GIRAFFES IN THE ROCKY MOUNTAINS
What would happen if you dropped some giraffes off in the Rocky Mountains? How well do you think they would survive?
How well would giraffes fare in the Rocky Mountains? Unlike mountain goats, they probably wouldn’t be able to walk around rocky slopes and rough terrain very well. They probably couldn’t eat pine trees. They could probably find some trees to eat, but they might overeat those trees, perhaps killing many locally, which would disrupt the ecosystem. They probably would not do well escaping predators like wolves and cougars. Eventually, the cold would probably kill them.
One way or another, they will freeze to death, be unable to find food, or otherwise die of malnutrition from improper food sources, stumble and break a leg, fall off a cliff, or be eaten by a predator. Giraffes would not survive long, and they might kill some trees and do some environmental damage before they do.
What if we introduced Bengal Tigers instead? They would be able to navigate the terrain, and they might be successful enough to out-compete Rocky Mountain predators. While they may have a better chance of survival than giraffes, their presence could lead to a significant shift in the predator-prey dynamics, with far-reaching effects that could persist for years, even if the tigers themselves did not survive. The truth is, neither giraffes nor Bengal tigers belong in the Rockies.
Do you think microbes follow different rules of biology? The short answer is no.
DIVERSITY OR STABILITY
Balance strengthens systems by enhancing stability, efficiency, sustainability, synergy, and reducing conflicts. It ensures even distribution of stress, optimal resource allocation, and minimal waste, leading to more resilient and sustainable operations.
Balanced systems can better adapt to changes. This results in more harmonious interactions, reduced vulnerabilities, and overall better performance in ecology, energy dynamics, and health.
If new elements are added to the system, they might not be able to integrate despite efforts to increase diversity, like adding giraffes or Bengal tigers to the Rockies.
COMBINING ECOSYSTEMS
If two or more balanced systems are combined, for example, combining IMO cultures, the effects are like war, with mass destruction and casualties on both sides. It can take generations to recover and become a peaceful, economically vibrant ecosystem once again.
Peaceful communities are more economically vibrant. Think of the USA after World War II. Both the population and economy boomed. War costs money and reduces prosperity, and therefore, energy is lost. During the war, the United States was on rations.
When you add microbial ecosystems together they must expend energy to adapt and change. That energy could have been used to grow food instead. Don’t put your microbes on rations.
Imagine building a new town and bringing together builders and architects from all over the world with the idea of using all the world’s knowledge to build the best town ever. How successful would that be?
First of all, not all of them speak the same language or understand each other. Builders from each location would be used to different local resources. They would all have different techniques. They would not agree on methodology.
For these reasons, they would not be able to cooperate, even though they want to. They would first need to learn how to communicate. Then, it would take time to come to a consensus about what resources to use, how to use them, and even what the goals for living arrangements should be because they all come from different cultures and live different lifestyles. It would take many years, more likely generations, for this town to become the cohesive society that was planned.
Keep these principles in mind when you want to add microbes together for the sake of diversity.
Diversity for the sake of diversity is chaos.
I once combined two IMO cultures, taken from similar locations that were minutes away from each other by car. I missed the opportunity to capture the reaction on video because I did not have my phone or camera with me at the time, but the results were shocking and dramatic.
I had two cultures of IMO2, which kept the microbes in a dormant state for storage. I had one small jar and one large jar. I started adding the IMO from the smaller jar into the large one. The interface of the two cultures started to foam and bubble. When I tried to mix the two cultures together, the entire jar began to foam up. This was not a small reaction; it was like a bomb! I literally stopped stirring and stepped back instinctively. It was clear to me that the cultures were not compatible and that combining them caused a microbial war.
This happened with cultures that were in dormant stages. I can imagine it would have been more dramatic with active cultures. Just because we can’t see it doesn’t mean it’s not happening.
These are things a microscope cannot tell you. You may be able to identify members of the community, but you cannot see how these living communities interact with each other.
This was a visually pivotal moment in my understanding of microbial ecosystem compatibility. Whenever I hear people talking about adding as many IMO cultures together as possible, I think of that foaming jar of IMO war.
Diversity is good, yes, desirable, yes, but not at the expense of stability and balance. The introduction of new microbes, especially two complete ecosystems, will cause a period of instability. The instability will lead to a loss of energy that could have been used to grow the system instead.
In biological systems, diversity generally enhances resilience, adaptability, and productivity. However, if not managed properly, it can lead to competition and conflicts.
My point of view is this: Start with stability and strength. It is better to have one good collection of IMO than a dozen weak ones. Combining weak ecosystems does not make them strong. Start with one good, solid, stable ecosystem. Then, when you add diversity, you will be adding value to a strong ecosystem. You will be building on success, strength on strength.
DIVERSITY WITH PURPOSE
Add the ability to withstand environmental hardships that your location has to deal with by collecting from sites that exhibit those characteristics. Add seasonal robustness by collecting from appropriate sites for those traits. But adding diversity for diversity's sake is simple chaos. It is foam in a jar, not a stable environment for growing food.
If your concern is diversity over time, integrate animals into your systems. Feed them a varied diet. An inoculated deep litter system will change over time with the animals. Using litter from the animals as mulch on the crops will add diversity gently over time.
Another way to accomplish this gentle, natural evolution over time would be to collect from the same general location each year. Wild animals, large, small, and tiny, will travel through your collection area every year, adding diversity. Adding diversity gently is the Natural pattern. Nature always knows the best way.
Think about diversity, yes, but not at the expense of stability.
Comments