Evolution and Diversity

Activate that Junk DNA!!!!

2008-06-09T22:05:00.000-07:00

Genes and pseudogenes buried in our "Junk DNA" have a function!.....click HERE to know more!

via Sandwalk

Image source: Flickr CC

Languages and genomes

2008-06-03T11:21:00.000-07:00

While looking through Technorati I stumbled on this blog post..."Litterature - Can languages be understood by treating them like genomes?". That caught my attention because a few years ago, while teaching population genetics at Carleton University in Ottawa I told my students about this tribe on Vancouver Island: The Nuu-Chah-Nulth. I have great respect for the first nations and I wanted my students to learn from an anthropological point of view, not just through a stretch of nucleotides. While doing my research for my course I found a few articles including this one: Gene flow across linguistic boundaries in native North American populations.

Using statistical methods and mtDNA analysis, the authors found that language can in fact be replaced (or modified) faster than mutations can occur because language can be transmitted in a vertical fashion (just like DNA) as well as horizontally between unrelated people. Because first nations have been subjected to tremendous pressures through the centuries it is plausible to think that at times DNA might have evolved at different speeds when compared to language evolution depending on the tribe.

A few highlights:

The Navajo and Apache, who reside in the Southwest, have high nucleotide diversities, in the range of nucleotide diversities in populations classified as Amerind speaking.
Several sites were polymorphic only in populations classified as Amerind-speaking, but none occurred in all populations attributed to Amerind.
With respect to Greenberg’s three language families, the average nucleotide diversity within populations is low in Eskimo-Aleut populations and high in Amerind populations. However, nucleotide diversity varies considerably among the populations classified as Na-Dene-speaking.
The Alaskan Athabascan and Haida populations, who reside in the North, have low
nucleotide diversities, in the range of nucleotide diversities in the Eskimo-Aleut-speaking populations.

When reading through the blog, I slowly realize that the author is a believer of intelligent design** and that, like all ID proponents, he decides to include some no-so-objective-god-related-stuff in his blog. Here's what he states while trying to explain why languages can not be understood the same way a DNA sequence can:

"The problem is that languages are fully teleological, whereas the tools of molecular phylogeny do not acknowledge teleology in genomes."

In other words...God created the languages...so do not even try to study them with objective techniques!

**Silly me...the title of the Blog site is: Literature - A discussion of ID-relating reading

Also published on my other site: http://biobsessions.blogspot.com/

Let's get serious!

2008-05-27T15:50:00.001-07:00

Human 2.0 Olympics

2008-05-23T22:35:00.000-07:00

Oscar Pistorius is a double-amputee South African athlete. I admire anyone that rises above life's challenges. I admire anyone that becomes a model for others. I admire anyone that decides they can do anything they want to. I really do! Oscar Pistorius is one of these humans that decides an obstacle is just that...an obstacle! I admire that! So much, you have no idea.

Despite this admiration I could only agree with The International Association of Athletics Federations (IAAF) decision to not allow him to compete in the Olympics. I really think his prosthetics give him an unfair advantage over the other athletes. Although I agree with that decision, I find it quite ironic that he has an "unfair" advantage....interesting when you think many of these athletes are using performance-enhancing drugs....so much for fairness!

This decision was overturned by the The Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS). I think this is a mistake and lack of courage from the CAS. How far will that go? The door is now open to Human 2.0 Olympics where genetically-modified cyborgs will compete. The Olympics will now become an ideal that is even farther than it ever was before for kids.

To get a spot on the start line in Beijing, Pistorius has to qualify but many doubt he will make it, apparently he is not in the shape he should be for that ultimate racing exerience. This does not matter wheter he makes it or not....the damage is done!

Also published on my other blog: Biological Obsessions

Blurred Lines

2007-12-15T23:20:00.001-08:00

A British Columbian monument is on the brink of extinction and it appears humans may be the catalyst for the acceleration of the evolutionary process yet again. According to researches from the University of Alberta, Dalhousie University and the Salmon Coast Field Station in Echo Bay, BC, infestations of the parasitic sea lice are contaminating salmon fish farms and proving fatal to wild stocks. It’s predicted wild pink salmon will be reduced to 99% of their present population in just four salmon generations or approx 8 years! The crustaceans attach themselves to the exterior of the salmon feeding on tissues, blood, and muscle; eventually resulting in death. Not surprisingly, juvenile populations are at most risk.

This bleak picture is a staggering realization of humans ever growing foot print. The bottle neck effect that these salmon farms could create will have devastating effects on the genetic diversity of local populations. And the most shocking angle of this study is it’s noted as an avoidable catastrophe.
Implementing legislation that will move farms from migration routes and replacing net pens with closed containment compounds will clean up the surrounding aquatic environment and ensure any parasitic threats are isolated from wild stocks. This, of course, comes at a price and owners are not keen on watching profits diminish and operating costs increase. It appears the moral line between profit, government and the environment continues to blur.

Reference: http://www.cbc.ca/technology/story/2007/12/13/tech-salmonfarm-lice.html

2007-12-15T23:02:00.001-08:00

The need for medical professionals to study evolution

Evolution has a significant rule in human lives which makes it an important fact for medical professionals to understand evolution. The entire basis of evolution started “millions of years a go when life began spontaneously in a pond, and became more complex and it came to the point of the survival of the fittest”. Those who were less fit, injured or unable to adapt did not accompany evolution. Humans are the result of this process. Humans too adapt to certain environment and these days medical professionals are not really taught evolutionary explanations for “why our bodies are vulnerable to certain kinds of failures.” Existence of wisdom teeth, having genes that cause bipolar disease, and not knowing why appendix is still there?

There are lots of reasons where there is a need for understanding evolution in terms of medical field. Cancer is a good example of natural selection among cells in human body. Antibiotic resistance in today’s world also has brought up a lot of issues and concerns in medicine and showing evolution of microorganisms. Understanding spread of antibiotic resistance and its origin is another question of evolution. The more medical doctors and personals are aware of this issue there is a better chance to stop the abuse of antibiotics.

There are many reasons why it is hard to convince medical practitioners to embrace evolution in the nature of science. “Evolutionary hypotheses about human physiology are notoriously hard to investigate, given humans’ long generation times” thus giving a hard time to medial professionals.

I believe that every body especially doctors need to understand evolution to be able to help humans to stop antibiotic abuse, know the evolution process of other animals and how close we are related to other animals to find cures for diseases, evolution of our immune system is part of population genetics and natural selection.

This is a very broad topic with lots of other reasons that all needs to be reviewed and learned by our fellow medical precisionist for the hope of better care, cure and understanding human evolution.

http://www-personal.umich.edu/~nesse/EMN/editorial.pdf

http://www.pandasthumb.org/archives/2007/01/why_do_so_many.html

http://www.evolutionandmedicine.org/

Frogs and Amphibians getting closer to extinction

2007-12-15T22:30:00.002-08:00

Scientists at the Zoological Society of San Diego have taken special note of the serious decline in the population of frogs and other amphibians in the last 30 or so years. Amphibians are often studied by scientists in order to gage environmental wellness because they are so sensitive to environmental changes. Amphibians can exist on both land and in the water and therefore they experience changes in both of these environments. However, scientists are becoming increasingly concerned because over 120 species of amphibians have now become extinct. We can guess at the main reasons for this decline in amphibian population. Scientists believe that changes in climate, pollution and diminishing habitats are the main threats to these creatures. The scientists at San Diego also point out that chytrid infections, caused by fungus can have a fatal affect on frogs. Frogs need the ability to respire through their skin and this disease affects this ability. One way to help the frog and amphibian populations is to create conservation programs for various species. This is being done by many concerned groups including the scientists at the San Diego Zoo. San Diego provided information about all of these topics in an article published by the Zoological Society of San Diego on their website. This article is entitled "A World without Frogs?". I personally believe that if we don't do everything we can to preserve the amphibian population we will be loosing a very valuable scientific resource. Not to mention, the devastating effects this could have on the "circle of life" as a whole. As previously stated, frogs provide us with very valuable information when it comes to the current health of the environment. Maybe if we can continue to study frogs and other creatures like them we can gain a better understanding of how to help the entire planet, not just one area, group, or species.

Sources: http://www.sandiegozoo.org/help_wildlife/story_frogs.html

Image source: http://www.flickr.com/search/?q=frogs

Komodo Dragon Spit-It's Aliiiiive!!!

2007-12-15T22:04:00.000-08:00

Komodo island monitors are famous for being the world's largest lizard, they can reach three meters in length. This may seem like reason enough not to mess with them, but you shouldn't be afraid of the dragons, just their thousands of tiny little friends...

Komodo dragons are scavengers and carnivores. They'll eat most recently dead animals, and will hunt goats, wild boars, water buffalo and even horses and eat them. But their hunting technique is quite unusual, they will stalk their large prey, then ambush it, not to kill it, but to bite it. The lizard then simply follows the unfortunate prey around until it dies, either from blood loss or infection. But what if the animal heals? Well, this just doesn't happen.

Komodo dragon saliva contains over 50 different kinds of bacteria, once an animal is bitten it is almost guaranteed to develop a bad bacterial infection, a septic wound that will become so toxic it will end their life.

A study of the saliva of both captive and wild komodo dragons was published in the Journal of Wildlife Diseases in 2002. In part of the study komodo dragon saliva was injected into mice. One strain of bacteria was present in the blood of mice who died following injection, Pasturella multicoda. The study stated that many strains of bacteria were isolated in the saliva, "54 of which were known pathogens" and "at least one species of which was highly lethal in mice".

These findings certainly explain the hunting style of the komodo dragon, but why isn't the deadly bacteria in their saliva a problem for these animals? Wouldn't a mere scratch to the gum be enough to introduce infection and kill them? The really interesting finding of the study was that the plasma of komodo dragons contains an anti-Pasturella enzyme, so if the bacteria were to enter the bloodstream, it would be killed.

This fact shows that the giant lizards have evolved with their little friends, so that they can coexist without any danger of infection. A sinister but fascinating kind of symbiosis!

sources:

Aerobic Salivary Bacteria in Wild and Captive Komodo Dragons

http://www.jwildlifedis.org/cgi/reprint/38/3/545.pdf

Animal Diversity Web

http://animaldiversity.ummz.umich.edu/site/accounts/information/Varanus_komodoensis.html

*This too was actually a post by Liz, sorry again*

Sleepy?

2007-12-15T21:55:00.000-08:00

If you catch yourself nodding off in classes, on the bus, or anywhere else, you can probably think of a reason for your condition. Perhaps you stayed up late studying for an important test, or to watch a movie with your roommate, or spent the night drinking. But do you really know why your body is telling you to sleep? What is the true purpose of that irresistible urge to close your eyes and drift away? Why do we and almost all animals need to sleep?

The truth is, scientists still don't have a clear answer to this question. They know that sleep plays an important role in memory and that cells function better in a rested person than in an exhausted one, but scientists say that so far as they can tell, animals could have evolved mechanisms to accomplish these things in a waking state, so why sleep?

I became interested in this topic after listening to a one of WNYC's Radiolab podcasts, called simply Sleep. The podcast discussed different scientific ideas about why we sleep and what happens when we do and included some really interesting information on research currently being done to try to solve this puzzle. One researcher they spoke to, Stephen Lima, is looking at sleep from an evolutionary standpoint to try to understand why animals evolved the need to sleep. It may seem obvious that animals would evolve to sleep, rest must be good right? Well, not really. Sleep makes an animal incredibly vulnerable, it could be eaten while resting, its offspring could be threatened, anything could happen. There is something about sleep that almost all animals need, and we still don't understand what that is. According to Dr. Lima, "The fact that sleep is so dangerous is the best evidence that it is necessary, because if it weren't necessary, we wouldn't be doing it.".

The evolutionary approach to sleep research is a new one, Dr. Lima states that, "One of the reasons we don't understand sleep is that we haven't taken this evolutionary perspective on it". The idea is that if we can understand why sleep evolved, we can understand why it is necessary and what it really does. He and his team of researchers have been watching animals like iguanas, ducks and, yes, fruit flies sleep. An article published in the New York Times also focuses on Dr. Lima's sleep research, as well as other researchers'. One discovery they have made that is particularly interesting involves the sleeping habits of ducks. When ducks sleep in a row, on a log or wherever, the ducks on the ends of the line will sleep with one eye, the one facing away from the other ducks, open. Every so often they will stand up, turn around and sleep with the other eye open. Dr. Lima discovered that the reason for this is that the ducks on the ends are only allowing half of their brain, the half controlling the closed eye, to sleep at a time. The team is now doing research on iguanas to see if they share this strange behavior. If they do, it will tell scientists that this half-brained sleep probably evolved early in animal evolution, and that early mammals may have been able to do it also, but then lost this ability later in their evolution.

Another model for sleep research is the fruit fly. A study published in the journal Science in 2006 focused on the sleeping habits of Drosophila (click here for abstract). It found that the flies needed more sleep after social interaction and couldn't remember tasks taught to them if they were deprived of sleep for a certain period of time after they learned them.

This article from the Public Library of Science details a study done in 2006 on zebrafish sleep that found "both striking similarities to mammalian sleep and its regulation and intriguing differences.

This new evolutionary approach to understanding human behavior shows that there's more to phylogeny and systematics than endless debate over the seemingly trivial classification of obscure creatures most people have never heard of. Hopefully through more research scientists like Dr. Lima will be able to solve more intriguing mysteries about our past, and help us to understand what has made us what we are.

Sources:

http://www.wnyc.org/shows/radiolab/episodes/2007/05/25

(podcast)

Jones R (2007) Let Sleeping Zebrafish Lie: A New Model for Sleep Studies. PLoS Biol 5(10): e281doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.0050281

Waking Experience Affects Sleep Need in Drosophila

Indrani Ganguly-Fitzgerald, Jeff Donlea, Paul J. Shaw http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/abstract/313/5794/1775?maxtoshow=&HITS=10&hits=10&RESULTFORMAT=&andorexacttitleabs=and&fulltext=drosophila+sleep&andorexactfulltext=and&searchid=1&FIRSTINDEX=0&resourcetype=HWCIT

Zimmer, Carl (2005) Down For the Count. New York Times

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/11/08/science/08slee.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1

*This blog says it's by Chicken but it's actually by Liz, who had to sign in as Chicken because she couldn't post as herself... sorry*

The Belgian Blue

2007-12-15T21:44:00.000-08:00

In the fitness and selection topic of our course this semester we touched lightly on the Belgian blue and it’s lethal mutation of the gene that codes for myostatin (a protein that counteracts muscle growth). To sum it up this cow has no myostatin, which results in it building mass amounts of muscle and very little fat because the mutation also affects fat deposition.

If you’ve ever lived in Belgium it’s quite apparent that they love their cows. The meat is sold in the butcher section of the supermarkets, never laid out on display like ours, and the posters “Big, Blue, Belgian” are pretty much everywhere. I was actually quite shocked not to be able to find one on the Internet.

They just remind shoppers how good for you the meat is:

i.e. No hormones

Less fat

Better taste (although I disagree with this because when it comes to a good steak it’s all about the marbling which the Belgian Blue has 17% less of than our normal heifers)

Blues also yield 5- 7% more sellable meat than our normal cows at 80% and their carcass is bigger. For some reason they also produce a higher yield of milk. Anyhow, the list goes on and on for the many reasons why these cows are “better.”

Why are they not common here?

Ignoring most of the English sites on the Internet the truth is that roughly around 80% of these cows cannot give birth to their calves depending on their age. The calves are just too big for their mother’s birth canals. Also the older the mother; the more muscle mass she’s put on, thus she will need caesareans every time she has a calf after being a possible first time successful at a natural birth mom, if she had been that lucky.

In September 2001 I spent a year In Belgium on a Rotary youth exchange. I was lucky enough to have spent three months with a veterinarian. I had no idea at the time why he needed two pagers and a cell phone and thought he took his work far too seriously. He hardly ever made it through a full dinner without leaving unexpectedly and woke up multiple times throughout the nights, sometimes more than once.

About eight months into it I finally clued in and happened to be attending a function where he was when of course; he got a call. It took some begging and I had to chug the rest of the bottle of wine for his sheer amusement but he finally let me go with him. (Note: Belgian’s can drink more than you, despite what you may think. They still like to watch us suffer/ enjoy as much as they have)

Belgium, which is a tad smaller than Vancouver Island is set up a little differently than Canada. There are small towns everywhere, two big cities and the rest is all farmland. The Blues are EVERYWHERE; in the smaller towns they even sometimes get loose and just wander around the streets until found.

After a 10-minute drive at 160km/hr we walked directly into a farmers barn to find our cow. (They HAVE to be at a certain stage in labor before a caesarean can be performed safely.) Since he had been there earlier that morning to check the cow he went straight to work. The cow wasn’t tied down nor did it even seem to care. He gave about 10 needles straight down its left side by its hind leg and waited 10min. He tested to see if she was numb by poking her with his scalpel and seeing that she was, sliced her open. She didn’t bleed as much as I thought she would. Next he opened the sac the baby was in and pulled it out. After taking the crap off its face so it could breathe he sewed up mommy. What’s scary was the calf was almost as big as me. The mom just ate hay while I tried not to throw up; the whole procedure took about 20min. We were back at the function in no time and hardly missed anything, except more drinking.

This vet who shall remain nameless performs roughly one caesarean a day on average but more like none some days and up to four on others. He charges 50- 150 euros depending on the relationship with the farmers. And those calves are worth 500- 1000 euros each, so it’s worth it for the farmers.

Warning: the blood is just the amniotic fluid.

Here is a video of a Blue caesarean:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JPY9sH_MU5w

When I watched it live it didn’t need two people: note the time. Also take into account the retarded people whose comments imply that this is cruelty. Cruelty is letter the mothers body kill the baby when she can’t give birth; then the dead baby killing the mother.

The Dairy site:

http://www.thedairysite.com/breeds/beef/8/belgian-blue/overview

Info. On the Blue:

http://www.kuleuven.be/cwte/viewpic.php?LAN=E&TABLE=DOCS&ID=17

It's the end of the world as we know it...

2007-12-15T21:40:00.000-08:00

Throughout the history of the earth the global climate has been punctuated with alternating periods of greenhouse warming and cooler "icehouse" phases. Researchers from the universities of York and Leeds have recently concluded that extinction rates are much higher during greenhouse phases of global climate. By comparing 350 million years worth of data from the fossil record on estimated temperatures and the levels of diversity in marine and terrestrial life, researchers have predicted that if global temperatures continue to rise we may be approaching a climate associated with past mass extinctions. Pollution and greenhouse gases are accelerating the heating process and if heating trends continue we could be heading to a 50% extinction of all plant and animal species on the earth. This is the first time global temperature trends have been compared to extinction rates for the entire fossil record, and the prognosis is not look so good. Of the five major mass-extinctions that have occurred in 350 million year span of the fossil record, four have occurred during greenhouse phases.

Whether or not mass exstinction is just scientific paranoia remains to be seen, however many species of plants and animals are already finding it increasingly hard to adapt to their changing habitats. The Polar Regions and the flora and fauna that inhabit them are especially in danger. If a mass extinction is unavoidable, then we are heading towards a reset of Earth’s animal hierarchy, and like mammals after the dinosaurs, a new species may inherit the earth. It would be interesting to hypothesise who the new dominant species might be; my vote is for the genetically modified mice.

Sources
http://www.york.ac.uk/admin/presspr/pressreleases/massextinctions.htm
http://www.livescience.com/strangenews/070808_GM_mass_extinctions.html

Can't Fight the Moonlight

2007-12-15T21:35:00.001-08:00

Studies indicate the sunlight that is reflected off the moon’s surface may indeed be romantic! Following a full moon, mass spawning of corals in the barrier reef occurs due to the cryptochromes, or photoreceptors of plants that detect the blue light. This is what tells the coral that it is the right hour of the right few nights to spawn during the spring.

Cryptochromes are believed to be the predecessors of eyes and exist not only in coral, but also insects, humans, and other mammals. Linked with a system which repairs damage done by ultraviolet radiation, cryptochromes may have evolved in eyeless beings that were incompatible with sunlight.

Brain monitoring of night-migrating birds demonstrate increased usage of cryptochrome-expressing neurons as well as forebrain region, suggesting that cryptochrome receptors may also have a role in birds’ directions, providing night-migratory birds with a magnetic compass of sorts, dependant on blue light.

If cryptochromes are vital to a coral’s spawning and in the migration of birds, what are the effects of moonlight on our cryptochromes? Does a full moon really make us wild? If they are still in our DNA, do we still have a use for them?

There is no doubt that cryptochromes do have a function in the circadian rhythms of organisms, which regulate metabolism, physiology, and behavior. However, up to this point, studies on how moonlight or a full moon may affect human behavior are inconclusive.

From what I have heard from working professionals who deal with people- a nurse and a policeman, I suspect that it’s not just a superstition that a full moon has an effect on people. They didn’t say that people were more violent or aggressive (a theory is that more people will be assaulted during a full moon due to increased aggression), however they both agree that people do seem to get a little crazier and their late shifts get a little busier than normal. I think that the area of cryptochromes needs to be explored further; it’s really fascinating that the photoreceptors may have so many different functions.

http://www.scienceagogo.com/news/20070922011725data_trunc_sys.shtml
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cryptochrome#_note-2
http://www.flickr.com
http://www.plosone.org/article/fetchArticle.action?articleURI=info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0000937

A Bird's Eye View

2007-12-15T21:34:00.000-08:00

Here is my brat Parrot: Piper. About six years ago after my childhood Budgie had died and I had returned home from traveling I decided I needed another bird. I had worked a fair bit and saved some money so that I would be able to get pretty much any parrot I wanted, however, having worked in a bird store (for a short time when I was in middle school) I chose wisely:

African Gray’s and Amazon’s are too noisy; Lorri’s need special food; Cockatoo’s are destructive. It’s quite a tough decision if you’ve been around the different breeds.

Choosing a bird is like choosing a dog that is going to live for 40-80 years. I eventually narrowed it down to two breeds, which would fit my lifestyle: the eclectus and the pionus.

Piper is a white- capped pionus. I chose him because of the breeds versatility. They don’t normally travel in flocks, they don’t eat a lot of fruit (some birds need a lot of fruit to stay healthy), they don’t chirp like those annoying cockatiels, and they tend to mate for life. Translation: he can be left home alone while I work, he won’t scream to communicate with the outside birds, and he will bond nicely with people.

One thing I wasn’t expecting was the amount of people who didn’t think he was a parrot because he didn’t have pretty colours. He’s green and blue with a peach bum. The peach colour is on his underside though and isn’t visible if he isn’t flying above you.

I found it weird that my parrot was boring so I researched him. It turns out that birds can see better than us humans. For starters, they can see ultraviolet light, whereas our eyes are sensitive to it and we loose our colour perception (when white glows and everything becomes purple).

Birds also have four dimensions of colour, which means everything that we see, they see in more vibrant hues. So a boring black crow to a bird is actually quite colourful and attractive.

Birds also use florescent colours to attract each other. That’s why some species have weird reflective markings: like a budgies cheek, a crows feather tips, or a ringneck’s, ring of colour around his neck. Take a good look at Piper again at the top of the page. Those multicolour feathers on the back of his head going down his neck are his reflective markings. They extend down his back and make him a pretty flamboyant bird when viewed by other birds, so he’s only a boring green/ blue hue to us.

Birds have many other advantages with their eyes and head. It is the most important part of their features for survival. The positioning of their eyes gives them a broader view than humans and they can also rotate their neck at least 180 degrees, sometimes more depending on the species. This allows them to see food or enemies and navigate when flying.

Ever wonder why pet birds rarely return home?

The use of giant eyes have to be trained, it’s like returning vision to someone who was never able to see and then wondering why they can’t identify anything without touching it. Birds need to learn how to navigate or they won’t know how. If a pet bird gets loose, unless he was taught how to find home again, he might not come back. You just have to hope he can’t fly far enough to get completely lost. This is why it’s good to let birds have a little bit of flight inside the house every now and again before you clip their wings (they learn to navigate how to land, and when they start getting obnoxious you clip them; some don’t need to be kept clipped it depends on behavior).

It’s sad that some birds are kept in cages. If they are looked after properly and trained they can learn to do everything a dog can do (fetch, rollover, speak). It takes time and patience but with a 40-80 year lifespan it just might be worth it.

On the angle of birds eyes:

http://birding.about.com/od/birdanatomy/a/birdsight.htm

On the colours that birds can see:

http://www.bio.bris.ac.uk/research/vision/4d.htm

Transformers of the Sea

2007-12-15T20:45:00.000-08:00

We all know about how animals can camouflage themselves to hide themselves from predator and/or prey, but who has heard of an animal that will actually imitate other animals in their environment? Discovered in 1998, the Indonesian Mimic Octopus, Thaumoctopus mimicus has been found to impersonate several ocean dwellers. Preys to deep water carnivores, the Mimic Octopuses often take shape of more poisonous animals to deter these hunters; while on the opposite end of things, change shape to attract the prey that might normally be too quick for the octopi to catch. Like all octopi, the mimic octopus is very flexible and can contort itself well- well enough, in fact, to fool a crab into thinking it could be a possible mating partner. Shapes that the octopus has said to have been caught in include that of the sea snake, lionfish, flatfish, brittle star, giant crab, sea shell, stingray, jellyfish, sea anemone, and mantis shrimp.

These Octopi are found in the murky waters around the Indo-west Pacific Ocean and can grow up to two feet in length. They feed in many different ways. Firstly, it can catch prey with its arms and kill it with its beak. Second, it can suck up the insides of their prey after paralyzing them with a poison; third, it may dig into the holes of prey, taking up the food with its arms; and lastly, it can swirl small prey into its suckers, entrapping them. They are brown and white in color, but do have the ability to change in both color and texture. They have a large brain and great eyesight, but they are deaf.

The number of sea creatures that the octopus copycats is disputed somewhat as well as how they have come about this ability. Some think that over the years, only the good impersonator octopi have survived, leaving us the Mimic species; while other theories suggest that the mimicry is misinterpreted and is just part of their sexual selection.

After watching videos and seeing pictures, I can’t imagine how the imitations could not be done purposefully. I think the intelligence in the octopus is amazing. Imagine how much concentration it takes to dance and to be aware of where you are and how you are moving. This is what the mimic octopus can and must do (while swimming), and do a good enough job to fool predator and prey.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=knoAHiM7z_s

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2001/09/0920_octopusmimic_2.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mimic_Octopus

http://www.flickr.com/

http://www.succeedsocially.com/coolanimals

Maggots Anyone?

2007-12-15T19:51:00.000-08:00

Volunteering in a poor government hospital in Africa provides an individual the opportunity to see many things that they haven't been exposed to before. I had always heard of hospitals using leeches and maggots in modern medicine, but I had never had the chance to actually witness it. One of the most common problems seen in African hospitals are the complications due to uncontrolled diabetes. Many individuals in Africa can not afford the cost of buying insulin to control their disease and so their blood sugars skyrocket and remain uncontrolled. Uncontrolled diabetes can have serious consequences. Over time, high blood glucose levels damage the nerves and blood vessels which can lead to a loss of feeling or sensation in the extremities; this is called neuropathy (1; 2). Diabetics suffering from neuropathy can develop minor cuts, scrapes, blisters, or pressure sores that they may not be aware of due to the insensitivity. If these minor injuries are left untreated, complications may result and lead to ulceration and possibly even amputation (3). Damage to the extremities, the feet, in particular, are a huge risk (2). Minor injuries, such as wearing a shoe too tight can create a small blister that can cause major damage. Since diabetes decreases the blood flow through blood vessels, the body's ability to heal is severely decreased which increases risk of infection. In diabetics, infections spread quickly (2).

You can imagine the risk associated with poor Africans who have uncontrolled diabetes. The environment they live in does not provide them with safe and sanitary places; and some of them are lucky to even have shoes. One particular patient we saw in the hospital was a women with uncontrolled diabetes who was suffering from a severe 'diabetic foot'. She had hit her foot on a tree stump, didn't really notice any pain, and never paid attention to whether her foot had any sores or had been affected by the injury. By the time I had seen her in the hospital, her big toe had been amputated and she had severe necrosis of her tissue. (Necrosis is the death of living cells or tissue (4)). Half of her foot was essentially gone, was full of pus, the stench of dead tissue was unbearable, and maggots were colonizing in her wound. Instead of cleaning the wound and amputating her foot; however, the doctor's were trying to save it. They decided to leave the maggots in her foot to deal with the necrotic tissue. At first, I was thoroughly disgusted and had to excuse myself for a minute, but after getting used to dealing with her wound changes and talking to the doctors and understanding what the maggots provide, their use became more clear to me. Although we see maggots as disgusting little larvae creatures, beyond their development into flies, they do have a viable use in modern medicine.

Maggot therapy, otherwise known as Maggot Debridement Therapy or larval therapy, is a type of biotherapy involving the intentional introduction by a health care practitioner of live, disinfected maggots into the non-healing skin and soft tissue wound of a human or animal for the purpose of selectively cleaning out only the necrotic tissue within a wound in order to promote wound healing (5). History of maggot therapy dates back to the Mayan Indians and Aboriginal tribes in Australia. There have also been reports of maggot treatment in the Renaissance times. During warfare, many military physicians observed that soldiers whose wounds have become colonized with maggots experienced significantly less morbidity and mortality than soldiers whose wounds had not become colonized (5). With the modern day advent of antibiotic resistant bacteria, maggot therapy has been successfully introduced into modern medical care as a safe and effective therapy (5). The current use of maggot therapy is estimated to involve over 3,000 doctors, clinics, and hospitals in over 20 countries (5).

The mechanisms of maggots have three principal actions. First, maggots debride wounds by dissolving only necrotic, infected tissue. Second, they disinfect the wound by killing bacteria, and third; they stimulate wound healing (5). Maggot therapy has been shown to accelerate debridement of necrotic wounds and reduce the bacterial load of the wound, leading to earlier healing, reduced wound odor and less pain. The combination and interaction of these actions make maggots an extremely potent tool in wound care (5).

Although in Africa, the maggots in this woman's foot were not disinfected and controlled like they would be in the modern world, after being in the hospital for a month, the woman's foot was looking immensely better. I was shocked and amazed at the benefit of keeping the maggots in her wound. Even more, I was impressed and moved by the resourcefulness and knowledge of the doctor's that I worked with at the hospital. It made me realize how medicine and care is still possible, even when you have so little.

Thinking about the use of maggots in terms of Biology, maggot therapy is just one more example of a possible symbiotic association between organisms. Using maggots in wound care provide nutrients to the developing larvae by digestion of the necrotic tissue and in turn the human benefits as well. It's kind of gross to think about, but in our modern world of more and more antibiotics, and extremely resistant strains of bacteria; if I ever get necrosis in the future....I just might ask the doctor to pass over the maggots.

References

1) WebMD. 2005 - 2007. Diabetes complications. Retrieved December 15, 2007, from http://www.webmd.com/a-to-z-guides/complications

2) American Academy of Orthopedic Surgeons. 1995 - 2007. The Diabetic Foot. Retrieved December 15, 2007, from http://orthoinfo.aaos.org/topic.cfm?topic=A00148

3) Foot.com: The foot health Network. 2005. The diabetic foot. Retrieved December 15, 2007, from http://www.foot.com/info/cond_diabetic_foot.jsp

4) Medicinenet.com. 1996 - 2007. Retrieved December 15, 2007, from http://www.medterms.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=4514

5) Wikipedia. 2007. Maggot therapy. Retrieved December 15, 2007, from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maggot_therapy

Picture References

1) Wikipedia. 2007. Magoot therapy. Retrieved December 15, 2007, from

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maggot_therapy

2) Smith, N. 2006. Personal photo from Portreitz Hospital in Mombasa, Kenya.

Parasitic Conifer

2007-12-15T19:25:00.000-08:00

So, New Caledonia is considered a "biodiversity hotspot" and has a high ratio of endemic species. (Yes, I know my last post was also about New Caledonia, but frankly, it's a rather amazing place.) For example, the island has approximately 3,270 plant species and 74% percent of those are endemic. This isn't particularly surprising consider New Caledonia is an isolated island and with such isolation, some rather unique life forms have developed including, Parasitaxus usta (or, as it is commonly known, the Corail), the only parasitic conifer in the world.

The Corail seems to lack proper roots and it attaches itself to the roots of Facatifolium taxoides and presents a "vesicular-arbuscular mycorrhiza" sort of parasitism. In other words, although the foliage of the Corail contains a few chloroplasts it does not photosynthesize particularly well and instead transfers sugars from the host plant via a fungal middle-man. Although, it seems that the Corail can also form a direct connection with the xylem of the host plant and in this way it can scavenge nitrogen. The plant itself is extremely delicate and, apparently, even stepping on the new shoots can kill them. Also, before the Corail was discovered to be parasitic, any attempts to extract it lead to the death of the specimen. Full grown, the Corail is a woody shrub with red or dark purple scaled leaves and is, honestly, a rather bizarre looking plant.

I feel unique species like the Corail serve to emphasize just how amazing island communities really are. In complete isolation from the mainland, species are free to develop and many have worked themselves into some rather unusual niches. Even though New Caledonia is relatively small, there are five different plant families and one hundred and eight genera which are endemic. There are only a few other countries with more endemic (including Australia and South Africa) and they are considerably larger than New Caledonia.

References
1. http://www.conifers.org/po/pa/
2. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parasitaxus_ustus
3. http://www.parasiticplants.siu.edu/parasitaxus.html (photo & text credit)
5. http://www.biodiversityhotspots.org/xp/hotspots/new_caledonia/Pages/default.aspx

Darwins' Islands

2007-12-15T19:14:00.000-08:00

The Galapagos Islands are located 600 miles off the mainland of Ecuador. When Charles Darwin first stepped foot onto one of they islands in 1835 he had come across a biologists dream. I have been lucky enough to have visited the island on two separate trips. I recommend it to anyone with a love for biology. Do it soon because time is running out. Four of the main islands have a population of 17,000 people that keeps growing. As with any population of us human being comes pollution. Worse than the pollution is the introduction of non native animals. Many of the native animals have never had natural predators so they are tame as can be. You can walk up any animal without it running away. There were many occasions where i wanted to pick up marine iguana's because i knew it was possible but i would have broken a federal law. Now imagine an animal that tame to something as big as me and now introduce dogs. Dogs eat and kill just about anything they can get a hold of. Biologists on the islands are doing their best to protect these animals that are found nowhere else in the world. The biodiversity is astounding. Of course you could see all the finches made famous by Darwin but there is so much more. Blue footed boobies that arch their backs and whistle to the sky during mating rituals. Giant turtles you could literally ride on. The wave albatross that looks more like a hand glider than a bird. The span of diverse life goes on and on. Just don't be too late.

Sources:http://www.galapagos.com/

Mummified Dinosaur Rocks World of Science

2007-12-15T18:08:00.000-08:00

Dakota, named after her discovery in North Dakota is no ordinary dinosaur find. The 67 million year old hadrosaur has begun unlocking secrets to the evolution of dinosaurs. This herbivore was mummified then fossilized preserving tendons and ligaments. It is very common to only find fossilized bones of dinosaurs, and very rare to find them joined together as they would be in real life. Some paleontologists say that if you find a complete fossilized dinosaur skeleton within your lifetime, you have hit the jackpot. For such an epic and preserved find the body had to come by many specific circumstances. The hadrosaur had to escape predators, scavengers, as well as decomposition due to the elements. Before bacteria was able to consume the tissue, it is believed to have been mineralized through a chemical process. It is miraculous how such an important specimen to science survived undamaged for approximately 67 million years. Using a CT scanner paleontologists were able to discover exactly how much muscle was in between the bones and skin of the tail. Dinosaurs are now believed to be even larger than first thought. The muscles at the base of the tail prove that this dinosaur moved much faster than predicted. A whopping estimate of 45 kilometers per hour. The muscle mass at the rear end of Dakota was calculated at 25% larger than first believed. This is an incredible find. Are all dinosaurs bigger and faster than first thought? Would mankind survive against these colossal reptiles? Will we ever find preserved cells leading to possible cloning? Would it really be a smart idea? All we can do is keep digging.

Sources:http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2007/12/071203-dino-mummy.html

Mighty mice!

2007-12-15T17:53:00.000-08:00

Much to the dismay of Peta activists, animal rights laws in most countries do not regulate the use of laboratory mice. Mice are the most commonly used mammalian model organism in labs, and since the advent of genetic research they have been subject to some remarkable genetic experiments. For instance, researchers in Cave Western Reserve University created genetically modified hyper-metabolic mice, which can run 6 kilometres for six hours straight without stopping. These "super-mice" eat 60% more than an average mouse, but are fitter, faster and live muce longer lives! Recently, Japanese researchers created a mouse that is completely unafraid of predators by disabling certain smell receptors that would normally cause the mouse to run away in fear. While obviously this is does not benefit the mouse in anyway, its human applications are worth considering. Scientists predict that this research may be used to help resolve anxiety disorders.

Another example of super-mice involves Myostatin, a naturally occurring protein that inhibits the growth of muscles. By inhibiting the Myostatin gene, the lack of any Myostatin protein allows muscle growth to continue unchecked. In mice growth dramatically increases, one report stated muscle mass increased by 60% in two weeks. The equivalent human gene coding for Myostatin was found in 2004 when a boy was born with a mutation preventing the Myostatin protein from forming. Myostatin gene-therapy has the potential to treat degenerative muscle disease but will also probably be abused by Barry Bonds.

Sources

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/11/071101162739.htm

http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn6065

http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/posted/archive/2007/12/13/mighty-mouse.aspx

http://www.ast-ss.com/articles/article.asp?AID=85

Achondroplasia

2007-12-15T17:04:00.000-08:00

Achondroplasia is a autosomal dominanat genetic (inherited) disorder that causes abnormal bone growth that results in a type of dwarfism. Autosomal genetic disorders affect a single gene on an autosome while the other gene is usually normal. There are two different inheritance partterns that are called dominant or recessive, depending on which type of gene has been mutated. Achondroplasia has one normal gene, giving a person that has this disease a fifty percent chance on passing on the gene to their offspring. However, if there are two copies of the mutant genes in one parent, it could be very fatal to the offspring, giving it a twenty five percent chance of the child death (stillbirth) before or after birth. Two other syndromes with genetic disorders similar to achondroplasia are hypocondroplasia and thanatophorphic dysplasia.

The growth of the brain and the intellectual level is usually normal, but the growth of the body and the limbs are disproportionate throughout the whole body. Irregular growth of bones and muscles in the body can cause compression of the spinal cord or obstruction of the airway passage, which is the common cause of infancy death. Obesity is a major issue that arises from achondroplasia due to the short body satuture.

Achondroplasia can be detected through clinical examinations. A prenatal ultrasound can be done before the birth of the child to test for the mutant genes in the DNA. The other ways in which this disorder can be detected is by the slow motor responses and movements as well as low muscle tone in the child.

There are no treatments present that are for achondroplasia today, however, there are surgical procedures that lengthen the limbs of the body. People with achondroplasia usually live life normally just like people who do not have this genetic disorder. Most people with achondroplasia do not hold back on physical acitivity or change their ways of living due to their height.

http://www.wrongdiagnosis.com/genetics/dominant.htm

http://student.britannica.com/comptons/article-201412/genetic-disorder

http://ghr.nlm.nih.gov/handbook/inheritance/riskassessment

Sleeping Sickness, Antigenic Variation, Medicine and the Injustices of Making a Profit

2007-12-15T16:07:00.001-08:00

Prelude

The mere mention of the word 'Africa' sets me into a myriad of emotions. Not only is this because I have a personal attachment to the continent, but because I have learned many things about the multiple injustices the people of Africa face everyday. When Dominic introduced the disease we call sleeping sickness in our class, he immediately caught my attention. My soon-to-be father-in-law has spent his life researching the parasite that causes the disease in his laboratory at the University of Saskatchewan, dragging his family to Kenya for 3 years (30 years ago) in order to investigate the parasite in its own habitat. During my graduate degree, two years ago, I took a Medical Anthropology course which spent a lot of time discussing the disease, the devastation it causes, and the political controversies and injustices that continue to progress surrounding the medication used in treating the parasite. Most recently, last year I spent two months volunteering in a government hospital in Kenya, Africa often aiding patients that were suffering from the complications that this disease causes. I was immediately interested in learning more about how the parasite works when Dominic introduced it in our Biology class.

What is Sleeping Sickness?

Human African Trypanosomiasis, also known as sleeping sickness, is a vector-borne parasitic disease caused by the protist kinetoplastid Trypanosoma (1). Kinetoplastids are characterized by a single, large mitochondrion that contains an organized mass of DNA called a kinetoplast (2). The protist is transmitted to humans by the bite of the tsetse fly which have acquired their infection from human beings or from animals harbouring the human pathogenic parasites (1). While taking blood from a human host, an infected tsetse fly injects metacyclic trypomastigotes into the skin tissue (3). Inside the host, they transform into bloodstream trypomastigotes, are carried to other sites throughout the body, reach other blood fluids such as lymph, and spinal fluid , and continue their replication by binary fission (3). The first stage of the disease, known as the haemolymphatic phase, entails bouts of fever, headaches, joint pains and itching (1). Due to the fact that the parasite migrates to the lymph system, lymph nodes often swell up to tremendous sizes. Winterbottom's sign, the telltale swollen lymph glands along the back of the neck may appear. If untreated, the disease slowly overcomes the defenses of the infected person, and symptoms spread to include anemia, endocrine, cardiac, kidney diseases and disorders (3). The second stage of the disease begins when the parasite passes through the blood-brain barrier. The symptoms of the second phase give the disease its name; besides confusion and reduced coordination, the sleep cycle is disturbed with bouts of fatigue punctuated with manic periods progressing to daytime slumber and nighttime insomnia (1;3). Without treatment, the disease is fatal, with progressive mental deterioration leading to coma and death (1;3).

Human African Trypanosomiasis can take on two forms, depending on the parasite involved:

- Trypanosoma brucei gambiense is found in west and central Africa. This form represents more than 90% of reported cases of sleeping sickness and causes a chronic infection. A person can be infected for months or even years without major signs or symptoms of the disease. When symptoms do emerge, the patient is often already in an advanced disease stage when the central nervous system is affected (1).

- Trypanosoma brucei rhodisiense is found in eastern and southern Africa. This form represents less than 10% of reported cases and causes an acute infection. The first signs and symptoms are observed after a few months or weeks. The disease develops rapidly and invades the central nervous system (1).

Antigenic Variation

The most devastating yet interesting thing about the Trypanosoma parasite evolutionary and diversity wise is its ability to evade the human immune system. Trypanosoma parasite lacks intracellular stages which makes the parasite a target for human antibody-mediated destruction (4). Indeed, many trypanosomes are cleared from the blood by liver macrophages; however, the remaining parasites survive and establish the infection due to their ability of antigenic variation of their variant surface glycoprotein [VSG] (4). Each trypanosome carries a large repertoire of VSG variants with different primary sequence and expresses a single VSG gene at any one time by replacing the previous gene at the telomeric active site of transcriptional expression with the new one (4). As a result, this repeated antigenic change of the VSG in trypanosomes allows them to evade the thymus-dependent humoral response, resulting in successive surges of parasitemia, a situation similar to being infected successively by related, but not identical pathogens (4). Due to this ability in the parasite, it makes it extremely difficult to develop a vaccine targeting the disease.

Since the pathogensis is linked to the inability of the patient to eliminate the parasite, attempts have been made to determine how the parasite interacts with the immune system and disturbs the balance of cytokines and other mediators, thus allowing the pathology to progress (4). This theory has provided the basis by which my soon-to-be father-in-law has spent 45 years of his life investigating.....since they still haven't found a vaccine for the disease, I'd say that the parasite has a pretty evolved mechanism!!

The Medicine
The history of treatment for sleeping sickness began with the introduction of an arsenic based compound called, Atoxyl, for the treatment of the disease (5). In 1920 a drug called, Suramin, was used to treat the first stage of the disease (3). By 1922, Suramin was generally combined with Tryparsamide, less toxic than Atoxyl, in the treatment of the second stage of the gambiense form (3;5). Suramin was used during the grand epidemic in West and Central Africa in millions of people and was the main form of therapy until 1969 (3). Pentamidine, another drug that was seen as highly effective in the first stage of the disease, began to be used in 1939. During the 1950's, it was widely used as a prophylactic agent in Western Africa, leading to a sharp decline in infection rates. At the time, it was thought that eradication of the disease was at hand......they were wrong (3;5). In 1932, 700 patients became blind after receiving the wrong dose of Atoxyl (5). In response to this disaster, a Swiss physician and chemist named, Professor Friedham, developed the drug Melarsporal, the bold concept of which was a single product containing a highly toxic arsenic-based molecule and its antidote (3;5). Melasporal was effective in controlling the disease; however, because it is arsenic-based, when injected it is extremely painful and burns the veins used for treatment (6). Additionally, 3-10% of patients injected have reactive encephalopathy and 10-70% of such cases result in death; also causing irreversible brain damage in those who survive the encephalopathy. Psychological effects from the drug are not uncommon and many patients have to be tied to their bed during treatment (6). Due to its effectiveness; however, Melasporal is still used today (3;6).

The most modern and safe treatment for sleeping sickness is a drug called Eflornithine. The drug was developed in the 1970's by Albert Sjoerdsmanot and underwent clinical trials in the 1980's (3). The drug was approved by the United States Food and Drug Administration in 1990, and was extremely effective against sleeping sickness, producing very little side effects; however, the drug was dropped from production in 1999 due to the fact that it was unprofitable (3;6). Apparently millions of Africans infected with the disease that the drug cures, can't pay astronomical amounts for the drug, so the drug company responsible - Bristol Myers Squibb and Aventis - decided they were not going to produce it anymore (6). When a vigilant Medicins Sans Frontieres supporter discovered that 'Vaniqa' facial hair cream, containing Eflornithine, was being sold in the United States, for $54.00 a tube, the ensuing publicity mobilised the drug companies responsible to restart their production of the Eflornithine medication (6). Million of dying Africans weren't enough motivation to produce the drug, but apparently at $54.00 a tube, production of a facial hair cream, was more important. In 2001, Aventis, in association with Medicins Sans Frontieres and the World Health Organization, signed a long-term agreement to manufacture and donate the drug (3;6). In addition, Aventis handed over the patent rights for the drug to the World Health Organization (6). Although this sounds like a happy ending, resistance to Eflornithine is emerging as the parasite develops new mutations which help to resist the mechanisms of the drug. Combination therapy is sometimes necessary. The number of doses and time span for treatment has doubled while debates for how long the drug will be donated continue.....(7).

Last Words

Sadly, the tale of Sleeping Sickness and the political controversies surrounding the medication produced to aid in its symptoms is not a unique one. Currently, in modern corporate-dependent societies, all things medical have been commodified (7). Nowhere is this as clear as in the TRIPS Agreement (Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights), which pits the public health community and the poor against the vast resources of a multi-billion dollar industry (8). In short, as commodities, all forms of medical goods, services and access to them are controlled by profit-seeking interest groups and political cliques. Governments that buy access to those goods and services also ration them (7). The TRIPS Agreement recognizes patents and the right to protect them for profit. Due to the fact that the TRIPS Agreement is international in scope, it allows countries in which a drug has been patented to prevent other countries from producing generic strains of a drug for which profitable royalties cannot be paid to the patent holder (7). Even when another country has bought production rights, it cannot sell its generic product to another country that does not have production capacity (7). In addition, the TRIPS provision that allows for the free flow of drugs in the face of epidemic diseases is not being honoured by the USA (7).

Commodification has also led to the 'direct selling' of medicine to the public. It is a strategy intended by the pharmaceutical companies to expand their market (7). Where there are pharmacare programs, refusal to release a new drug is often intended to coerce governments into putting the drug on the list to ensure greater sales (7). As a result, these practices have chipped away at our system we call 'universal health care'.

So,.....although evolution and diversity in parasites provides an interesting basis for us to research, investigate and solve problems; the issues surrounding treatment for parasites and other diseases becomes much more complicated and heated. Although I think studying Biology is a fascinating Science, I also think it's important to recognize its relatedness to all aspects within our society; health-wise, politically, and socially.

References

1) World Health Organization. 2007. African trypanosomiasis (sleeping sickness). Retrieved December 12, 2007, from http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs259/en/
2) Bergeron, D. (2007). Biology 124: Evolution and Diversity, lecture Notes. Camosun College.
3) Wikipedia. 2007. Sleeping Sickness. Retrieved December 15, 2007, from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sleeping_sickness
4) Zambrano-Villa, S., Rosales-Borjas, D., Carrero, J. C., & Ortiz-Ortiz, L. (2002). How protozoan parasites evade the immune response. TRENDS in Parasitology, 18(6), 272 - 278.
5) MicrobiologyBytes. 2007. Trypanosomiasis. Retrieved December 12, 2007, from http://www.microbiologybytes.com/introduction/Trypano.html
6) Botting, H. (2005). Anthropology 324: Medical Anthropology, lecture notes. University of Victoria.
7) Jackson, N. (2002). Saving lives in the name of vanity. Medicines Sans Frontieres Article [Electronic Version]. Retrieved September 30, 2005 , from http://www.msf.org/
8) Reid, M., & Pearse, E. J. (2003). Whither the world health organization? The Medical Journal of Australia, 178(6), 9 - 12.
Photo References
1) International Atomic Energy Agency. 2007. Retrieved December 15, 2007, from http://www.iaea.org/NewsCenter/Features/Tsetse/index.shtml
2) University of Wisconsin-Oshkosh, Medical Technology. 2004. Retrieved December 15, 2007, from http://www.uwosh.edu/med_tech/teaching/microscopy.php
3) DFID Animal Health Programme: Controlling Tsetse-transmitted trypanosomiasis. 1997. Retrieved December 15, 2007, from http://www.dfid-ahp.org.uk/index.php?section=4&subsection=42
4) Todd and Brad Reed Photography. 2007. Retrieved December 15, 2007, from www.toddandbradreed.com/links

Yeast, Genes, and Intoxication

2007-12-14T21:55:00.000-08:00

I will bet that many students will raise their glasses in celebration at the end of exams. Humans experience the intoxication of alcohol all thanks to Saccharomyces cerevisiae, otherwise known as brewers yeast. Brewers yeast is a single-celled fungus that plays an important role in the lives of humans from our distant past through to today.

The Genome News Network states that brewers yeast, and its evolution, is often studied because many genes that control the yeast's function are important in humans. Brewers yeast provides the first clear example that whole-genome duplication plays a role in evolution not just. This is important for understanding how gene duplication works, and its role in evolution.

Its good to understand how brewers yeast produces alcohol. Here are the basics, as taken from a December 2006 New Scientist article. "S. cerevisiae ... converts sugars into ethanol, generating a meagre two molecules of ATP per glucose molecule. Most cells resort to anaerobic respiration only when oxygen is in short supply, but give S. cerevisiae some sugar and it will churn out alcohol even when oxygen is plentiful - sacrificing huge amounts of energy in the process". It is amazing how evolution works. If you were to look at this process on its own, it would seem absurd and wasteful for brewers yeast to function as it does. A person may conclude that this was a horrible evolutionary mistake. Yet, we must not forget that every factor, and every possible element that influences brewers yeast survival, is essential to its evolutionary path. Holism is key to addressing evolutionary forces.

The gene duplication which occurred would have been a response to competition from other similar organisms. "Ethanol is toxic to most microbes, so acquiring the ability to turn all the glucose available in a fruit in to a sea of the stuff gave S. cerevisiae's ancestors a big competitive advantage" (New scientist). Ripened fruit contains higher levels of alcohol and is a food source for other larger organisms such as primates. Heres where human ancestors came in. New Scientist notes that "primates have long feasted on fruit, and many researchers think that our ancestors evolved to love the scent of alcohol that helped them discover ripe fruit". Throughout human prehistory and history, we have influenced plant growth by purposefully selecting for certain traits. This may be an early example of the human imprint on evolution in other organisms. Again, everything is connected. Skeptics point out that tests conducted as of April 2004 have found only very small doses of alcohol in fruits, perhaps one-tenth or one-hundredth of that found in a single cocktail. To learn more about human ancestors role, scientists are studying how much ethanol primates consume in the wild (New Scientist). The comparative approach between chimpanzees and humans is a common technique to help gain insight to human ancestors. Any results will help understand the effects brewers yeast may have had on human evolution.

According to New Scientist, we, like other primates, have an enzyme called adlehyde dehydrogenase that clears acetaldehyde, a toxic breakdown product of alcohol, from our bodies. As we know, where there are genes, there are gene mutations. There is a mutant gene for aldehyde dehydrogenase that makes the enzyme slower at clearing acetaldehyde from the body (New Scientist). This causes hot flushes and nausea after drinking alcohol (New Scientist). Up to 80% of Han Chinese, Korean, and Japanese people, however, have at least one copy of [the mutant gene]" (New Scientist). This article also notes that although the effects may appear as a disadvantage, they may be an asset since alcoholism is less common among those with the mutant adlehyde degydrogenase gene. Humans today enjoy and abuse alcohol in a variety of ways. Perhaps this mutant gene will mean more to us in the future, or maybe not. Time will tell.

Currently, human evolution is effected by evolutionary forces in different ways than our distant and not so distant ancestors. Today, gene flow, genetic drift, and mutations are more influential than natural selection on human evolution in many areas of the world. There is the possibility, and likelihood of change in frequency of the mutant aldehyde dehydrogenase enzyme. Whether the effects will be disruptive, stabilizing, or directional in the human population is the question. I expect gene flow to play the most important role in this case. Increased migration, travel, and interactions between people all over the world result in the movement of genes throughout the global human population.

Darwin's Bottle http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m3488/is_9_85/ai_n6230587/pg_1

Genome News Network http://www.genomenewsnetwork.org/articles/2004/03/19/evolution.php

New Scientist December 2006 http://www.newscientist.com/channel/life/mg19225831.100-festive-special-the-brewers-tale.html

The Missing Drink April 2004 http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib/20040407/news_lz1c7biology.html

Images:

Chimp Banana

Beer Bottles

A More Colourful World

2007-12-14T20:47:00.000-08:00

Most humans are trichromats. A trichromat has three color detecting cones in the retina. These cones allow the perception of blue, greenl and red. A trichromat is able to distinguish approximately 100 different shades of those base colours. An individuals brain then combines all of those different colours and gradients to create over a million different hues.
However, recently it has been discovered that some women are tetrachromats instead of trichromats. As a trichromat has three different cones and colours, a tetrachromat has 4 different cones and colours. tetrachromats have an extra cone that is in between the red and green sensors. It is thought to be around an orange colour. This means that tetrachromats are able to perceive a whole other range of colour which means that they are able to distinguish upwards of 100 million colours compared to the million of a regular person.
Researches propose that only women are able to be tetrchromats because the genes coding for pigments of green and red retinal cones lie on the X chromosome. As women have the double XX chromosome, it is only females who have the genetic opportunity to be a tetrachromat. Tetrachromats have one type of red cone activated on one chromosome and the other type activated on the other chromosome. Occasionally some women have a different type of green cone activated on each chromosome.
Despite having two different types of red cones (or green cones) activated, some women are not capable of perceiving additional colours. This is because if the two different cones are too close to the same pigment (colour wavelength) that there is minimal difference.
2-3 % of women are supposed to be tetrachromats that are able to distinguish increased number of hues.
This is an incredible advantage. Imagine the difference that it would make when gathering food. Being able to distinguish and detect more colours would allow faster and more accurate identification. Predators, even camouflaged, would be avoided easier thus increasing the likelyhood of survival. Even in todays world, being able to see more colour could be incredibly beneficial; you note a persons skin looks strange and ensure to keep distance between you, thus avoiding being exposed to the flu or cold virus.

References:
Roth, M. (2006). Some women may see 100 million colors, thanks to their genes.
Pittsburgh Post-Gazette.Retrieved December 14, 2007 from:
http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/06256/721190-114.stm

Wikipedia. (2007). Tetrachromancy. Wikipedia; the free encyclopedia. Retrieved December 14, 2007 from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tetrachromacy

Is the Cockroach mightier then Man?

2007-12-14T20:23:00.001-08:00

Many of us have heard the saying that “cockroaches will inherit the earth,” but do any of us really understand why? When comparing the two species by physical form we notice that the human epidermis is soft and easily penetrable, whereas the cockroach epidermis is hard and not so easily penetrated. Our “soft” exterior leaves us vulnerable to minor scraps and cuts, which could allow harmful bacteria to infect us, but the cockroach’s hard exoskeleton can protect it against such injuries. On a behavioral level, cockroaches have displayed the ability to group together to perform more complex tasks. Research has shown that the cockroaches easily cooperate and organize themselves, performing such tasks as resource allocation. In my personal experience, when humans are grouped together there are many different outcomes (of which not all are productive) due to human emotions. These human emotions (or human nature) now leads me to my next point. Being the complex organisms that humans are, with conscience thought, and the drive for constant learning, we have knowingly created many destructive things. War may be experience by all living creature, whether it be over territory or food, but humans have taken war to another level by creating nuclear war, a concept that could easily cease most if not all human life. Radiation interferes with cell division, so humans would be extremely vulnerable, but cockroach’s cells only divide when in the molting cycle. If a cockroach could find safety before their molting cycle, they could survive the nuclear fallout. Cockroaches were here long before us, and will probably be here long after us, but seeing as we are the more advanced complex organisms I would hope we could evolve one day into a more peaceful species.

Megan Dick

Photo Reference:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/ashademan/32160217/
Research Reference:
http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Hangar/2437/roachexoskeleton.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cockroach http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiation_poisoning

Natural immunity to HIV

2007-12-14T18:19:00.000-08:00

Since the outbreak of HIV, there have been the occasional noted case where an individual after repeated exposure to HIV did not acquire the infection. This is more than simply good luck. Researchers have been gathering evidence to explain this percieved natural immunity to HIV. This understanding will drastically improve the accuracy and effectiveness of treatment by individualizing drug regime and therapies. And of course hopefully lead to the developement of a vaccine.
Recent studies have proposed that the basis of HIV immunity is due to our ethnicity and history of disease experienced by our ancestors. These factors effect our genetic code and determine whether we will be susceptible to the HIV infection.
Genetic resistance to HIV infection works in a variety of ways between different ethnic groups. A genetic defect in those with European or Central Asian ancestry provide the most successful resistance to HIV as yet identified. Around 1% of Northern Europeans are virtually immune to HIV with Swedish people being most likely to remain uninfected. These highly HIV resistant individuals all possess a pair of mutated genes (1 per chromosome) that prevent the developement of the CCR5 cellular receptor that the HIV virus uses to infiltrate the cell. This genetric trait msut be inherited from both parents to have the most effect (homozygous). Inheriting the mutated gene from one parent provides some resistance but it is comparatively weaker (heterozygous). 10 -15% of Northern Europeans have this lesser immunity. By using molecular clocks, this genetic mutation dates back to the middle ages.
Other ethnic groups possess lesser HIV resistance due to increased copies of the gene CCL3L1.
Individuals with the greatest number of copies of CCL3L1 (as compared with their ethnic group)
had increased immunity to HIV. Those with the lowest numbers were the most susceptible and became ill approximately 2.5 times faster than others who were also infected. Increased copies of CCL3L1 appear to effect the amount of cytokines released during the inflammatory response. the cytokines attach to cellular receptors and guide the immune cells. The more cytokines that are attached to cellular receptors means less available sites for HIV infiltration. This type of immunity is not nearly as complete as the genetic mutation of CCR5 but is more prevalent in populations.
The genetic mutations that provide HIV resistance originate before its emergence. The question is why would a mutation persist for so long without reason? Many researchers beleive that other diseases, such as the bubonic plague, dysentary, or small pox were the stimulant to maintain a protective gene. This genetic protection would increase the survival of generations versus individual short term.
Although genetic induced HIV resistance is incredibly promising for the developement of a vaccine and impoved therapies, it does not replace the vital protection of safe sex. There is no guarenteed immunity only better odds.

References:

Novembre, J., Galvani, A., Slatkin, & Montgomery. (2005). The genetic spread of CCNR5 ^ 32 HIV-resistant allele. PLoS Biology, Vol. 3 (11), 1954.

Dotinga, R. (2005). Genetic HIV resistance Deciphered. Retrieved December 14, 2007, from
http://www.wired.com/medtech/health/news/2005/01/66198

Species Population in Captivity

2007-12-14T17:50:00.000-08:00

In order to have a strong and surviving population, a species must have numbers on their side. The larger the population, the better odds that the species can thrive. This makes sense, because the more individuals there are, the better the chance that at least some in the population will survive no matter what happens to the group as a whole. For example, if a disease spreads throughout a population, and kills many in the group, then the ones who survive obviously have some ability to withstand that specific illness. As a result, the offspring of these surviving individuals will have better immunity to this disease. However, if a species does not have a large enough gene pool with enough variation then the population is weakened. A species with this problem will have a much more difficult time surviving if something bad happens.
Knowing this, many people and animal rights groups are inclined to argue against zoos because endangered species bred in captivity are coming from such a small gene pool. Zoos often try to defend there existence by saying that they are aiding in the preservation of endangered animals.

While this may be true, it doesn't solve the population crisis. We know that species need a large and diverse gene pool to really thrive and this is simply not available in the environment of a zoo. This is really a difficult issue because it is hard to find a suitable solution. On the one hand we all want to help endangered species, and on the other we must ask ourselves if it is ethical to breed animals in captivity. Is it really our place to meddle with nature? Is there a better way to preserve species?

Sources: http://www.avma.org/onlnews/javma/dec02/021201d.asp

http://www.animal-rights.com/arsec9q.htm

Photo source: http://www.flickr.com/search/?q=Endangered+animals

Species Specificity

2007-12-14T12:13:00.000-08:00

So, lately I've been nosing through the IUCN Red List of Threatened Species and I've noticed that a fair number of the species listed under "Critically Endangered", are listed not because there has been an observed decrease in the population of those species, but because of how tiny the known population is. For example, on the island of New Caledonia (which is in Oceania, near New Zealand) there are three different species of birds, which are only known from a couple of individuals, the New Caledonian Rail, the New Caledonian Lorikeet and the New Caledonian Owlet-Night Jar. In particular, there hasn't been a definite record made of the New Caledonian Lorikeet since 1913, though there have been local reports through out the 1950s and 1970s. However, when specific searches were made in 1998 the Lorikeet couldn't be found, but the IUCN records say that the Lorikeet is unobtrusive and nomadic, so it seems that there will be continued surveys in the future.

This information is both encouraging and discouraging when considering the maintenance of biodiversity. For one, it shows that some species are simply difficult to detect, so it is impossible to make an accurate judgement concerning the numbers of existing individuals for certain species. It also seems to suggest the, obvious, possibility that there are undiscovered species which are still flying under the radar, so to speak. In this way, it seems possible that there is a sort of hidden biodiversity that just hasn't been detected yet.

However, it is also possible that this information suggests that species are becoming endangered without even being detected. Which leads me to wonder if we, as humans, have caused the extinction of a species without having known of its existence. It seems to be likely, especially considering that some species have relatively small or isolated populations, even in natural conditions due to the specificity of their diet or habitat.

Another endangered species, which demonstrates the previous last point, is the Queen Alexandra Butterfly. The Queen Alexandra butterfly is the world's largest butterfly and is also referred to as a bird-winged butterfly since the wingspan of the female can reach 31 cm. More to the point, the Queen Alexandra Butterfly is restricted to ~100 square kilometres of coastal rainforest in Papua New Guinea and is considered endangered by the IUCN Red List. The population is restricted to old growth rain forests since before pupating the species feeds on the pipe vines of the genus Paraistolochia. Because of the specificity of the Queen Alexandra's Bird-wing Butterfly, habitat destruction (mainly in the forming of spreading palm oil plantations) is a serious threat for the population. However, in this case, the destruction of the Queen Alexandra's habitat cannot be blamed solely on humans as a volcanic explosion destroyed a fair portion it in the 1950s.

So, it seems a rather self-evident that more specific a species' habitat and food or the smaller the original population, the more likely it is that a population will be (or soon become) endangered, sadly.

References
Photo
1. Ornithoptera alexandrae (Rothschild, 1907) Robert Nash, Curator of entomology, Ulster Museum. January 2007. Robert Nash cc-by-2.5

2. SeaWiFS captured this view of New Caledonia with neighboring Vanuatu hidden just beneath the clouds to the northeast. Source: [http://visibleearth.nasa.gov/view_rec.php?id=1325] Meta-data: Sensor: OrbView-2/SeaWiFS Datastart: 1998-10-07 Visib

Text
1. Gimenez Dixon, M. 1996. Ornithoptera alexandrae. In: IUCN 2007. 2007 IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. . Downloaded on 14 December 2007.

2. BirdLife International 2004. Charmosyna diadema. In: IUCN 2007. 2007 IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. . Downloaded on 14 December 2007.

3. BirdLife International 2004. Aegotheles savesi. In: IUCN 2007. 2007 IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. . Downloaded on 14 December 2007.

4. BirdLife International 2004. Gallirallus lafresnayanus. In: IUCN 2007. 2007 IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. . Downloaded on 14 December 2007.

5. Queen Alexandra's Birdwing. (2007, December 7). In Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Retrieved 08:04, December 15, 2007, from http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php? title=Queen_Alexandra%27s_Birdwing&oldid=176424621

Biological diversity; is it merely a result of simple evolutionary biology?

2007-12-14T10:37:00.000-08:00

Introduction

Charles Darwin and his colleagues opened the door on our understanding of evolutionary biology. Their insights have revolutionized the modern view of both the biological and ecological sciences. Interestingly though, as science has progressed, the somewhat linear theories that arose from Darwin and his counterparts may explain but just a small piece of the evolutionary tale. Systems approaches to understanding ecological processes have identified complex and fascinating interrelationships between the living and non-living world.

The basic evolutionary model assumes that the environment changes randomly, independent of the biological evolution. Accordingly, through a process known as ‘natural selection’, species evolve by means of a number of mechanisms including developing and expressing new beneficial, or the transfer of pre existing ancestral (genetic) traits and passing these on to subsequent generations (Anonymous, 2007). In this manner it is concluded that species, over time, either adapt or perish as their environmental changes. However, application of systems thinking to ecological and evolutionary processes at various (macro) ecological scales raise some intriguing questions about this assumption. For example:

· Have ecological systems evolved to reset the clock backwards so-to-speak across landscapes in order to maintain higher states and rates of biodiversity?

· Do species adapt to their changing environment, or can they change their environment to suit their evolutionary needs and hence evolutionary direction?

Although a strong temporal dimension is embedded in the science of evolutionary biology (Campbell and Reece, 2005) this perspective assumes that biological change occurs in a linear fashion and in response to the environment as an independent variable (Anonymous, 2007). Using examples of ecological processes and species commonly found here in British Columbia I challenge this simple evolutionary model by showing that the processes at play suggest greater complexity in the evolutionary pathways than originally conceived.

Small disturbances; a great diversifier?

Disturbance is a natural phenomena and takes place at many scales. Cleary, the palaeontological record shows great episodes of species evolution and radiation occurring after global catastrophic disturbance (Hlodan, 2007). However, it appears disturbance at localized scales and temporal time frames also plays a unique evolutionary role in maintaining and enhancing biodiversity.

Species diversity in of itself is thought to provide ecological stability and resiliency (The ‘natural range of variability’ (NRV), and the disturbances which take place within this range, help maintain ecosystem health by providing “a temporal dimension to biodiversity where the range of changes that occur in (the numbers and) assemblages of species, site conditions, and ecological relationships, in any one place, and across the landscape, increase an ecosystem’s ability to recover from perturbation” (Reese-Hansen, 2004).

In different ways disturbances such as fire, insect infestations, extreme weather conditions, etc., alter the landscape at various scales creating what landscape ecologists call ‘patches’. In these patches successions of new assemblages of different flora and fauna reestablish themselves on the disturbed site. Normally, each subsequent assemblage leads to a new assemblage of plants and animals, a process known as ‘succession’, and if left undisturbed, the process leads to greater stability with in the system (e.g. old growth forests, which can persist in some ecosystems for thousands of years). However, no ecological system is immune to disturbance and at some point it will be altered. Successional processes which help reestablish a disturbed site and lead to more stable states create greater resiliency (e.g. ability to recover from disturbance), a process that is achieved through spatial and temporal species diversity greater than what occurs in any given site at any one point in time. In fact, where natural processes such as succession and NRV are simplified or interrupted, as is typical of many forest management practices, the stability of the ecosystem can be compromised (Wong and Iverson, 2004).

Disturbance therefore, in a complex fashion involving mutually beneficial interrelationships of assemblages of spatially and temporally interdependent species, takes advantage of disturbance processes by setting the successional ‘clock’ backwards periodically in response to perturbation. In this way, dynamic temporal processes associated with disturbance, and the biological response to these events, have lead to increased species diversity which act together over the landscape and through time increasing system stability and resiliency to perturbation.

What do beavers and salmon have to do with influencing evolutionary direction?

It’s true that the environment is stochastic, changing in ways that can dramatically influence the evolutionary direction of life on the planet. But it also appears to be true that, in some instances and scales, there are overriding biological controls that directly influence the condition of the physical and biological environment in favour of the species making the change. This is certainly true of Homo sapiens, and although there is ample evidence of our significance in exercising this trait, we are not entirely unique. Two examples include beavers and pacific salmon.

Beavers: Number of years ago I set out to investigate links between anthropogenic land uses (a form of disturbance) and increased beaver (Castor canadensis) activity. While conducting the research I was astounded to discover the spatial and temporal magnitude to which beavers change their environment to suit their needs (Reese-Hansen, 2004). For example it became apparent to me that beavers modify the environment at very large scales by creating and maintaining (perhaps for centuries or longer) extensive valley bottom wetlands. In similar example but at a much greater scale, Hey (2001) convincingly argues that prior to the massive conversion of hydrological processes in the Mississippi basin post European contact, beaver played a important role in mitigating flooding through storage of water in vast networks of ponds and wetlands!

Given the beaver’s ability to dramatically alter or ‘engineer’ the environment to suit its specific needs (Haemig. 2007), it seems reasonable to conclude that this species may be inadvertently, but beneficially creating conditions which modify its own (and other species) evolutionary direction.

A small beaver created wetland. (Photo credit: Bonnie Bowin, http://www.flickr.com)

Salmon: The basic life histories of Pacific salmon are well known to British Columbians. For instance, most know salmon spend their adult lives in the marine environment and return to their natal streams as sexually mature adults where they spawn and die. Typically, after the new generation emerges from their gravel nests where they were spawned, they spend the early stages of their lives in the fresh water environment. Eventually, they return to the sea where they complete their journey to adulthood and the cycle is repeated.

To increase survival likelihood during the fresh water segment of the salmon’s life history they rely on some key habitat attributes linked to riparian forests. In a myriad of ways, large standing and downed trees (called large woody debris or LWD) create habitat complexity along the stream channel enhancing a variety of important habitat characteristics which help enhance or ensure survival of salmon populations (and a variety of other aquatic species).

Riparian forests, the LWD they contribute to the stream, and the hydraulic interaction between LWD and flowing water, improve important stream habitat conditions by creating: cover protection and refuge from predators in shallow waters; deep pools for rest and refuge during migration and spawning; sorted and stable substrates (gravel) suitable for egg laying and incubation; stable stream channels and stream banks through extensive riparian forest root networks and LWD which act to armour and hold stream banks and stream channels together; increased volumes of terrestrial organic material improving trophic levels and food availability for rearing slamonids; plus a variety of other enhancements.

Recently, our understanding of how salmon influence the ecological process taking place in salmon natal streams has expanded considerably uncovering a complex and fascinating interrelationship between the ocean and terrestrial riparian environment via pacific salmon. Instrumental in uncovering this relationship was tracing basic elements such as nitrogen (N), which exists as a unique isotope in the marine environment, and which is essential to the health and survival of plants and other organisms. In fact, N is a well known limiting factor for productivity in many ecosystems (Campbell and Reece, 2005).

By comparing the overall nitrogen content of riparian tree and plant species along both salmon and non-salmon streams researchers discovered a strong correlation between high nitrogen content in plants associated with salmon natal streams (Helfield and Naiman, 2007; Naiman et al. 2005; Mathew et al., 2003). By differentiating marine derived from other sources of N in both types of streams it was shown that the additional inputs of marine derived sources were responsible for increases in the productivity of plants and trees in the riparian ecosystem as a whole (Naiman et al. 2005; Mathew et al., 2003). Essentially, salmon streams tend to improve the productivity of riparian ecosystems, and in turn these areas grow trees faster and larger compared to other areas.

The transfer of marine derived nutrients is complex. Facilitated by bears (Helfield and Naiman, 2007) and a host of other species, the marine-terrestrial relationship comes a full circle when we consider one aspect of this relationship: the importance of riparian forests and their LWD contribution toward stabilizing and enhancing the aquatic conditions critical to salmon survival during adult migrations to natal streams, and juvenile rearing in the freshwater environment.

Bears, an important vector for the distribution of marine derived nutrients to the riparian environment. ((Photo credit: Steve Henderson, http://www.flickr.com)

While, given the level of our understanding at this time, it is difficult to know precisely what the evolutionary implications of this complex cycle are, it seems plausible that the interrelationships are not entirely coincidental. I would suggest that it is conceivable that natural selection maybe acting in a fashion such that salmon, which are instrumental in this complex web of interrelationship, may in their evolutionary path, be defining beneficial environmental characteristics essential to their survival. Through this process they may be influencing more than their specific geno and phenotypes, generation to generation, and shaping the environmental character of their natural natal environments which supports an essential part of their life histories’.

Conclusion

The examples I’ve discussed here highlight complex interactions between biological evolutionary processes and the environment. In this discussion I have tried to emphasise through these examples that species, assemblages of species, and ecosystems have responded to a stochastic environment in ways resulting in evolutionary processes that are more complex than a simple linear evolutionary model. By adapting complex ecological mechanisms which utilize biological diversity to take advantage of environmental stochasticity, or by altering the environmental conditions in a manner that favours a species (and often greater diversity), ecosystems and species alike may have the ability to, in complex set of interactions with the physical and biological environment, influence evolutionary direction, plus create greater ecosystem stability and resiliency through creation of greater species diversity.

References

Anonymous. 2007. Gene transfer. Wikipedia Foundation Inc. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gene_transfer Accessed: Dec 8, 2007.

Campbell and Reece. 2005. Biology (7th Edition). Pearson.

Chapin III, F.S., Zavaleta, E.S., Eviner, V.T., Naylor, R.L., Vitousek, P.M., Reynolds, H.L., Hooper, D.U., Lavorel, S., Sala, O.E., Hobbie, S.E., Mack, M.C., and Diaz, s. 2000. Consequences of changing biodiversity. Nature, 405: 234-242.

Hlodan. 2007. Macroevolution: evolution above the species level. BioScience, 57(3): 222-225.

Reese-Hansen. 2004. Beaver (Castor canadensis) patch-creation in response to land development in the Kitimat Valley, B.C (MSc. thesis). Royal Roads University. http://web.mala.ca/gilchrisa/PDF/LARS%20BEAVER%20Thesis%20-%20V%20Final.pdf Accessed:07/12/08

Haemig. 2007 Ecosystem Engineers: wildlife that create, modify and maintain habitats. (Ecology Information #12) http://www.ecology.info/ecosystem-engineers.htm Accessed: 07/12/08

Hey. 2001. Modern drainage design: the pros, the cons, and the future. Paper presented to the Annual Meeting of the American Institute of Hydrology, Minnesota, October 14-17, 2001. 7p. Wetlands Initiatives Website. http://www.wetlands-initiative.org. Accessed 10/01/03.

McCann, K.S. 2000. The diversity–stability debate. Nature, 405: 228-233.

Mathewson, Hocking, and Reimchen. 2003. Nitrogen uptake in riparian plant communities across a sharp ecological boundary of salmon density. BMC http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=156615 Accessed 07/12/13.

Naiman, Decamps, and McClain. 2005. Riparia: Ecology, Conservation, and Management of Streamside Communities. Academic Press

Wong and Iverson. 2004. Range of natural variability: Applying the concept to forest management in central British Columbia. BC Journal of Ecosystems and Management. Forrex. http://www.forrex.org/publications/jem/jem.asp?issue=21 Accessed: 07/11/12.

2007-12-14T09:34:00.000-08:00

Human beings, like every other type of living organism, have developed in response to their environment to succeed as a species. Certain adaptations, such as lungs and eyes, are obvious and their uses are evident. Others adaptations, such as the appendix, we are yet to find the use for. But going by past evolutionary trends, it is safe to say that every characteristic either has played or is currently playing a crucial role in our existence as a species.

Recently, an evolutionary theory has been validated by the discovery of a certain protein. The idea that ageing is an active process, rather than a passive one, has gained substantial credentials because of the discovery of the protein NF-kappa-B by researchers at the Stanford University School of Medicine. Scientists have found that the protein, found in mouse skin, appears to block certain gene activities, such as cell division. When researchers impeded the activities of the protein NF-kappa-B in the skin of a two year old mouse for two weeks, the gene activity began to resemble that of the skin of a newborn mouse. Tests have only been done on mouse skin, but it is believed that these genes occur throughout the body in most living organisms.

Since no other use for NF-kappa-B has been found, researchers believe its only use is to actively age body cells. If this is the case, this protein may have been developed by our ancestors as a mechanism to keep populations at a size that their food supply can support.

However, the tests at Stanford University were done as a search for a cure to ageing. Sure, on an individual basis finding a cure to wrinkles or the ageing of other body organs seems like a good idea. But to actively delay ageing is to undermine an evolutionary characteristic millions of years in the making. Evolution occurs to better of a population, not an individual, and as harsh as it may sound, it may not in the best interest of mankind to be pursuing such cures. Even today we are seeing the result of over-population in certain third world countries, and we need to understand that human beings, just like any other group of living organisms, will eventually be limited by the amount of food, water, and other resources in our environment.

Sources:
http://www.physorg.com/news115580049.html

The Threat of Losing the Biodiversity of the Coral Reef

2007-12-14T09:09:00.000-08:00

The coral reef is the most vulnerable ecosystem on the planet and is in danger of become completely destroyed. It is at threat by pollution, global warming, diseases and inhumane fishing practices. Losing the coral reef will leave a huge impact on tourism, fishing industry, and marine biodiversity for hundreds of countries. Antonio M. Claparols, the author of the article, “RP in danger of losing its coral reef biodiversity” says, “The coral reef colonies of the Philippines, considered the "rainforest of the ocean" for their bio-megadiversity, could end up dead and and with them the rich marine life.

Most of the fishing in the Philippines is done by using the poison cyanide, which causes the fish to swim in crazy circles right into the fisher’s nets. This poison is squirted into the crevices of the coral. Other destructive methods are also used such as, muro ami, kayaks, trawl fishing. These methods result in 6 percent of the reef to be in good condition and the other 94 percent either dead or in bad condition.
Global warming is also another major cause of the destruction of the coral reef. The rise in heat of the water is causing the reef to have heat stroke and if the temperature doesn’t drop most of the coral around the world will die from it. The ocean only has a certain amount of buffer to be able to maintain the pH at the correct temperature. With all the Carbon dioxide from greenhouses gases that is being put in the water, the ocean can not retain the correct pH. Resulting in the water becoming to acidic, ending in the coral being destroyed.
I believe that steps need to be taking to reduce and eliminate the amount our coral reef is being destroyed a around the world. The coral reef is a living animal and just like any living creature it has the right for the chance to live without disease. Losing the coral reef will mean great loses in the field of marine biodiversity. The hundreds, if not thousands of different species that the reef holds will be lost.

Sources: http://www.opendemocracy.net/globalization-climate_change_debate/2558.jsp

http://www.truthforce.info/?q=node/view/435

Look Out - There are Squirrels About

2007-12-13T21:04:00.000-08:00

Squirrels…they do cute things: climb down trees head first, use their hands like humans use their hands, walk along power lines, fill their cheeks so full of food they can barely close their mouths. So, why do so many people want to kill them?

That’s because they are an invasive species, and quite possibly a threat to Victoria’s biodiversity. The Eastern Grey Squirrel hails from eastern parts of the United States and Canada, and in 1966, three of these little critters escaped from a farm in Metchosin to wreak havoc on Southern Vancouver Island. Ever since then, many people around the island have called for the disposal of this cute little creature because of it’s attacks on birds nest and eggs, destruction of Douglas Fir trees, and consumption of our native squirrel species, the Red Squirrel. But let’s really look at what we’re talking about.

The CRD website describes an introduced species as “plants, animals and microbes that are not native to a region and that tend to out-compete native species for available resources. They often form dense populations and dominate regions or ecosystems.” Fair enough, so they’re introduced, but the real question is: How much has the Eastern Grey Squirrel out-competed the Red Squirrel?

I suppose we can think of it in two ways. Firstly, we can think of our own experiences. When was the last time you saw a Red Squirrel? Keep in mind that the Eastern Grey Squirrels come in grey and black. Okay, so I can’t think of a single time I saw a Red Squirrel, either; but if you want to check, here’s a picture:

Secondly, we can ask an expert. Here’s what University of B.C. PhD candidate Emily Gonzales has found: “Human development, not competition from grey squirrels, is responsible for the decline of the native red squirrel. Red squirrels prefer coniferous forests, so as forests decline, so do they. Eastern grey squirrels are increasing, by contrast, because they prefer residential habitats, which are on the rise.”

And apart from other squirrels, Gonzalez goes on to say “it has not yet been demonstrated that grey squirrels have negative effects on other native wildlife either.” So if the Grey Squirrel poses no threat to BC’s native wildlife, why are they considered a pest species? (http://wlapwww.gov.bc.ca/vir/wildweb/Grey%20Squirrel%20poster11X17.pdf). The answer is obvious: They bother Humans. They get into our attics; they chew holes in everything; and they attack birds, which so many of us enjoy looking at. This is obviously ridiculous, although true.

They do get in to our attics, and they do attack birds, but do they do anything that our native species of squirrel wouldn’t do? A website on invasive species says of the Grey Squirrel: “bird eggs, nestlings and frogs are all relished when they are available” (http://www.island.net/~cclt/invasive.htm). However, our native Red Squirrel’s “sustenance includes nuts, seeds, birds' eggs, young birds and fungi” (http://www.bcadventure.com).

In my mind, leave the squirrel alone. They provide just as much entertainment as watching birds does, and the Grey Squirrel is not responsible for the disappearance of the native Red Squirrel, we are. Here’s another case of Human beings “pickin’ on the little guy.” Only this time, the little guy is cute and furry…and there are thousands of them.

Please watch one of my favourite squirrel moments from one of my favourite Christmas movies, and have a safe holiday season. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HdiXSsFp29s

Photos:

Grey Squirrel - Adam Wharram

Red Squirrel - www.bcadventure.com/adventure/wilderness/animals/redsquir.htm

Info:

http://www.bcadventure.com/adventure/wilderness/animals/redsquir.htm

http://www.canada.com/victoriatimescolonist/news/islander/story.html?id=82d41a13-8bbf-491d-95d2-4af8b4bd492a

http://www.crd.bc.ca/watersheds/protection/concerns/Invasive_species.htm

http://www.island.net/~cclt/invasive.htm

the Peacock's dance, slightly over the top...

2007-12-13T17:49:00.000-08:00

When you think of diversity of life, how can the peacock not come to mind. Its stunning to see a peacock strutting around with its feathers fanned out to impress the peahens. Peacocks feathers grow longer and brighter as they age, until the age of six. Although it takes a little more than showing off your feathers when attracting a mate. Every year, during mating season, a peacock tends to return to the same location to preform his mating ritual. Don't get me wrong, The more colorful and pretty a peacocks feathers are provides major incentive to the peahens. But when the peahen approaches her selected peacock, it happens a little like this.

When a peahen comes close enough, the peacock turns his back and brings his feathers up, so the peahen cannot see his colors, and displays his tail feathers and flutters them very quickly. If the peahen is facing him properly, then all she should see is the grey and brown tailfeathers. The peacock continues to take a few steps in any direction, but makes sure the peahen is still directly behind him. As she moves in closer, because of some strange interest in his strange dance, the peacock moves backwards towards her. When she avoids him he reveals his front to her in all his colorful glory, then drops his fan of feathers onto the peahen. Three things could happen: She mates with the peackock after witnessing this crazyness, Walks away and looks for another mate, or just stands still. If she stands still he will start the whole thing over again. or if mating occured the peahen can be expected to lay three to five eggs and raise them with no help from the peackock.

References:

http://birds.suite101.com/article.cfm/the_peacock_courtship_dance

Image:

http://www.turtletrack.org/Issues03/Co12272003/CO_12272003_Inktomi_Fawn.htm

Panda's, its not all black and white.

2007-12-13T14:54:00.000-08:00

Most people know that the Chinese giant panda's are endangered, but maybe it wouldnt hurt to know a bit more about just how serious their situation really is. There are roughly 800 wild giant panda's, and more than 100 in captivity (mostly in zoo's, breeding centres and special reserves in China). Its no secret that these panda's primarily eat bamboo, but in the last few decades alone, nearly 50% of these forests were lost due to farming, and clear-cutting. We have alot of habitat loss in Canada as well, but it is a more immediate problem for panda's because bamboo flowers only every 80 to 100 years, and it takes 20 years to grow enough to sustain a panda population. Around the 1980's 150 panda's died of starvation when many bamboo forests died out inexplicably, which just goes to show how easily any population can become threatened by extinction.

Your probably thinking what i'am thinking: Why dont they just eat something else? It would seem that the giant panda's digestive systems don't digest bamboo very well at all. Your average panda eats 40 kg's of a specific type of bamboo every day, but only absorbs 20% of the nutrients. And if that bamboo is not readily available, the panda will simply starve to death, even when presented with other kinds of food. Giant panda's do not reproduce slowly (contrary to popular belief), a female giant panda can have 2 -3 cubs in a lifetime. If 2 cubs are born at once (twins) one of them will be abandoned since the mother must focus all her energy towards one cub, the reason being that baby giant panda's are completly dependant on their mother for up to a year, and continue to rely on her protection for an additional year.

Government agencies that aim to protect the already small number of giant panda's in various ways: Establishing breeding centers, conserving and growing the necessary bamboo required to feed the panda population, and my personal favorite, giving life sentences to poachers caught selling their fur on the black market.

References:

http://www.un.org/works/environment/animalplanet/panda.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Giant_Panda#Reproduction

http://thecandidtruth.blogspot.com/2007/06/panda-evolution.html

Picture:

http://www.adorablog.org/pandas/index.html

Fish Farms: The Antibiotic Nightmare

2007-12-13T14:17:00.000-08:00

The high cost and reducing abundance of wild salmon have caused the fish farming industry has grown rapidly since its introduction to the global fish market in the 1970’s. And while the reason for farming salmon may be economically sound, the main problem with fish farming is one that livestock farmers have had to deal with for years: disease control. Large concentrated host populations are perfect habitats for bacteria, and salmon farms are no different. A large amount of antibiotics are therefore used in the production of farmed salmon, and this creates a significant health risk to human beings. It has been proven in other fields of agriculture that the use of antibiotics in livestock feed has created antibiotic-resistant bacteria, and there is no reason the fish farm industry should be any different.

The main antimicrobial (antibacterial) substance used in fish pens off coastal B.C. is oxytetracycline, part of the tetracycline group. In 1998 alone, 6.4 metric tones of oxytetracycline were used in fish farms off the coast of British Columbia. The tetracycline group is used for its abilities to ward off both gram positive and gram negative bacteria. Most standard antibiotics prevent growth of just one type of bacteria, and it is tetracycline’s ability to deal with a large variety of bacteria that makes it so popular. For other reasons, though, tetracycline seems to be a poor choice. Tetracyclines are not properly absorbed by the fish digestive system, and sizeable amounts are lost to the environment. This is why concentrations of tetracycline can be found in the sediment below fish pens.

While livestock feed, including salmon food, makes up the majority of current tetracycline use in North America and the rest of the world, tetracycline is also one of the major antibiotics used in human treatment. Humans use tetracycline to treat a number of ailments from skin infections to stomach ulcers to infections of the urinary and digestive tracts.

The reason people use the same antibiotics as livestock is because they are threatened by the same bacteria as livestock. And since the use of antibiotics in livestock has been proven to create bacterial immunities, this poses a real risk to human beings. This risk is also much larger in salmon farming than it is in other agriculture because of several unique characteristics of salmon farming. The antibiotic material lost through the fish effluent often ends up settling in beds of harvest shellfish such as clams and muscles.

Also, it has also been found that several types of bacteria can transfer traits horizontally, meaning that if one type of antibiotic-resistant bacteria comes into contact with a group of antibiotic-susceptible bacteria, the group can quickly become resistant. Historically, the fish farms have been notorious for allowing escapee salmon from the fish pens, which then go and mingle with wild groups of salmon and spreading the resistant bacteria.

The practices of modern fish farms are far too dangerous to allow these farms to operate in the same manner. Places like Denmark have done tests and found it not only safer, but more profitable to reduce the amounts of antibiotics used in livestock production. Between 1994 and 2001, the elimination of antibiotics in feed (resulting in the increased use in treatment) in cattle has reduced the annual antibiotic use by 54%. This is not only safer and more responsible, but it financially outweighs the observed 1% loss in bull mass. These are numbers that should not be ignored by livestock farmers, especially those farming fish. And until antibiotic reduction techniques are put into place in the fish farm industry, people should avoid purchasing farmed salmon, choosing instead wild salmon.

Reference

Currin, John F. (2006). Strategic Use of Antibiotics in Stock Cattle. Virginia Cooperative Extension: Knowledge for the CommonWealth. Retrieved November 21, 2007 from http://www.ext.edu/pubs/beef/400-307/400-307.html

Ferber, Dan. (2003). Antibiotic Resistance: W.H.O. Advises Kicking the Livestock Antibiotic Habit. Science, 301(5636), 1027.

Olson, Elizabeth. (2000, June 13). Antibiotic Misuse Turns Treatable to Incurable. New York Times, p. F2.

Paone, Sergio. (2000, November). Farmed and Dangerous: Human Health Risks Associated With Salmon Farming. p. 4. Tofino: Friends of Clayoquot Sound.

Suzuki, D. (2007). Drugs Used in the Salmon Farming Industry. Retrieved November 16, 2007, from http://www.davidsuzuki.org/oceans/aquaculture/salmon/drugs.asp

U.S. National Library of Medicine (N.L.M.). (2007, October 22). Tetracycline. Retrieved November 20, 2007, from http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/druginfo/medmaster/a682098.html

Zemelman, Raul, & Miranda, Claudio D. (2002, September). Bacterial Resistance to Oxytetracycline in Chilean Salmon Farming. Aquaculture, 212(1-4), p. 31-48.

"Evolution in Reverse"

2007-12-13T11:48:00.001-08:00

The decrease in ocean alkalinity is a biological concern. The oceans have become more acidic over the past couple of centuries (since the industrial revolution) then they have been in millions of years. Ph has dropped by .1 units already. This translates into an approximate 30% increase in hydrogen ions. This is dire news for the calcifying organisms of the ocean and because they make up a large percentage of the base of the food-chain, the rise in ph could be catastrophic for the entire ocean ecosystem.
Ph of the oceans has risen as a result of human activity. This is not debated, like climate change, this is a generally accepted fact. The burning of fossil fuels releases CO2 into the atmosphere which is 'absorbed' by the ocean where it forms carbonic acid which then dissociates to form hydrogen ions. Intensive study done in the ninteen-nineties indicates that the oceans have absorbed half of the anthropogenic CO2 emited since the beginning of the nineteenth century! This rise in acidity will primarily affect small calcifying organisms, which in turn could affect the rest of the ocean ecosystem.
"The Darkening Sea" is an excellent article on the relationship between calcifiers and ocean acidity it was published in the New Yorker in November of 2006. The article mentions a woman who studies Pteropods, a type of shell forming zooplankton. At one point while collecting samples she had to put several pteropods into the same container, the next day the shells of the pteropods had begun to dissolve. The CO2 that resulted from the metabolism of the pteropods had not been allowed to escape from the container, as a result it mixed with the surrounding water and increased the acidity in the sample jar. This was before concern had developed over ocean acidity and the dissolving shells were ignored. On a much larger scale fossil evidence reveals what happens when the entire atmosphere experiences a sudden increase in CO2 concentration.
At the end of the Paleocene epoch a great deal of CO2 showed up in the atmosphere over a matter of thousands of years. This is a relatively short amount of time in Earth history. According to fossil evidence many species (including many calcifying species and those above them on the food chain) went extinct at this time and new ones rose to dominance. The rate at which CO2 levels are increasing in the atmosphere now is on the scale of tens to hundreds of times more rapid than during the Paleocene. What will this mean for the future of ocean life?
Carol Turly, a scientist who worked on the Royal Society's report on ocean acidification believes there may be "a shortening of the food chain;" in other words a loss of Biodiversity with only one or two species at the top. Thomas Lovejoy, a prominant biologist who first used the term "biological diversity," suggests that the oceans will undergo a "de-evolution process" whereby invertebrates such as jelly fish could rise to dominance.
There will almost certainly be a catastrophic loss of biodiversity. For instanc, coral reefs are home to an estimated 25% of fish species. Coral reefs are made up of millions of polyps which build the non-living skeleton we know as coral by combining calcium and carbonate ions found in sea water. For the past few million years they have done this in an ocean with an aragonite concentration level between 4 and 5*. This level has now dropped to below 4 in all but a few regions of the world and is predicted to drop to 3 by 2100. Within our children's lifetime, it may become impossible for coral reefs to form at all.
Ocean acidification is a very serious and complex issue which has the scientific community in a general state of concern, if not panic. The consequences will be great and are already beginning to occur. The only hope of preserving some of our ocean's biodiversity is if we stop the burning of fossil fuels and find alternate sources of energy. I think it's worth hoping for.

*the concentration value is a result of a complex formula involving a ratio of the product of calcium and carbonate ions to something called the "stoichiometric solubility product."

References:
The Darkening Sea, By Elizabeth Kolbert, article appearing in the November 2006 issue of the New Yorker.
The Royal Society's report on Ocean acidity
available at http://royalsociety.org/document.asp?id=3249

An Evolution of Civilization

2007-12-12T22:51:00.000-08:00

The actual article could be called "A review of Guns Germs and Steel" however, then I would have to review the book and not treat it as gospel.

Guns Germs and Steel is a book created by Jared Diamond dedicated to answering Yali's question: "Why is it that you white people developed so much cargo and brought it to New Guinea, but we black people had little cargo of our own?" From this point on, Jared explores a Doctors Thesis of information on human development and civilization.

The average person (not me or most of this class mind you) would have just said: "It is because of Capitalism," "How would we get here otherwise," "It is because we desired to be stronger," ""It is because my religion tells me to..." Instead Jared went on a 25 year quest to answer Yali's question (and got a bit sidetracked too).

Guns Germs, and Steel begins in New Guinea. New Guineans were at a "stone-age" level of technology just 200 years ago and as a result became a focus for study. Most of the time this was proof of a "why we are better then them," mentality. The view has changed dramatically with the times. New Guineans are just as intelligent, innovative, and creative as any of us, and sometimes even more so. For example, when Jared was with a gathering expedition, the troop he was with explained that a particular species of mushrooms were edible. Jared was of course taken aback and would not want to trust this advice blindly. He explained that he had some colleagues in America who were experts in the field however, they also became sick from picking the wrong variety. The NGs (New Guineans) stated quite blatantly that they knew far more then any so called "expert," in America by listing the vast variety of different plants, and they explained how to differentiate between them all.
It turns out that Jared needs to look beyond New Guinea's borders.

"In order to solve the problems of the future, we need to look to the past," (Marvin Dodds, High School History teacher."

About 7 million years ago, the earliest stages of human evolution started out in central Africa. The first 5-6 million years of human history were spend in Africa. 1 million BC, the first settlements in China Began. By 500,000 BC there were settlements in Europe and by 20,000 BC, there were settlements in Siberia. A key place is 13,000 years ago (11,000 BC) in the Fertile Crescent or modern day northern Iraq and Iran plus a small portion of Turkey.

13,000 years ago, the world was not in a situation where Humans make a substantial impact. However, most of the largest species in the world are extinct primarily because of Humans.
In the Fertile Crescent, hunter-gatherer teams took a longer time to return to their families. At first hunter-gatherers lived much longer lives then those that produced a sedentary lifestyle, but eventually the benefits overcame the losses. The people in the area needed to have a form of agriculture, or they would not survive. The one reason why Fertile Crescent made such an impact is because of the crops, cereal crops. Cereal crops provided much more nutrition then most other crops (however, hunter gatherers were still more fit and healthier). Also, with new advance in technology, they could be mass produced to greatly improve the population growth and density. The final result is the societies which developed agriculture were much stronger then the societies which only participated in Hunter/Gathering.

After the Fertile Crescent changed into becoming uninhabitable or unable to support a large population, a main cereal crop wheat, supported the Egyptian Civilization. From the Fertile Crescent, farmers migrated west and east, this is partly because climate does not change along latitudinal lines. At the time there were 4 civilizations: The Persians, the Chinese, the Egyptians and the Mayans. The Chinese did not use cereal crops however, they used rice and quickly became more advanced then the rest of the world untill the 1400's.

In essence, the reason why specific places are well adapted to support such high populations is because of Geography. In Europe, there are many places to find raw materials which allow for advanced warfare such as Toledo Spain. In North America, we have the "Great Triangle" which has large steel towns, such as Pittsburgh and Cleveland. Even Japan has a center for sword making, Kyoto. Guns and steel make a dramatic impact on what people can militarily accomplish. For example, 300 Conquistadors from Spain, defeated a 50,000 strong army of Incans, and concquered all of Inca. However, Spain may have taken much longer if the first explorers had not spread disease.

The lifestyle of Feudal European peasants was a great mix for bacteria and viruses to flourish. Which also allowed the Europeans to have a stronger immune system to the same diseases. When blankets containing smallpox were traded to First Nations, a vast majority died, leaving room for them to be conquered. The opposite is true for Africa. The only major settlement by European settlers is in South Africa. This is because, the climate for south Africa is very similar to a European climate. In the tropical, they found that most crops would not grow and people would die from a variety of diseases.

This is all I will explain, the rest will come from reading the book. Now that I have explained Guns, Germs and Steel I must give my answer to Yali's question.
In Conclusion, my answer to Yali's question would be, "It is because of Geography and History."

Ref: Diamond, Jared. Guns Germs and Steel, Pub. 1999, W. W. Nortan & Company, Inc.

The evolution of religion?

2007-12-12T17:15:00.000-08:00

While reading a current edition of New Scientist this past week, I was surprised to come across an article titled, "God's place in a rational world". Apparently at a recent conference in La Jolla a collection of top scientists gathered to discuss God. They asked the question, is there a God? As you can probably imagine the debate was a heated one, and no definite verdict was reached, but an interesting question was thrown down by "evolutionary biologist David Sloan". Sloan proposed "that humans' religious beliefs may have evolved over time, thanks to the advantages they conferred as a sort of social glue holding together groups that developed them." In other words, religion, or faith in a supernatural power, was an adaptive strategy. Sloan compares religious belief to human morals. Morality is a pervasive theme in all human populations. Although there is variation between cultures in terms of what is viewed as right or wrong, undeniably those beliefs exist. "[M]oral values", according to Sloan, are "a set of distinctly unscientific beliefs." Why should a human have rights? Why should any animal have rights for that matter? In the evolutionary race the main mantra has always been eat, survive, reproduce, yet somewhere along the line the human brain created meaning for it all. The question is: why? Rules and morals may have been a good way to reduce intraspecific competition among the members of a group. If there is a belief in an ultimate truth, and in turn consequences, would that possibly lead to less conflict?
Another possible benefit to evolving religion has been debated within the medical community for over twenty years. Does religious belief lead to better health? Live Science published an article in response to a study published in the March/ April 2006 issue of the Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine that found that frequent participation in a religious group actually increased an individuals life expectancy by several years. An article in The Frontier Post claimed that studies have linked religious belief to lowered levels of stress and of depression. Does this mean that religious belief could have conferred enough health benefits to become selected for by natural selection? We may never know for sure.
Some scientists, such as Dawkins' claim that religion is a mere byproduct of developing a large brain. In his article "Darwin's God", Robin Henig of the New York Times explains that"it was [either] because belief itself was adaptive or because it was just an evolutionary byproduct, a mere consequence of some other adaptation in the evolution of the human brain."
Whether religion evolved because of natural selection due to some adaptive advantage, or simply as an "extra" that came along with having a big and complex brain is yet to be understood for certain, in fact it may never be fully explained. I think, in a sense, that it should unite the evolutionists with the religious in that religious belief is something that is part of our hardwiring, whether God evolved us this way, or nature did, belief is a part of what makes us who we are as a species.

References:

Reilly, M. (2007, November 10). God's place in a rational world. New Scientist, 17.
Henig, R. (2007, March 4). Darwin's God. The New York Times, link
Religious people live healthier life: Study. (2007, June 11). The Frontier Post. link
Britt, R. (2006, April 03). Churchgoers Live Longer. Live Science. link

Alternative Sources

2007-12-12T13:48:00.000-08:00

Could the controversy over stem cell therapy be over? Recently two groups of competing scientists reported that they had taken regular human skin cells and genetically reprogrammed them to behave like human stem cells. By inserting a ‘potent cocktail’ of four genes into human skin cells, the skin tissues regressed to a stem cell stage. These new cells, described as ‘embryonic-like’, could allow stem cell therapy research to continue without the impediment of moral and ethical hang-ups of destroying fetuses.

Stem cells are often considered a ‘blank slate’ cell of sorts, as they are able to form any of the 220 cell types found in the body simply by being placed near them. It is hoped that stem cells will allow for medicine to combat injuries and conditions that drugs cannot, such as nerve damage. However until now the most versatile stem cells have only been available from human embryos. This new development is likely to be encouraged and could lead to the abandonment of embryonic stem cell research. However this doesn’t mean the years of embryonic stem cell research will be wasted. Due to the similarity of these new cells much of the existing research can be augmented and applied.

The real benefit of this new research is that these cells can be made from the patients own skin. In any donor situation there is huge problems with finding a donor of a similar blood type, and even after that is accomplished there is a lifetime of taking immune suppressants so the body does not reject the new tissue. With this new technique, the possibility exists that any new tissues created from the stem cells will be immediately accepted because they came from the patient.

References:

http://stemcells.nih.gov/info/basics/basics4.asp

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/08/21/AR2005082101180.html

Images:

http://www.usask.ca/alumni/alumnisite/publications/green_white/issues/spring2006/images/stem_cell1.jpg

Fighting Disease at the Source

2007-12-12T13:41:00.000-08:00

Our bodies are amazing machines, millions of processes and cycles working together keeping us alive. However as modern medicine learns more about these bodies, and consequently how to heal them, certain problems arise. It is now know that some conditions are genetic, coded into our very DNA. Ideas on how to treat these conditions vary and almost exclusively focus on controlling the results instead of focusing on the problem genes themselves. However recent medical developments may just change that.

There is a new approach to medicine design that works using molecules known as interference RNA (iRNA). These double stranded sections of RNA disrupt the normal protein synthesis process by targeting and destroying select mRNA strands, effectively preventing their translation into protein. With each iRNA strand able to destroy several thousand mRNA strands, this effectively silences the gene; with none of the mRNA being translated it’s like it wasn’t even there. Theoretically this process could be used to fight any disease or condition involving mRNA, and currently it is being developed to fight diseases involving the synthesis of proteins.

This is truly a wonderful new approach providing what could be a pardon to a genetic death sentence. However, whenever dealings with DNA in humans certain worries arise; questions about safety and ethics become paramount. While iRNA is designed to target specific mRNA strands, it is possible that some iRNA may cross-react with healthy or necessary mRNA strands with sequence similarity, possibly leading to healthy genes being unintentionally silenced. Thankfully this process isn’t getting rushed into production, but is going through rigorous clinical trials. Even recently studies found that large doses of a certain specific iRNA was lethal when injected into mice due to interfering with the cells ability to use its own micro RNA.

It’s important to remember that there are many different types of iRNA. While some may be harmful, many are already proving helpful. As the sorting progresses we can hopefully look forward to an era of more effective and targeted treatment.

References

- http://www.opko.com/tech.asp

- http://money.cnn.com/2007/10/09/news/companies/rna/index.htm

- http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=484202

- http://www.bioedonline.org/news/news.cfm?art=2545

Images:

- http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/f/f2/SiRNA_structure_2.jpg

Protecting Diversity On Vancouver Island

2007-12-11T23:11:00.000-08:00

Biological diversity is central to the health and success of any species or environment. Previous posts have incorporated the necessity of environmental preservation and conservation. Vancouver Island is rich in natural resources, in particular, old growth forests. However, these forests continue to be exploited in spite of the availability of second growth forests. Old growth forests' true value is being ignored.

Since the late 1800's, old growth forests of Vancouver Island have been logged. Now, these forests are at risk of disappearing. Old growth forests of Vancouver Island are famous for their exceptionally large trees. Yet, it is not just old trees that make old growth forests. Old growth forests are indicated by all four ecological lives of trees - "the young tree, the mature tree, the dead standing tree, and the fallen tree" http://www.ontarionature.org/pdf/Old%20Growth.pdf. Between 1860 and 2004, 73% of the original productive old growth forests have been logged, and 99% of the old growth forest in the Coastal Douglas fir zone on the east side of the island have been logged. On October 29, 2007 the BC Liberal government announced the new "Coastal Fo

rest Action Plan" for BC's coastal forests. Although there is a plan to shift away from logging old growth forests, there is no new restriction of logging old growth forests. Therefore, old growth forests are still unprotected and will be logged. The remaining stands, some reaching about 1,800 years old, are at risk of disappearing. Along with them, so will their genetic diversity disappear.

According to the Federation of Ontario Naturalists there are five important values of old growth forests - "habitats for forest species' and wildlife communities, sources of habitat diversity, living examples of how natural forests work, sources of inspiration and heritage appreciation, and resources for education and benchmark sites for scie

ntific research". It is extremely important to acknowledge and the cultural and spiritual significance to First Nations people of various regions.

We're living in a time of climate change and global warming. A Western Canada Wilderness Committee newsletter recently stated that old growth forests are far better at sequestering carbon dioxide from the atmosphere than the seedlings and second growth trees. It only makes sense to conserve the old growth forests for their role in carbon dioxide exchange. Preservation of old growth forests does not mean an end to logging. Second growth forests are at the stages that are ready for logging. This way the logging industry can continue and the sensitive ecology of old growth forests can be left relatively undisturbed.

A report from the Pacific Northwest Research Department discusses ecological value of old growth forests. They indicate that "[t]he old growth forest's structural complexity is the key to its biological diversity. Complex habitats support a diversity of organisms that could not coexist in simpler environments". The delicate balance of mutualistic relationships such as mycorrhizae can flourish in old growth forests. Some research suggests that old growth forests are more valuable for lichen conservation than younger forests.

In the same regard Natural Resources Canada states that "old growth forests provide an optimal habitat for species with specialization requirements, such as cavity-nesting birds, or symbiotic and parasitic organisms, or epiphytes (plants living on the surface of other plants)."

This emphasizes the connectivity of species and environment within old growth forests. Dead trees, and uprooted fallen trees are just as important as living trees. Different stages of tree life create different niches for species to inhabit. Removing dead trees may reduce some species from being able to find a home. The Federation of Ontario Naturalists also state that machinery used to prepare cut over areas for planting and tree regeneration may destroy the natural microtopography of the area. If this is true, then logging machinery could also cause such destruction in the process of reaching a designated logging zone. When logging occurs, the trees are not the only thing being destroyed. As a result of habitat destruction, it is no wonder that city dwellers may have dear, bears, and cougars in their neighborhoods.

If all this is not enough to halt logging of old growth forests, then what is? Now don't get me wrong, I know why governments implement plans of this nature. I am not naive. Yet, it is no less infuriating. It is a well known fact that when genetic diversity in a population is decreased, that population is at a heightened risk to disease, environmental catastrophe, and other debilitating events. When humans control and alter their environments in extreme fashions (which we often do) the results may vary from good to bad.

Ultimately its up to the people to advocate for the protection of these beautiful environments. Previous posts here incorporated species' loss (Vancouver Island Marmot), and ecological preservation, as well as the human imprint left on the world today. This is all public knowledge. I hope that the interest in biological diversity and environmental sustainability does not end here. We need the diversity of old growth forests. This is not our land to own, we simply live here.

Epiphytic Macrolichen Diversity http://www.for.gov.bc.ca/rni/research/date_creek/macrolichens.htm

Federation of Ontario Naturalists http://www.ontarionature.org/pdf/Old%20Growth.pdf

Ministry of Forests and Range "Coastal Forest Action Plan" http://www.for.gov.bc.ca/mof/coastalplan/

Natural Resources Canada http://cfs.nrcan.gc.ca/index/oldgrowthforests

http://cfs.nrcan.bc.ca/subsite/oldgrowth/brochure

Pacific Northwest Research Station http://www.fs.fed.us/phw/scienceupdate1.pdf

Western Canada Wilderness Committee Victoria BC http://www.wildernesscommitteevictoria.org/index.php

Wilderness Committee summary of the new "Coastal Forest Action Plan" http://www.wildernesscommitteevictoria.org/index.php?action=fullnews&id=685

Images:

http://www.nationalgeographic.com/traveler/images/h_carmanah.jpg

http://www.cathedralgrove.se/pictures/01-1-interfor.jpg

Sleepy?

2007-12-11T13:20:00.000-08:00

Sources:

http://www.wnyc.org/shows/radiolab/episodes/2007/05/25

(podcast)

Jones R (2007) Let Sleeping Zebrafish Lie: A New Model for Sleep Studies. PLoS Biol 5(10): e281doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.0050281

Waking Experience Affects Sleep Need in Drosophila

Zimmer, Carl (2005) Down For the Count. New York Times

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/11/08/science/08slee.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1

What if life came from space?

2007-12-11T08:44:00.000-08:00

As a scientist, wondering about life is all about experimenting. Some people believe life was created by god and they fear of a supreme being. Others prefer to believe that life is an expression of biological evolution. All theories are believe d to happened on earth, but what would happened if we discovered that life on earth came from space. Not to say from another planet, but merely from space. Since space has not been conquered by the human kind that may be the answer we are looking for: where does life came from? In the last 20 years researchers have been developing better and more reliable ways to prove where life was originated. One theory claims that life came from space, not as bacteria because the lack of oxygen, but as spores. Since spores are like seeds, there is a strong possibility that these spores may have been looking for the perfect conditions to reproduce. Once they got to earth they mutated and evolved until the point that all what we know was created. For this theory many people would ask: well, were does this spores came from or who created them. The answer for this question relays inexplicable since we haven’t been beyond our solar system. In addition it would be very selfish to think that all life beings are just in one little planet. There is so much research based on these theories and many studies and ideas can be found online. NASA is also doing research regarding this theory. They are specifically researching the reaction of bacteria in space. The results are amazing. The bacteria had been found to have the ability to keep mutating and adapting to any situation it is exposed to.

http://www.panspermia.org/bacteria.htm

http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewpr.html?pid=5621

http://www.scienceagogo.com/news/20010631230243data_trunc_sys.shtml

The Evolution of Language

2007-12-09T01:58:00.000-08:00

Raising children is a great gift that life can give us, however, at times it can truly be difficult. The adolescent years are especially hard on your patience as you ask yourself how your child developed such an extensive vocabulary. This is when you look back on the early years of diapers, naps, and the total and complete lack of speech as a true time of serenity. You seem to regret that you did not savor the times when your child did not have the ability to talk back. This reflection makes you ponder a deeper question. How did humans develop language?

Humans are differentiated by all other species in their ability to communicate through language. Although humans and primates are closely related and share common ancestors, primates lack the mechanisms to formulate speech (for chimpanzee vocalizations: http://www.junglewalk.com/Asounds/chimp2.wav). There are many reasons leading to these differences, such as physical and intellectual barriers between the two species. Humans are different in that they have a vocal cord enabling a diversity of sounds to be produced (1). They also have smaller tongues that are highly innervated, and very sensitive allowing movements that produce specific sounds. Human hearing has had to adapt in response to language development. The human ear is highly specialized to hear small differences in language from 1 kHz to 4 kHz (1). This sensitization is important, as the range in frequency is the range elicited by sound from the vocal tract.

<
In Darwin’s book, The Origin of Species, he suggests that evolution occurs by natural selection, where certain traits enhancing survival will be passed on to future generation (2). The gap between primates and human language can be explained through natural selection favouring the physical capacity for speech. Random mutations produced a change in the shape of the mouth, tongue, larynx, and hearing of humans. Evidence of this can be seen by the development of the larynx further down the throat of hominids 150, 000 years ago (3). When comparing Neanderthal development to human, the larynx of the Neanderthal was short like that of an infant making it difficult for speech formation. Hominids developed the physically capacity to speak, however, the change in laryngeal shape facilitated choking and was actually a disadvantageous feature for survival (3). In order to accommodate to the physical development, the brain would have also evolved to process language. The hominid brain grew larger in size with mental stimulation from the use of tools, producing specialized centers (4).This specialization differentiated further creating a left brain dominance for the processing of language. Today, humans have two areas predominantly in the left hemisphere called Broca’s and Wernicke’s area. Broca’s area is responsible for language initiation and production, while Wernicke’s area is the center for language comprehension and meaning (5). Damage to these areas result in speech loss or problems in comprehension, regardless if the physical ability to speak is present.

The brain and body both have had to develop simultaneously in order to progress from the inability to speak to modern day human language. This development occured slowly over thousands of years as language gained a selective advantage. What will be seen with the progression of our civilization now that humans have developed many languages to communicate with? It is unlikely for the world to develop one common language but perhaps people will come to learn a few dominant languages. With the progression of the Internet and technology, one could only assume that we will become better at processing information. Only time will tell what differences will arise and how our brains and bodies will evolve in the future.

You Tube:
A short film on the development of human cognition and language.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FnRJb-c4JEU

References:
1) http://www.ai.rug.nl/~bart/deBoerEncyclopedia.pdf
2) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_the_Origin_of_Species
3) http://www.brainconnection.com/topics/?main=fa/evolution-language6
4) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hominid_intelligence
5) http://www.brainconnection.com/topics/?main=fa/evolution-language7

Pictures:
http://rationalrevolution.net/articles/understanding_evolution.htm
http://www.brainconnection.com/topics/?main=fa/evolution-language6
http://the-half-decent-pharmaceutical-chemistry-blog.chemblogs.org/category/neuroscience/page/2

A Case Study of the Vestigial Appendix

2007-12-09T00:44:00.000-08:00

You wake up one morning with a slight dull pain in your abdomen. You rest your hands on your stomach pressing down around your belly button. The pain increases slightly and you notice that it worsens as you move your hands over your belly towards the right side of your hip. You brush it off as a case of indigestion from the leftover meatloaf and potatoes your roommate threw together the night before, and you head off to your university classes. By the end of the day, your stomach pain and bloating has worsened. To make matters worse, you feel weak because you could not get yourself to eat at all during the day. You have to go to one last class, however, you are feeling very nauseous and starting to perspire. You run to the bathroom and hope that no one heard you vomiting as you hovered over the Porcelain toilet. At this point, you realize that you feel too awful for this to be an ordinary occurrence and you phone your roommate to take you to the hospital.

After a long night of tests in the emergency room, the doctor informs you that you have appendicitis. You will have to have surgery to remove your appendix because there is a possibility that you could die if it bursts. All you manage to extract from the conversation with the doctor is the possibility that you could die and that you have some sort of reference section at the end of your intestine. Your mind is racing and you are confused from the spike in fever. Thankfully, the nurse comes in and explains to you what is occurring in detail.

Your appendix is a small pouch-like structure attached to the beginning of your large intestine (1). The actual cause of appendicitis is not known, however, it is commonly believed that the bacterial infection is a result of trapped fecal matter in the appendix (2). The infected appendix can worsen and abscess, exploding inside your peritoneal cavity (where your intestines are located) (3). The bacteria spread throughout, causing multiple organ failure and killing the patient (4).

You are worried at this point and are thinking that your life might be drastically affected by the loss of a digestive structure, but you need the appendectomy to survive. The nurse ensures you that most patients do not notice any difference in digestion after an appendectomy since your appendix is a redundant structure (5). The appendix is a vestigial organ; meaning the original function was lost with human evolution (6). It was originally thought to be the organ responsible for digesting cellulose, as seen in other herbivorous primates sharing commons ancestors with humans (7).

All experts in the medical community do not share the opinion that the appendix is a vestigial structure. Others believe that the appendix has an immunological function as an organ where antibodies are produced (8). This theory does not have strong supporting evidence, as the appendix would less likely become infected if it were a center for antibody production. Another theory suggests that the appendix is used to store necessary intestinal bacteria (9). Although the appendix may contain important bacteria, patients fail to notice a difference in digestion without an appendix (10). This indicates that the appendix cannot have a substantial role in the digestive system and, therefore, is a structure lacking true function.

Knowing the current information puts your mind at rest and you feel relieved that shortly you will have the source of your pain removed without long term consequences. You are informed that they are ready to take you in for surgery. As you are rolled into the operating room, you whisper into the nurse’s ear one last request. You want to keep your appendix. Here is a picture of what you grew so close to and could not part with:

Your Appendix

You Tube Video:
Surgical Appendectomy (caution graphic details):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0FuqMI2dKmo

References:
1) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vermiform_appendix
2) http://www.netdoctor.co.uk/diseases/facts/appendictitis.htm
3) http://www.medterms.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=2311
4) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Septic_shock
5) http://digestive.niddk.nih.gov/ddiseases/pubs/appendicitis/
6) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vestigial
7) http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/vestiges/appendix.html
8) http://wiki.cotch.net/index.php/The_human_
appendix_is_functional,_not_vestigial
9) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vermiform_appendix
10) http://digestive.niddk.nih.gov/ddiseases/pubs/appendicitis/

Pictures:
http://www.medicinenet.com/appendicitis/article.htm
http://www.flickr.com/photo_zoom.gne?id=384615215&size=m
http://www.healthbolt.net/2007/10/08/appendix/

On Angiosperms

2007-12-06T21:11:00.001-08:00

By Andrea Macdonald

"It must have been around seven am when a small shrew like creature stumbled out of its dark burrow and peered near-sightedly at the first flower, and decided it wasn’t dangerous. "
This is a line from the poem “in the early Cretaceous” by Al Purdy. The poem goes on to fancifully describe the proliferation of flowering plants during the Cretaceous. Reading the poem one can’t help but wonder what it was really like during the Cretaceous, how did those first few flowers come to be? How rapidly did they develop into a dominant form of flora and what made them so successful?
At the beginning of the Cretaceous the earth was warm and wet. There were no glaciers at the poles and the continents were grouped closely together. Dinosaurs and gymnosperms were the dominant fauna and flora. By the end, the continents had dispersed, dinosaurs had nearly become extinct, mammals were on the rise, and angiosperms had replaced gymnosperms as the dominant plant life.

So what came first, the Carpel or the ovary? That is, how did angiosperms evolve from gymnosperms? The main difference is in the reproductive tissues. Gymnosperm ovules occur on sporophylls, that is, open leaves. Angiosperms differ in that they have many different tissues surrounding the ovule; there is the ovary which is at the base of the carpel, there are the stamens, the petals, and the sepals. It is believed that these structures all evolved from leaves. Once upon a time a sporophyll began to curl around the ovules until it became fused and a carpel was formed from the fused leaf. That shrew could have stumbled out and seen a whorl of leaves with shortened internodes before he noticed the first flower. This bundle of leaves with a rolled leaf surrounding an ovule might have initially been an evolutionary advantage because the seed was better protected from the elements and/or seed eating fauna by the group of leaves.
The Amborella supports the fused sporophyll theory. Amborella is believed to be the most primitive flower that still exists today (based on molecular data). The Amborella has a carpel that is not fused but is held together by secretions, a possible evolutionary step leading to the fused carpel.
Somehow this bundle of leaves became attractive to insects and from there, more and more attractive and colourful species emerged in order to be more attractive to pollinators. (Some wind pollinated angiosperms did not develop these bright colours.) Most gymnosperms rely on wind to disperse their seeds, while angiosperms take advantage of a symbiotic relationship with insects and birds (possibly their most important evolutionary advantage) , in which the animal is rewarded with a nectar for dispersing the genetic info (pollen) of the flower. How the first bee ancestor became attracted to flowers is a mystery, but it is generally accepted that the success of angiosperms is closely related to their relationship with insects and birds.
By the early cretaceous wasps and moths had evolved and during the cretaceous winged dinosaurs and some birds were becoming successful species. Perhaps this was a disadvantage for the gymnosperms, which keep there maturing seeds up high possibly as a way to keep them safe from herbivores. Angiosperms on the other hand took advantage of flying creatures not only to aid in pollination but also to help in seed dispersal. Many angiosperms produce seeds that are meant to travel through the digestive system of an animal before they are meant to germinate. Angiosperms are the main food source of mammals and we have evolved and diversified simultaneously since the mid Cretaceous through the process of co evolution.
One example of this co evolution is how insects aided in the speciation of angiosperms. Insects provide an alternative method of pollination to wind. They allow for wide dispersal of genetic material which leads to more opportunities for mixture of genetic material. Because one bee may visit many different flowers, pollen obtained containing a mutation would be dispersed widely. The plants resulting from fertilization by the mutant pollen may produce mutated flowers which might not attract the original pollinating species and so the newly mutated species would not be cross pollinated with the parent species. This creates the sexual isolation necessary for speciation. The short lifecycle of angiosperms also allowed them to speciate rapidly. More variety of species means greater chance for species to be suited to difficult environments.
Fossil evidence of flowering plants suggests that they were first successful in environments where it was difficult for gymnosperms to survive. Riverbanks and areas that experienced unstable environments were dominated by angiosperms millions of years before they began to compete with gymnosperms for space in more stable areas. Their short lifecycle also aided in this success. Angiosperms can go from a seed to a mature adult in a matter of weeks or months whereas gymnosperms take over a year to develop a seed. Angiosperms also developed a more efficient form of vascular tissue which would have helped. In addition to the same xylem and trachieds of gymnosperms they also have vascular vessels for transporting water up the stalk.
Interestingly, Amborella does not include these vascular vessels suggesting it diverged from the other angiosperms prior to this development.

Fused leaves, rapid speciation, symbiotic relationships with birds and insects, suitability to harsh climates; these are some of the main ideas about how and why angiosperms evolved. There are entire books and university courses devoted to this topic I found out in my research. Darwin referred to the appearance of angiosperms in the fossil record as “an abominable mystery.” So many years later much of the mystery remains, a vast deal of research has been done and the theories proliferate like dandelions.
As Al Purdy wrote, “no one can ever know what it was like, that first time on Primordial Earth/ when bees went mad with pollen fever and seeds drifted away from home on little white parachutes without a word to their parents/ no one can ever know, not even when someone is given the gift of a single rose and behind that rose are the ancestors of all roses and all flowers and all spring times for a 100 million years of summer, and in her eyes an echo of the first tenderness…”

References:
Biology sixth edition, Authors: Neil A. Campbell, Jane B. Reece. Copyright 2002, Benjamin Cummings
The Historical Atlas of the Earth, Authors: Stephen J. Gould, Roger Osbourne, Donald Tarling. Copyright 1996, Henry Holt and Company.

Angiosperm Origins and Evolution
Copyright © May, 2001by: Sebastian Molnar
http://www.geocities.com/we_evolve/Plants/angiosperm.html

Angiosperms
Flowering PlantsPam Soltis, Doug Soltis, and Christine Edwards
http://www.tolweb.org/Angiosperms

Sixth Sense

2007-12-06T17:18:00.000-08:00

Many of us have experienced an urge to do something based on nothing other then a feeling. Whether it be to call a friend and learn that their father died, or to go back into a room just in time to find the dog about to eat your dinner. This feeling is often referred to as a sixth sense, or Extra-Sensory Perception (ESP). In 1999 researchers at Harvard University were examining a specialized organ in the nose called the vomeronasal organ (VNO). Many debate whether the organ still functions (in humans) and if so, whether it influences our behavior. While their research was marginally based on pheromones it got me thinking what other signals humans may be able to sense. In animals, the VNO contains many nerve cells and with the extensive abilities of nerves, the types of signals and number of signals available for them to receive could be limitless.

In modern day research there are many types of ESP, such as Clairvoyance, Precognitions, and Telepathy. But even in ancient times, before the study of ESP, many civilizations recorded having similar experiences. It is my opinion that people are experiencing ESP or a sixth sense more often, and that as we evolve we will learn to acknowledge and refine this skills more.

Photo Reference:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/daz71/90964236/
Research Reference:
http://www.hno.harvard.edu/gazette/1999/05.20/sixth.sense.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extra_sensory_perception

Megan Dick

Everyone Should Go Visit the Bug Zoo!

2007-12-05T19:30:00.000-08:00

The Bug Zoo is located at 631 Courtney Street in Victoria BC. I have already visited the bug zoo a couple times this year, and it never fails to amaze me. There is an incredible array of arthropods, including spiders, insects, scorpions, and myriapods ( millipedes and centipedes). The Bug Zoo is very reasonably priced, and there are special rates for students. I highly recommend visiting the zoo. For those of you who can't make it I am going to share some of the pictures I took while I was at the zoo, and talk about each of them.

This is a Hercules Beetle. It spends a large portion of its lifecycle as a larva. "A larva is a sexually immature form of an animal that is morphologically distinct from the adult stage, usually eats different food, and may even have a different habitat than the adult... Animal larvae eventually undergo metamorphosis, a resurgence of development that transforms the animal into an adult. (Campbell N.A., Reece J. B., 2005)." The larva tunnel through wood, eating rotting wood as they go. The adults get there nutrition from decaying fruit, as you can see in the picture here.

This is one of my favourite insects! It is the praying mantis and belongs to the order Mantodea. They use their color to camouflage into their surroundings. This may help while hunting prey, and may also be benificial from hiding from preditors. Males beware before heading too close to the cage though, the females like to devour their partners after mating. First the female bites off the head of the male while they are still mating, then she begins on the rest of the body. The wings are the only evidence that there had once been a male in the cage.

No these aren't sticks! These are actually stick insects. It is incredible how much they look like their surroundings. Natural selection has caused them to develop stick like features that aid in their survival. They have even developed stick like tendencies! They sway in the wind, hang around with other branches and leaves, and even have a plant-like smell (although this could be attributed to their diet)!

This is a leaf insect. As you can see it very convincingly looks like a leaf. This camouflage provides a great deal of protection from its own predators, but sometimes other bugs and animals will accidentally mistake it for leaf and take a bite out of it. Ouch! As the leaf bugs age, they also get yellow spots, turn brown, and develop jagged edges, making them look less tasty to animals and other neighboring bugs that may have mistaken them for a meal earlier on in their lives.

You'll never guess which insect this guy is kissing. A COCKROACHE!!! I know most of you said "Ew," but Cochroaches are actually very clean when it comes to bugs. They are constantly cleaning and grooming themselves. There are approximately 4,000 species of Cochroaches. Something interesting about them is that Cochroaches, like other insects, do not have a centralized brain that controls their entire body, instead they have clumps of nerves called ganglia that carry out functions. In the coachroache has 3 ganglia in the front of the head to form the brain, and 3 in the back of the head that control the mouth and the antenna. There are 11 more ganglia distributed throughout the body of the cochroach, 3 in the thorax, and eight in the abdomen. These ganglia control the roach's legs, wings and other body parts. Because all of the ganglia operate independently of one another they are still able to carry out their functions even if say the head is removed from the abdomen, until oxygen or nutrients stops the ganglia from functioning.

Some extras:

Current Exhibits List
(animals on display will change over time)

1. Australian Stick Insects 2. Shaking Leaf Insects 3. Katydids/Orchid Mantis 4. Thorny Devils/Giant Stag Beetle 5. Giant Long legged Bush Cricket 6. Dragon Headed Crickets 7. Diving Beetles/Whirlygig beetles 8. Birdeating Tarantula - "Pinkie" 9. Suntiger & Indian Ornamental Tarantulas 10. Atlas Beetle/Frog Beetles 11. Desert Beetles/Velvet ants 12. Mix Sticks - 7 species of walking sticks in one tank, including the world's longest walking stick 13. Giant African Millepedes 14. Giant Peruvian Centipede 15. Black Widow 16. Brown Recluse 17. Hobo spider 18. Wolf spider 19. Mexican Red leg Tarantula 20. Whiptail Scorpion (Uropygid) 21. Tailess whiptail scorpion (Amblylipigid) 22. Bark scorpion 23. Stripe tail scorpion 24. Emperor scorpion 25. Asian Forest scorpion 26. Giant Brazilian Roaches 27. Madagascar Hissing Cockroaches 28. Dead Leaf Mantis/Hercules beetle 29. Ghost Mantis 30. Jungle Nymphs/Titan Stag beetle 31. Assassin Bugs 32. Leafcutter Ant Colony - Amazing!! http://www.bugzoo.bc.ca/groups.htm

Sources:
http://www.bristolzoo.org.uk/learning/animals/invertebrates/hercules-beetle
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/09/05/science/05cann.html?_r=1&n=Top/News/Science/Topics/Insects&oref=slogin
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Praying_mantis
http://www.bugzoo.bc.ca/groups.htm
http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Hangar/2437/roaches.html
Campbell, N. A., & Reece, J. B. (2005). Biology seventh edition. An introducduction to animal diversity ( pp. 627). San Fransisco: Benjamin Cummings.

The Effects of Climate Change on Lyme Disease

2007-12-04T11:57:00.000-08:00

Currently, Lyme disease is not a nationally reportable disease in Canada; however, this may soon change. The increased effects of global warming are creating an environment favorable to disease bearing ticks, even in typically cooler countries such as Canada. Lyme disease is typically transmitted by ticks carrying the infectious spiral bacteria. These ticks are highly sensitive to temperature change and are unable to survive in cold environments. For this reason, cases of lyme disease are usually reported in southern Manitoba, Ontario and BC where temperatures are milder.
Unfortunately, with global warming comes increased humidity and shorter winters, leading to a more hospitable climate for ticks and their hosts. Short winters mean a longer season for tick activity, allowing them to infect an increased number of hosts. Recent studies have shown that globally, tick activity is not only prolonged but is shifting further north geographically. Incidences of lyme disease have been reported in mountainous regions of Europe as well as Canada.
Within Canada, rates of lyme disease are expected to increase at quite a shocking rate. By the 2020s, the northern range limit of the disease is expected to shift a minimum of 200 kms. The range is only likely to increase exponentially from there. Currently, the Public Health Agency of Canada is researching just how dramatically global warming will affect disease rates in the country. It appears; however, that the spread of lyme disease is inevitable on a global scale.

References:
http://www.phac-aspc.gc.ca/id-mi/lyme-fs_e.html#8
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2007/04/17/MNGFCP9UL41.DTL

Preserving Biodiversity

2007-12-03T18:44:00.000-08:00

After searching through websites on evolution and diversity, I came across the article, “How Stream Diversity is Used to Monitor the Health of Our Rivers” by Karen Markwort. The article is about how small invertebrates, such as mayfly nymphs and caddisfly larvae are collected from rivers to monitor the state of the waterway. I found it interesting that even though society has become reliant on technology, we can still use biological resources to keep our rivers healthy. As Dr Richard Norris, project leader for the CRCFE, states, “there are several advantages in using biological techniques to monitor water quality: it's fast and can be conducted by almost anyone without expensive technical equipment.”
A second article I came across is about the Rideau River Biodiversity project. The river has been under research for how to perverse the river’s great biodiversity. The Small invertebrates are essential to the well being of the river’s ecosystem. Aquatic and terrestrial animals provide food and resources and plants provide clean air and filter air. The project was started with the goal to record information on the river’s biodiversity. The researchers of the project have found that the Rideau River provides all of this for Earth’s survival and needs to be preserved.

References:

http://nature.ca/rideau/g/g1-e.html

http://www.environment.gov.au/biodiversity/publications/articles/biolink9.html#1

Frontiers of animal discovery

2007-12-02T10:57:00.001-08:00

One of the most exciting aspects of the study of biology must be the discovery of new species of animal. There are hundreds, maybe thousands of new species of bacteria and insects discovered every year, and not to take away from the diligent researchers making these discoveries, but the discovery of a new animal is especially unique. At first, it seems incredible that an undiscovered species can exist when you consider the population of the earth, and the geographic penetration of populations of humans into every land area of the plant. But on the other hand, consider that these "new discoveries" are not necessarily new to humankind- only new to the scientists that make publications and keep records. Aboriginal societies in the remote areas where new species are found likely not only to know about the species but have names for them. Take for example the new monkey species discovered in the African country

Tanzania

named the highland mangabey (Lophocebus kipunji). The locals were already aware of the monkey, and called it kipunji. In fact, it was through interviewing the local tribes that scientists first learned of its existence. Does this make the discovery any less exciting? Not at all. In fact, the process of sleuthing amongst old-world tribes to obtain clues towards finding new species makes it all the more interesting and exciting.

The island of Borneo in Indonesia is often in the news due to the high numbers of new species discovered there. If you aspire to go into a career discovering new species, this may be a good place to start. There were 52 new species of plant and animal discovered there in 2006, and researchers say many more are yet to be discovered. Many of the new animal species are fish, and there are also new frogs, lizards and even a new species of cat similar to a clouded leopard (see image). If you are interested in discovering new marine species, then the island of New Guinea may be the best place. There have been dozens of new coral, shrimp and fish species discovered in the waters surrounding the Indonesian part of the island in recent years.

Sadly, many of the new species found on Borneo and elsewhere may not be around for long. Not surprisingly, most new species are endemic to the regions they are found, meaning that they are found only in those regions. Unlike Canada where natural ecosystems are effectively protected by government programs and enforcement (yeah, right) the governments of other places in the world do not have the resources to enforce this level of protection. In Borneo, the rainforests are under threat of land clearing for rubber plantations.

There was a discussion on this blog in October about the issue of naming a new species and the traditional right of a biologist making the discovery to do so. Although most discussion members were disgusted that the naming of a species should be carried out by auction, I would like to point out that there can be a positive outcome of auctioning the right to name a new species. If the money raised was put back into the biologist's work to discover or protect a new species, it can be a good thing. It is difficult for biologists to raise funds for research endeavours to find new species, and given the benefit to the species that can be realized by human awareness of their existence, it shouldn’t be such a concern that it is named after some rich guy’s wife. On the other hand, Lophocebus microsoftus or Lophocebus cocacola doesn’t give me a nice feeling.

Image Source:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17619064/

New species of monkey in Tanzania:
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2005/05/0519_050519_newmonkey.html

New species in Borneo:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16270956/

New marine species:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14834763/

Naming of new species by auction:
http://darwinslegacy.blogspot.com/2007/09/nomenclature-or-moneyclature.html

Octopuses: Smartest Invertebrate?

2007-11-29T10:06:00.000-08:00

For many years, scientists believed that vertebrates were the only creatures capable of intelligence and thought. Now of course we know that many invertebrates, including squids and octopuses, have large brains and a high level of intelligence. Even slime molds, which have no nervous sytem, are seemingly capable of thought. How are octopuses, who belong in the same mollusc category as snails and clams, capable of such intelligence? One reason is that a octupus brain and a human brain are strikingly similar.

"Although an octopus brain differs from a typical vertebrate's brain—it wraps around the esophagus instead of resting in a cranium—it also shares key features such as folded lobes, a hallmark of complexity, and distinct visual and tactile memory centers. It even generates similar electrical patterns."

In addition to having a well-developed brain, octopuses have specialized features and complicated eyes.

"Octopuses, which rely on monocular vision, favor one eye over the other. Such lateralization, corresponding to our right- and left-handedness, suggests specialization in the brain's hemispheres, which is believed to improve its efficiency and which was first considered an exclusively human, then an exclusively vertebrate, attribute."

Scientists are still studying octopuses and are constantly finding out new and interesting things about these cephalopods. For instance, octopuses are known to exhibit clever and curious behaviour. Many octopuses will 'play' with a diver and tug at their masks and air regulators. There are even accounts of octupuses blocking drains, causing floods, and sneaking out of their tanks to eat fishies in neighbouring tanks. Interesting fact: An octopus has no bones and can fit through a hole the size of a quarter! They are also able to solve simple mazes and have short term memory. Unfortunately, many octopuses live extremely short lives, some even less then a year!

How does this relate to evolution?

"Octopuses challenge the deep-seated notion that intelligence advanced from fish and amphibians to reptiles, birds, mammals, early primates, and finally humans...Genetic studies show that mollusk ancestors split from the vertebrates around 1.2 billion years ago, making humans at least as closely related to shrimps, starfish, and earthworms as to octopuses. And so questions loom: How could asocial invertebrates with short life spans develop signs of intelligence? And why?"

To watch an octopus attack a shark and complete a maze:

<http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=octopus+shark>

Reference, <http://discovermagazine.com/2003/oct/feateye>

Photo credit <http://www.sciencepunk.com/v5/gallery/octopus.jpg>

PS: There are tonnes of internet debates over whether the plural is Octupi or Octopuses. Many dictionaries say the 'proper english' plural is octopuses.

Tool Use: Where We Fit In

2007-11-28T19:39:00.000-08:00

A recent article by Michael Krutzen et al. documents the first case of tool use by wild bottlenose dolphins in Shark Bay, western Australia (http://www.pnas.org/cgi/reprint/102/25/8939). This finding adds more debate to the questions of human evolution and our separation from the animal kingdom, as the discovery and definition of tool use has surfaced from studies of primates, marine mammals, and birds has done before it. Therefore, it stands to question: What makes us special when it comes to tools, and why is this such a big deal?

For many years it was thought that the development of our frontal lobe gave us special capabilities in problem solving and motor function, among others, which allowed us to manufacture and use tools; a trait, which until recently, was believe to be strictly human. With relatively undisputable evidence to the contrary, as advanced primates, we have decided to evolve ourselves to an even higher level, and alter our definition of “tool use” to ensure our separation from the “others”.

Although it hurts to say it (and even more to use it), Wikipedia offers a straightforward history of tool usage and the human need to be different:

Philosophers once thought that only humans used tools, and often defined humans as tool-using animals. But observation has confirmed that multiple species can use tools, including monkeys, apes, several corvids, sea otters, and others. Later, philosophers thought that only humans had the ability to make tools, until zoologists observed birds and monkeys making tools. Now humans' unique relationship to tools is considered to be that we are the only species that uses tools to make other tools. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tool)

Thus, what makes us special is that we are the only animal which can classify everything else, and defend the definition of ourselves. Our use of tools is different and more important because we can say so. But is this not a little shortsighted? Is a chimpanzee’s stick any different than our fishing rod and net? (http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/AN/journal/issues/v164n5/40471/video2.mov). Is a Sea Otter not using a primitive hammer to crack open shells? And now there is evidence of Dolphins using sea sponges to protect their snouts while digging for food. And birds using sticks like the chimpanzees (http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=xwVhrrDvwPM). How are these tools different from ancient humans?

Well, if we use BB Beck’s definition of a tool as a template, it becomes evident that it is not what the tool is, but how it works. Beck includes a specific definition of six different types of tools: object thrown at predators, objects used to hit predators, hunting weapons, objects for social displays, objects to clean body parts, and objects made and used to acquire food (from Animal Tool Behavior, Garland Press, 1980). Therefore, what has been evidenced as tool use by dolphins and birds, only falls into a single category. Primates other than humans can get away with two: the great apes has been observed using modified implements to acquire food, and for hunting prey and attacking each other. Of course, the perfect definition of tool use includes all things that humans do with tools. All six types of tools are easily within the human toolbox, and if we re-examine the Wikipedia definition, we are the only animal which has been observed using tools to make tools: using an object to more easily create another object to complete a task.

We make tools to separate us from the rest of the animals, we make better definitions to separate us from the primates, and we believe these definitions in order to reassure ourselves that we’re doing something right.

Photo Source: http://www.flickr.com/photos/gregorymjunge/598605680/

Who Lives In a Pinapple Under The Sea?

2007-11-28T16:44:00.000-08:00

When someone talks about a sea sponge my first thought is of the slimmy sponge sitting at the edge of my sink. Then if I think harder, the SpongeBob Square Pants toys I use in my preschool swim classes may cross my mind. However from now on I will be giving sea sponges more respect, because I found that they have abilities beyond my wildest dreams.

The real sea sponges may not be comical like our cartoon friend SpongeBob but they are fascinating animals. In fact the sponge from the genus Euplectella has one up on SpongeBob because it lives in a glass house. These sponges also known as Venus flower baskets, are master minds of mechanical engineering and are baffling scientists. The sponge is able to take glass particles from its environment and glue them together. They build their glass houses with a perfect geometrical pattern and what is more amazing... no heat is required. The sponge structure is also so strong that it is incredibly hard to break. Listen to this podcast and you will get a better understanding of how amazing these creatures are. This just comes to show that complexity does not mean everything. A sea sponge is the simplest animal on earth and yet it has engineering ability beyond human comprehension.

Not only do some sponges have the ability to build themselves glass mansions but other sea sponges could also be the source of many new antibiotics. Scientists have discovered that sea sponges house actinomycete bacteria. This type of bacteria produces over 70 percent of naturally occurring antibiotics. What is exciting scientists is that 25 percent of the bacteria gene pieces found in actinomycete bacteria, from sea sponges, were never seen before. Our sea sponge friends could be housing antibiotics that would have never been possible to create synthetically in a lab.

I really think that within the next few years sea sponges with be making headlines and their simplicity will no longer be over looked.

Sources:

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4734060 http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8498621/ http://www.abc.net.au/science/news/health/HealthRepublish_195275.htm

Nature's Secrets

2007-11-27T22:11:00.001-08:00

I find it very interesting how we continuously find such unique and useful remedies in nature that we have not already discovered in the laboratory.
The hagfish, which is a marine craniate, lives in deep water on the ocean floor. When captured in the jaws of a gill-breathing predator it releases a fibrous slime which when combined with water, turns into a thick and sticky gel.
It has recently been discovered that this amazing slime is very special because it contains thread-like fibers which are similar to the silk which spiders make. It is remarkably strong and has a tensile strength similar to that of high-grade steel. It is thought to have future uses in medical field, treating burn victims, and possibly even people with skin cancer.
Another one of the uses found for the slime produced by the hagfish is as a substitute for eggs. The slime is a sugar and protein solution that coagulates when it's secreted into water, forming a slime that is similar in texture and chemical composition to egg whites. This was done by research students in Bamfield, and they discovered that because of the slime’s colligative nature, it can be used as a substitute for eggs in baking. (See the recipe for Hagfish scones below!)
I find it fascinating how hard we work to synthesize artificial products, when we are often surrounded by much superior products. It demonstrates the diversity and awesomeness of natures. I am curious and excited to see the secrets nature is still hiding from us.

Sources:

A recipe for Hagfish-Slime Cheddar-Gruyere Scones. http://oceanlink.island.net/oinfo/hagfish/hagfishathome.html
http://uwadmnweb.uwyo.edu/rpc/UWTechs/VarousTechsSpiderSilk.asp

Stem Cell Research Controversy

2007-11-27T15:16:00.000-08:00

What are stem cells?
Stem cells are found in all multi-cellular organisms. They are cells which have not differentiated into specialized cell types. They have not yet decided what type of cell they are going to become (ie. brain cells or liver cells). There are two types of stem cells: i) adult stem cells, which can be found adult tissues; ii) and embryonic stem cells, which are found in a blastocyte.

Stem Cell Uses
There already exist a number of uses for adult stem cells, including adult stem cell therapies (eg. bone marrow transplants to treat leukemia). However, the controversy lies around embryonic stem cell research. After 20 years of research there are no approved treatments involving embryonic stem cells. However, they have many foreseen potential uses in regenerative medicine and tissue replacement.

The Controversy
Human embryonic stem cell research is particularly controversial because it requires the destruction of a human embryo, in order to retrieve the stem cells. These embryos are 3-5 days past conception, and most people argue that they have no consciousness, no self-awareness and no ability to feel pain.
Stem cells are obtained from in-vitro fertilization, which involves the creation of many embryos. It is hoped that one embryo will make it through to birth, but the majority are destined to be destroyed. Stem cell research uses the surplus embryos from this in-vitro fertilization.
Some stem cell researchers believe that even absolute anti-abortionists should be able to support stem cell research, because it uses surplus embryos that are going to be destroyed anyhow. However I disagree, if these embryos are "nothing less than individual beings in the earliest stages of life," then this logic would be parallel with defending Nazi experiments on Jews who were destined for destruction in the concentration camps. I believe that "if the microscopic dot (the embryo) is a human being with full human rights, the answer is easy: no stem cell research," as said by Michael Kinsley, Time magazine reporter.
However, if you don't believe that the microscopic embryo has feelings and deserves human rights, then there shouldn't be much argument against embryonic stem cell research. Many scientists and disease sufferers see embryonic stem cells as a life saver.

Therefore, I believe that your opinion on stem cell research should be based on whether you view the 5 day old embryo as something with human rights or without them.

Sources:
http://www.pbs.org/wnet/innovation/episode6_essay1.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stem_cell

Are We Prepared For Global Warming?

2007-11-27T14:21:00.000-08:00

As we all know global warming is inevitable. We can slow the process and reduce the damage done by lowering greenhouse gasses and emissions, but planning for our future climate is a necessity. Have you ever wondered how our essential crops, that we depend on as a source of food, will be effected by global warming? An article I recently read explained that scientist have been studying how plants can naturally evolve and adapt to new environments and conditions. Typically plants use a natural process called vernalization to determine approximate lengths of the cold of winter to predict the most appropriate time to flower. This process can vary greatly depending on the plants geographic location. Some plants need much longer lengths of cold than others before they initiate flowering. Researchers believe that these adaptations evolved very quickly and hopefully they can reproduce adaptations that could survive through extreme conditions. These adaptations would allow our crops to thrive even if significant temperature changes occured. Although I am opposed to genetic modifications I believe that this is one that will eventually be essential to the survival of the human race. I am glad that someone is actually recognizing the fact that global warming is happening and doing something about it instead of just playing it down and ignoring it. We need to remember that our planets equilibrium needs to be balanced in order to maintain life, one kink in the chain of an organisms food source could be devastating overall.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/01/070110090909.htm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vernalization

Risks for Misusing Antibiotics

2007-11-22T11:31:00.000-08:00

The misuse and over usage of antibiotics is causing a major downfall in our society. Despite the instructions on the bottle there are many people who stop the drug when they feel better. This creates a huge issue for scientists who are forced to create stronger and stronger prescriptions. The bacteria, which are causing the illness, will mutate to accommodate the antibiotic if the prescription is not used to its full extent. When you misuse antibiotics you are putting the world at greater risk for infection. The bacteria get stronger and more resistant to the antibiotic. The select few bacteria which survive will reproduce and create more of their resistant kind. This is why it is always important not to cheap out on your antibiotics.
Scientists say we are bringing this on ourselves which I agree with. We all go travelling and easily bring foreign bacteria back with us. We are also extremely sanitary therefore our immune systems are incredibly weak. By destroying the purpose of antibiotics we are setting ourselves up for a major disaster. In some places in the United States people are demanding antibiotics for viral infections, which we all know cannot be treated by antibiotics. These people helping create resistant bacteria which could potentially create huge health risks throughout North America.
Doctors are now becoming aware of the problems of antibiotic resistant bacteria and are starting to only hand out necessary prescriptions. This new method will hopefully help us to eliminate the problem of creating more antibiotic resistant bacteria.

http://www.shirleys-wellness-cafe.com/antibiotics.htm
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/evolution/library/10/4/l_104_03.html
http://www.fda.gov/FDAC/features/1998/698_bugs.html
http://www.kidshealth.org/parent/general/sick/antibiotic_overuse.html

South Park Takes on Evolution

2007-11-22T10:01:00.000-08:00

I know, I know, South Park is really immature and rude. However, there is one episode in Season 10 that is just hilarious and it actually brings up a lot of good science questions. For those of you who follow South Park, this is the episode where Cartman freezes himself so he can go into the future and get a Wii. For those of you who don't, I'll give you a quick summary. One of the characters travels to the future and ends up in the year 3000. He discovers that in the future there is no religion. However, instead of fighting religious wars the citizens are fighting science wars. There are several different science groups, such as the Atheist Alliance, and they are all at war over who is more logical and who has better scientific answer to life.

I think that this is a pretty accurate prediction for the future. Once people have stopped fighting over religion, we will still fight about something! It seems to be human nature to start wars and argue. People seem to think that a life without religion would be perfect (I'm not religious myself) but would that really be any better? I think that scientific beliefs would just replace our religious beliefs. In the episode, instead of saying "Oh my God!", the future people say "Oh my Science!"

Richard Dawkins, an uber famous evolutionary scientist, actually plays a part in the episode too. When the school teacher is forced to teach evolution, he claims that humans were descendants of 'retarded fish frogs that became monkeys'. The teacher gets fired and Richard Dawkins takes over to teach the class. Of course, people aren't really the descendants of fish-frog-monkey things...at least not in those words.

When the concept of evolution came out, I'm sure that the general public thought it was scandalous and unbelievable. Now it seems to be the opposite. The general public (In Canada, at least) seems to believe in evolution, and although we tolerate the idea of divine creationism we do not (for the most part) believe in it. It is interesting to note that many religious private schools are now required to teach both theories of evolution.

I guess that I enjoyed the episode so much because it made me think of how evolution will effect us in the future. I am not so much interested in where we came from but rather where we are going to be in 1000 years. Will religion exist? Will we have destroyed this planet and relocated to another one? For those of you who want to check out the episode, be warned that it is graphic and offensive. However, the storyline brings up a ton of good points.

Episode can be downloaded from http://www.tv.com/south-park/show/344/downloads.html

Photo credit: http://images.tvrage.net/screencaps/27/5266/473267.jpg

PS) Q: What did the male stamen say to the female pistil?

A: I like your "style". Haha...

Some musings on flu shots...

2007-11-18T22:21:00.001-08:00

It’s that time of year again, when we are collectively bombarded with relentless propaganda about the benefits of the flu shot. I don’t really want to debate whether or not you should get a flu shot, but there are some fringe stories that I find interesting…here I’ve found some interesting factoids that will make you sound smart at the pub!

Do it again. And again. And again.

Here’s an interesting statement: if you get a flu shot this year, then you will be worse off next year if you don’t get one. The theory goes like this… the immune system retains antibodies for diseases it has already fought in higher concentrations then background levels of random antibodies. By injecting you with a dead flu virus, flu-shot pushers are encouraging your immune system to create antibodies against that virus so that you are ready should you ever encounter the live version of the virus.

Let’s say your immune system develops four antibodies that are effective on one type of virus. Over the course of the winter, the virus mutates slightly, and you end up getting infected with a strain with only two binding sites in common with the one from the flu shot. The theory goes that your immune system will recognize the two sites on the virus that it has antibodies for, and produce more of these antibodies to fight the infection. In doing so it will ignore the newly evolved sites on the virus and stick with binding sites it recognizes.

Now let’s say next year, the virus has mutated some more, the two “new” sites on last year’s virus are still there, and maybe one of the old ones is still there as well. Because the antibodies for the old sites were effective when you were infected last year, the immune system didn’t make any antibodies for the new sites, and now the one antibody it still has for the old site is no longer enough to kill the virus, and you get sick!

Consider the alternative: last year you didn’t get a flu shot, and naturally fought it off by developing antibodies for all the sites. This year, you have antibodies for all the sites on the virus you contracted, and two of them still match up, allowing you to fight the infection. On the other hand, if you got a fresh flu shot next year, then it might have more antibodies that match the new ones. Is it believable? Maybe…. It depends on how fast it mutates.

Sunspots

This is an interesting story that you might not find elsewhere. Its especially interesting with all the media hype about bird flu slaughtering hundreds of millions. Well it turns out that there is an odd sort of correlation between sunspot cycles and flu pandemics. (What’s a sunspot?... click here). Check out the graph of flu pandemics and the sunspot cycle.

If this trend continues, with the next sunspot maximum expected to be in 2012, the next flu pandemic should be about one year prior. So my prophesy we’re all doomed in 2011. The more interesting question is why the correlation? Any ideas? Are higher levels of radiation during the sunspot peak causing more rapid mutation? Or is there some other explanation? I have heard a theory, but it’s complicated. If you care to hear it, I'll tell you sometime... it's not simple.

The Next Pandemic

So the next pandemic is expected to be bird flu H5N1. Will there be a vaccine against H5N1 by 2011? As of April this year, there already is! However, because of the rapid mutation of the influenza virus, even the current year's flu shot is not 100% effective for this year's flu. The lag time between outbreak and mass development of the flu shot can be up to 6 months. On a good year, the flu shot is only 80% effective, and for the current year it is only 40-50% effective. (See story here).

This makes it pretty much impossible to make a vaccine until an outbreak occurs. The vaccine against the bird flu that has been developed can only hope to slow it down until a custom tailored vaccine can be produced. Even then, it will have to be updated as the pandemic progresses to match the rapid mutation rate of the virus, making it logistically challenging to administer vaccinations worldwide. So relax… live for the moment. We could be dead soon.

Image Sources:

http://journalism.wlu.edu/rrarchive/11-17-2005/images/flu%20shot.jpg

Nature, 343, 25 January, 1990, p.304.

References:

Do it again next year: http://www.rice.edu/sallyport/2003/fall/sallyport/flu.html

Sunspots: http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v275/n5676/pdf/275086a0.pdf

Bird Flu Vaccine: http://www.cdc.gov/flu/avian/gen-info/qa.htm

BANANAS ARE IN DANGER!

2007-11-17T17:46:00.000-08:00

Source: Answers.com , November 14, 2007

This banana probably looks very familiar to you. It should because “100 billion Cavendish bananas consumed annually worldwide,” and it is America’s number one choice of fruit. Many of us take this wonderful fruit for granted. However, we should enjoy them while they last, because there is a chance that the Cavendish banana population will be wiped out completely. This may be hard to believe, but this is actually not the first time that bananas have faced extinction.

Up until the 1950’s a banana called the Gros Michel, or “Big Mike,” was the most popular banana type. It was apparently larger, and tastier, then the bananas that fill our homes today. Unfortunately, all the Big Mike banana
populations were wiped out by the Panama disease, which is caused by the Fusarium oxysporum fungus.
Fortunately, for the last 50 + years the Big Mike has been replaced by the bananas that we find in our homes today. They are a Chinese variety called the Cavendish, that were able to resist the disease. However, the very popular, inexpensive, and delicious fruit, may not be around for much longer because in the last thirty years a new disease, called the Black Sigatoka has been wiping out bananas crops everywhere, and not only Cavendish bananas. Other types of bananas in Asia, Africa and Latin America have been affected by the disease. The disease is having a major impact on the banana industry. Banana crops are being cut in half, and farmers have to use more fungicides to try and fight of the disease. Farmers may have to”spray their plantations up to fifty times a year! (gmo-compass.org)” This is costly, harmful to the environment, and to the health of the employees that harvest the fruit. One serious issue is that the major use of fungicide is actually creating ‘super fungus.’ The fungus that is destroying the banana crops is at an advantage because it has a very short generation times, which allow them to adapt quickly, and create new generations of fungi that are resistant to the fungicide treatment.
The Black Sigatoka is not the only thing threatening the banana population. It is actually a combination of things. One huge contributor to the doom of bananas as we know them, is the fact that Cavendish bananas are pathenocarpic.
Parthenocarpy

-The forming fruit without fertilization
The fruit of parthenocarpic plants are seedless, which is relatively rare among plants. Most cultivated bananas are parthenocarpic. Genetic engineering has been used to create seedless varieties of tomato, strawberry, raspberry, and eggplant. – (http://www.gmo-compass.org/eng/glossary/52.parthenocarpy.html)

So why is parthenocarpy a problem?

“Rather than forming seeds, bananas reproduce by forming side-shoots and suckers. This means that the gene pool of bananas never really changes over the generations. This is a major restriction to breeding possibilities: all efforts to introduce fungus resistance to Cavendish bananas through conventional breeding methods have failed (http://www.gmo-compass.org).”

Don’t be too quick to kiss the banana goodbye… there is still hope! With the useless effort to fight off fungus with fungicide, many banana producers are now hoping that genetic engineering can save the Cavendish bananas (and they might not be putting their bananas in the wrong basket).
“Last year a group of scientists announced that they would completely sequence the banana genome. They intend to focus particularly on banana varieties found in nature. Wild bananas can reproduce by seeds and are constantly confronted with fungi and other pathogens. Sequencing the genome should enable researchers to discover resistance genes that could be transferred to high-yielding, seedless varieties (http://www.gmo-compass.org).”
Many people have declared their love for bananas in song. One song that came out during a banana famine in 1923 was entitled, “Yes! We have no bananas.” Below is a link to a recreation of this 1923 hit, sung by the loveable Muppets.

Yes, we have no bananas- Muppet recreation : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B78rrwSQB24

Sources:

http://www.popsci.com/popsci/science/5a4d4c3ee4d05010vgnvcm1000004eecbccdrcrd.html

http://www.gmo-compass.org/eng/grocery_shopping/fruit_vegetables/17.bananas_using_genetic_engineering_against_fungal_disease.html

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B78rrwSQB24

Jellyfish - 500 million years old

2007-11-16T18:36:00.000-08:00

University of Kansas researchers used recently discovered "fossil snapshots" found in rocks from 500 million years ago to identify the oldest definitive jellyfish ever found. In a new article researchers describe four types of cnidarian fossils preserving traits that allow them to be related to modern orders and families of jellyfish. The specimens are about 200 million years older than the oldest previously discovered jellyfish fossils.

"The fossil record is full of circular shaped blobs, some of which are jellyfish," said Paulyn Cartwright, KU assistant professor of ecology and evolutionary biology and one of the article's authors. "That's one of the reasons the fossils we describe are so interesting, because you can see a distinct bell-shape, tentacles, muscle scars and possibly even the gonads."

A film left behind by the jellyfish in the fine sediment resembles a picture of the animal. Often being preserved in coarse sand, jellyfish don't leave behind such a clear impression. Lieberman said the jellyfish the group describes, found in Utah, offer insights into the puzzle of rapid species diversification and development that occurred during the Cambrian radiation, a time when most animal groups appear in the fossil record, beginning roughly 540 million years ago. This record reveals more about the early evolution and origin of animals with hard shells or bones, and very little on jellyfish.

"The fossil record is biased against soft-bodied life forms such as jellyfish, because they leave little behind when they die," Lieberman said. "That means that we are still working to solve the evolutionary development of many soft-bodied animals."

With the discovery of the four different types of jellyfish in the Cambrian, however, the researchers said that there is enough detail to assert that the types can be related to the modern orders and families of jellyfish. The specimens show the same complexity. That means that either the complexity of modern jellyfish developed rapidly roughly 500 million years ago, or that the group is even older and existed long before then.

Cartwright said the jellyfish described in the article are also unique because they push the known occurrence of definitive jellyfish back from 300 million to 505 million years, a huge jump, and show more detail than anything previously described that is younger.

Since we are learning about invertebrates in class, including jellyfish, I thought this article to be interesting and relevant. Fossils allow us to research and determine the origin and evolution of many species, found years ago and found recently.

Photo Source : http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/10/071030211210.htm
Information Source: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/10/071030211210.htm

Hobbits - a new species?

2007-11-15T23:07:00.000-08:00

On the island of Flores, Indonesia, was the discovery location of fossils of adult humans just 3 feet tall, with a cranial capacity of 380 cubic centimeters. Homo floresiensis is their scientific name. Since these fossils have been found, it has caused great controversy over whether or not these 'humans' were either a new human species or were dwarfs or pigmies possibly suffering from microcephaly, having abnormally small bodies and brains. These fossils date back anywhere between 12,000 to 95,000 years old. A recent study, led by Dean Falk (Florida State University), concluded that the hobbit's brain doesn't resemble microcephalics, and instead resembles a normal human brain, therefore they concluded that the hobbits do represent a new human species. Other scientists insist upon critisizing this study by mentioning the fact that the hobbit brain has other abnormalities, that the sample was too small, and that there should have been more brains to sample. The scientists that believe these hobbits are indeed a 'new human species' are basing this on an evolution theory. This theory is that these human species became seperated by a barrier impossible for either population to cross. These populations experience different mutations and will have different selection pressures over many tens of thousands of years, the time will come when they will be different enough so that they would not be able to interbreed even if they were placed together. Genetic isolation because of geographic isolation is one way evolutionists believe that new species are created. Some previous studies mentioned that the hobbits were humans, but with extreme brain deformities. Falk continues to explain that since the hobbits are small in both body and brain, they must be a new human species. Being isolated from humans on the Indonesian islands resulted in them evolving into this new species. It is clear that Falk and her team, based upon the theory of how new species are created, are 'creating' this new human species. Even if evolution were true, the island of Flores is too small to have maintained an isolated population for long enough to allow the evolution of a new species, say researchers at Pennsylvania State University.

The Bible does not use the word “species.” It is a word in the scientific vocabulary that does not sufficiently describe life as God created it. The word “species” has a very dissimilar meaning from the Genesis word “kind.” Regarding humans, God created one man, Adam. From Adam, God created Eve. From this pair, all humans have originated—mankind or humankind.

The fact that Falk and her team, using a humanistic philosophy, call the hobbits “another species of Homo” is meaningless. Evolutionists cannot prove that the hobbits were unable to reproduce with Homo sapiens, and interfertility is the basis for true biological relationships according to the Bible. God made only one kind of human.

I find this study to be very intriguing, and interesting. It seems that there is always a new discovery of evolution. It really makes us humans think about our true ancestors when we hear about such findings. And it also brings up the question as to what kinds of people roamed our earth thousands of years ago.

Sources:

http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs2007/0214hobbits.asp

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/homs/blog.html#flores7

Polar Bears

2007-11-14T10:01:00.000-08:00

One subject that I keep on reading about that particulary distresses me is the subject of-and I'm not even joking here-hermaphrodite polar bears. It appears that toxic waste and chemicals have caused some of our friends up North to develop new reproductive organs. These body-altering chemicals are called endocrine active substances (EAS) and many are a result of human activity. As humans continue to pollute the earth, the animal world is feeling the effects. It's not only polar bears that are becoming hermaphrodite, many Artic animals are in danger including seals, whales, and reindeer! Why are Artic animals particulary at risk? Because they have high levels of body fat and long life spans, which means they absorb a lot of toxins (mercury, cadmium, etc) for a long period of time. Also, the climate is freezing and there is no soil to absorb the pollution. How does this relate to evolution? Well, clearly these bears have undergone a mutation, and in a way adapted to their environment. Will they continue to mutate, or will they die out? Will other animals become hermaphrodites? What about humans? Due to environmental and lifestyle factors, the human male sperm count has been steadily decreasing. Will there come a day when men and women will no longer reproduce? Maybe in the future, humans will also mutate and become hermaphroditic...unless we stop polluting!

References

National Geographic, http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2002/10/1008_021008_arctic.html

The Register, http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/01/12/arctic_pollution/

Internet Journal of Urology, http://www.ispub.com/ostia/index.php?xmlFilePath=journals/iju/vol2n1/sperm.xml

Manufacturing Evolution

2007-11-09T21:23:00.000-08:00

Have you ever thought about cloning and the impact it could leave on this planet? How evolution will have human finger prints all over every genome know to man. Does this scare you or does it fascinate you? Personally I am confused, because neither the pros nor the cons of cloning can outweigh each other. Yes, cloning will cure diseases and replace much needed organs; however, cloning will also create a synthetic evolution and ultimately human race.

How you ask? Well it is simple, as humans, we have a natural desire to better ourselves. With the power of cloning we will never have to worry about another disease or organ failure again. We will have "optimal health", so we think. However, with no diseases life expectancy will increase and our world will become over populated. In turn, humans will become earth’s number one disease. If cloning becomes an everyday commodity, natural selection will take the back seat. The genes responsible for illnesses and less desired traits will not have natural selection to weed them out. Therefore, future generations are more likely to inherit "bad" genes.

The Council for Responsible Genetics warns that we do not know enough about the relationship of genes and traits. Therefore, there is no guarantee that if a gene is altered it will present the results we are looking for. Also they warn that there are many ideas of "biological perfection". Therefore, a gene that is altered by a parent and is considered "good" may in turn be considered "bad" by the descendent.

Morally cloning is in the eye of the beholder. For example a Christian may feel differently about cloning than an Atheist. Prof. Qiu Renzong, Director of the Bioethics Program at the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, points out solid arguments against the morality of human cloning. He believes that cloning not only will cause religious issues but also legal issues. Prof. Qiu Renzong also supports his argument by adding that when animals are cloned we are only fulfilling human need. Like I pointed out earlier humans have a natural desire to better themselves and unfortunately the life of other species are at risk of our selfishness.

I think in the near future cloning will become a major medical tool and evolution will be based on the ability to balance natural selection with human desire.

Time Is Running Out

2007-11-08T21:41:00.000-08:00

“We're losing at least two species an hour. (This is 2,500 times the "background" rate at which species have disappeared due to evolution.)” (2007 David Suzuki Foundation)
Incase you haven't noticed, we, humans, the selfish things that we are (naturally), are killing off more species than we could ever imagine. I guess part of it is not the fault of a single person considering that it takes two people for the population to grow. But let's come to our senses people; we are on the road to destroying our own kind. From the time we finally realized that what we are doing now may have a big influence on the lives of our great great great great grandchildren, it was already too late. There have been countless times where one person or group tries to take initiative in reducing whatever harmful things that us humans produce so that biodiversity can still be a part of this world but it's the fact that there are only so little of us who truly care what is happening to the earth. Take a look here at the list of things (other than population growth) that are threatening biodiversity. Everything, everything, is our fault; we are even capable of climate changes.

People, like David Suzuki, have dedicated their lives to find ways for society to live in balance with the natural world that sustains us. But the truth is, hardly anyone really cares for nature the way he does. Don't think that just because we are living in Canada, then by simply following the laws and promotions that are already set about recycling, carpooling, saving endangered species...etc. that we are doing the best we can. You would think that Canada should be a world leader in sustainability. However, in a recent study comparing the environmental performance of Canada to other developed countries, we finished 29th out of 30. Sad isn't it?

Some threats can be reduced in a short period of time. But some will take as long as we took to realize all the things we've done to damage the earth. Either way, we have to take action now.
After all, if it takes all of us to make up this world, then it takes all of us to save this world.

References:

http://www.davidsuzuki.org/Forests/Biodiversity/Threats.asp

Photo References:

"Nature, The Wildlife Blog"

http://www.deviantart.com/ Patricia Morel 2007

Invasive species and the death of biodiversity on Earth!

2007-11-05T16:46:00.000-08:00

It has come to my attention that 300 species a day are transported in the ballast water of large ships or freighters. Many species including lamprey, alewife and zebra mussels have been introduced into our Great lakes and some of these species are having a very negative affect on the biodiversity in this area. I was utterly shocked to learn that invasive species were being introduced to these lakes in this manner and at this rate. Ships fill there ballasts with water while out for stabilization in the sea and many times will not release this water until they are in an extremely different ecosystem. In this water there are many species that are alien to this dumping location.

In many cases the new species is incapable of surviving, but this is not always the case. Sometimes, the introduced specie is capable of invading the habitat of native species and becomes a strong competitor for food and space. An excellent example of this is the introduction of the zebra mussel into the Great lakes some time in the 1980s.

This species, believed to be transported in the ballast of a large freighter, is a filter feeder that is capable of surviving at an extremely high density rate. Due to the increase of this species population the water looks much clearer than it has in the past, although many native species are suffering because of this. With the numbers of zebra mussels increasing the amount of food they intake and deprive native species from also increases. There are many other native mussels and fish that feed on the phytoplankton that these invasive mussels are hording.

Why must such a ruthless and corrupt invasion continue? These species damage many aspects of the community and are capable of blocking drains, and even small inlets, yet, it is not a very high priority. Many states have adapted new regulations regarding ballast exchange before entering this water system, but it will require an extreme group effort considering the amount of people, and different governing systems that surround these bodies of water.

I did come across some information regarding some possible solutions that may have the ability of counteracting some of this invasion. One is the introduction of a less invasive species that is capable of feeding on the mussel. There are may different sponges that feed on these mussels but research is still underway.

Scientists are also trying to come up with a possible chemical that would kill all life in ballasts before they unload and would not harm the ecosystem. To me, this is just ridiculous! To fight a problem that occurred because of lack of knowledge, we should dump newly tested, chemically treated water into an already stressed habitat? How does that make sense? These lakes contain 95% of North Americas surface freshwater. This fact alone makes us aware of the importance of these lakes, and the impact they have on our survival. It is almost a guarantee that a few years down the road there will be a negative impact on this environment due to the intoruction of this chemical. What would the solution be then, and what impact would it have on the Great Lakes?

Is Antibacterial Soap Creating Superbugs?

2007-10-31T15:42:00.000-07:00

Bacteria are among the most amazing organisms found on earth. They can evolve extremely fast, which allows more diversity and a better chance of survival. In recent studies biologists are finding that because of the nature of bacterial evolution, antibacterial soap is more harmful than beneficial. The purpose of antibacterial soap is to kill the bacteria, however, there are the few bacteria which are not affected by it and survive to reproduce further. Scientists think that the antibacterial craze is overdone. Joe Schwarcz a director at McGill University says “You don’t want to use a jackhammer to kill an ant when stepping on it will do”. He means why use antibacterial soap and run the risk of creating a resistant colony when you can use normal soap. Humans have survived centuries with only soap, why change now to a more risky substance. According to Natural Life Magazine the FDA is planning on banning antibacterial soap altogether. It is also stated in the Natural Life Magazine that antibacterial soap kills all bacteria including the good bacteria. This causes a threat because with the good bacteria gone there is no competition for the bad resistant bacteria. Therefore this could potentially create a domination species of bacteria. Eventually these bacteria could become resistant to most of the drugs we use and cause a colony of antibiotic resistant bacteria.
Another aspect of antibacterial soap is that it is too sterile. Humans are a very delicate species and live in very sterile conditions. In order to have a good immune system we must come in contact with bacteria, so that our immune systems can make antibodies. A baby for instance needs this contact with bacteria in order to have any immune system at all.

http://www.canada.com/vancouversun/news/story.html?id=5e77ed4a-0881-4715-8963-72663b5bd13a&k=89059

http://www.life.ca/nl/107/soap.html

View link for cartoon:
http://foodsafety.wisc.edu/assets/foodfacts_2007/wffFeb2007_clip_image002.jpg

Sickle Cell Disease "Cure"

2007-10-23T16:37:00.001-07:00

More than 70,000 Americans suffer from sickle cell anemia, an inherited blood disorder that can be very painful and has no cure.
Fortunately doctors may be on the verge of discovering new treatments.
The hospital is a painfully common place for Juanita Gougis and Dave Auberry.
They have sickle cell anemia, and pain is just part of it.
In Dave's case it affected his growth. For Juanita it meant countless days away from school and social events.
Blood transfusions and surgery can reduce the risk of stroke and other complications, but there is no cure yet.
Dr. Yutaka Niihara may change that.
He made a surprising discovery when he was doing research on sickle cell.
"We did not want to believe it because it just seemed so simple," Dr. Niihara said.
The researchers found that when they applied glutamine, a common amino acid and nutritional supplement, to sickled cells in the lab it caused them to open up and become the normal ball-like shape.
"What this treatment does, is we are adding substance that is going to increase anti-oxidant in red blood cell and this seems to prevent all the damages that's caused by sickling," explained Dr. Niihara.
When Nihara and his team began to administer a strong form of glutamine to patients, the results were astonishing.
"We had about 85 percent success. One child had kidney dysfunction which is not uncommon for sickle cell patients. After starting on this medication, the kidney function start to normalize and this was really a fascinating story for me because this was one case where things actually reversed," he said.
Juanita and Dave volunteered for the study.
"It's better to try something that could possibly give me less frequent crises. Even if it doesn't work for me, it might work for the next person that has sickle cell," Dave said.
Dave's crises went down from once a month to once every three months.
Juanita, who used to go to the the hospital for treatment six times a year, only went once in the last year and a half.
Researchers hope to one day start the treatment in infancy in order to prevent organ damage.

http://www.nbcaugusta.com/news/health/10716196.html

Sickle Cell Disease is an evolutionary response to Malaria. If we can stop sickle cells from forming, will malaria be a greater threat?

Sickle Cell disease has supposedly been around for 70,000-150,000 years.
"Available calculations suggest that this gene has developed between 3000 and 6000 generations, approximately 70000-150000 years ago", (http://www.ispub.com/ostia/index.php?xmlFilePath=journals/ijhe/vol1n2/sickle.xml)
In all the regions where this disease originated, there is an endemic of malaria.

Malaria is a disease caused by protozoan parasites and are transferred between individuals by a vector (mosquitoes). Malaria has many affects on individuals, however since we have covered most of this in class; I will go over the general sociological and economic effects (Same with Sickle Cell Anemia).

Malaria infects about 400-900 million and kills 3 million of these a year and the vast majority infected are under 5 years of age. The death rate could double in twenty years if conditions remain the same (http://www.ajtmh.org/cgi/reprint/64/1_suppl/1-c) In Sub-Sahara Africa, 85-90% of fatalities from Malaria occur.

Malaria has also been a cause of poverty in many Sub-Saharan countries, it is estimated to cost $12 Billion US Dollars per year.

Since Sickle Cell Disease is a result of a recessive trait, those which are homozygous recessive have a high chance of death. People who are homozygous dominant, will be affected by malaria. The true advantage is to be heterozygous. Heterozygous individuals have a dominant trait, and a recessive trait, which lets them become immune to malaria and still able to live. This is where the problems with this treatment begin, will more people die from Malaria because we cure sickle cell anemia?

Some doctors say that the trade off is better for those with sickle cell disease to take Glutamine because Malaria can be prevented by other methods such as Mosquito nets or Jesuits Bark.
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08372b.htm

Personally, I find that anything that will save lives is a good thing.

The Evolution and Destruction of the Vancouver Island Marmot

2007-10-19T20:36:00.000-07:00

web.mala.bc.ca

To this day it is still unknown when the first marmot ancestor arrived on Vancouver Island. Some researchers believe they migrated here during the Illinoian glacial period 100 000 years ago, and others believe 10 000 years ago during the Cordilleran glacial period. During these ice ages the sea levels greatly declined and produced a pathway for the marmots to travel to the island. The marmots that traveled to the island became trapped when the glaciers melted and replenished the sea levels. This occurrence is what began the evolution of the Vancouver Island marmot.

Scientists described the first Vancouver Island marmot in 1911. They are herbivores that feed on over fifty species of grasses and wild flowers. They live in burrows they build that will have a number of exits. They are known to hibernate in these dens from Sept-April, as a family, and will block the exits with mud and grass. The marmots mate soon after waking, and produce three or four pups around July. Their average life span is roughly ten years old, and in this lifetime they can produce anywhere from twelve to fifteen pups. Roughly one third of young marmots will move away to start a new colony, consisting of at least two marmots.

http://www.cancaver.ca/

-There has been a recent discovery of marmot bones in 6 caves in British Columbia, and the research of these bones began in 1988. One cave in Strathcona Park held the bones of 74 marmots. It was determined by analysis that these bones were 26 000 years old. Bones of thirteen Vancouver Island marmots were discovered in a small cave in an isolated mountain range near Clayquot Sound, just west of Port Alberni. It is believed that these bones were the remains of the animals hunted for food in these areas.

The population of marmots on the island is currently about 121 marmots on the island total, and because of this they are considered one of the most endangered animals in Canada. There are two small colonies on Mt. Washington, but unfortunately at least 5 larger colonies on the island have become extinct. There is land throughout the island that is available for these marmots, but they are having a difficult time reaching it. This is because of the mass amounts of clear-cut areas that marmots will not cross because of the possibility of being spotted by predators. It has been found that female marmots in these areas located close to clear-cuts produce less offspring, and with the numbers so low this decrease in offspring is quite devastating. The lack of ability to move from habitat to habitat has had a huge impact of the population, and causes a decrease in genetic drift. Scientists believe that captive breeding and reintroducing will assist in getting this animal off of the endangered list. Marmots are being held for breeding at the Calgary and Toronto Zoos, and there is talk of opening a special breeding center on Vancouver Island.

Since clear cutting is the major destructor of this marmot species, I for one believe that we should explore alternate options to this logging technique. It affects a number of species, where as, other less drastic options would not demolish these habitats in this extreme manner. It is the pure selfishness of human beings that urges us to ignore these facts! Instead, we concentrate on what many believe is more important; money and a strong economy. I am convinced that with the diverse options available, including selective logging and alternate planning strategies these major logging companies could still make themselves money, while sparing the lives of wild species. In turn, this would keep environmentalists, and animal activists off their back, providing a win-win situation. We have all seen the attention activists can bring to situations and specific companies. If you were running one of these companies wouldn’t you want to avoid any bad publicity that could seriously damage the reputation of your company? Wouldn’t you want to avoid making it look like its being ran by money hungry corporate thugs?

The biggest influence on the population numbers is the clear cutting that is leading to many tragedies in wildlife eco-systems, but scientists are also looking for other possible problems. Some research is being done on marmot fecal and blood matter to test for Yersina and other potential pathogens. There is not very much known about the reproductive systems, but more is currently being learnt at the breeding facilities.

Through my research of the Vancouver Island marmot I learnt that at these zoos, where the breeding is taken place, marmots are being fed rabbit pellets, yams, broccoli, beets, spinach and carrots. This sound nice for the marmots but what I would like to know is how this will affect the marmots when they are returned to the wild. I also learned that they enjoy eating dandelions. I strongly believe that animals being bred with the intention of being returned to their natural habitat should be kept in habitats as similar to he ones they will be returning to. This includes feeding them foods that they can access on their own, in the wild.

not so perfect

2007-10-19T14:53:00.000-07:00

      I've often thought of how miraculous evolution really is, how amazing it is to find such infinitely complex structures that have been derived from billions of years of natural selection, how all of these "perfect" structures somehow or other originated from a single celled ancestor. Take, for instance, the human eye. Human eyes, and in fact most vertebrate eyes, are pretty incredible don't you think? We can see a broad range of colours, we have an acute sense of depth perception, and in fact primates are believed to have lost much of their sense of smell and hearing due to an increased reliance on our keen eyesight. Our eyes seem perfectly evolved to give us full colour, clear and true vision.
     I was intrigued when I picked up a recent issue of New Scientist that in their article, Evolution's Greatest Mistakes, Claire Ainsworth and Michael Le Page argue that the halls of human evolution are actually full of bloopers, and big "mistakes". Surprisingly, a good case of an evolutionary "oops" is the vertebrate eye. Contratry to my initial thoughts, our eyesight is actually quite far from perfect. According to Ainsworth and Le Page, "vertebrate eyes" have a huge flaw: "the retina, is wired up back-to-front, with the light-sensitive cells behind the nerves and blood vessels that support it". Apparently this distorts our vision and causes a substantial "blind spot in each eye". Although there is a small spot in the center of the retina that is not obstructed by these blood vessels, called the fovea, we still only have a small dot of full colour, detailed, in focus vision and a large out-of-focus periphery.
     Graham Lawton explores the concept of the imperfect eye in his article, Mind Tricks. Far from my assumption of clear and true vision, he calls our vision merely "sporadic input". Lawton reveals that what we see as a "seamless visual experience" is noneother than the patchwork collage of "fixations", or short bursts of vision, which are gathered in between the small darting movements of our eyes "called saccades". Apparently each time we move our eyes they cease to pick up visual information for that fraction of a second. Since we flick our eyes on average three times each second there is a lot we are not picking up. Most of us will never be able to see this blind spot, because it happens so quickly that we do not "see" it. However, if you want to test this theory Lawton suggests that you watch "your eyes close-up in the mirror and flick your focus back and forth from one pupil to another. However hard you try you cannot see your eyes move - even though somebody watching you can."
     The worst of it is that while your visual cortex isn't looking your brain is filling in the gaps with what it thinks you should be seeing. This likely explains why when the police interrogate five different eye witnesses, they tend to get five very different stories of what was or was not seen.
     So the question is why on earth would natural selection favour misassembled retinas, a mere peekhole of clear vision, and a line of sight that clocks off three times per second? The truth is probably that although the structure of the eye is not as perfect as it could be it is pretty useful at fulfilling it's evolutionary purpose: proliferation of the species by allowing us to quickly identify food and danger which in turn enables us to survive long enough to reproduce.

References

Ainsworth, C., & Le Page, M. (2007, August 11). Evolution's Greatest Mistakes. New Scientist, 36 - 39.

Lawton, G. (2007, September 22). Mind Tricks: Six ways to explore your brain. New Scientist, 35 - 41.

The "Scientific" Reliability of Natural Selection

2007-10-16T16:56:00.000-07:00

Although Europe has taking the initiative of banning the teaching of Creationism, it is important to look at how the North American school system takes a similar approach. In science classes the theory of evolution is presented as the primary explanation for life on Earth without much emphasis on creationism of intelligent design. Interestingly, it appears that criticism for Darwin's theory is becoming a more popular topic in the psychological field. Several of these arguments I feel, should be made more apparent in the typical schooling environment.
During the development of Social Darwinism, several of Darwin's theories came under attack from psychologists around the world. According to Karl Popper, a science is only valid if it can be disproven. This principle of falsifiability provides the largest criticism of evolution; that the "fact" cannot be challenged. It is virtually impossible to refute Darwin's arguments, however this does not necessarily demonstrate scientific reliability. In addition, it has been implied that the reliability of many of the stories that founded Darwin's theory are questionable. The reliability of the peppered moth, Darwin's finches, fossil record and probiotic soup have all been attacked.
Clearly, Darwin's theory cannot be entirely proven as we would expect from a "scientific" theory that has entirely transformed our world view. It's validity does not meet the standards we would expect from other scientific hypotheses although there is substantial supporting evidence. It is possible to view Darwin's theory as a philosophical assumption rather than an actual science. In this case, how are we to say that it should take priority over the teaching of other philosophical theories such as creationism?

References:

Study of ID means fair debate in schools - December 30, 2003By Curtis L. Brickley J
http://www.ravallirepublic.com/articles/2004/01/02/opinion/viewpoint/zvalley.txt

class discussions, PSYC 210 UVIC

Bacterial Spores

2007-10-15T10:10:00.000-07:00

When certain bacterium(Bacillus,Clostridium) are exposed to environmental changes, or a lack of food source,often times they will enter a state of change in order to protect themselves from damage. Once a cell notices these changes it begins to make a copy of its chromosome and replicate. In a sense the bacteria will "mummify" itself into what are called spores or endospores. These spores are incredibly difficult to destroy and are usually not affected by changes in heat, pressure, pH, lack of nutrient or even radiation! This has a lot to do with how the spore is formed, containing very hard multi layered coats for protection, thick layers of peptidoglycan and the ability to be dormant for long periods. It is possible that some bacteria could have even been revived after lying dormant for millions of years! This is truly an incredible survival technique, maybe researchers could use the same technologies to keep people with disease in a dormant state until a cure is found?
However, not all bacteria have the ability to spore but most that live in soil do and can be very harmful when contracted. These endospores can cause many serious diseases in humans. Anaerobic sporing bacteria can cause such diseases as botulism (Clostridium botulinum), gas gangrene (Clostridium perfringens), tetanus (Clostridium tetani), and acute food poisoning (Clostridium perfringens). Aerobic bacteria such as the well known anthrax (Bacillus anthracis) can also cause significant health issues.
One of widely unknown features of the spore is how it actually returns to a living bacterial state. So far researchers believe that the spore can only awaken from its dormancy once the conditions surrounding it are returned to the levels that were present when the bacterium was thriving. In the past it has been widely unknown how the spore actually breaks out of its dormant state but a new study by the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory scientists have proven many great insights. They have studied Bacillus atrophaeus spores and revealed that when the spore is awakening the spore coat will actually breakdown and a new bacterium will emerge!! Scary! almost a little too much like the Alien movies!
Although hard to fathom, hopefully these new studies will allow us to more clearly understand bacterial spores in order to better treat infections and to aide in protecting ourselves from future disease.

Sources:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Endospore
http://www.daviddarling.info/encyclopedia/B/bacspores.html
http://www.llnl.gov/str/Sep07/NewsSep07.html