Talk:Bristlecone pine

Plants Mid‑importance

	Plants portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Plants, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of plants and botany on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PlantsWikipedia:WikiProject PlantsTemplate:WikiProject Plantsplant articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

California Low‑importance

	California portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject California, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of California on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CaliforniaWikipedia:WikiProject CaliforniaTemplate:WikiProject CaliforniaCalifornia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Nevada (inactive)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Nevada, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.NevadaWikipedia:WikiProject NevadaTemplate:WikiProject NevadaNevada articles

This article uses text donated by Wildscreen from their ARKive project (see below). For further information, please see Wikipedia:GLAM/ARKive.

The content of this article has been derived in whole or part from Wildscreen ARKive texts. Permission has been received from the copyright holder to release this material under both the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported license and the GNU Free Documentation License. You may use either or both licenses. Evidence of this has been confirmed and stored by VRT volunteers, under ticket number 2011090810014488.
This template is used by approved volunteers dealing with the Wikimedia volunteer response team system (VRTS) after receipt of a clear statement of permission at permissions-enwikimedia.org. Do not use this template to claim permission.

Opening heading

Moved to talk page:
"One researcher claims to have found an older tree in the vicinity, but refuses to reveal the location to anyone, ostensibly for the tree's protection."
No evidence for the existence of this tree has been published in any scientific literature: data concerning its age etc could easily be published without revealing its location. I've come across this claim several other places, and strongly suspect it to be an urban legend - MPF 11:27, 28 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

There are a few mistakes here I believe, relative to the cutting of Prometheus. The name Prometheus is reported to have been applied to the tree several years before it was cut, and other old trees in the grove were also named. Currey probably did have an idea of the trees age--he is quoted in one of the articles listed below as knowing it was probably quite old. Note also the discussion regarding "oldest living thing" in one of the articles.

Please see: http://www.sonic.net/bristlecone/Martyr.html and http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/1998/08/23/SC72173.DTL

Jeeb 05:07, 21 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

According to Currey, in one of the web articles referenced at article end, the pith of the tree did not exist below the 100" point (about 8.3 ft or 2.5m) of the trunk. This is the distance from where the first full section was taken, to the germination point, not to the ground level. Ground level was elevated during the 5000 years the tree grew. Jeeb 22:22, 11 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I think the Prometheus tree deserves it's own article. Any objections? Jeeb 22:29, 11 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed; 'Methuselah' too - MPF 23:55, 11 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Oldest living single organisms

I put the word "single" back in the first paragraph of the Oldest living organisms section to match the wording of the first paragraph in the article Rsduhamel 19:20, 22 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I cleaned up a few instances of vandalism. I'm never having kids... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.235.46.169 (talk) 01:36, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I reverted a bit more. Walter Siegmund (talk) 02:11, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No longer recognized as oldest

There's an article linked on today's Drudge Report stating that a nearly 10,000 year old spruce tree has been identified--time to update this article. But I think we should nail down the actual species of this spruce before adding the mention. Matt Gies (talk) 19:39, 17 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There is a distinction to be made here between the Spruce in question (see [1]) where the longevity is the result of propagation through cloning and the Bristlecone pine where it is not. Jooler (talk) 02:28, 22 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Edited to improve sort order in Category Pinus

I edited this to change the sort order on the page for the Category Pinus. It had been set to alphabetize under Pine. That might make sense for categories where there are a lot of trees and a few of them are pines; then all the pines group together. But on the page where everything is a pine, it made more sense to alphabetize under Bristlecone. 71.126.140.136 (talk) 02:10, 13 April 2010 (UTC)Stephen Kosciesza[reply]

Good work. {{DEFAULTSORT}} may be useful here; please see WP:SORTKEY for more. BTW, you may wish to create an WP:ACCOUNT. Walter Siegmund (talk) 03:44, 13 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Pine cone pic

I have a decent, not amazing, pic of a pine cone (with bristles) and the bottle-brush leave structures. Should I place it on this article? If so , where? Seems pretty crowded. QFL 24-7 ^{bla ¤ cntrb ¤ kids ¤ pics ¤ vids} 03:21, 13 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Bristlecone pine. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140627000000/http://www.iucnredlist.org to http://www.iucnredlist.org

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:37, 8 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Taxonbar not showing up

It seems like the taxonbar isn't working properly for this page. Is someone more experienced able to fix that? I added the wikispecies tag but I was under the impression that having the whole taxonbar is preferable. Procyonidae (talk) 17:49, 22 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]