Keep Up
A research team has discovered a primate in Vietnam that hibernates. Hibernation is when energy is saved within an animal by decreasing body temperature and lowering metabolism. Hibernation has to be longer than 24 to be considered hibernation, otherwise the action is only daily torpor. Primate hibernation is a rare occurrence, with only three primates, all dwelling in Madagascar, being the only primates with this behavior (not anymore!). The pygmy slow loris is the new edition to the hibernating-primate family. They typically reach a body length of 20 centimeters and a mass of about 400 grams. They live in Southeast Asia and are nocturnal. The species was found to hibernate in episodes up to 63 hours in length between December and February. The reason that these primates do this is probably due to the cold weather that comes in and drops the temperature by 5 degrees Celsius. The drop in temperature indicates a drop in food abundance and results in the lorises' hibernation patterns. This new discovery may indicate a change in our understanding of the evolution of hibernation in primates. I find this issue of particular importance because the hibernating patterns of this species of loris may lead to a better understanding of sleep and how it has evolved to be a necessity. What I happen to wonder is whether the lemurs of Madagascar and the loris of Southeast Asia both derive from a common ancestor that had hibernation, or if perhaps the two species evolved to have the same behavior but in different environments. I think that maybe the two species obviously share a common ancestor (each being mammals) and thus have partaken in divergent evolution, but that the similar environments of their habitats and the presence of cold seasons have resulted in a type of convergent evolution, where the two species just happened to develop the same trait because of a similarity in environment. It seems a little sad that hibernation appears to have been lost as a trait in (most) primates in Asia, Africa, and the Americas - the idea of hibernation sounds somewhat pleasing, especially during a tiring end of the semester. http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2015/12/151203111221.htm
0 Comments
A litter of puppies was born using in vitro fertilization, a first in history. Nineteen embryos were given to the mother host dog, who gave birth to seven puppies. For success with in vitro fertilization, an embryo must be produced by fertilizing a mature egg with sperm. The egg must then be returned to the host mother at the right time of her reproductive cycle. What was difficult was trying to collect mature eggs from a female's oviduct. Dogs' reproductive cycles differ from other mammals, so trying to use eggs from other animals did not work since the eggs failed to fertilize. The researcher found out that leaving the egg in the oviduct an extra increased their odds of fertilization. Researchers had to simulate the conditions of the female tract, as the tract is what prepares the sperm for fertilization. Magnesium in the cell culture worked for this. Fertilization rates are now 80-90 percent. Researchers had to freeze the embryos and wait to insert them in the oviduct of the dog too, since a female dog only goes through the right stage of her reproductive cycle once or twice a year. In vitro fertilization allows conservationists to freeze and store semen and eggs so that the genetic diversity of a species may survive. I find this issue of particular importance because I like puppies. Well, that is not the only reason: this type of research and discovered technique may be used to help endangered species not go completely extinct. Also, this may preserve certain rare breeds of dogs. As long as there is an available host and available sperm and eggs, there should be a possibility to preserve a species or breed. Also, this technique, combined with genetic editing procedures, may be used to prevent certain diseases that certain breeds of dogs are known to have, as inbreeding has developed a lack of genetic diversity within breeds. http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2015/12/151209183500.htm In 2014, carbon emissions increased only by 0.6 percent, with a flattening or decrease in the rate of output of such chemicals expected to occur this year. What is surprising, however, is that though carbon emissions may be on the decline, we have experienced economic growth. This would be the first time in history where a this has happened. The decrease in carbon emissions is largely credible to China, which, after years of industrial expansion, has slowed down its emission rate by 1.9 percent in 2014 and an expected 3.9 percent in 2015. Whether or not this decrease in emissions is sustained depends on the use of coal in major consumers of the substance, such as the United States and China. What is also important is where new energy sources are available: China met over half of its energy needs in 2014 with non-fossil fuels. Even if we meet global peak emission levels, we will still be throwing vast amounts of carbon into the atmosphere. The only way to actually achieve climate stabilization is to cut emissions to near zero. I find this issue of particular importance because this is actually some good news when it comes to us and the environment. Though we are still destroying the planet because of our large amounts of pollution, we are at least on the right track toward reducing our emissions. Perhaps the leaders at the Paris Conference on Climate Change can come up with a solution that may help to reduce our emissions and allow us to live a bit longer as a species on Earth. http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2015/12/151207113733.htm Climate change is expected to have great impacts on food security, especially for those living in poorer conditions or in tropical areas. The report focuses on the effects of climate change on food through 2100. Climate change will affect tropical and subtropical areas more so than in other areas, though there will be regional differences. Higher latitudes would experience more agricultural productivity at first, since the warming of the climate would actually make the area habitable for crops and their would probably be an increase in precipitation. But even these regions will suffer if carbon emissions continue to increase. Countries could expect a change in available diet and the price that must be payed to purchase food. The demand of exports would increase since countries that are experiencing more hardship and lack of agricultural activity would need food. Higher temperatures can impact food storage and pose a health risk. The rising oceans and other bodies of water would likely mess with transportation routes for the food. In a worst case scenario, one in which there is high population growth and low economic growth, there could be an increase of 175 million more undernourished people by 2080, resulting in a grand total of 980 million undernourished people around the world. This article is of particular importance because people have difficulty believing in the real consequences of global warming. Climate change can drastically change the planet, and by the time that it does and people begin to care about the subject, it will have been too late. Only then, in a time of great suffering and regret, will people realize all the harm that they've caused to the world. The article reminds me of the "Lorax" video we watched in class, where the Once-ler ruined his environment and could do nothing about it afterward. We are potentially Once-lers who are destroying the planet beyond repair. http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2015/12/151202142319.htm As would be surprising, it turns out that mice have longer sperm than do elephants. In the animal world, if multiple males mate with the same female, a longer sperm would prove to be advantageous in fertilizing the female's egg. When it comes to fertilizing eggs, the two things that help are the length of the sperm and the quantity of sperm in the ejaculate. For smaller animals, the more important factor is the length of the sperm, as there is a higher possibility that multiple sperm will reach the egg. This higher probability of more sperm hitting the egg is due to the small anatomy of such small animals. So, when the sperm of small animals has to compete against other sperm, the one with the longer tail tends to fertilize the egg. Conversely, larger animals tend to have smaller sperm because of the longer distance the sperm has to travel to the egg. So, instead of making small amounts of sperm that have long tails, elephants make large amounts of sperm with short tails, as the real competition of fertilizing an egg in large animals is getting to the egg itself. This is why a whale's sperm is almost a thousand times shorter than that of a fly. I find this article of particular interest because it deals with the development of animals through sexual reproduction. The finding is largely linked with the idea of evolution, as animals with a sperm type that betters suits their anatomy have evolved to be that way. Certain organisms of a species may not reproduce because of their bad type of sperm, while other organisms of a certain species may because of their sperm that is best suited to out-compete other sperm. Therefore, the organism with the more advanced sperm will pass on the trait of having that type of sperm. http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2015/11/151118071404.htm A glacier in northeast Greenland is melting and has the potential to raise ocean levels by 18 inches. The glacier is named Zachariae Isstrom and is losing mass at a rate of 5 billion tons per year. The glacier is now breaking up and calving in ways that will increase the levels of the ocean. Data from aerial surveys and satellite observations are collected for the researchers. Both the bottom and top of the glacier are being melted away, with the top being melted by warming air and the bottom being melted away by warm water currents. Zachariae Isstrom neighbors another glacier, Nioghalvfjerdsfjorden, that is also melting, but at a slower rate.These glaciers make up 12 percent of the Greenland ice sheet and would raise the ocean level by 39 inches if they both melted. This issue is particularly important because the melting glaciers of Greenland are indicators of the warming we are causing to our planet. With the loss of our glaciers, an ocean level rise will increase and cause there to be a loss of coastline. People along the coast would and have to move, so, potentially, millions of people would have to move further inland. Besides the ocean level rise, the gradual warming of the planet can lead to climate changes that we do not yet know will result in. http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2015/11/151112150438.htm A team of biologists has made the first observations on one of the world's least known species of whale: the Omura's whale. For a long time, these whales were commonly mistaken for the Bryde's whale, for both are small, tropical, baleen whales. The Omura's, however, are smaller than the Bryde's whales, and have distinguishing markings. The Omura's whale was finally distinguished as its own species in 2003 when analysis was conducted on genetic data from beached whales. Prior to now, there had been no confirmed sightings of Omura's whales in the wild. Omura's whale tend to dwell in remote regions and are usually between 33-38 feet. Scientists know so little about the whale that they are not able to of how many of the species there actually is. The whales were observed off of the coast of Madagascar. Researchers are studying the vocalization patterns of the whales as well as the whales' habitat preferences. The team hopes to produce the first estimate for the size of a population of Omura's whale. This issue is of particular importance because it is important to know about the different species of organisms that are found in the world. Knowing the intricacies of each species will allow us to better understand the role of each species in the grand scheme of their particular ecosystem. Such a species may play a crucial part of a food web. For these whales, their ability to remain hidden for so long simply calls for curiosity. Figuring out more about Omura's whales may help us to calculate our impact on them, which was already made apparent by the fact that some of them have been caught during whaling expeditions. http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2015/10/151022141744.htm Sea turtles lay their eggs in burrows along the coast, and the burrows are left unattended and without parental care. The incubation time varies with environmental conditions. Drought, heavy rainfalls, and climate changes are influencing the incubation and sex ratios of loggerhead sea turtles. Sea turtles do not have an X or Y chromosome, so what determines the sex of the hatchlings is the temperature during incubation. Warmer incubation environments produce females, while cooler incubation periods produce males. Loggerhead turtles already have trouble reproducing and repopulating, as only 1 in about 2,500 to 7,000 turtles reaches adulthood. With climate change increasing the ratio of males to females in a species in where the females already outnumber the males, it is going to become increasingly difficult for sea turtles to reproduce. This issue is particularly important because it can lead to the demise of the sea turtle. With warmer temperatures, the sea turtles will not have enough males to repopulate their species. And with only a select few of males actually surviving, there will be a lack of genetic diversity in the sea turtle offspring. The loss of genetic diversity within the loggerhead turtle population will mean that they are especially susceptible to factors that may reduce their population size. The extinction of the loggerhead sea turtle would only contribute to the mass extinction that is currently underway. http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2015/10/151015111047.htm http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2015/10/151006085230.htm There are predators in the world, such as killer whales, that can move from their main food source to another when the particularly favorite food is in short supply. Though this may help these predators in the long run, moving to other foods can be detrimental to ecosystems. For example, the killer whale's main source of food was newborn whale calves, but when the supply was running low, the killer whales moved on to hunting seals instead. After when the seal supply in turn began to decrease, the killer whales turned to sea otters as a new food source. Through the hunting of sea otters, whales were able to indirectly increase the amount of sea urchins, since they are the main food source of sea otters; with less sea otters comes more sea urchins. The sea urchins have now eaten the kelp beds that once were thriving with many different species. The new conclusion that the changing of food sources can lead to a cascade of extinction contradicts what was once thought before: that an extinction cascade would be avoided if the predator could find a new prey. This issue is of particular importance because now we are able to see the effects that we are having on the ecosystems that we are currently over-fishing. Some fisherman have resulted in harvesting in nature reserves when fish supply is low, which leads to the extinction of the species that were once in that specific nature reserve. Increases awareness is important in our role in altering ecosystems because then we may take action in trying to reduce our effect on ecosystems that are delicately arranged in food webs. http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2015/10/151006085230.htm
After five years of studying and research, scientists have found that glaciers in warmer Patagonia move faster than those in Antarctica. Patagonia is a region in at the southern end of South America that contains the Andes mountains and the deserts and grasslands to the east of the Andes. The glaciers in Patagonia cause more erosion because they move faster, a process that is only made possible by the melting ice helping to lubricate the glaciers. Glaciers erode 100 to 1,000 times faster in Patagonia than in Antarctica. The depositing of sediments due to this erosion may impact fisheries, dams, and freshwater in mountain areas. Depositing more sediments around the polar regions will decrease the biodiversity there as organisms there are not accustomed to the high level of minerals that would be brought about. These findings have helped to confirm that glaciers do more erosive damage during the end of each cycle of glaciation rather than when ice cover is greatest.
This topic is of particular importance because melting glaciers can permanently alter the shape of the planet, and in doing so, can decrease the biodiversity of polar regions. Sediments being deposited by the moving glaciers have the potential to impact fisheries, an industry that is already facing major crises. This recent finding should encourage us to reduce our impact on global warming even more so, since melting glaciers are not only warming the ocean and causing more extreme weather, but are also changing the shape of the earth as we know it.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2015/10/151001142222.htm
|
AuthorI'm Angel Archives
April 2016
Categories |