back
138 comments
So in a symbiotic bacteria/fungi/plant ecosystem, I can understand why CO2, H2O, and O2 might be able to remain in balance. But decomposition produces not only CO2, but CO, CH4, nitrate chemistry... I have trouble understanding why this cycle isn't at least a little bit leaky, since it seems like some of the trace gasses wouldn't automatically have all of the biological, solar, and marine sinks available in nature. I would be interested to know how the internal pressure of this experiment fluctuates due to phase transitions, especially chemical reactions which could potentially produce phase transitions that are not thermally or biologically reversible in the vicinity of STP.
It really depends on the bacterial flora present in the container. Bacteria are incredibly diverse, and just as one decomposer may be a methanogen [1], a different species of bacteria present may be a methanotroph [2]. So given the right bacterial "mixture," a self-sustaining CH4 cycle is not unreasonable.

Additionally, CO is a metabolite for some methanogenic bacteria, specifically in production of acetyl CoA [3].

My point is, as long as enough diversity has survived in the ecosystem, it is quite possible that not only CO2/H20/O2 are able to maintain a balance, but _most_ common molecules would be able to remain at nontoxic levels for the plant.

[1]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Methanogen [2]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Methanotroph [3]: http://textbookofbacteriology.net/metabolism_7.html

Project idea: start another one of these sealed gardens, but also include various sensors within the bottle/compartment (CO2, CH4, O2, temperature, humidity, pressure, whatnot; but also light levels.)

They can be pretty small and made to fit in nicely. The cheapest way to power them would probably be to use a simple coated electrical cable (through a layer of wax, or through something less leaky), I suppose.

Having them relay data in some fashion while having all the electronics not be exposed to erosion/etc might be a bit tricky.. ideally, just the actual sensor surfaces themselves would reside within; coated wires would all go through the seal, etc. Or, the devices could be (not very easily) shielded, and just the sensor surfaces be exposed..

Of course the most fun way to do this would be to have a whole self-sustaining arduino/whatever running inside, relaying data wirelessly, and having it be powered by small solar panels (would still need to take care of erosion/etc.)

Collect all data, plot it (including the light levels), and see if you can make anything out of it. :)

edit actually, I can now imagine a really large aquarium, with not much light passing into the very middle; for mostly entertainment purposes, it would be nice to also be able to place a cheapo camera there which could take (infrequent, like once every 5min or 20min) timelapses. Another camera with IR lens if needed, for neat composite images.. etc etc. Not sure of possible scientific value re: the latter, but hey!

I've had a terrarium in a sealed mason jar on my desk at work for 2 or 3 years now and have never once opened it. It seems like everything grows much much slower in there. There's some type of grass that has maybe grown 2 inches in that time and a leafy plant that hasn't grown appreciably either. The leaves don't really fall off, so decomposition is at a minimum. Perhaps the waste products of decomposition keep the bacteria and whatnot in balance.
It's almost certainly at least a bit leaky; glass carboys tend to let a surprising amount of gas get in around the bung, which never seals quite perfectly.

That said, even if it falls short of a 100% perfect hermetic seal it's still darn impressive.

Have you guys seen the SUPER SUPER LARGE sealed ecosystem. It's called earth. It's amazing how long it has lasted without any significant mass coming in or going out.
The reason it's difficult to understand is because this article is not true.
What I'm more amused by is the level of scepticism over an self contained eco-system. In order for any eco-system, either contained or not contained, there has to be much greater tolerances to extreme conditions that we generally acknowledge. In truth, outside of absolute extremes where organic life is simply impossible because or either denaturing or absolute destruction of organic material, life will exist. It's also entirely possible that this bottle now contains bacteria, fungi, or other organisms that are much more efficient at breaking down the organic material left by the dying plant mater.
The skepticism is entirely valid when the article in question is from the Daily Mail.
> now contains bacteria, fungi, or other organisms

Whichever types it contains now, surely it started out with :)

As someone who keeps both fresh water and salt water aquariums, it makes perfect sense that this is completely plausible. I think most aquarist are well aware that bacteria are the most powerful thing in keeping our aquarium ecosystems in balance.

By mass, that vast majority of living material in that bottle is almost certainly bacteria, some nitrifying, others denitrifying. All otherwise decomposing, consuming, and recycling the various chemistry within.

Think about the earth as a sealed globe within space, and you start to understand how good a job bacteria does at balancing the chemistry of life.

I've actually seen something similar to this at a local museum called an "Ecosphere", which includes tiny shrimp living inside. They've been known to last for over ten years.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ecosphere_(aquarium)

Carl Sagan's review of an Ecosphere: http://www.eco-sphere.com/sagan.html

Oh, hell, how did a Daily Mail link get to the front page? This is a british tabloid. You may as well be debating the veracity of a story about a wolf boy discovered in the wild.
Would you prefer an article from the times?

http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/science/biology/article3667780...

Think of it as encouraging better stories from them.
A clear balloon containing an ecosystem would heat up due to the greenhouse effect. If it's sufficiently large and allowed to slightly expand it could float freely in the air. Imagine closed gardens flying freely around the world.
I don't think you could get them to be consistently warm on Earth. But the atmosphere on Venus is so thick you could have a bunch of these floating above the clouds.
Whether it would float would depend on the equilibrium that the ecosystem gets in. For example, carbon dioxide is heavier than air, so if the ecosystem has lots of it, a balloon would have to expand quite a bit to compensate for that before it floats. And of course, any balloon must overcome its own weight before getting airborne.
I used to love making those things with pickle jars:

https://www.google.com/search?q=pickle+jar+terrarium&es_sm=1...

I don't suppose my parents have any of them left though... they tended to get kind of crusty with something growing on the glass and blotting out the light.

Compare the EcoSphere: http://www.eco-sphere.com

I had one; amusing, though seemed finicky about lighting.

Ah, I see they include a magnet to clean the inside of the glass. Good idea!
> EcoSpheres have an average life expectancy of two years.

Very interesting, I had thought they were sustainable for much longer than that. I suppose even the most tightly controlled starting conditions will lead to unpredictable results when you have organisms reproducing.

I can't figure out what would be providing more CO2. The container is near full of greenery; where does it get air exchange? Maybe the cork leaks just enough is all I can figure.
Plants suck in CO2 when they are storing energy, but when they spend their energy they make CO2 just like us. Plants have a respiration process just like animals. They just tend to remove more CO2 than they put out (until they get burned/turn into coal, oil, etc)
Bacteria in the soil. One of the reasons Biosphere 2 fell apart.
From what I understand the container was sealed 11 years after the initial planting. I guess all the carbon entered from the atmosphere before the final watering in 1972. The total biomass must have remained roughly constant since.
From a related article: "But the eco-system also uses cellular respiration to break down decaying material shed by the plant. In this part of the process, bacteria inside the soil of the bottle garden absorbs the plant's waste oxygen and releasing carbon dioxide which the growing plant can reuse."
My coworker had a smaller version of this in his cube. His son had made it in middle school and it had been going for 10+ years. I think his was sealed with wax or something.

It's an easy experiment to reproduce and works great if you have enough time to wait around.

Absolutely fascinating. The greatest Bio- / Hardware hack I've seen yet. Congrats to the gardener.

(Just assuming it's true)

Most aquarium plants grow excellent in this way, better than when they are submerged in an aquarium. Aquarium plants have two distinct forms, submerged or emerged, and the foilage can look completely different. The emerged form does better, since it doesn't need to compete with algae and co2 is more available. To grow your own plants, fill a pickle jar with damp miracle grow organic potting soil, and plant what ever aquarium plants you can get your hand on, seal the jar, than enjoy.
Assume the garden is somehow provably what it is claimed to be. Further assume that it is not cleaned manually because the usual culprits for blackening the inside, by pure chance, happened to be absent or long dead.

I am curious how one might go about reproducing this exact ecosystem in other bottles by cloning the original, without adding contaminants. Under these assumptions selling clones could become a commercial proposition.

This is motivation to try to repeat the experiment, in my opinion .. would be a great Instructable, with the last step: wait 50 years or so .. ;)
StackExchange Skeptics addressed this last year:

Can a plant survive bottled in its own ecosystem for 50 years?

http://skeptics.stackexchange.com/questions/15838/can-a-plan...

So it has had water and presumably some atmosphere was exchanged when it was watered in 1972, 40 years ago. The title is somewhat misleading but 40 years is still a long time.

The stopper doesn't look like its particularly well fastened and could potentially pop up and allow leaks. Impressive but without closer inspection it looks like a slightly flawed execution to me. Maybe I'm just being pedantic. A picture of the starting point would be nice.

I've just been reading Verner Vinge's A Deepness in the Sky where the space-dwellers consider these the highest art form.
Hah! I can't read this because ... provisional military junta in Thailand not happy with Daily Mail?

Some kind of breakdown here: http://www.andrew-drummond.com/2014/05/daily-mail-and-mail-o...

"A good software project is never answered. It is not a bolt to be tightened into place but a tendril seed to be planted and to bear more seed toward the hope of enfoliating among the world wide landscapes."

                -- John C Hardy
What if we build a huge sealed bottle garden and send to Mars, can humans live in it!
I was wondering how easy/difficult this phenomenon is to study in depth. If I wanted to examine any organisms in the jar, I would have trouble doing it while simultaneously maintaining the ecosystem's independence.
> The only external input needed to keep the plant going is light, since this provides it with the energy it needs to create its own food and continue to grow.

Future of clean energy ?

How long will it last? Will the plant eventually get a mutation and die?
The headline should read: "53-year-old Sealed Bottle Garden..."

I see this more and more even in edited publications. It's especially irksome here since the article contains almost no actual writing.

Maybe I'm being nit-picky, but it's not "entirely self-sufficient," as it still needs light from an external source.
doesn't the plan die? or it's producing seeds itself?
Reminds me of the movie: "the journey to the center of the earth"
Hmm can we open the bottle and test if the water is indeed from 1972?

I mean how can we actually test that this guy isn't just making things up, and wasn't opening the bottle to water the ecosystem?

And plant-rights activists aren't all over this? No thank you, my plants like to be cage-free.
Perhaps not as exiting, but I have aquarium which requires maintenance only 4x a year. Feeder, filters, lights, water exchange etc operate automatically.
Easiest explanation: they're fibbing. Somebody opens the bottle regularly. There's no reason to take every extraordinary claim posted on the internet at face value. Next we'll see bigfoot photos?