After 5,000 years, British tree changes its sex
Lowenberg, Loivia. "After 5,000 Years, British Tree Changes Its Sex." Alaska Dispatch News. The Christian Science Moniter, 08 Nov. 2015. Web. 08 Nov. 2015.
If this title doesn’t catch your eye, I’m not sure what will. Because, if you didn’t know, it is a general rule for yew trees to be dioecious, meaning that they are one sex or the other. The Fortingall Yew that is estimated to be between 3000 and 9000 years old, has broken that rule. For its entire history, the tree has been documented as a male tree; male yews have small conical structures that issue clouds of pollen upon reaching maturity. Female yew trees, by contrast, have red berries during the autumn and winter months. That is why it was very rare and unusual (even if it is not entirely uncommon for trees to switch gender from one to the other) when Botanist Max Coleman found a group of red berries on the Fortingall Yew, because the rest of the tree was clearly male. Dr. Coleman and his fellow scientists have theorized on the causes of this strange change in sex. He and his team believe that the sex change could have been prompted by environmental factors, but could be a tactic the tree is using to prolong its lifespan.
According to Brian Muelaner, chair of the Ancient Tree Forum, the apparent sex change is in fact a strategy for longevity and as he told the Guardian, “The Fortingall yew is fragmented and it may be so compartmentalised that part of it has become sexually ambiguous. We are all continuously learning about ancient trees – the ageing process of trees is a new science.” I thought this was a relevant piece because of how we were just learning about the genders of plants and their specific sex organs. I also thought it was really cool how this yew tree has changed its sex in order to prolong its life. I also find it very courageous, even if it took 5000 years, that this tree has finally come out.
This article really peaked my interest and did a great job presenting the information on the Fortingall Yew tree. It had no grammatical errors and was short and sweet. One thing I wish it had done was include more discussion on the importance of this tree to science and genetics, since it is such an unusual occurrence.
You are right sam, this article title did catch my eye and it was no less interesting to read about it. I think you did a few things well here while writing this article. First off I think that you did a good job at making it funny and lively. You incorporated many jokes and things to capture the reader's attention. You also did great job tying in the poeple who did the research into your review. The inclusion of Max Coleman give the scientific base the rest of the article needs. Lastly you did a good job being brief and to the point. You were never sidetracked and told the article straight out accomplishing the task quite efficiently. However this can also be considered one of your flaws. There wasn't any fluff to it and I really didn't get the sense of why the topic really mattered as a whole in opposition to its comedic value. Also think it lacked much of the information that really could have tied it back and made it interesting. I think maybe you also think the same as you wrote that you wanted to include more information tying to the broader subject. Over I thought it was incredibly interesting that a tree would do that at that point in its life. Nature is a weird place.
ReplyDeleteSam, I really enjoyed reading your article review regarding a tree that has changed its sex. One of the things you did very well in this review was catching the audience's attention with an enticing first sentence, which will persuade them to read the rest of your work. In addition, I thought you did a nice job of summarizing the article without including too much unnecessary information. As a result, you efficiently articulated the points of your piece without boring readers, which is the basis for an effective review.
ReplyDeleteIf you wanted to improve your review, you may want to consider expanding your critique of the article and discuss more of what you didn’t like about the piece as a whole. In addition, I would like to have known more about how this discovery will contribute to science in the future, and what kind of importance it holds in terms of what we currently know about plants.
Mainly, by reading this review, I discovered that trees can have specific genders, which are apparent based on their presence of certain flowers or berries during the appropriate seasons. This was very interesting to me, because I had always been under the impression that plants are not gender specific.
Sam,
ReplyDeleteI’ve got to admit your article title did catch my eye, but it was your opening line that got me laughing and got me to continue reading your review. Your sense of humor in the opening made it possible to have an easy transition into your interesting botany related article. I’m not an avid fan in the science behind plants but your article is actually pretty interesting, who ever knew plants could change their gender? Another great quality about your piece is that you remained focused and provide us with a nice clean summary that doesn’t repeat information and is straightforward.
In all honesty, I didn’t really think there was anything wrong with your piece; you did a pretty good job. If you had to improve anything though, I would expand on the freshness of this ambiguity of gender in plants if your article mentioned that. Because the case with the yew tree is most probably not the first. If your article did address it, it may be a good point to talk about during your summary. One thing that may have strengthened your piece may be incorporating more expert quotes in your summary.
The ambiguity of sex within a plant is certainly a new concept to me, perhaps because I never really pondered on the subject. However it opens up my eyes on how important conducting research is, that we’ve got to keep challenging ideas to notice new scientific findings. If not for their research work, the scientists would have never realized that such a tree like the 9000 year old Fortingall Yew tree would have male as well as female parts. The most astonishing part is how scientists deduced that this sexual ambiguity will in fact aid the tree in longevity.
Citation:
Lowenberg, Loivia. "After 5,000 Years, British Tree Changes Its Sex." Alaska Dispatch News. The Christian Science Moniter, 08 Nov. 2015. Web. 08 Nov. 2015.
Link:
http://www.adn.com/article/20151108/after-5000-years-british-tree-changes-its-sex
ReplyDeleteI read Sam’s review on the article, “After 5,000 Years, British Tree Changes Its Sex”. I think he did a very good job of highlighting the key points of the article and giving definitions of the word, dioecious, and explaining the difference between male and female Yew trees. I also think he did a good job of including different scientists like Botanist, Max Coleman, and including a quote to back up some of his pieces of evidence. Lastly, I think Sam did a good job of showing his voice through his writing and incorporating funny sentences like, “I also find it very courageous, even if it took 5000 years, that this tree has finally come out.”
Although Sam’s review was very well written and included the key factors of the article, he could have went more into detail on what kind of factors cause the tree to change sex after such a long time. Even though this article might not have gone into depth on this, he could have mentioned that as one of the things the author could have improved on. Lastly, I think the review could have been slightly longer and some of the sentences could have been put together in a better manner.
This article is important in informing society about the various discoveries scientists are making in the field. Trees are part of the natural landscape for many people around the world. After reading this article, people can view a tree in a new light. It also might raise awareness towards trees, making people think more about the environment and how important trees are to survive.
I thought that this review was very well done because Sam was able to get the main ideas about the tree across without adding in insignificant details that distract from the main point. I liked that Sam’s summary was easy for someone who is unfamiliar with this type of tree to understand; he made it clear that the berries are a female distinction and that the males produce pollen. He also defined dioecious which made the article review much easier to understand. Finally, I liked that Sam included the reason for why scientists hypothesize that this tree changed sex. I think using a quote to explain this phenomenon helped because the scientist phrased it in a really nice way, which when included heightened the review.
ReplyDeleteAlthough this was very well done, I thought that there could have been clarifications especially when talking about how changing sex helps prolong life. This fact was stated without much explanation as to how this would prolong life. I also felt that there could have been better connections made to why this article is relevant. I think it would have been helpful to explain how this discovery fits into the currently accepted ideas, and how this changes scientists views.
I chose to read this because I thought that the review was written in a very intriguing way. There was humor embedded in the information, and it was an overall interesting article. I thought that the humor helped keep the reader interested and made the article review easier to read. This article really showed me how things can evolve even after such a long period of time; this tree changed sex after 5000 years. I think that there should be further investigations to see how these trees change sex and to identify more of the factors causing it. I also wonder if this is the first time this tree has changed sex.
Sam,
ReplyDeleteI thought you did another great job with your article. One thing that I enjoyed was that you include the right amount of details: not so many that it was distracting, but not so few that it was difficult to understand your topic. Another thing that you did well was that you picked a topic extremely relevant to what we are learning in class right now. Lastly, I thought you did a good job incorporating your sense of humor into this review.
There were two main things I feel you could have improved on. I feel as though your critique of the article is fairly limited and expanding on this area would improve the quality of your work. Also, I feel that if you explained how the tree’s ability to change sex could “prolong life” it would make your article more friendly to the reader.
Overall, I thought your article was very well done and written in a very clever manor. I was astounded that an organism could change its sex as such. Great job Sam.
Samuel,
ReplyDeleteI found your review of your current event article particularly riveting. You did a capital job summarizing the main points of the article, while first introducing general concepts that made it easy to understand. For example, you explained that trees do not usually change gender, which made it all the more surprising that the Fortingall Yew partially did as it is already more than 3000 years old. In addition, I thought it was helpful that you included how to differentiate between male and female yews, and then stated that the historically male yew began to grow berries that were characteristic of a female yew. Lastly, I found it beneficial that you included expert theories as to why the tree partially changed sex, citing the fact that it was most likely attempting to prolong its lifespan. In terms of what you could have done better, I think you could have include more information as to how becoming partly female would lengthen the life of the tree, as it wasn’t really explained. Also, you could have included more regarding the aging science of trees as it is unclear. I chose to review this article because your headline really hooked my attention and I was impressed by the Fortingall Yew’s courage in coming out after 3000-9000 years.