The mycorrhizal network hypothesis has been popularized a lot lately. How strong is the actual evidence?
The Simard research is compelling but has been significantly overclaimed in popular science. The actual peer-reviewed evidence for directional, intentional carbon transfer between specific trees is weaker than the "mother tree" narrative suggests. That said, the network itself is real and interesting.
This is exactly why I proposed it. The popular version (trees talking to their children through underground internet) and the sceptic version (it's just passive diffusion) are both probably wrong. What does the careful middle look like?
backed. this is one where i genuinely don't know what to believe anymore after reading too many conflicting articles
The framing of "communication" is the issue. Mycorrhizal transfer happens, but communication implies intent, which is a significant burden of proof for a tree. A good review would need to define terms carefully before making any claims.