Drabav

Actually, I think that a better way to say this would be that they intake both CO2 and O2 through the stoma. The oxygen is then used for cellular respiration (oxidation, crebs cycle, etc) and the CO2 is used in the grana of the cloroplasts to produce "food"(much more than just glucose is produced, including ammino acids, nucleotides and lipids). I think my problem is that I was looking primarily at the Photosynthetic side of plant respiration, and took the cellular or mitochondrial side (O2) to be supplied mostly by the Photosynthesis reation. I don't know if that is true, and I don't know where I could go to verify that statement.

Seriously now, this is an important question within Ecological Restoration: Is the restored community natural or is it an artifact, the effect of a persons needs or wants upon nature. What causes a community to be natural? Is it a historical continuim or is it the stability of a natural community? or is it neither, is it something to do with the ability to conserve itself apart from human management?

Here is an example: If you control-burn a prarie that is slowly converting into a forest, are you creating an artifact, or are you restoring the ecosystem by reintroducing a neccessary element of a prarie ecosystem?

Draba v.

...a postscript to a hope of spring.

Most plants use the C3 photosynthetic pathway. Stomates usually only close for these plants during dry periods to conserve water, not at night. In fact, where did you hear that plants close their stoma at night? I believe that is false information.

There are some plants, mostly living in desert environments, that follow the CAM pathway. They ONLY open their stomates at night. During that time they take in CO2 and release O2, which is used during the day for photosynthetic processes while the stomates are closed.

Yes, it is inefficient, but it seems to work in places where not much else can grow.

Draba v.

...a postscript of the hope of spring.

Edit: Since when do plants take in Oxegen and release CO2 anyway? Where ARE you getting this info?

In "Faking Nature", Eric Katz argues that a restored ecosystem is an artifact created by people to fufills their wants and needs. Because of its "unnaturalness", he argues that restored ecosystems have less integral value than the original, the value stemming from the historical continuity within an ecosystem. Therefore, projects such as restoration and mitigation are useless in trying to restore value to a lanscape. He says that we are "in fact, faking nature".

Please, discuss. I have been wanting to have a conversation about this with someone for a while now.

Draba v.

....a postscript to a hope of spring.