Hudson Fish Adapts Fast to Resist PCBs

By: Greg Clary, Gannett News Service February 20, 2011

The discovery of PCB-resistant fish in the Hudson River is known as one of the fastest species adaptations on record. Usually, if the fish followed normal natural selection, it would have taken thousands of years to mutate but for this case, it only took about 50 years. Researchers have been studying these fish for years, even bringing in control fish to monitor the growth. The Atlantic tomcods were the fish that were unaffected from being exposed to toxic levels while the control fish were much more sensitive. The fast adapting of the Atlantic tomcods comes down to one gene, said by Isaac Wirgin, the New Rochelle resident that lead the research team who made the discovery. The Atlantic tomcods have two missing amino acids, that the control fish have, which gives the ability to prevent the man made toxins to the tomcods. This change in the gene caused and evolutionary change and the funding of the removing of PCBs should still be happening. The PCBs are not going to go about by themselves. (picture- Isaac Wirgin holding an Atlantic tomcod)

Taking thousands a years to adapt is a long time but going from thousands to just 50 is a big difference in the natural selection process. I never knew animals could adapt to a man made toxin. Since it's man made you would think that the fish wouldn't be able to adapt at all. I have never been to the Hudson River so I don't know how bad the water is but since the Atlantic tomcods feed on the bottom of the Hudson and millions of pounds of PCBs have been dumped, it must be very unhealthy for the fish. I'm surprised that some people would think that since the fish adapted to the PCBs that they should stop the funding of trying to clean the river up. The PCBs changed life and the funding should continue until the river is clean.

How do you think they could get rid of the PCB in the Hudson River faster?

Why do you think the fish are adapting to what man puts in the river?

How are the fish affecting the people?

http://www.poughkeepsiejournal.com/article/20110220/NEWS01/102200362/Hudson-fish-adapts-fast-to-resist-PCBs

Boa Constrictors Becoming an Invasive Species

Summary: Boa Constrictors were introduced into Aruba in an illegal manner, and since that time they have been multiplying in exponential numbers. This foreign invasive species is making a big impact on this generally secluded islands' bird species. The birds that are feeling the impact of this foreign species the most are the mockingbird, oriole, and owl. These birds are being eaten in incredible numbers this is not too large of an issue at the moment, but in the future it has a potential of greatly impacting Aruba's environment.

Reaction: I think that we all have heard how vicious boa constrictors are so the thought of them becoming predators is not very difficult to wrap your mind around, but at the same time the rate that they are eating the bird population is astounding. They seem to be wiping out the bird population and there is nothing being done to stop this before it makes a real impact. I feel like when we here about environmental issues its always after they've made an impact and is too late. Boa Constrictors are turning into a very dominant species in this area and this can only turn out negative.

Questions:
1. How do you think you could stop this species from becoming a large issue now?
2. What could the birds do to become able to get away from these snakes?
3. How much concern do you think Aruba should put towards this environmental issue?

Urban Coyotes

Summary:

We are constantly shifting the surroundings where many wildlife species live. Some species have certain habitat necessities and they are becoming extinct, while adaptable ones are continuing to grow. Coyotes are popularly known for being sly and can live up to the constant change of a region. Coyotes initially have taken the southwestern U.S., but they spread all through North America in the past century. In 2005, coyotes were guilty for 60.5% of an estimated $18.3 million in sheep losses. Coyotes have killed sheep and goats in North America ever since domestic species were introduced. People have been trying to minimize the coyote’s population. Each pair of coyotes creates about six spare young coyotes per year. Organizations suggest that more than 70% of coyotes have to be removed from a population within many years in order to actually reduce a population. If only certain methods were allowed, such as completely getting rid of, killing, or destroying, the coyote population will solved. But as a result, the coyotes are not going anywhere for some time.
Coyotes are able to adapt to different environments much more quickly than usual animals. They will alter their movement and space use in reaction to humans, and they will also hurriedly adjust to alter in prey resources and sharing. Coyotes are unique, with different responses to different management methods. Their unpredictable behavior, however, also makes their organization more difficult. Not all coyotes are evenly vulnerable to all management methods, no distinct approach will always be victorious.

Reflection:

I have never seen a coyote before and am still wanting to. I understand why organizations would want to kill coyotes to help minimize their population, but it just seems like an awful thing to do. Since coyotes are so adaptable to their different environments, maybe the other types of animals could follow the coyotes “techniques.” Coyotes have never struck me as an immensely populated species.

Questions:

How else do you think we could get rid of these coyotes?

What do you think we can do to help prevent killings of our farm animals?

Do you know of any other species that can adapt as quickly as coyotes?

If rearranging an environment causes so many problems with animals being extinct and increasing, why do you think we still do it?


http://www.actionbioscience.org/biodiversity/shivik.html

X-rays Reveal Ancient Snake's Hidden Leg

Summary:

Recently found that a 95 million year old snake fossil reveled that the snake had legs. Scientist used a 3D simulation machine to show the hidden legs. Scientist still don't know if the snake was a ocean dwelling snake or a land dwelling snake. Scientist also used another machine to show the other leg of the snake that was inside of the fossil. The machine that they used this time is like a X-ray machine but a 1000 times higher revolution. The scan they ran showed no foot or toes on the snake.

Review:

Why would a snake need legs is what I am wondering. Snake being able to walk of

crawl would defeat the purpose of having a of the vertebra's in its spine. If snake

had legs that must have adapt them so if they did what was the purpose.

What purpose do you think the legs had?

Why do you think snakes grew legs in the first place?

Do you think any other species are like this?

http://www.livescience.com/11816-rays-reveal-snake-hidden-legx-rays-reveal-snake-hidden-leg.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed:+Livesciencecom+(LiveScience.com+Science+Headline+Feed)

Killing Endangered Whales; Tamsyn, 15 November 2001

The slaughtering of whales stared in the year 3000 BC, and first developed in northen Europe. The Nordics discovered it in the 19th century that they could make money off of whale body parts. This started when six men were in rowing boats armed with weapons. The whales bones were sold to make knife handles, corsets, brushes, and unbrella ribs. The main money maker from whales was their blubber. It was melted down in brick ovens to become oil. The oil was then used for lighting and lubrication. When steam powered boats were introduced in the year 1870, whaling became even more popular. Many people quickly frowned upon whaling, because whales were, and still are on the endangered species list. Whaling became banned in 1986, although Japan and Iceland still continue to catch whales for research and other things. Unfortunately, not much is being done to stoop the slaughtering of whales.

When flicking through the channels on TV, Whale Wars was one of the shows that popped up. This show is about how we are trying to stop foreign conuntries from killing the whales, and while doing so we get ourselves tied up in a little war. I understand why people would want to kill whales, because it does make a lot of money, especially from the oil. What I do not understand is why people continue to kill the whales, when they are on the endangered species list. It would be a very sad thing if whales were to become extinct, and ocean life would not be the same without them. I feel that whaling should be looked at more closely, and more laws made to stop the slaughtering of whales.

Do you think whaling should be banned? Why?

What other things do you think we could do to stop people from killing whales?

What other species of animals have a similar problem, such that humans kill them for moneys sake?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/cbbcnews/hi/club/your_reports/newsid_1656000/1656108.stm

Rhino Poaching in South Africa Reaches All-Time High

Summary:

In recent years rhino poaching has become a serious global issue, especially in the country of South Africa. The problem spiked in 2008 when 83 rhinos were illegally murdered for their horns, which is in high demand for use in Asian medicines. Despite many efforts being put forth by different organizations, the situation is getting progressively worse. Many rhino-protecting organizations have come up with different ways to catch poachers such as implanting tracking chips in rhino’s horns, and intensifying poaching laws. They are also providing additional breeding lands for this endangered species. However, poachers are one step ahead of the government when it comes to rhino hunting. They have acquired technologies such as night vision equipment, veterinary tranquilizers, and helicopters, which make their illegal hunting far easier. Dr. Joseph Okori, the WWF African Rhino Program Manager states: “This is not typical poaching, the criminal syndicates operating in South Africa are highly organized and use advanced technologies. They are very well coordinated.” Unfortunately, he could not be more right, these criminals are highly advanced and have many ways of outsmarting the government. In 2010 an astounding 333 rhinos were killed; that is an average of about one rhino murdered every day. Ten more rhinos being killed in the first week of 2011 alone does not show much hope for South African rhinos in the year ahead.

Reflection:

It is amazing how much these people put in to poaching. I mean helicopters and night vision equipment are not cheap. If people are willing to risk so much for this business then it must make them a lot of money. However, even if it is a high paying “job”, it is quite sad that people are able to do this to an endangered species just for the sake of money. I think that more countries should come the aid of the South African government when it comes to this issue because they are obviously not the strongest or richest government, and powerful countries such as our own could make such a difference. In an odd way rhino poaching reminded me of a big problem we have in our own country, drug dealing. Big time drug dealers face life in prison if they are caught, but are willing to risk this because they make so much money. I am sure poachers face the same punishment, if not worse, but continue to do it because the payoff is so high.

Questions:

What are some ways the South African government can crack down harder on rhino poachers?

Do you think other countries would be of any help to South Africa by getting involved with this issue? If so, how?

What are some other global issues that involve poaching?

How do you think poachers acquire such advanced and expensive technologies?

Should we even be worried about this issue? Why or why not?

http://www.worldwildlife.org/who/media/press/2011/WWFPresitem19251.html