Saturday, January 17, 2015
New analysis promps scientists to rethink.
A new discovery of a fish called Janusiscus schultzei, was found imbeded in a rock. The fossel provided evidence that the fish was a relative of a bony fish. However, recent tests and observations have provided evidence that the fish is a relative of a cartilaginous species. The tests showed that the fossel had traces of the partial skull roof and brain case looked vary similar to that of a bony fish. Though the scientists also found that the placement of blood vessels in the brain case located above and between the jaws were like that of a cartilaginous due to new and improved 3-D scans and X-Rays. Thus the name of the creature became Janusiscus schultzei.
This article relates to our current topic in Biology, Evolution. Scientists found that this particular fish could have a common ancestor that lived over 420 million years ago. However, recent data says that these shark-like creatures are highly evolved and in the past had lots of bone, linking them to the evolution of sharks. Thus explaining that over time the creatures like sharks are not primitive, but had evolved far, just like humans.
Article Page: http://www.the-scientist.com/?articles.view/articleNo/41893/title/Reassessing-One-Really-Old-Fish/
Friday, January 16, 2015
Immune System Evolution
Source: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2015/01/150115134715.htm
By: Science Daily
Evolutionary theory is based around the fact that organisms adapt to their surroundings. This article provides a clear example of just that, offering deeper insight into evolution, humanity, and our immune system. A study spanning the course of two decades has found that the environment has a much bigger impact on the human immune system than hereditary genes. For the first 20 years of a human's life, his/her immune system remains extremely active, continually adapting to encounters with any sort of outside influence and growing all the stronger for it.
Clearly, this connects to what we've talked about recently, such as evolution and adaptation. Without evolution, we would still be bacteria swimming in a primordial soup, and this recent discovery helps shed light into one of nature's most vital processes.
By: Science Daily
Evolutionary theory is based around the fact that organisms adapt to their surroundings. This article provides a clear example of just that, offering deeper insight into evolution, humanity, and our immune system. A study spanning the course of two decades has found that the environment has a much bigger impact on the human immune system than hereditary genes. For the first 20 years of a human's life, his/her immune system remains extremely active, continually adapting to encounters with any sort of outside influence and growing all the stronger for it.
Clearly, this connects to what we've talked about recently, such as evolution and adaptation. Without evolution, we would still be bacteria swimming in a primordial soup, and this recent discovery helps shed light into one of nature's most vital processes.
Wednesday, January 14, 2015
Dinosaurs wiped out suddenly
Source: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2015/01/150113121218.htm
By: Pensoft Publishers
Most of the theory on why the dinosaurs have gone extinct have been based on fossil evidence found in the Americas. In fact, nearly all the fossils in the late cretaceous were from North America. Recently, a group of paleontologist have found more fossil evidence in Europe. This evidence suggests that the Dinosaurs had gone extinct in their prime time. This evidence also further supports the theory that dinosaurs had been wiped out by an asteroid impact.
This connects to what we have learned as it relates to evolution. It was through the extinction of the dinosaurs that mammals were able to gain dominance and rule the land, much like how the dinosaurs had done so 65 million years ago. By better understanding how the dinosaurs went extinct, it is easier to understand the conditions in which the mammals had to evolve in, leading to a potentially better understanding of how mammals evolved after the dinosaurs.
By: Pensoft Publishers
Most of the theory on why the dinosaurs have gone extinct have been based on fossil evidence found in the Americas. In fact, nearly all the fossils in the late cretaceous were from North America. Recently, a group of paleontologist have found more fossil evidence in Europe. This evidence suggests that the Dinosaurs had gone extinct in their prime time. This evidence also further supports the theory that dinosaurs had been wiped out by an asteroid impact.
This connects to what we have learned as it relates to evolution. It was through the extinction of the dinosaurs that mammals were able to gain dominance and rule the land, much like how the dinosaurs had done so 65 million years ago. By better understanding how the dinosaurs went extinct, it is easier to understand the conditions in which the mammals had to evolve in, leading to a potentially better understanding of how mammals evolved after the dinosaurs.
Stone Age humans weren't necessarily more advanced than Neanderthals
Source: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2015/01/150114101528.htm
By: University of Montreal
Date: 1/14/2015
It was long thought that Neanderthals did not have the ability to create tools out of bone, however, recent discoveries in the past decade has put this statement into questioning. Very recently, a multi-purpose bone tool was discovered. It had been made from a reindeer femur, and had been intricately crafted by a Neanderthal. The tool had been of secondary thought, after obtaining the meat for energy, and can be seen with fractures where the marrow was released. The tool was most likely use for carving sharp edges for stone tools, as well as being a scraper. The reason for such interest in a bone tool that appeared to be common place, was the fact that the tool shows that Homo Sapiens were not the only ones capable of understanding the properties of bone and how to create such a tool. This supports that argument that the gap between the two species is not as large as it originally seemed. Having the brain power to make more complex tools, thought to be specific to only Homo Sapiens, is revealed to also be a trait of some Neanderthals as well, meaning technically, one species is not as superior as first though. This is relevant to our studies as it showcases they difference between the predecessor of and the Homo Sapiens species as well.
By: University of Montreal
Date: 1/14/2015
It was long thought that Neanderthals did not have the ability to create tools out of bone, however, recent discoveries in the past decade has put this statement into questioning. Very recently, a multi-purpose bone tool was discovered. It had been made from a reindeer femur, and had been intricately crafted by a Neanderthal. The tool had been of secondary thought, after obtaining the meat for energy, and can be seen with fractures where the marrow was released. The tool was most likely use for carving sharp edges for stone tools, as well as being a scraper. The reason for such interest in a bone tool that appeared to be common place, was the fact that the tool shows that Homo Sapiens were not the only ones capable of understanding the properties of bone and how to create such a tool. This supports that argument that the gap between the two species is not as large as it originally seemed. Having the brain power to make more complex tools, thought to be specific to only Homo Sapiens, is revealed to also be a trait of some Neanderthals as well, meaning technically, one species is not as superior as first though. This is relevant to our studies as it showcases they difference between the predecessor of and the Homo Sapiens species as well.
Tuesday, January 13, 2015
Pet CSI: How Dog and Cat DNA Nabs Bad Guys
article by Vicki Croke, published January 13, 2015
http://thewildlife.wbur.org/2015/01/13/pet-csi-how-dog-and-cat-dna-nabs-bad-guys/
Recently, scientists have been aiding lawyers in the courtrooms by providing evidence with DNA from a victim's pet. Since pets tend to leave either shed, drool, pee, feces, or blood in various place around their owner's home, it is very probable that if the suspect was in their home he/she would have picked up some of whatever was left by the pet. In this way, it is increasingly common for scientists to compare, for example, the DNA from dog hair on the suspect's jacket with the DNA of the victim's pet. The DNA profile of every animal is different enough that no other dog hair would give the same profile as the victim's dog. So, if the dog hair profile and the victim's dog's DNA matches up, lawyers can conclude it evident that the suspect either was in the victim's home or was in close enough proximity to acquire the victim's dog's hair. An entire field is being grown around this concept of using animal DNA in court, leading to the recent foundation of the International Veterinary Forensics Sciences Association.
This article relates to our study of molecular genetics. During this unit, we learned about how human DNA is used as evidence in court for crimes. But what if the crime left no human blood? What if the suspect only committed vandalism? Human DNA would not likely be available. Pet DNA however, would probably be acquired by the suspect, flagging him/her down to be connected with the household he/she stole from.
http://thewildlife.wbur.org/2015/01/13/pet-csi-how-dog-and-cat-dna-nabs-bad-guys/
Recently, scientists have been aiding lawyers in the courtrooms by providing evidence with DNA from a victim's pet. Since pets tend to leave either shed, drool, pee, feces, or blood in various place around their owner's home, it is very probable that if the suspect was in their home he/she would have picked up some of whatever was left by the pet. In this way, it is increasingly common for scientists to compare, for example, the DNA from dog hair on the suspect's jacket with the DNA of the victim's pet. The DNA profile of every animal is different enough that no other dog hair would give the same profile as the victim's dog. So, if the dog hair profile and the victim's dog's DNA matches up, lawyers can conclude it evident that the suspect either was in the victim's home or was in close enough proximity to acquire the victim's dog's hair. An entire field is being grown around this concept of using animal DNA in court, leading to the recent foundation of the International Veterinary Forensics Sciences Association.
This article relates to our study of molecular genetics. During this unit, we learned about how human DNA is used as evidence in court for crimes. But what if the crime left no human blood? What if the suspect only committed vandalism? Human DNA would not likely be available. Pet DNA however, would probably be acquired by the suspect, flagging him/her down to be connected with the household he/she stole from.
New Fossil Discovery Sheds Insight on Evolution
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2015/01/150113-sea-monsters-paleontology-scotland-animals-science-fossils/
Recently, a fossil was discovered in Scotland that reveals clues about the evolution of reptiles in Europe. The fossil that was discovered is a new genus of "ichthyosaur", a reptile that ruled the seas during the Middle Jurassic period. It is around 14 feet long, and is the first of its kind to be discovered by paleontologists.
The new fossil comes from a time during the Middle Jurassic period that scientists know very little about. Scientists do know that after the Middle Jurassic period, there was a larger and more advanced type of ichthyosaur that becomes dominant around the world. The fossil found in Scotland is a smaller and more primitive type of ichthyosaur, revealing that the transition to the more advanced type of ichthyosaur happened later than scientists had thought. The discovery of this smaller fossil also indicates that the transition to the larger ichthyosaurs was a gradual shift, not a sudden shift due to a change in environment.
This connects to our study of evolution in class. This small version of ichthyosaur shows that the change to the bigger ichthyosaurs was a slow and gradual change, as the ichthyosaurs underwent natural selection and the better fit traits were passed on. The smaller ichthyosaur pinpoints a more exact rate at which the ichthyosaurs evolved.
Domestication: Cat's and Humans
Hanita Haller; 1/13/15
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/25/opinion/our-cats-ourselves.html
This article is about controlled evolution, or as it is more commonly called, domestication. Most people do not think of domestication as a type of evolution, but that is exactly what it is. Humans have created a new ecosystem for themselves, and have coevolved with those that have been introduced to and welcomed in their new ecosystem. This new ecosystem has given humans smaller brains, smaller jaws, and an extraordinary variation in colors. Dogs have exhibited the same changes, in addition to a variety of size and shape.
The article focuses more on cats, who have been partially domesticated. Because they have only been coexisting with humans in our newly invented ecosystem for 1/3 of the time that dogs have, cats have not evolved in the same way that humans and dogs have. House cats have smaller skulls and jaws than their wild counterparts, but have yet to produce a wide range in size and shape, or give up on their hunting instinct. The cats' jaws and brain reduced in size quickly because they no longer have to hunt for their own food, or chew tough meat, but the other signs of domestication must come by chance - or through breeding.
The article's focus on domestication and genetic variation links back to the current unit on evolution. Coevolution is also referenced repeatedly, which happens to be one of our unit vocabulary words. Most importantly, the article talks about the genetic history of humans, and the impact that we have had on the world, and on other species, a topic which has been important to the entire Honors Biology course.
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/25/opinion/our-cats-ourselves.html
This article is about controlled evolution, or as it is more commonly called, domestication. Most people do not think of domestication as a type of evolution, but that is exactly what it is. Humans have created a new ecosystem for themselves, and have coevolved with those that have been introduced to and welcomed in their new ecosystem. This new ecosystem has given humans smaller brains, smaller jaws, and an extraordinary variation in colors. Dogs have exhibited the same changes, in addition to a variety of size and shape.
The article focuses more on cats, who have been partially domesticated. Because they have only been coexisting with humans in our newly invented ecosystem for 1/3 of the time that dogs have, cats have not evolved in the same way that humans and dogs have. House cats have smaller skulls and jaws than their wild counterparts, but have yet to produce a wide range in size and shape, or give up on their hunting instinct. The cats' jaws and brain reduced in size quickly because they no longer have to hunt for their own food, or chew tough meat, but the other signs of domestication must come by chance - or through breeding.
The article's focus on domestication and genetic variation links back to the current unit on evolution. Coevolution is also referenced repeatedly, which happens to be one of our unit vocabulary words. Most importantly, the article talks about the genetic history of humans, and the impact that we have had on the world, and on other species, a topic which has been important to the entire Honors Biology course.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)