Navigating the Intersection of Science and Belief: the case of the ‘Wood Wide Web’

by Pedro M. Antunes

The concept of the ‘wood wide web’, is a rather metaphorical term used to describe the complex network of mycorrhizal fungi that directly and indirectly connects the roots of different plants in natural systems, allowing them to exchange nutrients and water and, hypothetically, allowing trees to communicate and share resources, much like the ‘World Wide Web’ connects computers and facilitates information exchange. The concept gained popularity due to its poetic and evocative nature, as it evokes images of interconnected forests working together in harmony. It serves as both a term and a slogan, capturing the essence of the idea and making it more accessible and appealing to the general public. No doubt, trees helping each other through underground fungal networks is a fascinating, almost mystical idea that has captured the media and the movie industry’s imagination (e.g., Avatar). However, the scientific evidence behind the concept is insufficient, meaning that further research is required to understand the inner workings of these underground networks. But what happens when scientific research challenges widely held beliefs?

In a recent article, scientist Justine Karst and colleagues comprehensively reviewed existing literature, clearly finding insufficient data to support the hypothesis of the ‘wood wide web’. They also found no evidence that mature trees support saplings of the same species through these networks. But despite the lack of data shown by Karst and colleagues, the ‘wood wide web’ concept stubbornly continues to be pervasive among journalists, activists embracing the notion, thereby percolating into society. The reasons for this might be economic (click bait?), a quest for the spotlight or they might be genuine. But this begs the question: why and how should scientists respond when their work clashes with beliefs like the ‘wood wide web’, and is it worth their time to attempt to change those beliefs through public outreach?

The wood wide web's popularity can, to some extent, be compared to a form of faith connected to ‘the awe of nature’, which is deeply ingrained across diverse worldviews. Perhaps, indirectly, the term ‘wood wide web’ was coined stemming from such a natural emotional connection with nature. While there is nothing inherently wrong with holding beliefs, the issue arises when they conflict with scientific evidence. When this occurs, scientists face a challenging choice; that is, whether or not to engage in dialogue with those who hold different worldviews, seeking to understand their perspectives and find common ground where possible. While the time and effort to do this across platforms can be emotionally taxing, I think it’s worth it. By engaging with different perspectives and fostering an open dialogue, scientists can attempt to promote a deeper understanding and appreciation of principles and processes that drive scientific inquiry. This is very important in a society where scientific literacy remains limited despite the incredible progress of communication technology and access to the literature (see the last interview to Carl Sagan). At the same time, this dialogue may help create a more nuanced understanding of a complex issue. It may lead to new research questions and innovative approaches. Ultimately, the goal should be to create a more informed and open-minded public discourse, one that is willing to engage with scientific evidence. By doing so, we can continue to explore the complexity of our natural world based on different perspectives but, continuously, through the unavoidable lens of science.