array9

It occurred to me that being more efficient at collecting energy from the sun, must have an evolutionary advantage.  If you have a greater fuel source, you are going to do better.  Now I am not quite sure how this works out across species, rather than within species, whatever species means.

But my thought would lead one to believe that a wild scene would be on average better than a farmed scene at absorbing the suns energy.  Now we might not like what the plants do with the energy that they have managed to gain, this going into some nasty chemical and positional strategies, such as woody stems/ height and herbicides,  But even these strategies could not ultimately make up for being less efficient.

This does not mean that woods are the optimum energy sink, since clearly they are still having to put a large amount of energy in to the warfare of climbing above their competitors, which is not exactly useful per se.  Just short term bullies.

Maybe woods are just a temporary feature, and that eventually they will get bumped off through some use of energy by another species of plant or bug.

Anyway it makes me think that by doing nothing in the garden, I am generating more compostable waste, than my neighbour who is being terribly neat and tidy.

Obviously this is a hope rather than a clear principle.

martin