This afternoon keepers released video footage of the baby white cheeked gibbon born at the Minnesota Zoo on December 27. The baby -- the 10th one born at the Minnesota Zoo -- is being cared for by people because her mother, "Tia," shows little interest in mothering her. Still, the baby is growing well and keepers are hopeful that Tia will come around eventually.
The baby gibbon won't be on exhibit for a few months, so watch the video.
Tags : Extinction could be a family affair
in Life Science, Diversity of Organisms, and Biological Populations Change Over Time
Extinction: It may run in the family.
Courtesy Mark RyanExtinction is a fact of life. Species rise up, consume energy, reproduce, radiate to fill their range, and die off. It happens all the time. In fact, nearly 99% of all creatures that have ever lived on Earth have gone extinct. That’s just the way it is. Sometimes the cause for extinction is minor – a subtle change in the environment such as increased competition for a food source or the introduction of a harmful contaminate or virus. Other times it can be more heavy-handed, like when a giant asteroid hurls in from outer space and slams into the planet sending the biosphere into a tizzy, and wiping out entire faunas. Either way it sucks big time.
But now there may be a third, more insidious reason. Extinction could be built into the genes of some unfortunate creatures, and according to the new study, it may be get passed on as an ancestral species branches out into new ones. Meaning extinction is a family affair.
The research team, composed of Kaustuv Roy of the University of California, Gene Hunt from the Smithsonian Institute, and David Jablonski of the University of Chicago, studied a whole gamut of extinction patterns in shelled marine animals such as clams, mussels and scallops. Their paper, which appeared recently in the journal Science, suggests that propensity for extinctions could be passed on through the whole groups of species that share common ancestors.
"Biologists have long suspected that the evolutionary history of species and lineages play a big role in determining their vulnerability to extinction, with some branches of the tree of life being more extinction-prone than others," said Roy, a biology professor at UC San Diego.
"Background extinctions" are the normal extinction rates that occur between major extinction events (e. g. killer asteroids), and usually don’t include those caused by human activity. (I don’t see why not – are we not part of Nature?) Anyway, when the team analyzed ‘background rates” from the Jurassic to the present they were struck by how some of the marine species with the highest rate of extinction during those “normal” times were also the most vulnerable (along with their close relatives) during major extinction events.
"Big extinctions have a filtering effect. They tend to preferentially cull the more vulnerable lineages, leaving the resistant ones to proliferate afterwards," Hunt said.
This means extinction isn't as random as we’d like to think, and actually tends to affect entire genera not just species within them. These clustered extinctions chop off larger branches from the family tree and cut deeper into the lineage history.
"Now we know that such differential loss is not restricted to extinctions driven by us but is a general feature of the extinction process itself," Roy said.
The study, according to evolutionary biologist Charles Marshall of Harvard University, shows how fossils are an important record of evolution’s workings.
"Only by analyzing the past do we get a direct sense of the rules by which evolution has worked and will continue to work,” he said.
LINKS
Science in the White House: an interim report
Last January, Bryan praised Barack Obama’s inaugural address for promising to make decisions based on observation, data and statistics. Bryan also said,
We will keep a watchful eye over the next four years to make sure that science policy adheres to the agenda and principles that our new president has set out.
So, how are things going so far?
One:
Last week, the White House released a new report on climate change. Roger Pielke Jr., professor of environmental studies at the University of Colorado, says the study is seriously flawed. He finds the report relies on data that is old, narrow, non-peer reviewed, second- and third-hand, and contradicted by more recent, peer-reviewed studies. He specifically objects to claims that global warming is leading to more natural disasters. Such disasters are Dr. Pielke’s specialty, and he argues there is no such trend.
Two:
Back in February, Secretary of Energy Steven Chu said that global warming was going to destroy agriculture in California. Dr. Pielke (who is becoming something of a one-man band in reigning in the more outrageous claims of global warming) picked apart that one as well.
Three:
In March, Interior Secretary Ken Salazar removed gray wolves in the northern Rockies from the Endangered Species list. This action was first proposed by President George W. Bush just before he left office, but suspended by the incoming administration. Two months later, they decided that Bush was right to accept the unanimous recommendation of Fish and Wildlife scientists.
Mark hates it when I point out stuff like that…
I just downloaded the Raptor Resource 2008 Project Banding Report (how's that for a little light reading?), and I found the following:
"We removed the High Bridge stack nest box after the 2007 nesting season. Xcel Energy was converting from a coal facility to natural gas turbine operation, and planned to raze the stack some time in early 2008. We installed a replacement nest box on the nearby ADM stackhouse, but it appears that the falcons chose to nest under the nearby High Bridge instead."
All spring we watched and waited, and the birds were there all along! I'll get in touch with the folks at Xcel and Raptor Resource and see what we can do about watching the peregrines during the 2009 nesting season.
Here's a report of a metro man facing a prison sentence after shooting a wolf in northern Minnesota while the animals were still catagorized as an endangered species.
Return of the native: For the first time since the 1930s, a leatherback sea turtle has nested on Padre Island, Texas.
Courtesy NOAA
For the first time in 70 years, biologists have confirmed that a leatherback sea turtle has nested in Texas. Though they did not see the animal itself, the researchers found its unmistakable tracks and a freshly-dug nest.
The leatherback, the largest reptile in the world, is endangered worldwide. Many drown when caught in fishermen’s nets. Poachers steal their eggs. Development encroaches on the sandy beaches the turtles need for their nests. The return of at least one turtle to Padre Island, Texas is hopeful sign that the species may be making a slow comeback.
You can learn more about leatherbacks turtles here and here.
A drink with some bite: China cracks down on the sales of tiger bone wine
Here's some interesting video about a problem in Chinese wildlife preserves: the sale of tiger bone wine, which some Chinese believe has medicinal benefits.
Big trouble for a little animal: The federal government is studying if endangered status needs to be expanded for the pygmy rabbit, a little bunny that can be found in eight western U.S. states.
Courtesy WikipediaDid you know there was such a thing as the pygmy rabbit? Neither did I until I ran into a news story today that the federal government is considering adding the creatures to the endangered species list.
Pygmy rabbits have already hit endangered status in eastern Washington. Now, their numbers are looking to dip below that standard in other western states of California, Oregon, Nevada, Idaho, Montana, Wyoming and Utah.
As their name implies, pygmy rabbits are small – just nine to 12 inches long and weighing just under a pound. They live in tall brush and dig down into soily burrows. They’re one of the few rabbit species that live in the ground.
Why are their numbers going down?
Human development is pushing out places for the little bunnies to live. Farming, fires, mining and recreational development have encroached on their habitats. For several years, researchers have spent millions trying to develop a breeding program to re-establish their numbers in eastern Washington. A population of 20 pygmies put into the area earlier this year has been reduced down to one lone rabbit due mainly to the munching habits of predators.
Should these kinds of efforts continue or is this a lost cause? Share your thoughts about protecting threatened and endangered species here with other Science Buzz readers.
Preble's meadow jumping mouse: Preble's meadow jumping mouse. Photo courtesy U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.In what I personally consider to be a sweet move, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service reversed rulings that denied seven endangered species increased protection, after an investigation found the actions were influenced by political pressure.
Once such species that is now given increased protection is one of my personal favorite rodents (I like so few rodents) – the Preble's meadow jumping mouse.
The person responsible for limiting the protection for these animals, Former Deputy Assistant Interior Secretary Julie MacDonald (who was at the time responsible for overseeing the Fish and Wildlife Service) was pressuring Fish and Wildlife scientists to alter their findings regarding the endangered animals. What other actions have been done – what other damage has been done – that we don’t know about? MacDonald was influential in delisting the Sacramento splittail, a fish found only in California's Central Valley where she owns a farm on which the fish live - come on!
The Center for Biological Diversity reports that the current administration has listed only 52 species under the endangered species act, the fewest of any administration since the law was passed in 1973. I hope this decrease is because of politics and not because we’re running out of species.
I know this sort of thing happens on both sides of the aisle, but I guess I would way rather that there be too many species listed as endangered, and that we were being overly cautious, rather than being to strict about what species deserves protection and then finding out later that we acted too late to preserve them. I would rather err on the side of caution, rather than crossing my fingers and hoping the problem fixes itself.
And there are very real trade offs here too. Set aside a habitat for a spotted owl you’re removing a source of income for families that have limited options. It’s not an easy choice.
What do you think?
Get my good side: Bears are showing up much more frequently than expected in a wildlife photo project being conducted along the Appalachian Trail.
Courtesy by grizzbassFrolicking through the Appalachian Trail wilderness, wildlife for the past six months have been secretly having their photos snapped through a project coordinated through the Smithsonian Institution. And for the most part, the results have been pretty predictable, outside of a few embarrassing images.
Using 50 cameras attached to motion detectors, the project is set up to document wildlife patterns along the trail without the influence of humans being around. Once a month volunteers go to the cameras to collect the digital images and move the cameras to new locations.
Among the findings: deer, very unsurprisingly, have a glazed-over look when getting their picture taken; bear are curious and aggressive; wild horses are still running in the eastern wilderness.
Here's a link to some of the photos that have been captured of animals at night along the trail.
Since starting in the spring, the project has collected about 1,900 images of animals both at daytime and night. And researchers are already learning some things about the changing wildlife conditions in Appalachia. Bear populations are rebounding big time, with bear images being captured at 75 of the 273 camera locations used so far. Also, photos have been taken of species thought to be possibly extinct in the area: the long-tailed weasel, a variety of flying squirrels and bobcats. However, there are also concerns about one species that hasn’t shown up on photos yet: the eastern cougar.
How do these unsuspecting animals cooperate for the camera? It’s all in the nose. Project organizers knew they had to have a way to stop the animals in their tracks to get a photo. They concocted a blend of animal secretions called “the stink” to stop animals in their tracks. That aromatic blend is put on a stick near the camera area to entice the animals to stop for the camera.
To say that the photos are candid might be an understatement. Some mysterious black, fuzzy photos had researchers stumped for a while. Then they realized that bear were using the camera lens as a way to scratch their, um, posteriors.
Subscribe
I want to learn about
Science Buzz is supported by the National Science Foundation.Copyright © Science Museum of Minnesota, 2004-2010, except where noted.
Add a new comment