Mmmmm, I’d say specialists would not use the broader definitions that are more colloquial. Generally, trees are woody plants with secondary growth and they aren’t monocots.
Comment on Palms
dannoffs@hexbear.net 2 months ago
This is a reminder that there is no universally accepted botanical definition of tree. It is also a reminder that usage supersedes definition, so pointing out that coconut palm trees aren’t “trees” makes you both annoying and wrong.
fossilesque@mander.xyz 2 months ago
dannoffs@hexbear.net 2 months ago
scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C3&q=c…
Someone should tell the authors of these hundreds of papers then.
fossilesque@mander.xyz 2 months ago
dannoffs@hexbear.net 2 months ago
There’s no way you actually read that.
It’s literally a blog post of one person’s opinion which concludes without a definitive statement, that it’s not settled if they’re trees or not, and then links to a page “for further reading” that categorizes them under trees.
manuallybreathing@lemmy.ml 2 months ago
The definition of tree exists within the context of all that came before it? 🌴
joyjoy@lemm.ee 2 months ago
Only in the context of biology and evolution, which the right doesn’t understand.