Click to enlarge
http://e-edition.metro.co.uk/2010/06/01/ - p21.
Tuesday, 1 June 2010
Solenodon hunt: On the trail of a 'living fossil'
The solenodon is one of just a handful of venomous mammalsSunday, 30 May 2010
By Rebecca Morelle Science reporter, BBC News, Sierra de Bahoruco, Dominican Republic
It is swelteringly hot and unbearably humid as we set off on our journey deep into the heart of the Dominican Republic's tropical forests.
And as we drive along the bone-joltingly bumpy track, crammed into a truck loaded with enough supplies for our week in the wilderness, the excitement amongst the researchers grows.
We are on our way to see if we can track down one of the most strange and ancient mammals in the world - the Hispaniolan solenodon.
But finding one will not be easy: naturalists once thought that you would be more likely to see a ghost than this elusive creature. And, indeed, few have ever come face-to-face with one.
The nocturnal solenodon, which is only found in the Dominican Republic and in one of the last forested patches of Haiti, is often described as a "living fossil", thanks to the fact that it has been around, virtually unchanged, for the past 76 million years.
Remarkably, this means it would have once scuttled amongst the giant feet of the dinosaurs, in the days when they roamed the Earth.
And it is an odd-looking animal.
It is the size of a rabbit, with a ginger-brown coat. It has disproportionately large, clawed feet, beady little eyes and a very long, thin nose.
But perhaps its most bizarre - and prehistoric - feature is that it is the only mammal that can inject venom through its teeth, the same way a snake does.
The poison, while not deadly to humans, is the perfect tool for the insectivore, allowing it to dine on bugs as it moves around the forest at night.
Last survivors
But this unique creature is now under threat.
The Dominican Republic and Haiti, which together make up the island of Hispaniola, used to have a diverse mix of monkeys, shrews, sloths and rodents, but these have died out one by one.
This has left the solenodon and a tree-dwelling rodent called the hutia as the only native mammals that remain.
Now, researchers from the UK and the Dominican Republic, with the help of a grant from the UK government's Darwin Initiative, have embarked on a project called The Last Survivors, which they say could be our last chance to save the solenodon and hutia before they vanish from the forests forever.
The programme involves the Durrell Wildlife Conservation Trust, the Zoological Society of London (ZSL), the Hispaniolan Ornithological Society (SOH) and the Dominican Republic's national zoo and environment ministry.
Dr Richard Young, head of conservation science at Durrell, explains: "The problem is that we really don't know anything about these animals - we don't know where they are, how many there are and how this relates to their habitats.
"And before you can start to conserve them, you need to answer some really basic questions."
But, given the suggestion that a supernatural sighting might be more likely than snatching a glance of a solenodon, finding these creatures to uncover the answers is not going to be easy.
And in fact, says Jorge Brocca, SOH's director, few people in the Dominican Republic have ever seen one, and many have never heard of them.
He explains: "We've been showing local people photographs, and most of them do not know what these animals are."
We head for the Sierra de Bahoruco, a mountain range in the south-west of the Dominican Republic, which straddles the border with Haiti. At its highest point it reaches an elevation of 2,200m (7,200ft).
As we negotiate the steep incline, we see a spectacular range of habitats - from dry, cactus-studded forests in the lowlands, up to vibrant, cloud forests dotted with giant trees, ferns and mosses, and finally, at the peak, a pine forest, that looks something like a tropical version of Scandinavia.
Here, the team is surveying patches of forest for solenodons - the start of an attempt to get a comprehensive grasp of the mammal's spread across the country.
Much of this work takes place during the day, while the animals are sound asleep in their burrows.
As we trek ever deeper into the forest, Durrell's Joe Nunez-Mino, who is working in the field with the SOH's Pedro Martinez and local research assistants Nicolas Corona and Lleyo Espinal, tells me that trying to find them feels a bit like being a detective.
The first clue, he says, is the "nose poke" - he points to one as we tramp through the dense vegetation.
He explains: "These are holes that the creatures make in the ground as they use their long noses to probe the earth as they look for insects."
Nearby, we find what might be the entrance of a burrow.
He bends down and takes a deep sniff inside the cave.
Solenodons, he says, have a really musty smell, a bit like a goat. And sure enough, a pungent odour seeps out of the cave - an exciting sign that one might be in there.
Long wait
But until night falls, the solenodon will remain asleep in its subterranean den, and there is little more we can do here.
So we return to our wooden cabin, set in a small clearing, and feast upon our campfire-cooked meal, waiting for darkness to descend over the forest.
For the ZSL's Dr Sam Turvey, who works on the Edge of Existence Programme, the prospect of spotting a solenodon is thrilling.
"I cannot tell you how excited I am about seeing one. Being in the middle of the forest, in the middle of nowhere, in the night, is going to be amazing," he says.
"It's going to be one of those life-defining moments to see one in the wild."
We know our chances of finding one might be slim, but with good weather, the expert skills of our local research assistants and a huge pinch of luck, we grow ever more hopeful that we might soon become some of the fortunate few to have come face-to-face with this elusive forest "ghost".
See video at: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/science_and_environment/10146397.stm
Media Watch caught out by its fossil morality tale
Peter McAllister
From: The Australian
April 26, 2010
MEDIA Watch has done what any entertainment outlet, National Geographic included, does: craft an appealing narrative.
The timing is exquisite. Just six weeks after being spit-roasted on Media Watch, controversial anthropologist Lee Berger, has set the study of human evolution aback with the discovery of a possibly game-changing human fossil. The find has forced a grudging acceptance from his surprised critics. Despite his allegedly charlatan ways, the huckster apparently has his scientific uses.
In reality nobody should be surprised. Carnival showman types have been rewriting archeology since Indiana Jones was in leather shorts.
In the 19th century Heinrich Schliemann, war-profiteer and all-round charlatan, wrong-footed historians by proving Homer's mythical city of Troy so real he was able to haul away cartloads of its treasure. He even publicised his find by draping his wife in the Trojan "jewels of Helen". The Great Belzoni, the giant Italian Egyptologist who opened the second pyramid at Giza, went one better, funding his digs with public strongman performances such as lifting 12 men at a time.
Berger has not accumulated a Trojan treasure but he has amassed $6 million in private research support. He has likewise shown a Belzoni-like talent for publicity, lining up National Geographic funding and documentaries for his various projects.
But this is no cause for celebration, it seems. In fact, it is the apparent misdeed that got him on Media Watch. According to the ABC's watchdog, Berger's mixing of entertainment and science has led to a serious perversion of the latter by the former.
How valid is Media Watch's criticism? Leaving aside its tone of latent xenophobia "some [foreign documentaries] simply don't deserve to be gobbling up precious prime time on the national broadcaster" the program's main claim is that science stories are inevitably corrupted whenever a (foreign) media organisation mixes in at the research stage. Those damned Yank television companies can't be trusted to craft a straight story with our pure science, it seems.
The supreme irony, of course, is that Media Watch has fitted itself up nicely for the same charge. J'accuse, Jonathan Holmes.
Reviewing the National Geographic documentary on Berger's research into a possible fossil prehistoric pygmy population in the Micronesian nation of Palau, Mystery Skulls of Palau, Media Watch crafted a classic morality tale of villains and virgins, muddying the science dreadfully themselves in the process.
To give one example of the errors Media Watch lands itself in by taking sides in a science spat, Holmes quotes archeologist Scott Fitzpatrick as "proving" Berger's pygmy fossils are actually well within the range of modern populations. Indeed, they are the range of modern human pygmy populations, that is.
Holmes, of course, was able to find authors to rubbish Berger's work. Fitzpatrick, for one, describes Mystery Skulls of Palau as a pseudo-documentary. Yet these vitriolic claims are simply an unfortunate stock-in-trade of much scientific debate these days. Finding one academic to call another's work totally discredited is like shooting fish in a barrel. Numerous scientists have described the Homo floresiensis "hobbit" as discredited too, but that doesn't make that brilliant discovery any less remarkable.
What Media Watch has really done is what any self-respecting entertainment outlet, National Geographic included, does: craft an appealing narrative. Theirs simply features different heroes (Fitzpatrick) and different villains (Berger). The point is there is no valid reason, beyond the needs of a good story, for elevating one above the other. Berger's work is just as legitimate as Fitzpatrick's, and Media Watch is in no position to choose between the two on anything other than the grounds of prejudice.
Do Berger and National Geographic really deserve their roles in Media Watch's morality tale? I don't think so. What, for example, is the end result of their dastardly efforts? One, some interesting research on Palauan fossils was done that wouldn't have been otherwise. Two, a lay audience now knows a little more about themselves and the world they live in. And three, a few thousand males aged 16-35 (the main documentary demographic, if National Geographic's research is to be believed) were entertained for an hour or so late on a Tuesday night, instead of being out committing crimes (another favoured activity of that demographic, apparently).
True, Media Watch is on safer ground criticising sensationalism in modern science entertainment. With every researcher hyping their find to the skies there is a danger the viewing public will suffer revelation fatigue. After all, the past few years have seen a succession of supposed "missing links", of which Berger's African find is only the latest. Yet this, too, is simply what has to be done to craft an entertaining yarn for a wide audience.
Holmes chided Berger for "knowing a good story when he sees it". He does, thank god. And thank god too, for the sake of science, that he tries to tell it.
Peter McAllister is a Perth based lecturer in science communication. His book, Manthropology, is under development as an SBS-National Geographic co-production.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/media/media-watch-caught-out-by-its-fossil-morality-tale/story-e6frg9bo-1225858121977
From: The Australian
April 26, 2010
MEDIA Watch has done what any entertainment outlet, National Geographic included, does: craft an appealing narrative.
The timing is exquisite. Just six weeks after being spit-roasted on Media Watch, controversial anthropologist Lee Berger, has set the study of human evolution aback with the discovery of a possibly game-changing human fossil. The find has forced a grudging acceptance from his surprised critics. Despite his allegedly charlatan ways, the huckster apparently has his scientific uses.
In reality nobody should be surprised. Carnival showman types have been rewriting archeology since Indiana Jones was in leather shorts.
In the 19th century Heinrich Schliemann, war-profiteer and all-round charlatan, wrong-footed historians by proving Homer's mythical city of Troy so real he was able to haul away cartloads of its treasure. He even publicised his find by draping his wife in the Trojan "jewels of Helen". The Great Belzoni, the giant Italian Egyptologist who opened the second pyramid at Giza, went one better, funding his digs with public strongman performances such as lifting 12 men at a time.
Berger has not accumulated a Trojan treasure but he has amassed $6 million in private research support. He has likewise shown a Belzoni-like talent for publicity, lining up National Geographic funding and documentaries for his various projects.
But this is no cause for celebration, it seems. In fact, it is the apparent misdeed that got him on Media Watch. According to the ABC's watchdog, Berger's mixing of entertainment and science has led to a serious perversion of the latter by the former.
How valid is Media Watch's criticism? Leaving aside its tone of latent xenophobia "some [foreign documentaries] simply don't deserve to be gobbling up precious prime time on the national broadcaster" the program's main claim is that science stories are inevitably corrupted whenever a (foreign) media organisation mixes in at the research stage. Those damned Yank television companies can't be trusted to craft a straight story with our pure science, it seems.
The supreme irony, of course, is that Media Watch has fitted itself up nicely for the same charge. J'accuse, Jonathan Holmes.
Reviewing the National Geographic documentary on Berger's research into a possible fossil prehistoric pygmy population in the Micronesian nation of Palau, Mystery Skulls of Palau, Media Watch crafted a classic morality tale of villains and virgins, muddying the science dreadfully themselves in the process.
To give one example of the errors Media Watch lands itself in by taking sides in a science spat, Holmes quotes archeologist Scott Fitzpatrick as "proving" Berger's pygmy fossils are actually well within the range of modern populations. Indeed, they are the range of modern human pygmy populations, that is.
Holmes, of course, was able to find authors to rubbish Berger's work. Fitzpatrick, for one, describes Mystery Skulls of Palau as a pseudo-documentary. Yet these vitriolic claims are simply an unfortunate stock-in-trade of much scientific debate these days. Finding one academic to call another's work totally discredited is like shooting fish in a barrel. Numerous scientists have described the Homo floresiensis "hobbit" as discredited too, but that doesn't make that brilliant discovery any less remarkable.
What Media Watch has really done is what any self-respecting entertainment outlet, National Geographic included, does: craft an appealing narrative. Theirs simply features different heroes (Fitzpatrick) and different villains (Berger). The point is there is no valid reason, beyond the needs of a good story, for elevating one above the other. Berger's work is just as legitimate as Fitzpatrick's, and Media Watch is in no position to choose between the two on anything other than the grounds of prejudice.
Do Berger and National Geographic really deserve their roles in Media Watch's morality tale? I don't think so. What, for example, is the end result of their dastardly efforts? One, some interesting research on Palauan fossils was done that wouldn't have been otherwise. Two, a lay audience now knows a little more about themselves and the world they live in. And three, a few thousand males aged 16-35 (the main documentary demographic, if National Geographic's research is to be believed) were entertained for an hour or so late on a Tuesday night, instead of being out committing crimes (another favoured activity of that demographic, apparently).
True, Media Watch is on safer ground criticising sensationalism in modern science entertainment. With every researcher hyping their find to the skies there is a danger the viewing public will suffer revelation fatigue. After all, the past few years have seen a succession of supposed "missing links", of which Berger's African find is only the latest. Yet this, too, is simply what has to be done to craft an entertaining yarn for a wide audience.
Holmes chided Berger for "knowing a good story when he sees it". He does, thank god. And thank god too, for the sake of science, that he tries to tell it.
Peter McAllister is a Perth based lecturer in science communication. His book, Manthropology, is under development as an SBS-National Geographic co-production.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/media/media-watch-caught-out-by-its-fossil-morality-tale/story-e6frg9bo-1225858121977
Spawning Habitat of Bluefin Tuna in Gulf of Mexico: Critical Area Intersects Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill
ScienceDaily (May 31, 2010) — Electronic tagging and fisheries catch data have revealed pronounced differences in preferred habitat of Atlantic bluefin tuna and yellowfin tuna in the Gulf of Mexico, despite their close ancestry, according to a new study published today in the peer-reviewed journal PLoS ONE. Bluefin tuna return to the same regions of the Gulf of Mexico during spring months to spawn. The bluefin are selecting a particular habitat along the slope waters of the Gulf of Mexico, which has unique oceanographic properties that are predictable and can be seen from satellites. Yellowfin tuna are more widely distributed throughout the warm Gulf waters and occupy the region throughout the year.
"The bluefins' habitat requirements are relatively exact so we can predict with reasonable accuracy where bluefin tuna are likely to be spawning at any given time based on oceanographic data continually being gathered by satellites and weather buoys," said lead author Steven Teo of the University of California at Davis. "This is in stark contrast to yellowfin tuna, which exhibit much more generalized environmental preferences." The fidelity to breeding areas over time detected in this study is reminiscent of salmon returning to their natal stream to spawn.
Bluefin tuna are among the most valuable fish in global markets. The International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas (ICCAT, http://www.iccat.int) currently manages the Atlantic bluefin tuna as two distinct populations, with western Atlantic spawners of the Gulf of Mexico forming a distinct population genetically from the eastern spawners of the Mediterranean Sea. The western Atlantic stock has suffered a significant decline in spawning stock biomass since 1950, and a 20-year rebuilding plan has failed to revive the population or the North American fishery. The failure of the Gulf of Mexico spawning population to rebuild, as well as the scope of illegal and under-reported catches -- particularly in the Mediterranean Sea -- are of such major concern that the species was recently considered by the United Nations for endangered species listing in March of 2010.
Targeted bluefin fishing has been banned in the Gulf for over twenty years, but bluefin continue to be captured accidentally on pelagic longlines, often resulting in mortality. The study shows that bluefin tuna are captured in the Gulf of Mexico from January through June each year, and the highest pelagic longline catch rates are in April and May, during the bluefin spawning season.
The authors compared environmental preferences and spatio-temporal distributions of bluefin and yellowfin tuna as revealed by pelagic longline catch rates and scientific tagging cruise conducted by the Stanford University and Monterey Bay Aquarium team coupled with oceanographic data sets. Drawing on these data, a model was developed to determine the relative probability of catching bluefin and yellowfin tuna at a given place and time. This model showed that there are two major hotspot regions within the Gulf where bycatch occurs -- one in the eastern Gulf of Mexico to the north of the Loop Current, and the other in the western Gulf of Mexico. Both regions are along the slope where the shallow continental shelf depth changes rapidly to the deep sea. It is within these hotspots that bluefin tuna prefer to spawn in circular, swirling water masses called "cyclonic eddies." These eddies are more productive and slightly cooler than surrounding warm Gulf ocean currents. Yellowfin tuna, however, are much more widely dispersed throughout the Gulf of Mexico throughout the year.
These findings indicate that it would be possible to utilize spatial management techniques to protect western Atlantic bluefin tuna on their breeding grounds in the Gulf of Mexico without compromising the yellowfin tuna fishery, which could be carried out in other areas during the critical bluefin tuna breeding times.
Unfortunately, these findings also give cause for concern in light of the recent Deepwater Horizon oil spill. "Both catch data and electronic tags indicate the Gulf of Mexico along the continental shelf is the preferred habitat of this majestic fish. I think it is amazing how precisely we can predict where the bluefin are. Unfortunately their spawning habitat overlaps the Deepwater Horizon oil accident site, and the timing of the spill coincides with the time when we expect them to be there spawning" said senior author Dr. Barbara Block of Stanford University.
Funding for this study was provided by the Lenfest Ocean Program, the Tag-A-Giant Foundation, the David and Lucile Packard Foundation, the Monterey Bay Aquarium Foundation, the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration and the Disney Foundation.
"The bluefins' habitat requirements are relatively exact so we can predict with reasonable accuracy where bluefin tuna are likely to be spawning at any given time based on oceanographic data continually being gathered by satellites and weather buoys," said lead author Steven Teo of the University of California at Davis. "This is in stark contrast to yellowfin tuna, which exhibit much more generalized environmental preferences." The fidelity to breeding areas over time detected in this study is reminiscent of salmon returning to their natal stream to spawn.
Bluefin tuna are among the most valuable fish in global markets. The International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas (ICCAT, http://www.iccat.int) currently manages the Atlantic bluefin tuna as two distinct populations, with western Atlantic spawners of the Gulf of Mexico forming a distinct population genetically from the eastern spawners of the Mediterranean Sea. The western Atlantic stock has suffered a significant decline in spawning stock biomass since 1950, and a 20-year rebuilding plan has failed to revive the population or the North American fishery. The failure of the Gulf of Mexico spawning population to rebuild, as well as the scope of illegal and under-reported catches -- particularly in the Mediterranean Sea -- are of such major concern that the species was recently considered by the United Nations for endangered species listing in March of 2010.
Targeted bluefin fishing has been banned in the Gulf for over twenty years, but bluefin continue to be captured accidentally on pelagic longlines, often resulting in mortality. The study shows that bluefin tuna are captured in the Gulf of Mexico from January through June each year, and the highest pelagic longline catch rates are in April and May, during the bluefin spawning season.
The authors compared environmental preferences and spatio-temporal distributions of bluefin and yellowfin tuna as revealed by pelagic longline catch rates and scientific tagging cruise conducted by the Stanford University and Monterey Bay Aquarium team coupled with oceanographic data sets. Drawing on these data, a model was developed to determine the relative probability of catching bluefin and yellowfin tuna at a given place and time. This model showed that there are two major hotspot regions within the Gulf where bycatch occurs -- one in the eastern Gulf of Mexico to the north of the Loop Current, and the other in the western Gulf of Mexico. Both regions are along the slope where the shallow continental shelf depth changes rapidly to the deep sea. It is within these hotspots that bluefin tuna prefer to spawn in circular, swirling water masses called "cyclonic eddies." These eddies are more productive and slightly cooler than surrounding warm Gulf ocean currents. Yellowfin tuna, however, are much more widely dispersed throughout the Gulf of Mexico throughout the year.
These findings indicate that it would be possible to utilize spatial management techniques to protect western Atlantic bluefin tuna on their breeding grounds in the Gulf of Mexico without compromising the yellowfin tuna fishery, which could be carried out in other areas during the critical bluefin tuna breeding times.
Unfortunately, these findings also give cause for concern in light of the recent Deepwater Horizon oil spill. "Both catch data and electronic tags indicate the Gulf of Mexico along the continental shelf is the preferred habitat of this majestic fish. I think it is amazing how precisely we can predict where the bluefin are. Unfortunately their spawning habitat overlaps the Deepwater Horizon oil accident site, and the timing of the spill coincides with the time when we expect them to be there spawning" said senior author Dr. Barbara Block of Stanford University.
Funding for this study was provided by the Lenfest Ocean Program, the Tag-A-Giant Foundation, the David and Lucile Packard Foundation, the Monterey Bay Aquarium Foundation, the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration and the Disney Foundation.
Oldest living creature is back in safe waters after road fears
A €400,000 'pearl of wisdom' has saved one of Europe's last remaining colonies of a rare shellfish from being run over by a new motorway.
The 500 freshwater pearl mussels -- now found only in a few isolated sites in Europe -- live in a small stretch of the River Nore, along the route of the new M7/M8 Dublin to Cork/Limerick motorway.
The shellfish, which can live for 100 years and are protected under law, faced the threat of extinction in Ireland due to excavation work on a bridge across the river as part of the new M7/M8 project.
Upstream
However, the National Roads Authority (NRA) has funded a €400,000 project to save the mussels, which are found in a 6km stretch of the river upstream of Poormansbridge.
The shellfish were removed from the river and placed in a purpose-built captive breeding facility, where their condition is being monitored. It is planned to re-introduce the mussels back into the river over the next few months at the appropriate time of their life cycle.
Since the 1990s the population of pearl mussels has declined, with only 500 remaining in Ireland. It is the only species of mussel in Ireland listed for protection under the Habitats Regulations.
Pearl mussels are the oldest living creatures in Ireland and they have virtually disappeared from the rest of Europe over the past century due to climate change and pearl harvesting.
NRA spokesman Sean O'Neill said the cost of the project was estimated at about €400,000.
"These environmental measures are required when constructing any new motorway and there are significant costs associated with them," he said.
"But the benefits for a native species in Ireland will offer more than a pearl of wisdom for generations to come," Mr O'Neill told the Irish Independent.
The project was carried out by Arup Consulting on behalf of the NRA along with specialist consultant Dr Evelyn Moorkens.
Treacy Hogan
Irish Independent
Monday May 31 2010
The 500 freshwater pearl mussels -- now found only in a few isolated sites in Europe -- live in a small stretch of the River Nore, along the route of the new M7/M8 Dublin to Cork/Limerick motorway.
The shellfish, which can live for 100 years and are protected under law, faced the threat of extinction in Ireland due to excavation work on a bridge across the river as part of the new M7/M8 project.
Upstream
However, the National Roads Authority (NRA) has funded a €400,000 project to save the mussels, which are found in a 6km stretch of the river upstream of Poormansbridge.
The shellfish were removed from the river and placed in a purpose-built captive breeding facility, where their condition is being monitored. It is planned to re-introduce the mussels back into the river over the next few months at the appropriate time of their life cycle.
Since the 1990s the population of pearl mussels has declined, with only 500 remaining in Ireland. It is the only species of mussel in Ireland listed for protection under the Habitats Regulations.
Pearl mussels are the oldest living creatures in Ireland and they have virtually disappeared from the rest of Europe over the past century due to climate change and pearl harvesting.
NRA spokesman Sean O'Neill said the cost of the project was estimated at about €400,000.
"These environmental measures are required when constructing any new motorway and there are significant costs associated with them," he said.
"But the benefits for a native species in Ireland will offer more than a pearl of wisdom for generations to come," Mr O'Neill told the Irish Independent.
The project was carried out by Arup Consulting on behalf of the NRA along with specialist consultant Dr Evelyn Moorkens.
Treacy Hogan
Irish Independent
Monday May 31 2010
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
