No one really knows what a tree is - Max G. Levy
video description
Date: 2025-04-20
Related videos
Comments and reviews: 20
OakFencePost
saying a plant isnt a tree because it doesnt have a woody stem is like saying humans arent predators because we dont have claws
for instance a thought experiment
Let’s imagine a scenario where all the plants on Earth are erased. Now, take a Monstera plant and place it in an environment where it can evolve and diversify. Over time, this single Monstera plant gives rise to thousands of species, all of which descend from it. These new species gradually fill the ecological niches that were once occupied by trees, creating vast rainforests. However, there's an important twist: since all these plants are descendants of Monstera, and Monstera is a monocot, they all share certain characteristics inherent to monocots.
Monocots, by definition, do not have woody stems. This is a key point because, according to the current definition, a tree is generally understood to be a plant with a woody stem. Therefore, despite these plants filling the roles of trees and forming large, complex ecosystems, they would technically not be considered trees. Instead, the entire Earth would have no true forests, as all the trees are monocots without woody stems.
How absurd is that standing unde rthe canopy of a non-forest full of non-trees
reply
saying a plant isnt a tree because it doesnt have a woody stem is like saying humans arent predators because we dont have claws
for instance a thought experiment
Let’s imagine a scenario where all the plants on Earth are erased. Now, take a Monstera plant and place it in an environment where it can evolve and diversify. Over time, this single Monstera plant gives rise to thousands of species, all of which descend from it. These new species gradually fill the ecological niches that were once occupied by trees, creating vast rainforests. However, there's an important twist: since all these plants are descendants of Monstera, and Monstera is a monocot, they all share certain characteristics inherent to monocots.
Monocots, by definition, do not have woody stems. This is a key point because, according to the current definition, a tree is generally understood to be a plant with a woody stem. Therefore, despite these plants filling the roles of trees and forming large, complex ecosystems, they would technically not be considered trees. Instead, the entire Earth would have no true forests, as all the trees are monocots without woody stems.
How absurd is that standing unde rthe canopy of a non-forest full of non-trees
reply
TopherThe12th
Wikipedia articles change over time, but right now the article on palm trees shows a good cross-section of a palm-tree trunk from one that was cut down. Apart from not having tree-rings (or maybe only one tree-ring, which might just be an artifact of the way it was cut, or may be the result of the older material near the center weathering or decaying over time in a manner different from the new material near the circumference, it looks like wood to me. Or at least, particle-board of a very fine particle-size. What is it, if it is not wood Does it hold together well enough to make a table out of it The timbers to frame a house
reply
Wikipedia articles change over time, but right now the article on palm trees shows a good cross-section of a palm-tree trunk from one that was cut down. Apart from not having tree-rings (or maybe only one tree-ring, which might just be an artifact of the way it was cut, or may be the result of the older material near the center weathering or decaying over time in a manner different from the new material near the circumference, it looks like wood to me. Or at least, particle-board of a very fine particle-size. What is it, if it is not wood Does it hold together well enough to make a table out of it The timbers to frame a house
reply
arnaldorentes5371
This distinction is interesting and can be misleading, because it is based on arbitrary rules. The same species can develop into a tree or never become more than a shrub, depending on the climate and soil variations in its area of occurrence. And the aforementioned Brazilian grape tree, my beloved jaboticaba trees (there are about fifty, between species and varieties) often grow branched from the ground. They would be, technically, shrubs; a woody plant, branched from the base. It's kind of crazy.
Excellent video, as always.
reply
This distinction is interesting and can be misleading, because it is based on arbitrary rules. The same species can develop into a tree or never become more than a shrub, depending on the climate and soil variations in its area of occurrence. And the aforementioned Brazilian grape tree, my beloved jaboticaba trees (there are about fifty, between species and varieties) often grow branched from the ground. They would be, technically, shrubs; a woody plant, branched from the base. It's kind of crazy.
Excellent video, as always.
reply
richardcwest1004
It’s good to understand the botanical definition of and boundaries around the word tree. But we should also remember that scientists didn’t create, nor do they own, the word. That is, you can still call a palm a tree. There are ferns that grow 20’ tall with a single hard, bark-covered stem, while dogwoods can be a shrub or a tree, depending on the environment.
reply
It’s good to understand the botanical definition of and boundaries around the word tree. But we should also remember that scientists didn’t create, nor do they own, the word. That is, you can still call a palm a tree. There are ferns that grow 20’ tall with a single hard, bark-covered stem, while dogwoods can be a shrub or a tree, depending on the environment.
reply
jaspermcjasper3672
The latest pseudo-science fad today is to find ANYTHING that isn't a clade (fish, sabertooth cats, trees) and say that it doesn't exist, or there's no such thing as a _____, or nobody knows what a ____ is. Ummm, no. Just because something isn't a clade doesn't mean it's not real (as anyone ever bitten by a saber-tooth cat can tell you.
reply
The latest pseudo-science fad today is to find ANYTHING that isn't a clade (fish, sabertooth cats, trees) and say that it doesn't exist, or there's no such thing as a _____, or nobody knows what a ____ is. Ummm, no. Just because something isn't a clade doesn't mean it's not real (as anyone ever bitten by a saber-tooth cat can tell you.
reply
Khyranleander
Tree is a habit, not a clade. IN MY OPINION, it just means any sessile lifeform that extends from a single hardened trunk emerging from the ground and grows to at least 30M. So it counts for lignin based plants -- land, sea, even individual Aspen 'trees' -- possibly mushrooms & those fossilized pseudo-mushrooms. But that's just me.
reply
Tree is a habit, not a clade. IN MY OPINION, it just means any sessile lifeform that extends from a single hardened trunk emerging from the ground and grows to at least 30M. So it counts for lignin based plants -- land, sea, even individual Aspen 'trees' -- possibly mushrooms & those fossilized pseudo-mushrooms. But that's just me.
reply
ted_ed
The correct name for Brazilian grape tree is jaboticaba, with the J sounding like H in English. They're tasty fruits, and apparently the trees will not grow from cuttings or air layering, they must be grown from seed according to the information I found. They're pretty trees and if you live in Florida south of Tampa you can grow them.
reply
The correct name for Brazilian grape tree is jaboticaba, with the J sounding like H in English. They're tasty fruits, and apparently the trees will not grow from cuttings or air layering, they must be grown from seed according to the information I found. They're pretty trees and if you live in Florida south of Tampa you can grow them.
reply
derkaiser420
I just learned about this in my biology class. You covered all of the bases really. Phylogeny is bizarre. Like fungi are actually more closely related to animals than they are plants even though they look like plants. Going into carnivorous plants just throw another wrench into evolution. Biology is fun.
reply
I just learned about this in my biology class. You covered all of the bases really. Phylogeny is bizarre. Like fungi are actually more closely related to animals than they are plants even though they look like plants. Going into carnivorous plants just throw another wrench into evolution. Biology is fun.
reply
221b_Bakerstreet
I've long believed that while we have veterinarians, dentists, and a spectrum of medical professionals, we sorely lack dedicated plant doctors. It's high time we established this as a vital branch of medicine!
btw dr ted ed, bring back the ''outsmart the fallacy'' I miss the demon of reason
reply
I've long believed that while we have veterinarians, dentists, and a spectrum of medical professionals, we sorely lack dedicated plant doctors. It's high time we established this as a vital branch of medicine!
btw dr ted ed, bring back the ''outsmart the fallacy'' I miss the demon of reason
reply
WrongParadox
I'm surprised bamboo wasn't mentioned as an example of not a tree.
Coconuts fall under palms, so that was included as not a tree.
I've met some people that mistake cane sugar as a tree. not sure why, basically another grass.
The you have cactus (succulents also not a tree)
reply
I'm surprised bamboo wasn't mentioned as an example of not a tree.
Coconuts fall under palms, so that was included as not a tree.
I've met some people that mistake cane sugar as a tree. not sure why, basically another grass.
The you have cactus (succulents also not a tree)
reply
topherthe11th23
This video's argument is that we don't know what trees are because their ancestries don't all converge on one branch of, of what The evolutionary family TREE! If we don't know what trees are, how can we refer to the concept of TREE to describe how nobody knows what trees are
reply
This video's argument is that we don't know what trees are because their ancestries don't all converge on one branch of, of what The evolutionary family TREE! If we don't know what trees are, how can we refer to the concept of TREE to describe how nobody knows what trees are
reply
boldjawad
Such a superficial branch of science. Too many assumptions. This belong to this family so does that. No concrete proof what so ever. Just because someone long ago said so. So superficial. This looks like pseudo science after studying something like physics or chemistry.
reply
Such a superficial branch of science. Too many assumptions. This belong to this family so does that. No concrete proof what so ever. Just because someone long ago said so. So superficial. This looks like pseudo science after studying something like physics or chemistry.
reply
existentialnoodles
if banana trees arent trees, and bananas are berries (because botanically speaking they technically are cuz they come from one ovary, have a soft fleshy interior and multiple seeds, does that technically make banana trees berry bushes /hj
reply
if banana trees arent trees, and bananas are berries (because botanically speaking they technically are cuz they come from one ovary, have a soft fleshy interior and multiple seeds, does that technically make banana trees berry bushes /hj
reply
rubiks6
You muddy the picture when you bring evolution into it. Evolution is a false paradigm. Trees and any other plants can be examined and described as they are today. Inventing false evolutionary narratives adds nothing to our knowledge of the trees.
reply
You muddy the picture when you bring evolution into it. Evolution is a false paradigm. Trees and any other plants can be examined and described as they are today. Inventing false evolutionary narratives adds nothing to our knowledge of the trees.
reply
ted_ed
Maybe it needs a chemical definition. Lignin and celluloses are the structural elements of wood.
Tree = lignin / cellulose >= 1
The video was focussed on the phylogeny of plants. That covers interrelationships between plant species.
reply
Maybe it needs a chemical definition. Lignin and celluloses are the structural elements of wood.
Tree = lignin / cellulose >= 1
The video was focussed on the phylogeny of plants. That covers interrelationships between plant species.
reply
DrKwaneshaKrumb
this is all complete nonsense and does not provide any actual important information. in reality, a tree is anything that looks like what you think a tree is. and anyone who says differently shouldnt have arms or legs any longer
reply
this is all complete nonsense and does not provide any actual important information. in reality, a tree is anything that looks like what you think a tree is. and anyone who says differently shouldnt have arms or legs any longer
reply
AristotleFreeman
Ted ed is like Wikipedia only national socialist are allowed to write there. Your senseless videos are of no use for grown ups of the species but good look with your membership in national socialist collectives.
reply
Ted ed is like Wikipedia only national socialist are allowed to write there. Your senseless videos are of no use for grown ups of the species but good look with your membership in national socialist collectives.
reply
oracleofdelphi4533
As we look deeper into anything, we realize that our definitions break down. What is life What is gender What is my wife thinking, What's this thing on my shoe
The closer we look, the greater the mystery.
reply
As we look deeper into anything, we realize that our definitions break down. What is life What is gender What is my wife thinking, What's this thing on my shoe
The closer we look, the greater the mystery.
reply
Chris. Davies
Language has a lot to answer for, but biology has the answer!
Dicotyledons make wood. While Monocotyledons do not.
And if you were educated in a civilised country, you learned this stuff at school.
reply
Language has a lot to answer for, but biology has the answer!
Dicotyledons make wood. While Monocotyledons do not.
And if you were educated in a civilised country, you learned this stuff at school.
reply
mrpocock
So you think that's mad So you think you know what leaves are Except different plants have evolved leaves independently, so that there are multiple structures we can leaves, but which are not homologous.
reply
So you think that's mad So you think you know what leaves are Except different plants have evolved leaves independently, so that there are multiple structures we can leaves, but which are not homologous.
reply
Add a review, comment
Other channel videos
