Easy Parenting: Brood Parasites Get Someone Else to Do the Hard Work

Friday, September 25th, 2020 | Petrina Duncan | No Comments

 For most birds, reproduction is a life process that takes up a lot of time and energy. There are huge energetic costs to a female bird with respect to mating, egg-laying, incubating the eggs and feeding hungry chicks for many weeks or months. Some birds also migrate vast distances across land and sea before breeding can commence, using up even more time and energy. Breeding for a bird is a lot of hard work.

So, if a bird found an easier way to become a successful breeder, we would expect that behaviour to be favoured by natural selection and become fixed. In about 1% of all bird species, that’s exactly what has happened: it’s called brood parasitism.

Brood parasites are birds who have learned how to make the parenting process much easier. They still have to find a partner and mate successfully, but instead of the female bird laying her eggs in a nest that she and/or her partner made, she stealthily lays them in the nest of another bird. Intraspecific brood parasites lay eggs in nests belonging to birds of their own species, compared to interspecific brood parasites who target other bird species.

Common cuckoo chick in the nest of a tree pipit.

Common cuckoo chick in the nest of a tree pipit.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Benefits and advantages for the brood parasites:

  • Increased breeding output
  • Minimal energy expenditure because they don’t defend a nest, incubate eggs or feed chicks.
  • Genes passed on to the next generation.

Costs and disadvantages for the host birds:

  • Decreased breeding output
  • Expending more energy raising someone else’s offspring, especially if the parasitic chick is very large as more food will have to be found.
  • Not passing on genes to the next generation.

Generalists and Specialists

Some brood parasites put their eggs into the nests of a wide variety of other species. These are called generalists. An advantage of this behaviour is the flexibility it offers. Generalists can be successful in many different places and at almost any time, as long as a suitable host bird is nesting nearby.

Alternatively, brood parasites can be specialists. They will target one species to be the host of their egg/s. The limiting factor in this approach is the lack of flexibility, as parasites must live close to their host species or spend time and energy travelling to find them during the breeding season.

 Brood parasites in New Zealand

Cuckoos are the most famous brood parasitic birds worldwide. In New Zealand, two migratory species of cuckoos arrive on our shores in September and October each year. The shining cuckoo/pīpīwharauroa (Maori name) is the smaller of the two species. These small birds fly all the way from the Solomon Islands and the Bismarck Archipelago, a distance of more than 5000 kilometres. On arrival in NZ, shining cuckoos/pīpīwharauroa seek out their target host species, the tiny grey warbler/riroriro, in forests and gardens across the whole country.

Shining cuckoo/pīpīwharauroa being fed by its host parent, a grey warbler/riroriro.

Shining cuckoo/pīpīwharauroa being fed by its host parent, a grey warbler/riroriro.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Long-tailed cuckoos/koekoeā fly to NZ from even further away. They spend winter in an arc of Pacific Islands which extends from Henderson Island (Pitcairn group) in the east to Palau in the far west of Micronesia. A long-tailed cuckoo/koekoeā migrating from Palau to NZ will fly more than 6700 kilometres – perhaps that’s why they don’t have the energy to be a ‘normal’ bird parent. They arrive in NZ in September and October to begin searching for their target host species. In the North Island, they look for a small bird called the whitehead/pōpokatea in tall, mature forests. The forests of the South Island have two host species for long-tailed cuckoos/koekoeā: the brown creeper/pīpipi and the rarer yellowhead/mohua. All three of these host species are endemic to NZ and closely related.

Whitehead host parent feeding a young long-tailed cuckoo

Whitehead host parent feeding a young long-tailed cuckoo

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Strategies of a successful brood parasite

  • Be selective. Brood parasites take their time to find the best host ‘mum’ to be a surrogate parent for their offspring. In human terms, this is a like parents shopping around to find the very best day care centre for their toddler. Before putting her eggs into a host’s nest, the parasitic bird will watch a potential ‘mum’ closely to appraise her age, condition, singing ability, territory location, size of the nest and its location. These factors will contribute to the parasite’s final choice of the best host for the job.
  • Team Work. Some parasitic bird pairs work together to achieve their goal. For example, male great spotted cuckoos in Southern Europe will stage an attack on an unsuspecting pair of magpies. The male cuckoo appears in full view of the magpies to divert their attention and launch a pretend attack. Meanwhile the female cuckoo sneaks into the magpies’ nest to quickly lay her egg. This risky egg-laying behaviour is only possible because both the male and female are working as a team to ensure the hosts don’t see what’s happening.
  • Egg mimicry and timing of laying. Parasitic bird eggs have evolved over time to look and feel very similar to the host’s eggs, a concept called egg mimicry. This reduces the chance of egg rejection by the host. Their eggs also usually have thicker shells than the host’s eggs. Parasitic birds will also strategically time their egg laying. By waiting until the host has already laid a few eggs, the parasitic female ensures that incubation is already underway.
The larger blue egg is that of the parasitic common cuckoo. The cuckoo’s egg looks very similar to those of the host, a common redstart

The larger blue egg is that of the parasitic common cuckoo. The cuckoo’s egg looks very similar to those of the host, a common redstart

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  • Chicks who are bullies. Brood parasite eggs generally hatch earlier than the host’s eggs. The parasitic chicks use strategies like pushing the host’s eggs and chicks out of the nest or stabbing chicks with a special hook on their beak. Imposter chicks also tend to make louder, more frequent begging sounds to ensure they get all the food from host parents. Some species like NZ’s shining cuckoo have chicks who can mimic the begging call of a grey warbler’s chicks, ensuring the host is fooled into feeding them.
  • Total destruction of eggs. Sometimes a cuckoo misses the chance to lay her eggs at the optimum time. As an extreme measure, she will destroy the entire egg collection in the host’s nest. This behaviour is like a reset for the host bird to start over with breeding. She will probably mate again and lay another clutch of eggs while the watchful parasite bird prepares to intercept at just the right time.
Common cuckoo chick in host nest

Common cuckoo chick in host nest

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Can host birds fight back?

Brood parasitism is a classic coevolutionary “arms race”. Each time a host species evolves a new behaviour to defend against brood parasitism, the parasite species evolves a new trait which makes its breeding strategy more successful. Here are a few ways in which hosts can fight back.

  • Egg recognition. Many host birds have evolved to be experts at egg recognition. They will recognise and then reject eggs which look different to their own. Sometimes a host will even leave its nest entirely if a strange looking egg appears. However, brood parasites have adapted to this selection pressure by either becoming generalists (they parasitise multiple species) or producing eggs which are almost identical to the host’s eggs (egg mimicry).
  • Chick recognition. Some host ‘mums’ are able to recognise and reject chicks which are not their own. However, rejecting chicks carries the risk of mistakenly rejecting their own chicks. If the rate of parasitism is very high, selection for accurate chick recognition will be stronger.
  • Nest features. Species that commonly get parasitised may deploy nesting tactics to minimise interference. Their nest may be well camouflaged to avoid detection. The nest’s location could be away from places where parasitic birds can sit. The nest entrance may be too small for the brood parasite to enter. For example, the grey warbler’s nest entrance is tiny, preventing shining cuckoos from entering. But the cuckoo manages to parasitise their nests regardless. Researchers suspect the egg is laid elsewhere then carried in the cuckoo’s beak up to the warbler’s nest and carefully deposited inside.

Should we be concerned about brood parasitism?

As our climate changes and the human population continues to increase, natural habitats such as forests are disappearing due to fires, logging, agriculture and urban sprawl. For bird species that are already in decline due to habitat loss, brood parasitism  may pose a significant threat, especially if generalist parasites increase in numbers. Reproductive success will be compromised at a time when the population is already decreasing. The combined pressures could become too much, putting the species at risk of localised extinction.

On the bright side, a brood parasitic species can’t survive without its host species. Parasitic birds often wait until their target host has raised one clutch of offspring before parasitising the second nest. This is a behaviour which will give rare host species a helping hand.

Grey warblers will often raise a family of chicks successfully early in spring, before the shining cuckoos arrive in NZ from their long migratory journey. Even if the grey warbler’s second nest gets targeted by a shining cuckoo, they have already contributed their genes to the next generation and hopefully the behaviour of early nesting was also passed on to their offspring.

For rarer NZ bird species such as the yellowhead/mohua and whitehead/pōpokatea, being less successful breeders due to parasitism by long-tailed cuckoos/koekoeā is a concern to conservationists. Long-tailed cuckoos are also able to parasitise the nests of the more common brown creeper/pīpipi in the South Island. As yellowhead numbers decrease, brown creeper numbers may also begin to decline due to being parasitised at a higher rate. In the North Island, whiteheads are increasing in numbers due to human conservation efforts which will hopefully help to mitigate the negative effects of brood parasitism.

Conclusion

Brood parasitism represents a rare and unusual parenting strategy. There are many benefits for the bird who does the parasitising such as avoiding most of the hard work involved with being a parent.

Brood parasitism is a great example of coevolution in which the evolutionary “arms race” is played out in the privacy of a nest or within the boundaries of a territory. There will always be winners and losers in this host-parasite exploitative relationship. What we must try to do is reduce or eliminate human-related pressures which adversely affect the breeding success of birds. By helping to conserve native bird species and their habitats, we’ll be supporting them to withstand the negative impact of brood parasitism long term.

Further reading:

Photo Credits:

Common cuckoo chick in the nest of a tree pipit.
Vladlen666/WikiMedia Commons (CC1.0)
https://www.sciencenews.org/blog/wild-things/cuckoos-may-have-long-lasting-impact-other-birds

Shining cuckoo/pīpīwharauroa being fed by its host parent, a grey warbler/riroriro.
Photography by Robin Colquhoun. From NZ Birds Online: http://www.nzbirdsonline.org.nz/species/shining-cuckoo#bird-photos

Whitehead host parent feeding a young long-tailed cuckoo. Photography by Adam Clarke.
From NZ Birds Online: http://nzbirdsonline.org.nz/species/long-tailed-cuckoo

The larger blue egg is that of the parasitic common cuckoo. The cuckoo’s egg looks very similar to those of the host, a common redstart. Photography: Dr. Tomas Grim. https://phys.org/news/2018-05-russian-cuckoo-invasion-alaskan-birds.html

Common cuckoo chick in host nest. Photography by Per Harald Olsen (CC BY 2.0)
https://www.birdorable.com/blog/bird-term-brood-parasite/

The Food of Your Future

Wednesday, August 22nd, 2018 | STEPHEN BRONI | No Comments

AquAdvantage Salmon

The Food of your Future

Head shot of student Joe Glancy

 

Joe Glancy​ ​South Westland Area School​ ​(2018)

 

Who doesn’t enjoy a perfectly cooked salmon with a freshly baked loaf of bread. Mmmnnmmm! I know I do! This seafood that we know and love is becoming increasingly popular in our diet, but will it be the same for our grandkids – will it last?

In 1989, research began on the AquAdvantage Salmon which scientists claim can reach market size almost twice as quickly as normal salmon. The creation of AquAdvantage salmon begins with the selection of two DNA sequences: one from a Chinook Salmon ; the other from an eel-like fish called the Ocean Pout.

The Ocean Pout lives in the near freezing waters of the North Atlantic Ocean. The growth hormone gene from the fast growing Chinook Salmon is combined with the antifreeze promoter of the Ocean Pout (a promoter is a sequence of DNA that ‘turns on’ a gene). By genetically joining these two DNA sequences, scientists are able to create a gene that keeps that internal, fast growing, hormone factory switched ‘on’ during those cooler winter months. Something that salmon normally do not do. This means that they can be farmed year-round and in any climate. Resulting in a fish that reaches market size in just 18 months rather than three years for normal salmon. These are the offspring intended for our dinner plates on those warm summer evenings.

This AquAdvantage Salmon is the very first of its kind. Never before has a genetically modified animal been approved for human consumption. In 2015 the United States approved the production, sale and consumption of the AquAdvantage Salmon. Many other GM animals have been developed and tested but politics and public fears have kept them off our dinner plates. The FDA claims that this salmon will have no effect on consumers … that’s you and me … and will look, feel and taste just like a normal Atlantic Salmon, which is what we all want.

The company that produces AquAdvantage Salmon believes in sustainable seafood production. They claim that their product is better for both consumers and the environment. The Salmon will be raised in land based farms, meaning that there is no risk of escaping salmon entering wild populations and no risk of diseases spreading out of containment. All waste water is filtered extremely well and reused; the small amount that is not required is cleaned of all contaminants and used on nearby tomato farms as fertilizer.

GM salmon use roughly 20% less feed then normal salmon, therefore making it a whole lot cheaper to feed them. Also these AquAdvantage salmon are grown in land based systems close to the production factories. This eliminates the cost to transport them to the place where they cut them up. This has created a salmon that is just as tasty as a wild one but costs a whole lot less to produce.
Business man, Brendan Borrell, claims that the normal salmon cost almost $1.50 to make whereas the AquAdvantage Salmon has a cost of less then $1.00!
A major environmental implication of farmed salmon is the increased preservation and protection of wild populations, populations that have been in decline since at least the 1950’s. By eliminating the need of wild salmon commercial fishing and introducing more land based farms, many threats to the wild salmon are removed. Currently these threats include reduced food supply caused by over-exploitation of the salmon feed, parasites
spread by water based fish farms and destructive fishing techniques. By introducing land based systems such as the one used by the AquAdvantage Salmon, the wild salmon will be protected from these threats and be allowed to live their lives largely uninterrupted.

David Suzuki, Canadian academic and environmental activist, feels very strongly about GMO’s. For years he has been promoting outright bans on GMOs, despite the fact that many scientists have declared them perfectly safe for all of you to consume. He and other anti-GMO activists have been able to stall crucial experiments with GM crops that are designed to improve yields and nutrition, which would benefit poor people around the world.

Ronald Stotish, chief executive of AquaBounty, also claims that the main advantage of the salmon is that the fish can be grown in tanks inland, greatly reducing the effects on the environment. “Demand for global protein is increasing,” he says. “We have to do a better job and we have to do it efficiently.”

Personal:

Now then, I know those of you that get out
there and have been to South Westland
Salmon Competition, you will know just
how little fish are around. In fact, just in the last few months, I have been out chasing
salmon on the Waitaha River several  times. Even though I have had no luck recently, I thoroughly enjoy the feeling of a wild salmon fighting with your line. This is a feeling that I strongly want our future generations to experience.

Personally, I am all for the Genetically Modified AquAdvantage Salmon.

From my research, I think that it is an incredibly well thought out process that takes into account all the various viewpoints. I was especially impressed with its environmental impacts. In order for one of the prime cattle beast from your local dairy farm to put on just 1 kg of body weight, it requires 8 kg of food. Whereas a GM salmon needs just 1kg of food to put on 1 kg of body weight. This shows that the salmon is among the most economically sustainable protein source for humans. All of a sudden this GM salmon has become one of the few animals that puts on weight in equal proportions to its feed. However, currently the NZ ministry for the environment does not allow you and I to purchase and enjoy any fresh meat, fruit or veg that is a GM product. I think that they should change their stance on this. If we can convince them to allow the sale of AquAdvantage Salmon here in our hometown, then we would be giving the wild populations of salmon in our local rivers a much better chance of surviving. I am talkingabout the Wanganui, the Waitaha, the Whataroa, the South Westland fishing competition. All of these places will be able to host a larger population of salmon for your future generations to enjoy.

If you are interested in finding out more please take time to look at the
AquAdvantage Salmon home website Aquabounty.com

 

 

 

Reference List:

https://www.biofortified.org/2010/10/salmon/
https://scienceprogress.org/2011/09/the-gmo-salmon-struggle/
https://gmoanswers.com/9-things-you-need-know-about-gmo-salmon http://aquabounty.com/
https://www.fda.gov/AnimalVeterinary/DevelopmentApprovalProcess/GeneticEngineering/GeneticallyEngineeredAnimals/ucm473237.htm
https://pacificwild.org/take-action/campaigns/protect-wild-salmon
http://www.mfe.govt.nz/publications/hazards/gm-nz-approach-jun04/genetic-modification- new-zealand
https://www.organicconsumers.org/news/10-world-organizations-have-taken-stand-again st-gmos
https://geneticliteracyproject.org/2018/05/02/viewpoint-david-suzukis-views-on-gmos-well-outside-the-scientific-mainstream/
https://www.ft.com/content/ab9b81ae-c94e-11e7-8536-d321d0d897a3
https://www.businessinsider.com.au/this-salmon-will-likely-be-the-first-gmo-animal-you-eat-2014-6?r=US&IR=T
https://www.seafoodsource.com/news/supply-trade/aquabounty-sells-first-batch-of-genetically-engineered-salmon

Futuristic Animals from the Past?

Wednesday, August 15th, 2018 | STEPHEN BRONI | No Comments

Futuristic animals from the past? 

Harriett Spoelstra – Ruawai College

 

The enclosure is empty; the dinosaur has disappeared! Scientists are unable to control this creature, this monster – deadly but amazing. We’ve all yelled at the screen as movie characters act dramatically stupid; at the scientists in Jurassic World who create a creature too powerful to control or understand; at the cartoons with the evil scientists who accidentally make a supervillain. This hunger to learn everything, to create something just because you can is what makes these characters so memorable.
Scientists (a term that covers a whole range of people and jobs) have greatly contributed to making the world what it is today, and scientists who have a passion to help and learn about our world are the key to a future that we would like to come true.

What if it were possible to bring back species long extinct?

Let the moa and the mammoth walk again? Or let a dinosaur once more paw the earth, or even make something new move and breathe? That power so often found in books or movies may soon not just be in our heads but in our hands.

New Zealand is a land of paddocks full of sheep, cows and chickens. If we were to
take a look at these creatures in the past, they would look quite different to the
domesticated version we are so used to. Through intensive selective breeding,
domesticated animals have been transformed so they better suit our needs; they
can produce more meat and grow more quickly. Breeding has also been used to
reduce infection and avoid diseases.

paddock with cattle &rainbow

 

Living on a farm myself, I can
easily see how our ideas and
inventions influence the land and
in turn influence our lives. This is
one way we have used scientific
methods in an attempt to create a
world which can better support us.

 

Modifying animals for our own purposes can be a terrifying and controversial concept, but human nature seems to dictate that we will continue to pursue this.

Genetic modification in the lab is different to intensive selective breeding but ultimately both are using science to change animals to suit us. De-extinction is a term that can be misleading, as we wouldn’t be able to bring back a creature that was extinct but rather create a hybrid with a close living relative, and so make a proxy of the extinct species. De-extinction is a concept that seems rather terrifying yet exciting. However, I wonder how different a creature made in this way would be from its ancestors, and I wouldn’t want to create a new creature that doesn’t fit into our world. An animal’s interaction with its environment is what influences its behaviour and quality of life. We may have to give ourselves limits on what we do, for the sake of our ethics; what would be the point of ‘bringing a species back to life’? Where would they live and how would they be able to survive in a world of humans, especially if humankind was a cause of their extinction?

The temptation to bring back species, or even help prevent endangered species from becoming extinct would be very great but I think we should be careful not to try and ‘rule’ over animals but rather do something that benefits the world as a whole and its future as well as humankind, especially when this science is not at all cheap. We may intend to help animal-kind as well as human-kind, but this technology may give us the feeling that we don’t have be proactive in protecting animals because we could always just bring back extinct species at will. Of course, I am talking about extreme circumstances and a future which may be more fitting in a sci-fi movie than reality but a version of this future could be real and may be not so far away.

In a world without science, there would be no new knowledge contributed to society, no inventions; the paddocks dotted with designer cows I see whenever I look out the window would not be possible. Science, and our understanding of it, has developed alongside the development of humankind. It is a part of me and my life, and the life of everyone who has ever wondered how something worked or used a cell-phone, turned on a light, or even just ate food cooked in a kitchen. Through science humans have developed the ability to influence genetic modification for our own purposes and technology is rapidly advancing right at this very moment.

We must always remember that our curiosity and scientific methods have made our present world and will make our future, but just because we have the power to genetically modify animals and humans doesn’t necessarily mean we should.

References
https://www.nzherald.co.nz/index.cfm?objectid=12039710&ref=twitter
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-3459168/From-giant-GM-salmon-buffed-Belgian-Bluecattle-animals-eat-looked-like-humans-began-breeding-food.html
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_genetic_engineering

Photo credits:

“A frightening and potentially dangerous technology”

Wednesday, May 13th, 2015 | STEPHEN BRONI | No Comments

That was how Otago University Prof Peter Dearden  from Genetics OtagoChinese genome scientist(1) described  a recent paper by a groups of chinese scientists describing the first genetically modified human embryos and opening a route to germ-line modification of our own species.

Check it out  and add your own views to the Sciblogs  comments  page.

Calling all Biologists…Chemists…and maybe even Physicists

Tuesday, May 13th, 2014 | STEPHEN BRONI | No Comments

Daniel has posted a great question on  the
Knowledge Forum Biology Curriculum: Human Evolution   Discussion View:LifeSpiral2

Q: What are the best examples in the world today that support the
theory of evolution
?

 

I’m putting the challenge out there for you all.

This is a great opportunity to get back into Knowlege Forum with a topic at the heart of the biology curriculum.

Is the evidence all  from Biology? 

If you have forgotten how to log-in   to Knowledge Forum and build on a post we will be putting  up  a  link to refresher tutorial very soon but flick us an email in meantime and we’ll get you in there right away.

PS When you get into the  Knowledge Forum – Biology Curriculum: Human Evolution View you are looking the build-on the post  titled ‘Support’ on the far right of the Discussion View.

The Dawn of De-extinction. Are you ready?

Friday, March 15th, 2013 | STEPHEN BRONI | No Comments

“Throughout humankind’s history, we’ve driven species after species extinct: the passenger pigeon, the Eastern cougar, the dodo … A colour collage of threatened species

But now, says Stewart Brand, we have the technology (and the biology) to bring back species that humanity wiped out. So — should we? Which ones? ”

Check out  Stewart Brand’s TED  Talk here at

http://www.ted.com/talks/stewart_brand_the_dawn_of_de_extinction_are_you_ready.html 

 Is it the answer to every conservationist’s prayer?

Or,
As Barry Hillman  muses in  on one of  the responses,
“Sure, we have a responsibility to un-do the damage we’ve done,let’s try to change our thinking and become a more caring society that has no need to damage our world and then we can spend more of our valuable and limited time on earth creating instead of repairing.”

What do you think? 

There’s a follow-up here, a panel video discussion `hot off the  press’  from March 15th  :  http://tedxdeextinction.org/ 

(OUASSA students: You can now comment on our Blog-posts,  but after clicking ` Comment’ box, you will have to sign-in using your Otago University login given  to you at the January camp)

Great resource for Processes and Patterns of Evolution

Thursday, July 19th, 2012 | smida55p | No Comments

This is a one of my favourite websites for simple, clear and valid content for learning about evolutionary processes and patterns from Berkeley:

http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evosite/evo101/index.shtml

Heaps of wonderful images, explanations and examples for revision or note-taking.

Maui’s dolphins’ survival near ‘point of no return’

Monday, April 30th, 2012 | hamvi58p | No Comments

Maui Dolphin

CLOSE TO EXTINCTION: A Maui dolphin and her calf.
The survival of the critically endangered Maui’s dolphin species will soon be “past the point of no return” unless emergency action is taken, an expert says.

What is believed to be a Maui’s dolphin was found dead by a member of the public in Taranaki last week. The dolphin was found on a beach near Pungarehu, south of New Plymouth.

It was collected by the Conservation Department and taken to Massey University for an autopsy.

It is not yet known if the dead dolphin is a Maui, of which only 54 are believed to be left, or a closely related Hector’s dolphin. The latest population survey found a couple of Hector’s mingling further north than usual with Maui’s dolphins.

If confirmed, it would be the second Maui’s dolphin found dead in Taranaki this year. Another, a female, was accidentally killed by a fisherman in January.

Otago University zoology professor Liz Slooten said the species was at a level where any loss would have a huge impact.

“Basically all bets are off already, natural processes could take them away. If we stopped catching them in fishing nets tomorrow we would still hold our breath … so we really need to pull out all the stops or soon we’ll go past the point of no return.”

Set net bans are imposed on the coastline between Dargaville to north Taranaki.

“As a biologist it’s really frustrating. I’ve done surveys there and wrote an article in 2005 to say the Maui is going much further south than the protected area,” Prof Slooten said.

The Fisheries Act included allowances for emergency protection measures to be put in place “literally overnight” in cases of sudden stock declines or unprecedented events, she said.

Submissions on laws to further protect the Maui’s dolphins closed on Friday. The laws want to extend the current ban on set nets along the west coast of the North Island and also extend a marine mammal sanctuary.

The fishing industry will argue against the ban, saying the dolphins have not been seen in the Taranaki area for years.

Keith Mawson, of Egmont Seafoods in Taranaki, earlier told the Seafood Industry Council that a proposal to extend the set net ban was a knee-jerk reaction. A ban would be disappointing for the fishing community, which was being used as a “scapegoat”, he said. By Michelle Robinson and Shane Cowlishaw.

– © Fairfax NZ News

Was Human Evolution Caused by Climate Change ?

Wednesday, April 11th, 2012 | STEPHEN BRONI | No Comments

Neanderthals at the cave site of Trou Al'Wesse in Belgium, clinging on as climate deteriorated. (Credit: Digital painting by James Ives)

Neanderthals at the cave site of Trou Al'Wesse in Belgium, clinging on as climate deteriorated. (Credit: Digital painting by James Ives)

Although an African origin of the modern human species is generally accepted, the evolutionary processes involved in the speciation, geographical spread, and eventual extinction of archaic humans outside of Africa are much debated. An additional complexity has been the recent evidence of limited interbreeding between modern humans and the Neandertals and Denisovans (a newly discovered group from Siberia). Modern human migrations and interactions began during the buildup to the Last Glacial Maximum, starting about 100,000 years ago. By examining the history of other organisms through glacial cycles, valuable models for evolutionary biogeography can be formulated. According to one such model, the adoption of a new refugium by a subgroup of a species may lead to important evolutionary changes.

   “Ultimately, this model explains why Homo sapiens as a species are here and the archaic humans are not.” Dr J.R. Stewart

The research also leads to interesting conclusions as to how and why Neanderthals, and indeed the Denisovans, evolved in the first place.

Check out the full article here

http://www.sciencemag.org/content/335/6074/1317.full

Essential Readings for Level 3 Bio Externals

Wednesday, October 5th, 2011 | hamvi58p | No Comments

http://www.becominghuman.org/

->Covers human evolution, this website has excellent video coverage and resources

site applying genetics to examples

http://learn.genetics.utah.edu/

->Genetics applications, an excellent site

http://dnalc.org/home.html

-> Gene Almanac, an awesome interactive

http://dnaftb.org/dnaftb/

-> DNA from the beginning, an excellent summary of level 3 genetics

http://www.dnai.org/

-> DNA Interactive, excellent case studies as applications of genetic practises and processes, an awesome site with case study approaches to assist in exam prep (especially for schol exam).

http://sci.waikato.ac.nz/evolution/index.shtml

->  NZ evolution examples, excellent site for evolution with lots of good NZ examples.

http://www.sciencecases.org/hemo/hemo.asp

-> Inheritance of haemophilia, an interesting case study, good practice for thinking.

http://www.biotechlearn.org.nz/

-> NZ science research, home grown examples of applications of science, a good site.

http://www.rsnz.org/education/gamma/

->Royal Society of NZ webiste, Gamma Series, Science behind the news, great articles modelling good writing.

http://www.nzqa.govt.nz/scholarship/index.html

-> scholarship information, details of scholarship, an essential for scholarship candidates.

http://www.nzqa.govt.nz/scholarship/subjects/resources.html

-> Biology Scholarship Information, details of exams etc, an essential for scholarship candidates.

http://www.tki.org.nz/r/ncea/bio3_supportmaterial_15feb06.doc

->NCEA on TKI supplementary materials, summary of genetics and evolution at level 3

http://www.tki.org.nz/r/ncea/bio3_supportgenetics_18dec06.doc

->NCEA on TKI supplementary materials, summary of Plant and Animal and ecology knowledge required for level 3 and scholarship

 

Isolating Mechanisms

Tuesday, August 16th, 2011 | hamvi58p | No Comments

http://www.teachersdomain.org/resource/tdc02.sci.life.evo.lacewings/

Check out the section called ‘Background Essay’….. brilliant for your revision, here is a sneak peak.

‘When explaining a breakup, couples will often say, “We grew apart,” or “We both changed in different ways.” That’s a good metaphor for how species are formed: members of a population somehow begin to diverge, usually as a result of being geographically separated from each other. Eventually, they can no longer interbreed, and at that point a new species has formed.

Yet if the two groups continued to live near each other, it’s likely that mating attempts between naturally varying members of the two populations would tend to allow the species to merge again. This is called “gene flow” between the two groups. What keeps this from happening, and what allows new species to arise and endure, are what are known as “isolating mechanisms.” These are either behavioral or structural differences between species that make mating impossible……’ see website for remainder of article.
Discussion Questions:

  • How might different songs keep species of lacewings from interbreeding?
  • Can you think of other examples of traits or mechanisms that would similarly isolate other closely-related species?
  • Speciation resource –

    Tuesday, August 16th, 2011 | hamvi58p | No Comments

    The Origin of Species

    This is a great website for those wanting to apply themselves to what has been taught in the classroom.  The extract below is the background reading, there are applictaion questions as well as the interactive slide show.  A must for serious Biologists and Excellence/Schol. candidates!

    http://www.teachersdomain.org/resource/tdc02.sci.life.evo.anorigin/

    The term evolution refers to the cumulative change that occurs in populations of organisms over time. Sometimes evolutionary change is so dramatic that different populations of the same species diverge to become two or more distinct species. In the case of a group of birds called honeycreepers, for example, a single species that colonized the Hawaiʻian Islands about 5 million years ago ultimately diverged into 57 different species.

    This process, which evolutionary biologists call speciation or adaptive radiation, can happen anywhere. However, it is most clearly demonstrated on geologically young land masses, such as newly formed islands or mountains. In these environments a population of organisms will typically find a set of environmental opportunities and pressures very different from the conditions they experienced in their place of origin. These environmental differences come in many forms and often cause sweeping evolutionary changes in a founding population.

    Several environmental factors affect the process of speciation. The structural habitat of an area determines the ease with which creatures are able to move around and find shelter from weather and other organisms. Food, both the type and its availability, dictates the ease with which animals are able to acquire the energy they need to survive and reproduce.

    Competition for various resources is another factor that can drive the process of speciation. Competitive pressure can come from organisms of the same species or from organisms of different species. Generally, in highly competitive environments, traits that minimize competition — traits that, for example, allow two different populations to feed on very different types of food — are advantageous.

    Another factor that can influence speciation is predation. Predators typically reduce the rate of speciation because they limit other organisms’ access to resources. On newly formed land masses, however, the number of predators is typically lower than on older continents. These younger environments, therefore, provide more opportunities for species to evolve into new and different species

    Evolutionary Evidence from New Zealand

    Thursday, May 26th, 2011 | STEPHEN BRONI | No Comments

    Kakapo,Kea, kaka complexStruggling to get your head around role of polyploidy in speciation, adaptive radiation and such like?
    This page brings those concepts into focus using New Zealand examples.
    http://sci.waikato.ac.nz/evolution/NZevidence.shtml

    Check out the rest of the Evolution for Teaching site for  information on ‘Human Evolution’, `Darwin & Religion’, Earth’s History & Evolution’ and `Theories, Hypotheses, & Laws’.

    A good authoratative site from University of Waikato with a links to glossary &  a useful FAQ page.

    Speciation

    Monday, May 23rd, 2011 | KEV KNOWLES | No Comments

    This achievement standard involves the description of processes and patterns of evolution.

    Processes of evolution are limited to

    • ways in which speciation occurs (sympatric, allopatric)
    • reproductive isolating mechanisms that contribute to speciation (geographical, temporal, ecological, behavioural, structural barriers, polyploidy)
    • the role of natural selection.

    Patterns of evolution will be selected from: convergent evolution, divergent evolution (including adaptive radiation), co-evolution, punctuated equilibrium, gradualism.