[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Tunguska URL

dean>>Looking at the 1908 ring in this picture, it is obvious that the 
meteorite never killed the tree since it kept growing afterwards. My 
question is " How could a meteorite create such a huge year of growth?". Is 
something else going on here? Maybe it is a weak section that damaged the 
tree but it recovered afterwards? The answer might have ramifications about 
what actually happened.<<

Trees in a forest compete for their share of sunlight. Their efforts will 
reflect on their growth rings. Let's say you have a new forest starting out 
after a major fire destroying all the older growth. For the first approximate 
dozen years, the growth rings will be relatively thick...indicating plenty of 
sunlight, minerals and water. Eventually the stand of trees will crowd each 
other out, causing the amount of sunlight falling onto each tree to be less. 
Also the larger trees will now be using water at a greater rate as 
transpiration increases. Some trees may not get their fair share anymore as 
the water table drops as a result. Less minerals for good growth will be 
available. Most of what is there for growth is locked up in yet to be decayed 
matter. Anyhow, as the forest becomes full of mature trees, the effect on 
their growth rings will show up as being thinner. Perhaps the surviving tree 
with the thicker growth rings as indicated above, is expressing the lessening 
of competition for sunlight, water and an increase of available minerals 
after the fire.?
GeoZay

----------
Archives located at:
http://www.meteoritecentral.com/list_best.html

For help, FAQ's and sub. info. visit:
http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing_list.html
----------