Category Archives: Evolution

Those pesky robots, eh? This week, Facebook shut down a pair of its artificial intelligence chatbots after they invented their own language and started talking to each other in a way only they understood. Eat your heart out, Stanley Kubrick. This was like a sinister plot twist in a dystopian vision of the future.

If the tinny tykes arent hell-bent on universal domination (see Doctor Whos Cybermen), theyre becoming scarily sentient (witness Humans or Westworld).

Hyper Evolution: Rise of the Robots (BBC Four) was a timely two-part documentary investigating how far robots have come and what it could mean if, like in those sci-fi series, machines developed true consciousness and emotional intelligence.

This concluding episode saw evolutionary biologist Dr Ben Garrod and electronics engineer Professor Danielle George criss-crossing the globe to come face to metal face with a range of futuristic creations.

Go here to see the original:

Hyper Evolution: Rise of the Robots is a timely look at robots that Kubrick could only dream of - review - Telegraph.co.uk

The 2001 discovery of the seven million-year-old Sahelanthropus, the first known upright ape-like creatures, was yet more proof of humanitys place among the great apes. And yet Mike Pence, then a representative and now US vice president, argues for the opposite conclusion.

For him, our ideas about our ancestors have changed, proving once more that evolution was a theory, and therefore we should be free to teach other theories alongside evolution in our classrooms.

How to respond? The usual answer is that we should teach students the meaning of the word theory as used in science that is, a hypothesis (or idea) that has stood up to repeated testing. Pences argument will then be exposed to be what philosophers call an equivocation an argument that only seems to make sense because the same word is being used in two different senses.

Evolution, Pence argues, is a theory, theories are uncertain, therefore evolution is uncertain. But evolution is a theory only in the scientific sense of the word. And in the words of the National Academy of Sciences, The formal scientific definition of theory is quite different from the everyday meaning of the word. It refers to a comprehensive explanation of some aspect of nature that is supported by a vast body of evidence. Attaching this label to evolution is an indicator of strength, not weakness.

If you take this approach, you have failed to understand the purpose of Pences rhetoric, or why it is so appealing to creationists. Pence is an accomplished politician, and knows exactly how to appeal to his intended audience. He is also an accomplished trial lawyer, which makes him a conjuror with words, and like any skilful conjuror he has pulled off his trick by distraction. Pence has drawn us into a discussion about words, when our focus should be on the evidence.

I would suggest the opposite approach. The problem is not really with the word theory at all. Students will have learned its meaning in the same way they learn meanings in general: by seeing how the word is used.

They will have heard of atomic theory, which no one has seriously doubted for over a century. And what about the theory of gravity? Finally, they may have seen how Darwin himself uses the expression my theory, although at the time it was neither comprehensive nor well supported (there were huge gaps in the fossil record), to refer in a very general way to his linked ideas about mutability of species, common descent, and the power of natural selection.

So if anyone says, Evolution is a theory, dont give them a lecture on the meaning of the word theory. If you do, youve fallen into the trap of making it seem that how we define words should affect how we see reality. You will be fighting on ground of your opponents choosing, since arguing about how to apply words is the stock in trade of theologians, preachers and lawyers like Mike Pence.

The correct response is to say that evolution is a theory like gravity is a theory and then redirect attention to the evidence. And that evidence is overwhelming.

Start with family relationships. Carl Linnaeus showed how living things can be classified into species, genera, families and so on, and Darwin pointed out that this is exactly the structure we would expect from a family tree. All dogs are canines, so dogs share an ancestor with foxes; all canines are carnivora, so dogs share a more remote ancestor with bears; all carnivora are mammals, so dogs and sheep are, albeit more remotely, related, and so on.

Then look at the discovery over the past few decades of family relationships at the molecular level, and the fact that the molecular family tree matches that based on anatomical resemblances.

Observe the fossil record. Once lamentably full of gaps (Darwin was among the lamenters), it is now densely populated. A century ago, it still made sense to point to the missing link between humans and pre-human apes. Now we know of several different hominin species living alongside each other, and the problem becomes one of distinguishing our grandparents from our great uncles. And yes, there are missing links in the chain, but without evolution we would not have a chain at all.

And then theres biogeography: for example, why marsupials are only found in South America and Australasia, and except for a few species that made their way across the Isthmus of Panama, are never found elsewhere.

Plus we can actually observe evolution, and study it in the field or in the lab. The emergence of pesticide resistance is evolution in action, as shown in the justly famous Harvard/Technion demonstration evolution on a plate. So is the delightful Russian experiment of breeding tame foxes. Artificial selection, just as much as natural selection, is evolution in action.

And finally, and most convincingly, we must look at the way that these different lines of evidence mesh together. We can apply biogeography to the fossil record, and link it to what we know about the movements of the continents. Using the methods of molecular biology, we can identify and time the mutations that led different species to diverge from their common ancestor, and match the timing against the fossil record.

Thus the fossil record, deep anatomical resemblances, and DNA evidence agree in showing that whales, for instance, are closely related to hoofed mammals, diverging from them in the Eocene period. There are many other examples of such consistency.

Then, and only then, pause to explain how a scientific theory is an interlocking connection of ideas that explain things about the world, and that evolution is one of the most successful examples. And challenge the Mike Pences of this world to spell out exactly what they would like to see taught alongside the Theory of Evolution and why.

See original here:

How to slam dunk creationists when it comes to the theory of evolution - The Conversation UK

Contact: Sarah Nicholas

STARKVILLE, Miss.Mississippi State is part of a new research collaboration sponsored by the National Science Foundation in which a colorful tropical butterfly is helping researchers investigate genetics and evolution.

Scientists at the Starkville land-grant university and the University of Puerto RicoRio Piedras will be studying the relationship in organisms between genetic material, or genotype, and physical characteristics due to gene expression and environmental influences, or phenotype.

Brian Counterman, an associate professor of biological sciences, leads the MSU research team. Ryan Range, assistant professor of biological sciences, as well as Jovonn Hill and Federico Hoffman, both assistant professors in the Department of Biochemistry, Molecular Biology, Entomology and Plant Pathology, also are part of the study that will examine genotype-phenotype relationships using color patterns of the Heliconius butterfly.

More than $1.2 million is being provided through the NSFs Established Program to Stimulate Competitive Research, known as EPSCoR, for the MSU collaboration over four years.

National Science Foundation leaders have noted how the genotype-to-phenotype relationship has significant societal and economic implications across scientific fields and areas of industry such as medicine, agriculture and biotechnology.

According to EPSCoR Head Denise Barnes, Over the past several decades, scientists and engineers have made massive strides in decoding, amassing and storing genomic data. For that reason, the federal agency is committed to providing the U.S. scientific community, including MSU, with resources for future discoveries that may help improve food-crop yields, better predictions for human disease risk and new drug therapies.

Angus Dawe, head of MSUs Department of Biological Sciences, said that in addition to helping raise our profile nationally, the project will make possible extensive support for training students and extend the impact of work at MSU to other regions.

This award will support foundational work at the cutting edge of genetics and evolution, Dawe said.

As Counterman recounted, groundbreaking 19th century naturalist Charles Darwin (1809-82) considered Heliconius to be the most striking example of natural selection in the wild because it has the ability to work with other butterflies to train predators that they are toxic.

When species work together, more individual butterflies survive and produce offspring, which is the process of natural selection at its best, Counterman observed.

Counterman said the new inquiry actually is an extension of a project we were already working on with Puerto RicoRio Piedras. When we finished in February, we decided to take it a step further and write a proposal for this grant.

Dawe said the MSU department is proud of its facultys continued success in obtaining research support from a variety of agencies, even as federal funding rates have been cut dramatically. To be able to receive awards in this climate is further evidence that biological sciences at Mississippi State competes with the very best programs anywhere, he emphasized.

Counterman said he and fellow team members are excited about opportunities to provide highly specialized genomic training in both Mississippi and Puerto Rico.

An MSU faculty member since 2010, Counterman is a biology doctoral graduate of Duke University who earlier earned a bachelors degree in ecology and evolution at the University of California, Santa Barbara.

Dawe said that research proposals for national grants typically involve a tremendous amount of work. He expressed his departments deep appreciation for administrative support and scientific collaborations with campus colleagues in the College of Arts and Sciences, the Department of Biochemistry, Molecular Biology, Entomology and Plant Pathology in the College of Agriculture and Life Sciences, as well as the offices of Sponsored Projects and Research and Economic Development.

We are extremely grateful for their support, without which the submission of grant proposals could not happen, he said.

For details about EPSCoRs ongoing mission, visit http://www.nsf.gov/od/oia/programs/epscor.

MSUs College of Arts and Sciences includes more than 5,000 students, 300 full-time faculty members, nine doctoral programs and 25 academic majors offered in 14 departments. It also is home to the most diverse units for research and scholarly activities, including the Department of Biological Sciences.

Research expenditures in the humanities are also an important part of Mississippi States overall research portfolio. Additionally, the NSF has ranked MSU among the top 25 for research expenditures in the social sciences. For more information on MSUs College of Arts and Sciences, visit http://www.cas.msstate.edu. The Department of Biological Sciences is online at http://www.biology.msstate.edu.

MSU is Mississippis leading university, also available online at http://www.msstate.edu.

Read the original here:

MSU genetics and evolution study receives $1.2 million NSF grant - Mississippi State Newsroom

) at a the laboratory of Santa Fe zoo in Medellin, Colombia. Many species of frogs, including the Golden Frog, the most venomous frog in the world, are in danger of extinction. Photograph: Raul Arboleda/AFP/Getty Images

Although Kermit the Frog has always struggled with body image, in evolutionary terms, the frog body plan is a rather successful one. With a short, stout body, protruding eyes and strong, flexible limbs with webbed feet, the world can be your swamp. The frog body plan has remained rather similar for almost 200m years, and with only limited tweaks in anatomy, frogs (Anura) have managed to occupy a range of different habitats, from muddy pools in Alaska to tree tops in the tropics. Currently, over 6700 species are known from all continents except Antarctica, which makes frogs one of the most diverse and species-rich groups of tetrapods. Never change a good thing. However, this limited variation in the frog body plan over time and space has made it difficult for biologists to reconstruct the evolutionary history of frogs and to sort out who is related to who.

Frogs are amphibians, and the oldest member of the frog lineage the stem-frog Triadobatrachus massinoti which lived during the Early Triassic (~250m years ago) in what is now Madagascar still retained primitive features, such as a tail and the likely inability to jump, that distinguish it from modern frogs. By the Early Cretaceous (131-120m years ago), the first members of the modern frogs have evolved, such as the three-dimensionally preserved Liaobatrachus zhaoi from the Yixian Formation in China (Dong et al., 2013).

The rise of molecular techniques enabled scientists to use DNA instead of morphology to try to unravel the frog family tree. Initial studies focused only on a limited number of genes, and as a result, age estimates for certain groups of frogs varied wildly. Moreover, these studied did little to understand relationships within frog groups, particularly for those groups that contain massive numbers of species, such as the Hyloidea which includes the glass frogs and poison-dart frogs.

A new study by Yan-Lie Feng and colleagues from Sun Yat-Sen University in Guangzhou, China, set out to change this by using an extensive molecular dataset that included 95 different genes from 156 species of frogs. Their dataset represents a major leap compared to previous studies, and has resulted in the best supported timescale of frog evolution thusfar.

By using such a large number of genes and species, this new analysis indicates that the major frog groups are younger than previously thought. The last common ancestor of all living frogs (crown-group Anura) is estimated to have lived during the Upper Triassic at 210m years ago. This is in contrast to previous studies that placed the last common ancestor much further back in time at around 250 million years.

When plotting the diversification of frogs on a geological time scale, it becomes clear that diversification events in frogs coincide with break-ups of major prehistoric landmasses. The first split within Anura is that between the Neobatrachia and other anurans. This split occurs at ~ 180 Mya (Middle Jurassic), at around the same time as the breakup of Pangaea into the two supercontinents Laurasia (northern hemisphere) and Gondwana (southern hemisphere). A second break up occurred at around 135m years ago, when two major lineages of Neobatrachia split into Proceola, containing the superfamily Hyloidea, and Diplasiocoela including the Ranoidea. This split coincides with the separation of South America and Africa and the spreading of the South Atlantic Ocean sea floor in the Early Cretaceous.

Interestingly, three major lineages of frogs, the Hyloidea, Microhylidae and Natatanura, have a near-synchronous origin at around 66m years ago. That estimate overlaps with a major extinction event, the Cretaceous Tertiary (K/T) mass extinction, during which two-thirds of life on earth, including the non-avian dinosaurs, marine reptiles and pterosaurs, went extinct.

Although there is little fossil evidence to show how the K/T mass extinction impacted frogs, it is not unlikely that a number of frog species went the way of the dinosaurs. However, when researchers looked at the rate at which species originated during that time period, the analysis indicated that there was a surge in frog diversification immediately following the K/T boundary. Quite ribbiting, perhaps, is the fact that 88% of current frog species originated in this relatively short time period after the K/T mass extinctions.

Mass extinctions leave behind a wasteland of empty ecological real estate. Species that survive can take advantage of this empty ecological space, and as different organisms invade different niches, they adapt and diversify. This is why mass extinction events are often followed by periods of rapid adaptive radiation and speciation.

The demise of non-avian dinosaurs and many other groups at the end of the Cretaceous triggered explosive radiations of mammals (Alroy, 1999) and birds (Ksepka et al., 2017). This new study on frogs shows that the aftermath of the K/T mass extinction may have provided new ecological opportunities for amphibians as well. Particularly, the increase in forest habitats after the massive loss of vegetation that happened at the K/T boundary is thought to have played a major role in enabling adaptive radiations for arboreal taxa. Truly arboreal species of frogs are limited to groups that originated after the K/T boundary, demonstrating how mass extinctions in the past have shaped the current diversity of frogs. However, as past performance is no guarantee for future success, it remains to be seen how frogs will do in the next round of mass extinction.

References

Alroy, J. 1999. The fossil record of North American mammals: evidence for a Paleocene evolutionary radiation. Systematic Biology 48 (1).

Dong, L., Roek, Z., Wang, Y., and Jones, M.E.H. 2013. Anurans from the Lower Cretaceous Jehol Group of Western Liaoning, China. PLoS ONE 8 (12)

Feng, Y-J., Blackburn; D.C., Liang, D., Hillis, D.M., Wake, D.B., Cannatella, D.C., and Zhang, P. 2017. Phylogenomics reveals rapid, simultaneous diversification of three major clades of Gondwanan frogs at the Cretaceous Paleogene boundary. PNAS 114(29)

Ksepka D.T., Stidham, T.A., and Williamson, T.E. 2017. Early Paleocene landbird supports rapid phylogenetic and morphological diversification of crown birds after the KPg mass extinction. PNAS 114 (30)

See the rest here:

Jump for joy: researchers make huge leap in understanding frog evolution - The Guardian

August 1, 2017 by Eric Hamilton Credit: CC0 Public Domain

After Dan Levitis and his wife lost two pregnancies, before having their three children, he was drawn to investigate why pregnancy loss is so common, and whether other living beings face the same struggle his family did.

Levitis, a scientist in the University of Wisconsin-Madison Department of Botany, had one main suspect in mind: meiosis, which organisms use to produce sperm and eggs for sexual reproduction. He describes meiosis as an intricate cellular line dance, one that mixes up chromosomes to reshuffle genes. This rearrangement helps create offspring that are different from their parents, offspring that might be better equipped to survive in a changing world.

But meiosis is also one of the most complex processes that cells undergo, and a lot can go wrong as chromosomes tangle and untangle themselves. Levitis figured that this complexity might lead to problems creating healthy progeny.

In new research published this week (Aug. 1, 2017) in the Proceedings of the Royal Society B, Levitis and his collaborators report that meiosis takes a heavy toll on the viability of offspring. And not just for humans. Creatures from geckos to garlic and cactuses to cockroaches pay a price to undergo sexual reproduction.

The work provides deeper context on the fundamental biological causes behind pregnancy loss, and suggests that the advantages of sexual reproduction must overcome the severe constraints imposed by meiosis.

"It's known that for humans, the primary cause of pregnancy loss is chromosomal abnormalities arising from meiosis," says Anne Pringle, a professor of botany at UW-Madison and another author of the research. "But what wasn't at all clear was whether meiosis is a leading cause of inviability not just in humans, but wherever it occurs."

The video will load shortly

To answer this question, Levitis compared the viability of offspring produced by three different kinds of reproduction. Sexual reproduction, where two players make a genetic contribution, always requires meiosis. On the other hand, asexual reproductionwhere the offspring are clones of their parentsusually uses the much simpler mitosis, a comparatively easy cloning of cells, no genetic reshuffling required. When asexual reproduction does use meiosis, it is even more complicated than sex.

In this three-way comparison, Levitis found that more complex reproduction resulted in lower offspring survival. For example, asexual lizards that use meiosis had lower viability than sexual lizards that also use meiosis because asexual meiosis was more complicated. Yet the organisms that used the simpler mitosis, like palm trees and damselflies, produced healthier offspring.

This pattern held true in 42 of 44 species. "When you get a result that consistent across such a wide range of organisms, it's suspicious," says Levitis. But even after a second look, the data checked out. Something about meiosis, seemingly its complexity, kills offspring.

"If you're making your tally sheet, all the pluses and minuses of sex, the fact that sex requires this deadly process is pretty clearly a disadvantage," says Levitis.

Regarding the evolution of sex, Levitis' findings suggest that the advantages of going through meiosis must be significant enough to balance that tally sheet. The reshuffling of genes between two parents during sex might provide even more of an advantage than previously thought.

The other takeaway, says Levitis, is that although it's easy to think that natural selection can solve every problemand that we might wish it had, such as for high rates of pregnancy losssometimes it comes up against fundamental constraints. Meiosis seems to be one of those insurmountable barriers.

Yet the tradeoff, offspring that are truly unique, with novel genetic combinations to face a challenging world, must be worth it.

Explore further: Researchers identify traffic cop mechanism for meiosis

More information: Is meiosis a fundamental cause of inviability among sexual and asexual plants and animals? Proceedings of the Royal Society B, rspb.royalsocietypublishing.or .1098/rspb.2017.0939

Researchers at NYU and the Whitehead Institute for Biomedical Research have identified the mechanism that plays "traffic cop" in meiosisthe process of cell division required in reproduction. Their findings, which appear ...

Researchers at New York University and the Whitehead Institute for Biomedical Research have identified the mechanism that plays "traffic cop" in meiosisthe process of cell division required in reproduction. Their findings, ...

Alternative splicing significantly expands the form and function of the genome of organisms with limited gene numbers and is especially important for several stages of mouse spermatogenesis.

Why is sex so popular among plants and animals, and why isn't asexual reproduction, or cloning, a more common reproductive strategy?

Where would we be without meiosis and recombination? For a start, none of us sexually reproducing organisms would be here, because that's how sperm and eggs are made. And when meiosis doesn't work properly, it can lead to ...

Geneticists have identified an enzyme which regulates the production of sperm and egg cells in human reproduction.

Researchers have been able to switch on and study the mechanism some bacteria use to inject toxins into their rivals.

All animals use a combination of senses to survive. But where the majority typically rely on one or two especially sensitive sensory systems, the oilbird excels by apparently having keen senses all-around.

An unspoken frustration for evolutionary biologists over the past 100 years, says Craig Albertson at the University of Massachusetts Amherst, is that genetics can only account for a small percentage of variation in the physical ...

Interpreting relationships between species and their environments is crucial to inform ecosystem-based management (EBM), a priority for NOAA Fisheries. EBM recognizes the diverse interactions within an ecosystemincluding ...

After Dan Levitis and his wife lost two pregnancies, before having their three children, he was drawn to investigate why pregnancy loss is so common, and whether other living beings face the same struggle his family did.

The first flower to appear along the path of plant evolution, during the time of the dinosaurs, was a hermaphrodite with petal-like organs arranged in concentric circles, researchers said Monday.

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Read more:

Pregnancy loss and the evolution of sex are linked by cellular line dance - Phys.Org

Hyper Evolution: Rise of the Robots, BBC4. Photograph: BBC/Windfall Films/Ed cave

No royal goes unmocked as the family plan a gathering at Balmoral. Camilla (Haydn Gwynne) wants revenge on Theresa May, and Charles (Harry Enfield, giving it the bumbling brilliance) makes waves in Scotland when its revealed hes wearing nae skiddies beneath his kilt. Prince Harrys relationship with Meghan Markle reaches new heights when the actor gets a part in Hollyoaks, but Pippa plans to scupper their love. Gloriously silly stuff. Hannah Verdier

Davina McCall and Nicky Campbell help two more families pulled apart by the cruellest of circumstances. Andy McNicol from Walsall, along with wife Hazel, has devoted years of his life to fostering children. But the McNicol family album is lacking any pictures of one person: Andys biological son from a previous relationship. We also meet Mary Davies from Hounslow, as she tries to find the mother forced to offer her up for adoption at six weeks old. Mark Gibbings-Jones

If humanity is doomed to be crushed by Skynet or similar, boffins Danielle George and Ben Garrod are determined to look our future metal overlords right in the eye-sensor. In the concluding part of their lively R2-detour, the pair criss-cross the globe to fistbump with state-of-the-art robotic AI, from Nasas bipedal would-be Mars rambler Valkyrie to darling little Kirobo, a Japanese chatterbox designed to cheer up lonely astronauts. Graeme Virtue

The season finale of what has been a superb series, of which you trust the Coens themselves would have been proud. Theres a warehouse shootout involving the formidable Kikki and Wrench, Ruby Goldfarb reveals her true colours, and Emmit teeters ever nearer to the brink to which he has been nudged throughout the series. Meanwhile, Gloria and the almost engagingly villainous Varga push towards their final confrontation. Immensely satisfying TV. David Stubbs

Because hip millennials need reality TV, too, you know. This new show follows comedians and real-life couple Bobby Mair and Harriet Kemsley as they plan their wedding. The theme this week is money the pair dont have much, and everything involved with weddings is expensive. Some amusing moments for sure, but the fact is, when youre dealing with a life event like this, its impossible to see the funny side all of the time. John Robinson

In which modern confectioners undertake a time-travelling busmans holiday, recreating the sweets of ye olden days using the ingredients and equipment of the time. Tonight, in the final episode of the series, its the turn of the Victorian era. Historians Emma Dabiri and Annie Gray provide deft social and economic context as the confectioners stock their shop with items up to and including an immense Easter egg. Andrew Mueller

The host of BBC2s The Mash Report takes his turn in the standup showcase. Confidence and likability power him through a series of anecdotes that expend a lot of energy setting up often gentle punchlines. Among the best stories are Kumars trip to see Shame at the cinema accompanied by his father, his response to a racist press question, and his attempt to rebrand as a cooler version of himself at uni. Jack Seale

Arbitrage (Nicholas Jarecki, 2012) 1.30am Thursday, Channel 4

Robert Miller is a crooked, silver-haired hedge fund manager suddenly on the verge of ruin when he and his art dealer mistress (Laetitia Casta) are involved in a fatal car crash. Its a role tailor-made for Richard Gere and the Armani suits fit immaculately. Theres nothing too original, but its a sleek and lustrous affair, with fine support from Susan Sarandon as the wronged wife and Tim Roth as the LA detective investigating Miller. Paul Howlett

Horse Racing: Goodwood Festival 1.30pm, ITV. The second day including the Qatar Sussex Stakes.

Cycling: Tour of Poland 2.30pm, Eurosport 2. Coverage of stage five featuring a 130km route from Olimp to Nagawczyn.

T20 Blast Cricket: Leicestershire Foxes v Nottinghamshire Outlaws 6pm, Sky Sports Cricket. A North Division match which takes place at Grace Road.

Read the original here:

Wednesday's best TV: Hyper Evolution Rise of the Robots; Fargo - The Guardian

Part of the reservoir created by the Serra da Mesa dam. Felipe Venncio/CC BY 2.0

Thanks to the Serra da Mesa Dam in central Brazil, close to 300 islands were created in the span of just two years. More than 650 square miles of the Cerrado region were inundated by the reservoir, which finished filling in 1998. The region is considered a biodiversity hotspot. By so altering the landscape, the dam and reservoir threaten that, but by creating new environments and isolating species, theyre showing how life adapts to all the changes we throw at it.

The hilltops that became islands were once home to a variety of lizards that eat termites, and isolation impacted different varieties of lizards in different ways. Larger species died out (though they survive on the mainland) because they couldnt find enough termites on their islands maintain large body size. So Gymnodactylus amarali, a small gecko, inherited a whole termite buffet.

There was just one problem. For most of the G. amarali geckos, the termites were too big to eatbigger than their mouths. But some of the individual lizards were lucky enough to have slightly larger heads. So they gobbled up termites, thrived, and passed the large-head trait on to their offspring. When scientists from Brazil and the United States compared the island-dwelling lizards with their mainland relativesseparated by only 15 years and a short stretch of waterthe researchers found the island lizards had heads that are about four percent larger. The researchers write in their report that the shift is astonishing because it was so rapid and the lizard populations on the five islands they studied evolved the same trait independently of each other.

It is possible, Science reports, that the larger head size isnt a result of evolution, but rather better growth thanks to the new environment and altered diet. However, the researchers believe evolution explains the size difference, and plan to check for genetic changes in the future.

Read this article:

A Dam in Brazil Has Altered the Course of Evolution - Atlas Obscura

PELLSTON Jordan Price, a University of Michigan Biological Station faculty member, will present a lecture about bird nest evolution at 7:30 p.m. today, Tuesday, Aug. 1, at the Gates Lecture Hall at the biological station near Pellston.

Perching birds of the order Passeriformes, such as warblers, sparrows, thrushes and finches, are considered by birders and ornithology enthusiasts as master nest-builders. Their abilities as nest architects are thought to have played an important role in how they evolved and diversified (through evolutionary radiation).

This group of birds originated in Australia, and they were so successful from an evolutionary standpoint that more than half of all bird species in the world are passerines. Their nests are likely an important factor in that success.

When analyzing nest evolution, biologists often assume that nest architecture became more complex over time, progressing from simple cup-shaped nests to more elaborate domed structures with roofs. But which came first? Thats the question Price will explore in his talk, The Surprising Evolution of Bird Nests.

Hell describe the evolutionary history of passerine nests, focusing on early Australian lineages and species found here in Michigan. In the process, hell explain what nest-building behavior can tell us about the evolution of bird behavior, in general.

Price is the Steven Muller Distinguished Professor of the Sciences at St. Marys College of Maryland and is the chair of the biology department. His research integrates techniques from behavioral ecology and molecular phylogenetics to investigate the evolutionary histories of animal traits, especially the behaviors, sounds, and color patterns of birds. He received his Ph.D. from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and bachelors degree from Queens University in Canada.

Price is the University of Michigan Biological Stations Hann Endowed lecturer for 2017.

The University of Michigan Biological Station entrance is located at the intersection of Riggsville Road and East Burt Lake Road. Follow the signs to parking near the Gates Lecture Hall. The event is free and open to the public. Staff ask that no pets be brought to the biological station, as they need to protect ongoing scientific research projects.

See the rest here:

Bio station lecture to focus on bird nest evolution - Petoskey News-Review

Evolution of Panthers won't be noticeable until ball is in the back of the end zone Charlotte Observer What they did in free agency and the draft, for the offense, could probably be qualified more as progressive tweaks than a complete offensive evolution. It's the same playbook, but based on personnel like rookie running back/receiver Christian ... and more »

View original post here:

Evolution of Panthers won't be noticeable until ball is in the back of the end zone - Charlotte Observer

An opinion piece was recently published in JAMA Internal Medicine with the provocative title: No wonder no one trusts us. The writer, a doctor, imagines a dialogue with a patient Mr. Jones based on the shifting recommendations of the US Preventive Services Task Force about prostate cancer screening.

Mr. Jones, receiving updated advice from his doctor that differs from the updated advice he received last time, grows predictably exasperated. (In case you are wondering, the current task force position on prostate cancer screening is: Grade C. This means there is a close balance between potential benefits and harms, and clinicians should discuss prostate cancer screening with patients, and reach individualized decisions together.)

The writer is not so much complaining about the task force as about the challenges of turning the evolving state of medical evidence into guidance patients can both understand and trust. The piece is tongue-in-cheek in any case. But still, there is a complaint being lodged, and fundamentally, its about the nature of science and the publics relationship with it.

Science evolves. And maybe thats a particular problem for Mr. Jones and Mrs. Smith and their countless counterparts in our culture because we so blithely, selectively dismiss science and replace it with GOOP as the spirit moves us. Maybe we cant disparage, dismiss and deny the science of climate change, immunization, nutrition and evolution, for that matter and appreciate the evolution of science.

Advertisement

Science is something of an in for a penny, in for a pound proposition. What I mean is, you either accept the value of the scientific method, and the voluminous evidence that it works, and thus pay attention to it even when you dont like what it has to say or you really should disavow the voluminous evidence that it works. Lets be clear about that choice: disavowal means no planes, or trains or automobiles; products of science, all. It means no antibiotics or microwaves; it means no radio, television or internet. It means, quite simply, that it should not be possible for you to be reading this now.

Science works, and we all know it because we are beneficiaries of its effectiveness every day. You really cant beam well-behaved electrons through cyberspace and throw shade at science while doing it. Pick one! How easy, though, to embrace the products of science we like and renounce the conclusions we dont.

In a display of serendipity, a deadly serious opinion piece in the Annals of Internal Medicine followed the facetious one in JAMA Internal Medicine by a mere day. This one was entitled Statin Denial: An Internet-Driven Cult With Deadly Consequences, and was about the deadly consequences of statin denial. Statins are the most popular drugs for lowering LDL cholesterol, are highly effective and when used appropriately, decisively reduce mortality. In other words, they save lives.

As the commentary suggests, there are all sorts of alternative realities online, raising doubts about the benefits of statins, the value of lowering LDL, and the relevance of elevated LDL to heart disease risk.

One readily finds debate about the cholesterol hypothesis online but finds virtually no such debate among cardiologists. These alternative realities are alternatives to reality, and the commentator is right to point this out as an urgent matter of life and death. As a lifestyle medicine expert, I hasten to note that diet and lifestyle can do the job that statins do, and there are strong arguments for a lifestyle approach but thats a topic for another day. The effectiveness of lifestyle in preventing and treating heart disease does not obviate the corresponding effectiveness of statins.

That more Americans believe in angels than evolution may seem a matter of inner philosophical convictions, disconnected from real world consequences. But that is not so. Selective disrespect for science poisons the well of it, and proves toxic in surprising and intimate ways; as intimate as ones heart, prostate or uterus.

Medicine is ineluctably a bit of art, but is or should be a whole lot of science. There is no way for patients to participate as they must as key partners in the stewardship of their own health if they dont understand the basis for important decisions.

Its bad, in other words, that people dont know or respect the incontrovertible science of evolution. But that problem tends to be at least somewhat remote. Its arguably worse that people dont know or respect the incontrovertible fact that science evolves and that the evolution of science will cause medical practice and advice to drift and shift over time. Doubt and discomfort born of that is consequential up close, quite personally, and in our most intimate parts.

Dr. David L. Katz;www.davidkatzmd.com; founder, True Health Initiative

Continued here:

Dr. David Katz, Preventive Medicine: Trust the evolution of science - New Haven Register