its larger family, the nightshades—which includes tomatoes, eggplants, peppers, and Etuberosum—they have found mixed clues. Some evidence has seemed to point to the potato being a tomato derivative: Large stretches of their genomes resemble each other, and the two crops are similar enough that they can be grafted together into a plant that produces both foods. But other patches of the potato genome look more similar to that of Etuberosum, which bears flowers and underground stems that are far more potato-esque than anything that the tomato sports. 'We couldn't resolve the contradiction for a long time,' Zhiyang Zhang, a biologist at the Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, and one of the paper's lead authors, told me. [Read: Tomato + potato = TomTato] To settle the potato paradox, Zhang and his colleagues amassed more than 120 genomes from dozens of species spanning the potato, tomato, and Etuberosum groups and tried to piece together a narrative. One explanation for all of the shared genes, for instance, might have been that the potato lineage originally split off from the tomato one, then crossbred with Etuberosum later on. If that were the case, the genomes of more ancient potato species would be expected to look more tomato-like, and more modern ones should carry more of Etuberosum's genetic baggage. Instead, the researchers found that all of the potato genomes they sequenced had about the same tomato-Etuberosum split. That points to a possibility that potato researchers hadn't really considered before, Helen Tai, a plant geneticist with the Canadian government's agricultural department, told me. The entire potato lineage must have sprung from the same ancient source: a fusion between tomato and Etuberosum that persists, in a multitude of forms, into the modern day. The key to that success seems to have been the hybrid's newfound ability to tuberize, a feat that neither of its parents managed, because each lacked the necessary genetic accoutrement. Only the proto-potato had the proper combination: underground stems from Etuberosum that provided a structural scaffold for the tubers, and a genomic switch from the tomato that told the tubers to grow there. Many hybrids struggle to sexually reproduce, but the proto-potato one didn't have to: The plant's underground storage organs (that is, the potatoes) allowed it to propagate asexually. (Potatoes can still be cloned today—just bury bits of one in the ground—but sometime in the past 8 to 9 million years, the plants gained the ability to reproduce sexually, too, a shift that scientists are still puzzling through.) Ancient tomatoes and Etuberosum were native to different stretches of the western coast of South America. But the proto-potato was able to colonize colder, higher, drier environments, allowing it to spread as far north as Arizona and west, out to the coasts of Argentina, Uruguay, and parts of Brazil. 'That's what a tuber does for you—it allows you to survive better in stressful conditions,' C. Robin Buell, a plant-genomics expert at the University of Georgia who wasn't involved in the study, told me. Hybridization in nature still, more often than not, ends in tragedy—'offspring that are sterile, inviable, maladapted, or mixed up in some negative way,' Robin Hopkins, an evolutionary biologist at Harvard who wasn't involved in the research, told me. But through the sheer power of mixing genes into new combinations, the risky gamble of interspecies pairings has also sometimes majorly paid off. Hybridization among East African cichlids seems to have triggered an explosion in the diversity of certain genes important for eyesight, helping the animals navigate waters of varying murkiness and depth. Certain frogs have been documented soliciting mates outside of their own species to up the chances that their offspring will survive periods of drought. Our own ancestors mingled with Denisovans and Neanderthals, equipping modern humans with traits that may have helped us adapt to new environments. Today, farmers frequently breed different species of crops together to boost yield or hardiness against extreme weather and disease. The potato's innovations, though, are still exceptional. Rather than just collapsing its parents' various traits together, this ancient hybrid struck out on its own evolutionary path. [Read: Why these frogs make 'the grossest blunder in sexual preference'] Although that proto-potato is long gone, understanding its origins could still keep fries and hashbrowns on modern tables. Cultivated potatoes are prone to disease, and—thanks to their four-copy genomes—a pain to breed and genetically manipulate. Some scientists are trying to address those issues by developing a two-copy-genome potato. But the past could offer another avenue toward sustainable spuds, Yiyuan Ding, a biologist at Huazhong Agricultural University and one of the paper's lead authors, told me. Perhaps, with some genetic help from Etuberosum, scientists might someday coax tomato plants into producing edible underground tubers of their own. Article originally published at The Atlantic
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Trial for new test to detect early signs of cancer reaches milestone
A trial for a new test to detect early signs of cancer has reached a milestone in Dorset. The trial, known as the MODERNISED study, has now recruited more than 450 patients to examine a new blood test that aims to identify ten different types of cancer in their early stages. The test, not used in any other multi-cancer detection trials, looks for blood signals that indicate an immune response to developing cancer. It is also being evaluated to see if it can identify the type of cancer. Ian Robinson taking part in MODERNISED at UHS (Image: Southampton Clinical Trials Unit) The study is recruiting patients from five hospitals across the country, including University Hospitals Dorset NHS Foundation Trust and Dorset County Hospital NHS Foundation Trust. It is led by researchers from Southampton. Ian Robinson, a 72-year-old grandfather of five, participated in the trial after being diagnosed with colorectal cancer. He said: "There were no symptoms, no pain, nothing, so you would never know until it was much more advanced and therefore much more difficult to treat." Ian was invited to take part in the MODERNISED study, where a blood sample is taken. He added: "I'm delighted to participate and hopefully help improve the way things are done." Dr Victoria Goss (Image: Southampton Clinical Trials Unit) Around 385,000 new cancer cases are diagnosed every year in the UK, but some cancers are hard to detect in the early stages. Dr Victoria Goss, associate professor and head of early diagnosis research at the Southampton Clinical Trials Unit, said: "Detecting cancer early means that treatment can begin sooner, increasing the chances of successful outcomes for patients." The MODERNISED study is being led by Professor Andy Davies, director of the Southampton Cancer Research UK and National Institute for Health and Care Research Experimental Cancer Medicine Centre. Professor Davies said: "Most current research into multi-cancer blood tests is focussed on detecting abnormal DNA that has been released into the blood stream by cancer cells. "We are instead looking at levels of certain proteins found in blood." The trial will see samples taken from 1,000 patients with newly diagnosed cancer, as well as 350 control samples from patients with similar symptoms that are not cancer and also healthy volunteers.
