Sadly I've still never seen any real papers on this being an actual theory.
I still want to believe I'm Ent livestock though.
A place for majestic STEMLORD peacocking, as well as memes about the realities of working in a lab.

Rules
This is a science community. We use the Dawkins definition of meme.
Sadly I've still never seen any real papers on this being an actual theory.
I still want to believe I'm Ent livestock though.
It’s because it doesn’t really make sense, plants came before animals. Plants do not need us to survive, but we need plants to survive.
Plants came before moths, but there are some desert plants whose life cycle is dependent on a species of moth pollinating them. How things were in the past influences but isn’t the sole arbiter of how things are in the present or future.
Which isn’t to say that it’s strictly true, I think it serves more purpose as a thinking exercise than a scientific theory. But I don’t think it’s impossible that it’s true, either.
“Some” being a key word there. Plants, as a whole, are not dependent on mammals for their existence.
Yeah, I don’t think the OP was saying every plant in existence is dependent on humans. But crops are, and we’re dependent on them. Co-domestication, I guess.
We don't need chickens to survive either. It doesn't mean we didn't domesticate them.
Plants need us animals to turn that oxygen they produce back into carbon dioxide for them.
Nope, fungi and other decomposers do that.
I'm decomposing with the best of them, my friend.
You're more of a decomposee than a decomposer.
I think it's the fungi manipulating all of us.
That top sentence has a bunch of flavor text. Livestock implies they're intentionally being kept as livestock. Plants aren't sentient. That's like saying evolution is intentional.