February 13, 2008

Plants Don't Like Greenhouse Effect

Fossil remains indicate that insects actually eat more plant material when the planet is warmer. Karen Hopkin reports.

Illustration of a Bohr atom model spinning around the words Science Quickly with various science and medicine related icons around the text

SUBSCRIBE TO Science Quickly

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.

Seems like every week brings news that global warming is going to be bad for some poor animal or other. But plants? Well, I guess I was thinking that plants would welcome the heat. I mean, global warming is caused by greenhouse gases. And plants live in greenhouses. So everyone’s happy. Well, according to a new study, published in the February 12 issue of the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, I was wrong. Or at least not quite right. Because plants, too, are likely to face problems as the earth heats up. And their biggest problem is likely to be: insects.

Scientists were looking at the fossilized remains of leaves that fell off trees about 55 million years ago. At that time, the planet was undergoing a period of warming. The scientists found that as the temperatures rose, the leaves looked more…nibbled. Seems that with more CO2 in the atmosphere, plants take up more carbon. That actually makes their leaves less nutritious for plant-munching bugs—so the insects just eat more. So, a warmer planet will be home to some hungry bugs. Which I daresay will not please the trees. Or anyone else who relies on plants for food—which includes, ultimately, all of us.

—Karen Hopkin

60-Second Science is a daily podcast. Subscribe to this Podcast: RSS | iTunes

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American