Pachyderm Problems for Zoo Elephants

In the December 12 issue of the journal Science Ros Clubb of the Royal Society for the Protection of Animals and colleagues, including well known elephant researcher Cynthia Moss, report that captive elephants do not live as long as their free-living counterparts, or even as long as working elephants in Burmese timber camps.

Collecting data from over 4,500 elephants from European Zoos, wild populations in Amboseli National Park in Kenya and working elephants in Burmese logging camps, the authors found a significant correlation between captivity and longevity. Females from a well studied population of African Savannah Elephants (Loxodonta africana) in Amboseli National Park in Kenya exhibited a median life span of 56.0 years (these data excluded mortality from humans). African Savannah Elephants in zoos have a median life span of only 16.9 years. As of 2005 when the study ended female African Savannah Elephants in captivity experienced a mortality risk 2.8 times higher than the natural mortality of wild female elephants in Amboseli. Captive-born female African Savannah Elephants die earlier in zoos than in the wild but infant and juvenile mortality was similar between wild and captive elephants.

For Asian Elephants (Elephas maximus) the effect of zoo captivity on mortality was also significant. Captive female Asian Elephants in the study exhibited a median life span of 18.9 years while working Asian Elephants in a Burmese timber operation had a median life span of 41.7 years. While mortality risk in African Savannah Elephants went down over time, suggesting improved captive management, there was no significant reduction in mortality for Asian Elephants. Also, being born in a zoo versus born in the wild had a significant effect on surviorship in Asian Elephants. Ironically, wild-caught Asian Elephants did better in captivity than their captive-born counterparts.

Elephants live in tightly knit social groups of females and juveniles with very long-term associations among individuals. Wild female elephants rarely move between groups, but, zoos regularly transfer individuals among institutions. Female Asian Elephants are moved around among European Zoos approximately once every 7-years. Transfers have an effect on the health of captive elephants. This study found that inter-zoo transfers significantly reduced survivorship in Asian Elephants.

Georgia Mason, a co-author on this study and zoologist at the University of Guelph in Ontario, Canada, discussed the results on the December 12 Science Magazine podcast. According to Mason the situation for American zoo elephants is no better than their European counterparts. 15% of zoo-born elephants in Europe die in their first year while in the USA 40% of zoo-born elephants die before the age of one.

Small group size, frequent inter-zoo transfers, and comparatively tiny enclosures for an animal that has orders magnitude greater home range area in the wild are all likely contributors to the problem of reduced survivorship in zoo elephants. However, solutions to this problem are not straightforward. Large sums of money have been spent in European and US zoos to build larger enclosures for captive elephants but the study by Clubb and colleagues found little evidence that such improvements have resulted in increased survivorship in captive elephants. Some increases in survivorship for African Savannah Elephants have occurred but not nearly enough to bring their surviorship on par with wild counterparts and the study found that despite increased spending and larger enclosures there was no increase in survivorship for Asian Elephants. Mason in the Science Podcast interview pointed out that recent expenditures of approximately 23 million US dollars spent on improving enclosures for the elephants at the Oklahoma City Zoo were greater than the entire annual budget for the Kenya Wildlife Service or the South African National Parks Authority. Perhaps the greatest concern is that captive elephant populations are not self sustaining and can not survive without introduction of individuals taken from the wild.

This study provides a compelling argument for an elevated discussion on not just captive elephants but the welfare of other large-ranging, social mammals as well. Hopefully this study will place a renewed emphasis on future research and novel approaches to captive husbandry of these magnificent mammals.

Clubb, R., Rowcliffe, M., Lee, P., Mar, K. U., Moss, C., Mason, G. J. (2008). Compromised Survivorship in Zoo Elephants Science, 322 (5908) DOI: 10.1126/science.1164298

-END

Unless the post above is followed by '-END' then CLICK HERE to read more!

Interview with Judge John E. Jones III

The journal PLoS Genetics has published a wonderful interview with Judge John E. Jones III. A conservative federal judge in the US District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania, Judge Jones was recommended for his current position by PA senator Rick Santorum and appointed to the bench by President George W. Bush in 2002. Judge Jones ruled for the plaintiffs in Kitzmiller versus Dover Area School District striking down a school board policy exposing students to intelligent design creationism in the public classroom.

In the PLoS Genetics interview Judge Jones is asked about his own personal views on creationism and evolution. After saying that as a judge he can review a case independent of his personal views he adds,

"I am a person of faith. I'm certainly not an atheist or an agnostic and I see some divine force somewhere. That said, having had a pretty good education, a great liberal arts education at Dickinson College, I must say that I never had any substantial doubts about evolution generally. I had forgotten, admittedly, a lot of what I had learned about evolution back in college. Moreover, a lot had happened since the '70s, so my understanding was rudimentary. But I never had a crisis of confidence about evolution or a reason to doubt that it constituted a valid theory and good science."

Brown University biologist Ken Miller was an expert witness in the trail and recently gave a wonderful lecture on evolution and intelligent design as part of the Cincinnati Museum Center's Dury Science Lecture Series. Here's what Judge Jones had to say about Dr. Miller's testimony in the PLoS Genetics interview,

"I will always remember Ken Miller's testimony in the sense that he did A–Z evolution. And then got into intelligent design. And having laid the foundation with the description of evolution, got into why intelligent design doesn't work as science, to the point where it is predominantly a religious concept."

Contrast this with Judge Jones opinions of the expert witnesses for the defense, particularly Lehigh University professor Michael Behe,

"Another remarkable moment on the science side was Michael Behe, who was the lead witness for the defendants, and a very amiable fellow, as was Ken Miller, but unlike Miller, in my view, Professor Behe did not distinguish himself. He did not hold up well on cross-examination."

That a conservative self-proclaimed "person of faith" appointed to the bench by President Bush rules so desisively against the teaching of intelligent design creationism speaks volumes for the validity of the evolution position and the vacuity of intelligent design from a scientific and, in so much as the idea is applied to public education policy, legal stance.

-END

Unless the post above is followed by '-END' then CLICK HERE to read more!

Yeast goes with the FLO

“Share and share alike”, so goes the old adage about equally distributing goods, even at one’s own expense. Darwin’s idea of natural selection explained evolutionary change by posing that traits spread in the population due to the benefits these traits confer on their bearers. Individuals with certain characteristics produce more offspring relative to those individuals with other characters and as a result the population as a whole takes on a different appearance. However, Darwin’s idea couldn’t explain those traits that provide benefits to others at the expense of their bearers. Sharing with others at one’s own expense is called altruism and in biology altruism remained a puzzle for over a century after Darwin.

Then come the 1960’s and William Hamilton. Hamilton said that a rare gene underlying some altruistic behavior could spread despite the cost to the bearer. But how? How could a gene that results in fewer offspring for its bearer spread in the population? Lucky for Hamilton he had an understanding of genetic inheritance that was not available to Darwin. If behavior is directed towards those individuals in the population who also harbor the same genes for altruism then the trait will spread in the population through the recipients of altruistic behavior. Rare genes for altruism would more likely spread if there were a readily observable marker of the same altruistic gene in others. Richard Dawkins popularized this idea in the 1970’s calling it the ‘green beard effect’. In a hypothetical example Dawkins imagined that genes for altruism would result in a marker, such as a green beard, along with the altruistic behavior. With this clear marker of the altruistic gene in others helpers could direct their behavior only towards those that shared the gene for altruism.

Amazingly there is good evidence for the ‘green beard effect’ in nature in several organisms, from slime molds and fire ants. Even more astonishing, there are examples where a single gene is responsible for ‘green beard’ altruism. Scott Smukalla, Marina Caldara, and Nathalie Pochet of Harvard University and their colleagues report in the latest issue of the journal Cell that they have found a ‘green beard’ gene in the budding or brewer’s yeast, Saccharomyces cerevisiae.Yeast is not only the critical component in the making alcoholic beverages but it is also a classic model system in the study of the eukaryotic cell. Yeasts are single celled organisms but wild strains of Saccharomyces cerevisiae in times of stress will aggregate into multicellular mats often called biofilms. These aggregates of cells can protect cells from antibiotics, heat and cold stress, ethanol, and other toxins. The coming together of single yeast cells into a multicellular group is called flocculation and the aggregations are known as flocs. Occurring in wild yeast in response to stress, flocculation allows the population to ride out tough times.

Typical of many organisms grown under the resource-rich and stress-free conditions of the laboratory, times are seldom that tough and many years of culture in the lab have lead to the loss of flocculation in laboratory strains. Comparing a wild, flocculent strain called EM93 with a laboratory strain, S288C, incapable of forming flocs, Smukalla and colleagues found that flocculation fell under the control of a single variable gene called FLO1. This was confirmed by activating the expression of FLO1 in normally non-flocculent S288C cells. Expression of FLO1 resulted in flocculation exactly like that observed in wild yeast. FLO1 expression creates cell membrane proteins that allow cells to recognize and adhere to other yeast cells expressing the FLO1 gene.

FLO1 in Saccharomyces cerevisiae acts like the ‘green beard’ gene predicted by Hamilton as it allows yeast cells to detect others also expressing FLO1 and form multicellular aggregates and thus provide group protection against environmental toxins. But, remember altruism by definition involves a cost to the altruist. Where is the cost? When grown under toxin free conditions and ideal temperatures yeast expressing the FLO1 gene suffer a 4-fold reduction in population growth relative to yeast cultures that do not express the FLO1 gene.

A mixed culture of FLO1 expressing and non-FLO1-expressing cells grown under conditions that lead to flocs results in flocs containing primarily FLO1 expressing cells and free cells that do not express the FLO1 gene. FLO1 is therefore a true ‘green beard’ gene as it promotes the altruistic, social trait (flocculation) and at the same time excludes participation of those cells not expressing the social trait. Requiring FLO1 for cell adhesion eliminates the spread of selfish cheaters, yeast cells that forego the cost of expressing FLO1 while times are good but also reap the benefits of flocs when times are tough.

Research on the evolution of social, altruistic traits like flocculation can shed light on one of the most important transitions in the history of life, the evolution of multicellular organisms from single celled organisms. Saccharomyces cerevisiae, social amoebae, slime molds and many social bacteria move between a single celled and a multicellular lifestyle. Like Saccharomyces cerevisiae, multicellular forms in other microorganisms are often in response to stressful environments. Very early in our own evolution the colonization of harsh environments by our single celled ancestors likely promoted the same altruistic behavior seen in many modern microorganisms today.

S SMUKALLA, M CALDARA, N POCHET, A BEAUVAIS, S GUADAGNINI, C YAN, M VINCES, A JANSEN, M PREVOST, J LATGE (2008). FLO1 Is a Variable Green Beard Gene that Drives Biofilm-like Cooperation in Budding Yeast Cell, 135 (4), 726-737 DOI: 10.1016/j.cell.2008.09.037

-END

Unless the post above is followed by '-END' then CLICK HERE to read more!

Ken Miller speaks at Cincinnati Museum Center

This Thursday, December 4th at 7:30pm at Cincinnati Museum Center's Union Terminal Dr. Kenneth Miller of Brown University will speak in the museum's Dury Science Lecture Series. Dr. Miller is a cell biologist and author of life sciences textbooks and popular books on the conflicts between evolution and intelligent design creationism.

A vocal proponent of evolutionary biology in the public arena Dr. Miller has been featured on the PBS series Evolution and served as an expert witness in the recent Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School Board case in US District Court of Middle Pennsylvania. Dr. Miller's testimony played a critical role in the Judge John Jones' decision which declared that the Dover school board's policy to promote intelligent design (ID) theory in public school science courses was in violation of the US Constitution's Establishment Clause because, while presented as science, "ID cannot uncouple itself from its creationist, and thus religious, antecedents".

While proving to be highly effective at exposing the deep flaws within this latest version of scientific creationism, ID theory, Dr. Miller has provided a counterpoint to creationist/ID accusations that evolution promotes atheism by being very open about his own personal beliefs in the Christian faith. Miller's highly successful popular book Finding Darwin's God was not only an effective rebuttal against ID but also a personal testimonial of a Christian scientist's ability to reconcile faith with the scientific consensus on biological evolution. His latest book, Evolution and the Battle for America's Soul, dismantles ID arguments and emphasizes the explanatory power of evolutionary biology in making sense of life's diversity.

In a dwindling economy with environmental and energy crises looming larger and innumerable challenges for the US both domestic and abroad the ability to innovate is critical in moving America forward. The launch of the Sputnik satellite in 1957 by the Soviet Union was a wake-up call for the US and spawned an increased focus in science education and research in the 1960's. The rising prominence of China and India in science and engineering is today's Sputnik and Americans need to decide if they want to continue to be leaders and producers of science innovation and technology or followers and consumers of technology provided by other nations.

Far from an esoteric issue the debate between ID creationism and evolution cuts to the heart of science education in the US. On the one side is scientific innovation and adoption of evidence based inquiry and the other is an attempt to roll back two centuries of scientific progress and judge scientific evidence on the basis of narrowly-defined, preconceived socio-religious ideology. Attending Dr. Miller's lecture at the museum center will be an excellent introduction to these critical issues in American scientific literacy and demonstrate that, contrary to what creationists would have us believe, scientific progress need not come at the expense of our religious faith. I hope to see you there.

-END

Unless the post above is followed by '-END' then CLICK HERE to read more!

DNA lab is coming together

The new molecular genetics lab at Cincinnati Museum Center is slowly coming together. Supported by a grant from the National Science Foundation this lab will provide the instruments needed to apply molecular genetic tools in research in ecology, evolutionary biology and molecular systematics. The centerpiece of the lab is an automated capillary electrophoresis machine, also known as an automated DNA sequencer, manufactured by Applied Biosystems. We received a new lab bench to support this valuable instrument and provide much needed workspace. We also had to run a new electrical line to supply 220V, 30A power to the sequencer. Researchers from partner institutions such as Xavier University and Thomas More College will be touring the new lab soon and start bringing in students to gain valuable skills in cutting edge molecular genetic tools. The lab is getting some attention in the community as well and a story by staff reporter James Ritchie appears in the Buisness Courier of Cincinnati.

Yesterday I ran the very first polymerase chain reaction EVER at Cincinnati Museum Center. This technique used to copy a specific region of an organism's genome is the backbone of modern molecular genetics. Our first reactions were a test run of some genetic sexing reactions amplifying a seqment of the sex-linked chromo-helicase-DNA-binding gene in Red-shouldered Hawks. This work is done in collaboration with Cheryl Dykstra to learn about growth and development of Red-shouldered Hawk nestlings in Southern Ohio.

I have high hopes for the lab. Keep checking back here and at cincyevolution for more updates on this new line of research going on in molecular ecology and systematics at Cincinnati Museum Center.

-END

Unless the post above is followed by '-END' then CLICK HERE to read more!

How to collect a blood sample from a bird

Genetic tools are a major part of modern comparative biology. Museums are the place where much of this sort of research occurs as museums are storehouses of the source material used in comparative genetic studies. Frozen tissue is stored in ultralow freezers or in liquid nitrogen for a variety of organisms comprise genetic resource collections or GRCs. Ideally tissue samples should be associated with a voucher specimen such as skeletal material, a stuffed skin or a pickled specimen. This allows researchers to check the identity of the tissue sample or compare genetic data with morphological data derived from the source specimen. In ornithology there is a growing trend to collect a blood or feather sample from a bird and release the bird back into the wild. A digital photo together with carefully taken morphological measurements can serve as the voucher for the blood sample. While this is not the "gold standard" way to build a bird collection it can augment traditional collecting efforts and increase numbers of samples while minimizing the effect of collecting on avian populations. Below is a video of me collecting a blood sample from a House Sparrow (Passer domesticus) caught just outside the Geier Collections and Research Center at Cincinnati Museum Center. When done properly there is no evidence of adverse effects on the bird, even though surely it is not an experience they enjoy!


-END

Unless the post above is followed by '-END' then CLICK HERE to read more!

New National Science Foundation funded DNA lab at CMC!

Fantasic news for zoology research and education at the Cincinnati Museum Center. We just received an award from the National Science Foundation to fund the purchase of instruments for a molecular ecology and systematics laboratory in the zoology department here at the Cincinnati Museum Center! The centerpiece of this new laboratory will be an automated capillary electrophoresis machine. This piece of equipment will allow for DNA sequencing and multilocus genotyping to be done completely in house at Cincinnati Museum Center's zoology department. Numerous projects are already planned to be conducted in the new lab covering a diverse array of topics, everything from DNA barcoding of Neotropical land snails to the population genetics of owls to amphibian conservation genetics to characterizing the genetic mating system of songbirds. The new lab will have close partners in the region including the Cincinnati Zoo, Thomas More College, Cincinnati Country Day School and Xavier University and will facilitate research, future funding opportunites and educational experiences in cutting edge life sciences techniques for high school students and educators, undergraduates, graduate students, local college and university faculty and our dedicated volunteer staff.

Now I just need to think of a name for the lab! I was thinking of the CincyMolES Lab (Cincinnati Museum Center Molecular Ecology and Systematics Laboratory). We could have a Star-nosed Mole as our mascot maybe? OK, I don't study mammals but it's a neat critter and I thought the name was catchy! I'm happy to field other suggestions from my readers.

-END

Unless the post above is followed by '-END' then CLICK HERE to read more!

AOU/COS/SCO 2008 Meeting in Portland: Part II

Last week was the joint conference of the American Ornithologist's Union, the Cooper Ornithological Society and the Society of Canadian Ornithologists in Portland, Oregon. There were many excellent presentations on a variety of topics in ornithology. Below are, in my opinion, some of the highlights from the conference representing the cutting edge of avian research in North America.

- Rosemary Grant of Princeton University presented a plenary lecture summarizing her collaborative work with her husband, Peter Grant, and numerous students and post-docs on the evolutionary biology and ecology of Darwin's Finches in the Galapagos Islands. The Grants' work on selection on bill size in Darwin's Finches is a classic work, arguably the most famous and well supported examples of Darwinian natural selection in the wild. Now the Grants are tackling speciation and presenting their ideas on how Darwin's Finch species arise over time. Whether or not many currently recognized species of Darwin's Finch are indeed true evolutionary species or complex, polymorphic populations was a hot topic of debate behind the scenes in the lobbies of the Hilton and the bars and restaurants on the streets of Portland. It remains to be seen how the Grants' ideas on speciation will stand up to the scrutiny of their ornithological peers.

- Terry Chesser of the National Museum of Natural History along with co-authors from museums around the country such as the University of Kansas and Louisiana State University presented new data on the relationships of one of the largest and most problematic groups of passerine birds, the Neotropical ovenbirds of the family Furnariidae. The woodcreepers were found to be monophyletic (meaning all the birds currently assigned to the woodcreeper group were found to share a single common ancestor). Two main groups were distinguished within the Furnariidae the woodcreepers and the "true" furnariids, or simply the rest of the furnariids.

- Townsend Peterson of the University of Kansas discussed the power of museums in understanding the spread of animal-borne diseases (aka zoonotic diseases). The "bird-flu" or H5N1 virus has the potential for a global pandemic and since 2003 has persisted as a lingering threat to human health, especially in south and south-east Asia. Peterson's group found in surveys of birds collected from south China that H5N1 is not exclusively a disease found in galliform birds (chickens, etc.) and waterfowl but is also found among passerines (i.e. songbirds) and other wild landbirds. Peterson also used bird banding databases to model the potential outbreak of zoonotic, bird-borne diseases, like H5N1, in North America and found that where the outbreak starts can have dramatics effects on the spread and geography of the subsequent spread. All of these findings can only be possible with large museum-led databases of both specimens and large scale sighting and banding records.

- John Wieczorek of the University of California at Berkeley presented an update on the ORNIS database. ORNIS is a distributed database that links together avian data from dozens of museum collections. Today the ORNIS database allows one not only to access holdings on avian specimens but also millions of sighting and banding records, digital photos and sound recordings. Wieczorek also discussed a new online tool, BioGeomancer, to add georeferencing data to existing specimen, photo, recording and sighting records. The power of these online, distributed databases and the georeferencing tools that accompany them was seen in numerous talks during this meeting. With adoption of it's new KE EMu database Cincinnati Museum Center is poised to join these other institutions in making it's collection more accessible and usable by researchers in novel and powerful ways.

- An entire session was devoted to the hot topic of subspecies in ornithology. The traditional way in which scientists name species is the binomial, the familiar genus and species names given to every organism. However, there is variation within species and to incorporate this variation into taxonomy many have adopted a trinomial system of nomenclature consisting of three names for each species, genus, species and subspecies. Kevin Winker of the University of Alaska at Fairbanks gave a good history of the use of trinomial nomclature in ornithology and discussed why divergence in phenotpyes (those characteristics of an organisms most often accessible to direct observation such as size, color, etc.) is not also equal to genetic divergence. This means that often the readily observable, physical traits used to distinguish between different subspecies of birds may not correspond to much genetic variation and thus may be of little evolutionary significance when it comes to distinguishing independent genetic lineages. Susan Haig of the USGS Forest and Rangeland Ecosystem Science Center discussed the problems that differing species concepts and subspecies designations pose for conservation efforts. Haig believes that subspecies designations are critical for conservation and law enforcement purposes even if their biological footing is less than solid. These points were hotly debated in the session and in discussions outside the talks.

- Perhaps my favorite talk of the entire conference was by Matt Carling and Rob Brumfield of the Louisiana State University Museum of Natural History. An idea in evolutionary biology known as Haldane's Rule says that in hybrids the sex that contains two different sex chromosomes (the heterogametic sex) should be less fit than the sex that contains two of the same sex chromosomes (the homogametic sex). A bad version of a gene can be overruled by the action of a good version of the same gene on another chromosome. Therefore heterogametic hybrids will be affected by all deleterious alleles on a sex chromosome. Haldane's Rule has been shown to predict the weaker sex in hybrids in everything from insects to mammals. In humans, and most other mammals, males are the heterogametic sex by virtue of having X and Y sex chromosomes while females are the homogametic sex having two X chromosomes. However, in birds females are the heterogametic sex with W and Z chromosomes and males with two Z chromosomes. Lazuli and Indigo Buntings hybridize in the central US. Carling and Brumfield measured the change in gene frequency across a hybrid zone between Lazuli and Indigo Buntings for both nuclear genes and genes linked to the sex chromosomes. They found much smaller genetic clines for sex-linked loci than for autosomal loci (those loci on chromosomes other than sex chromosomes). This is consistent with sex linked genetic incompatibilities in the hybrids. They also identified one locus in particular that contributed very heavily to this narrow genetic cline in Lazuli and Indigo Buntings. This loci was matched to a similar sequence in the chicken genome which, in chickens, contributes to the failure to lay eggs. Essentially Carling and Brumfield have identified an important gene which contributes to the maintenance of Lazuli and Indigo Buntings as discrete species. An amazing study which I hope to hear more about in the future.

- A fantastic symposium was presented on the last day of the conference in which some of the top curators and collections managers in ornithology presented techniques on preparing and managing material in avian collections. University of Kansas curator Mark Robbins and University of Washington Professor Emeritus Sievert Rohwer presented a live demonstration of their study skin preparation techniques. With some relatively minor differences our volunteers in the ornithology collection at Cincinnati Museum Center are preparing specimens like the pros do it, however, I did pick up some useful tips that will improve our specimens. Kimberly Bostwick of the Cornell University Museum of Vertebrates demonstrated her techniques for preparing skeletal material from bird specimens, again as a live demonstration. This was also very useful as here at Cincinnati Museum Center we plan on a major push towards increasing the collection's avian skeletal holdings. Also, Kevin Winker of the University of Alaska at Fairbanks presented a general overview of the tools of the trade for avian collecting from the intricacies of the permitting process to auxillary barrels for a shotgun! All of the talks in this session provided useful tips for the growing bird collection at Cincinnati Museum Center but they also reaffirmed that the changes implemented in our protocols have put us on the right track towards having a world class ornithology collection.

-Finally Irby Lovette of Cornell University presented some interesting, if not troubling, results on measuring genetic diversity using molecular genetic markers. Researchers for various reasons often want to know the genetic diversity of an individual organism. Genetic diversity in an individual is typically measured in terms of heterozygosity. At any particular location in an individual's genome (at least for sexually reproducing organisms) there will be two copies of a particular gene. If those two copies are the same the individual is homozygous at that locus if they differ then the individual is heterozygous a that locus. Researchers use different types of genetic markers to determine the degree to which an individual is heterozygous across it's entire genome. However, Lovette demonstrated that different markers do not agree with one another on genome-wide heterozygosity. A level of heterozygosity determined using one type of marker may not correspond to the same level determined by another marker. Even multiple loci of the same types of markers often do not agree. This work is consistent with previous findings showing that levels of relatedness and inbreeding were only evident using very large numbers of genetic loci and that molecular genetic markers were inferior to good pedigree data in determining genetic diversity. However, there are many correlations in birds between molecular genetic based genetic diversity and various fitness measures, such as hatching success or growth or behavioral measures. The question then is what do these correlations mean? This will be a fertile field for future research for sure!

-END

Unless the post above is followed by '-END' then CLICK HERE to read more!

Two other CMC blogs of note...

OK, I'm sitting in the airport in Denver on my way home and was getting caught up on blogs from my Cincinnati Museum Center colleagues. I encourage everyone to check out Dr. Glenn Storrs' blog for his annual dinosaur field school in Montana at cincymuseum.blogspot.com and Jason Dennison's museum professionals blog at youngmuseumprofessionals.blogspot.com. Enjoy!

-END

Unless the post above is followed by '-END' then CLICK HERE to read more!

AOU/COS/SCO 2008 Meeting in Portland: Part I

This week was the joint conference of the American Ornithologist's Union, the Cooper Ornithological Society and the Society of Canadian Ornithologists in Portland, Oregon. This meeting celebrated the 125th anniversary of the American Ornithologist's Union(AOU) and ushered in a new president for the AOU, Dr. Edward "Jed" Burt who is a faculty just down the road from Cincinnati in Delaware, OH at Ohio Wesleyan University. It was a great meeting and many important ties were forged between Cincinnati Museum Center and researchers and natural history museums around North America and the world. I meet with friends and colleagues from the University of Windsor, University of Alaska at Fairbanks, the Taiwan Endemic Species Research Institute, University of Cincinnati, Auburn University, the Delaware Museum of Natural History, the Cleveland Museum of Natural History, and many other colleges, universities and museums and promoted greater use of the collection and plotted out new collaborations and research projects.

There were many excellent talks on the latest findings in ornithology and my next blog will provide a survey of some of the highlights, but, perhaps most useful was a nearly day long symposium on avian museum collections that included live demonstrations of the latest preparatory methods from some of the top curators and collections managers in the country. This symposium in particular proved to be invaluable and provided me with a wealth of information from preparation to permits that will greatly improve the collection at Cincinnati Museum Center. Also, meeting with colleagues and forging new ties resulted in several new projects. The plan is have in house research at Cincinnati Museum Center result in at least 10 new publications over the next year. A bold goal but one that can be achieved through the numerous collaborative efforts between Cincinnati Museum Center Zoology Department and top researchers in avian biology from around the globe.

Of course I take every opportunity to increase the collection at Cincinnati Museum Center and collected many digital photos to go into a growing georeferenced digital resources database for birds. The meeting reinfornced the utility of this growing type of natural history collection in several talks regarding the ORNIS distributed database system. I gained new insight during this part of the meeting on how to manage these collection and provide proper georeferencing (location data critical to making a useful digital resources collection). Also I learned of new ways in which digital resources in ornithological collections are being used alongside both traditional material (skins, skeletons, spread wings, etc.) and frozen tissue collections. Shown in this blog entry are three new digital photos to be archived in a growing digital resources database for ornithology (Top, Northern Fulmar; middle, Barred Owl; bottom, Pacific-slope Flycatcher).

-END

Unless the post above is followed by '-END' then CLICK HERE to read more!

On the flip side...

Critics of evolution often point to a perceived lack of transitional forms in the fossil record as evidence that some forms of life don't share a common genetic heritage but rather arose independently. Creationists have been using this line of argument for over a hundred years. But, they do so in spite of the evidence. Intermediate forms are those organisms that have a mosaic of characteristics linking two seemingly unrelated groups or an organism that exhibits a character state in between those found in two or more other organisms. Creationists claim these forms are lacking in the fossil record. However, the transition between theropod dinosaurs and modern birds, the evolution of the mammalian ear bones from a reptilian jaw, the evolution of whales from terrestrial mammals and even the fossil record for our own species are all classic examples of evolutionary transitions complete with several intermediate forms.

Add to the growing list of evolutionary transitions another example from the fossil record. Vertebrate animals have a bilateral body plan, that is they exhibit a front and back and dividing the body down the middle results in two symmetrical sides. There are few exceptions to the symmetrical vertebrate body plan. One striking exception familiar to us all are the flatfishes (Order: Pleuronectiformes). This group includes fish found at your local market or seafood restaurant including sole and halibut. Adult flatfishes are asymmetrical. They start off life with the typical symmetrical body found in other fishes however as they grow their skull undergoes a radical developmental change with the eyes rotating to one side of their head. A flatfish on the sea bed is therefore a fish essentially lying on it's side with an asymmetrical head. Imagine lying on your left side with both your eyes on the right half of your face and you'll get the picture.

The question is how did this unusual body plan evolve? There are clear benefits to exploiting an open ecological niche and becoming specialized to be a bottom feeder but doing so can mean a radical change in an organism's body plan. The flatfish body plan clearly evolved from a typical symmetrical fish plan. Comparing the details of flatfish anatomy and their genes shows that they fit within the large radiation of bony fishes, nearly all of which have a symmetrical body plan. Also, the turbots (Psettodes sp.) are the living representatives of the earliest branch of the flatfish family tree and it, as expected if flatfish evolved from a symmetrical ancestor, they have one eye that doesn't quite make it all the way around the head during development. What's more, the adult asymmetrical flatfish plan develops from a symmetrical larval body plan. Together all these data indicate that the asymmetrical flatfish plan evolved from a symmetrical ancestral body plan. However, as creationists are fond to ask, where are the intermediates?

Along comes University of Chicago evolutionary biologist Matt Friedman. In the July 10th edition of the journal Nature Friedman provides evidence for the evolutionary transition between symmetrical bony fishes and the asymmetrical flatfishes. Friedman provides highly detailed descriptions of fossil fishes in the genus Amphistium and describes a new species, Heteronectes chaneti. These fossils were available to researchers before, however, Friedman applied computed tomography to the specimens to obtain detailed three-dimensional images of their anatomy. Computed tomography involves moving an x-ray source and detector around a specimen and digitally reconstructing a detailed three-dimensional image from the x-ray exposures. Previously it was difficult to tell an asymmetrical flatfish-style skull from a symmetrical skull crushed by the weight of sediment during fossilization. With the new imaging technology Freidman concluded that these fossil fish do indeed show different intermediate stages leading to the fully asymmetrical modern flatfish body plan. Specifically, the part of the skull containing the orbits, the neurocrania, rotates over evolutionary time. A close relative of the flatfishes, Trachinotus, shows the classic symmetrical condition with one eye on either side of the head. The fossil Amphistium and Heteronectes show an intermediate stage with one eye squarely on one side of the head and the other eye on the other side of the head but shifted up towards the top of the head. The earliest branch on the flatfish family tree, the turbots, one eye rests nearly on top of the head and in the rest of the flatfish the eye has migrated fully to the other side of the head.

New findings are popping up all the time from fields ranging from paleontology to developmental genetics that affirm the conclusion that life shares a common ancestry and that these unusual body plans, such as the asymmetrical head of a flatfish, have arisen through evolutionary processes.

Friedman, M. (2008). The evolutionary origin of flatfish asymmetry. Nature, 454(7201), 209-212. DOI: 10.1038/nature07108

-END

Unless the post above is followed by '-END' then CLICK HERE to read more!

Top ten new species for 2007

It is astonishing just how many critters are out there who are to date unknown to science. Even well known groups like birds and mammals occasionally have a new species described. But for large groups, like insects, marine invertebrates, or plants, finding new species is much more common, particularly in little studied areas like tropical forests or deep sea marine habitats. The International Institute for Species Exploration at Arizona State University has released it's list of the top ten new species for 2007 (click here for photos of these amazing critters). These include a new species of fruit bat from the Philippines (Esselstyn 2007), a mushroom discovered on the campus of Imperial College in London (Taylor et al. 2007), a bright pink millipede from Thailand (Enghoff et al. 2007) and an electric ray from South Africa whose genus name is reminiscent of a popular brand of vacuum cleaners (Compagno and Heemstra 2007). Discovering new species is just one of the many potential exciting aspects of museum-based zoology!

ESSELSTYN, J.A. (2007). A New species of stripe-faced fruit bat (Chiroptera: Pteropodidae: Styloctenium) from the Philippines. Journal of Mammalogy, 88(4), 951. DOI: 10.1644/06-MAMM-A-294R.1

TAYLOR, A., HILLS, A., SIMONINI, G., MUNOZ, J., EBERHARDT, U. (2007). Xerocomus silwoodensis sp. nov., a new species within the European X. subtomentosus complex. Mycological Research, 111(4), 403-408. DOI: 10.1016/j.mycres.2007.01.014

ENGHOFF, H.,SUTCHARIT, C.,PANHA, S. (2007) The shocking pink dragon millipede, Desmoxytes purpurosea, a colorful new species from Thailand (Diplododa: Polydesmida: Paradoxosomatidae). Zootaxa, 1563, 31-36.

COMPAGNO, L. J. V.,HEEMSTRA, P. C. (2007) Electrolux addisoni, a new genus and species of electric ray from the east coast of South Africa (Rajiformes: Torpedinoidei: Narkidae), with a review or torpedinoid taxonomy. Smithiana Bulletin, 7, 15-49.

-END

Unless the post above is followed by '-END' then CLICK HERE to read more!

Butterflies, nanotech and BugFest 2008

This weekend was the Cincinnati Museum Center's annual BugFest. Together with my son Cameron we had a great time showing visitors a sampling of butterflies from the zoology department's entomology collection (see photo left). Public presentations of museum collections should introduce the role of museum collections in scientific research. Museum collections and other collections-based field work can have uses that will come as a surprise to many. Focusing on butterflies Cameron and I chose to present the role collections can play not only in gaining a basic understanding of nature but also their potential role in very practical applications in materials science.

High magnification images of the wing of a Morpho butterfly were fed to an LCD screen and used to show visitors the intricate scales that make up a butterfly wing. The very fine micro-structure of these wing scales is what creates the iridescent blues and greens of butterfly wings. While many colors in nature are due to pigments embedded within biological structures like hair, feathers or scales other colors are purely structural created by the particular scatter of light reflected from a structured compound like keratin in birds' feathers or layers of chitin in insect scales. Many blues and greens in bird feathers and insect scales tend to be determined by structure rather than pigments. The very fine microscopic structure of a blue feather or scale therefore determines the wavelengths of light it reflects and thus it's color.

Believe it or not a knowledge of how nature produces colors is useful in nanotechnology. Nanotechnology deals with the engineering of very tiny machines on the size scale of a cell. Mimicking nature can be very useful in producing components for these tiny nano-devices. Butterfly wing scales are studied by engineers to create nano-parts with very particular optical properties. Jingyun Huang et al. in 2006 in the journal Nano Letters found that the wing scales of the iridescent blue butterfly Morpho peleides could be used as a template for making tiny artifical scales of aluminum oxide. These artificial aluminum oxide butterfly scales had identical reflective properties to their natural counterparts and they could be used in nanotechnology to split beams of light. Radislav Potyrailo et al. in the journal Nature Photonics in 2007 published a paper describing the ability of the wing scales of Morpho sulkowskyi to act as components in tiny optical gas sensors.

Of course museum collections act as accessible storehouses of biological diversity and the holdings in collections, like those at Cincinnati Museum Center, can provide material for numerous applications (many of which would have never been anticipated by the original collectors) in both basic and applied research.

Potyrailo, R.A., Ghiradella, H., Vertiatchikh, A., Dovidenko, K., Cournoyer, J.R., Olson, E. (2007). Morpho butterfly wing scales demonstrate highly selective vapour response. Nature Photonics, 1(2), 123-128. DOI: 10.1038/nphoton.2007.2

Huang, J., Wang, X., Wang, Z. (2006). . Nano Letters, 6(10), 2325-2331. DOI: 10.1021/nl061851t

-END

Unless the post above is followed by '-END' then CLICK HERE to read more!

Can you pick up a drop of water with tweezers?

Some birds can! A group of shorebirds called phalaropes have a curious way of feeding. They feed on the surface of lakes, tidal wetlands and other bodies of water by swimming around in a tight circle on the surface furiously kicking their legs. This creates a vortex in which tiny aquatic invertebrates like shrimp, aquatic insects and copepods are pulled to the surface. Once food items are trapped in the swirling water phalaropes gobble them up with their long thin bills. But, while the phalarope's curious means of concentrating aquatic invertebrates is well known less well understood is how they use their bills to consume their tiny water suspended prey. A team at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology lead by Manu Prakash has uncovered just how suspension feeding birds like phalaropes use their bills to draw up droplets of water packed with their invertebrate prey.

Unlike a straw a bird's bill is open on both sides and opens in an up-and-down motion much like a pair of tweezers so they can't suck up shrimp filled pond water like you would a slushie. In phalaropes their bills are long and very thin (see photo to the right of a Red-necked Phalarope (Phalaropus lobatus) from the Cincinnati Museum Center's Zoology collection). Just how phalaropes can use a tweezer-like bill in a straw-like fashion is a puzzle. Prakash and colleagues found that a drop of water in a very thin bill can be drawn up the bill by what they call a "capillary ratchet". They looked at data in the literature derived from real bills (much of which was originally from museum specimens) and built a mechanical bill with similar properties. When the bill is closed the drop of water is compressed and when opened again it moves a bit further up the bill towards the mouth. Close the bill again the water is compressed. Open again and it moves a bit further up the bill. Click HERE for a Quicktime movie of the Prakash et al. mechanical bill in action. The ability of an artificial bill to serve as a capillary ratchet is highly dependent on both it's shape and it's wetting properties.

This study has several important implications. First, it describes a novel evolutionary adaptation in birds and helps us better understand the myriad of solutions that evolutionary processes can generate to basic challenges in life. Second, an understanding of biomechanics for natural structures like the bill of the phalarope can help human engineers design devices for moving very small amounts of liquid (i.e. microfluidic transport systems). Such devices, inspired by nature, can have important implications in nanotechnology and molecular biology and could potentially advance human health. Finally, because Prakash et al. found that the wetting properties of the bill were critical in its ability to act as a capillary ratchet device environmental managers should look for effects of pollutants on the feeding efficiency of phalaropes and other shorebird species. Petroleum products and detergents could have significant effects on the wetting properties of a phalarope bill and in turn lead to less food for affected birds.

Of course museums, like Cincinnati Museum Center, often play a significant role in these biomechanical studies by serving as storehouses of all the clever tricks invented by evolutionary processes. Taping into nature's diversity is not only good simply for the sake of a greater knowledge of our living world but it also can provide us with designs for our own technology, designs that have been tested over eons of evolutionary tinkering.

Prakash, M., Quere, D., Bush, J.W. (2008). Surface Tension Transport of Prey by Feeding Shorebirds: The Capillary Ratchet. Science, 320(5878), 931-934. DOI: 10.1126/science.1156023

-END

Unless the post above is followed by '-END' then CLICK HERE to read more!

The weird and wonderful platypus genome

Modern comparative biology has truly entered a new age. The list of species for which researchers have completely sequenced their genomes continues to rapidly grow. Fruit flies (Drosophila melanogaster), chickens (Gallus gallus), sea urchin (Strongylocentrotus purpuratus), pufferfish (Fugu rubripes), Short-tailed Opossum (Monodelphis domestica), mosquitos (Anopheles gambiae), Rhesus Macaque (Macaca mulatta), several plants such as rice (Oryza sativa) and cottonwood (Populus trichocarpa), numerous microbes, and even Humans (Homo sapiens) all have complete genome sequences completed.

Add to that list the Duck-billed Platypus (Ornithorhynchus anatinus). A research team has just completed the first sequencing of the platypus genome. The platypus is truly among the strangest of mammals. Found exclusively in Australia and Tasmania, they have hair and produce milk as do the rest of their mammalian kin but they also lay eggs and have a brain much like a reptile. Male platypus also sport a spur on their hind feet that can deliver a venomous sting. Because of this odd mix of reptilian and mammalian characters the first platypus specimens brought back by the early explorers of the Australian continent were thought to be a hoax, patched together from bits and pieces of other animals. Cincinnati Museum Center's Zoology Collection has an old platypus specimen in it's holdings (see photo left).

Like it's reproductive behavior, physiology and morphology the genome of the platypus reveals it's key evolutionary position at the base of the mammal family tree. For example, mammalian ova have an outer membrane called the zona pellucida which aids in fertilization. Of the proteins make up the zona pellucida in mammals four found in the platypus match those found in the human genome, however, the platypus genome has two additional ova membrane proteins previously found only in birds. Additionally, the platypus genome contains genes for the yolk protein vitellogenin, a protein found in the eggs of birds but neither marsupials or placental mammals.

The genes underlying the venom found in the spurs of male platypus also tell an interesting evolutionary story. Platypus venom, like many venoms found in reptiles, is a complex mix of different proteins. Platypus venom contains 19 different compounds. The venom proteins in platypus venoms appear to have arisen through duplications of genes. Gene duplication is a common evolutionary process that can give rise to new characteristics. When a gene is duplicated the new duplicate is free to accumulate new mutations and take on new functions while the original gene retains it's original function. Not only has gene duplication played a role in the evolution of platypus venom but the same process likely led to the evolution of venoms in reptiles. Also, the venom proteins in the platypus arose from the same gene families as in venomous reptiles providing an interesting case of convergent evolution (evolution of similar traits arising independently in different lineages).

The complete sequence of the platypus genome follows previous work on the sex-determination chromosomes in the platypus (Grutzner et al. 2004. Nature 432: 913-917). For mammals, sex is determined by two sex chromosomes, X and Y. Females have two X chromosomes and males have one X chromosome and one Y. But, platypus have ten sex chromosomes! These ten chromosomes are arranged in a chain such that females are have five pairs of X chromosomes and males have five XY pairs. In birds the sex determination system is different. The sex chromosomes in birds are called W and Z and rather than males being the sex with two different sex chromosomes (called the heterogametic sex) the females are the ones with different sex chromosomes (female birds are WZ and male birds are ZZ). Interestingly, like much of the rest of the platypus genome the sex chromosomes belie their position in the mammalian tree. At one end of the chain of X-chromosomes in the platypus genome is an X chromosome with sequence similarity to the avian Z chromosome. This suggests evolutionary links between the sex chromosomes of birds and mammals and thus a common evolutionary history for these two different groups of animals.

Surely further investigation of the platypus genome will reveal more insights not only into platypus evolution but the evolution of the whole mammalian family tree, including us. As more and more organisms are sequenced we will gain more insight into evolutionary history and processes.

Warren, W.C., Hillier, L.W., Marshall Graves, J.A., Birney, E., Ponting, C.P., Grützner, F., Belov, K., Miller, W., Clarke, L., Chinwalla, A.T., Yang, S., Heger, A., Locke, D.P., Miethke, P., Waters, P.D., Veyrunes, F., Fulton, L., Fulton, B., Graves, T., Wallis, J., Puente, X.S., López-Otín, C., Ordóñez, G.R., Eichler, E.E., Chen, L., Cheng, Z., Deakin, J.E., Alsop, A., Thompson, K., Kirby, P., Papenfuss, A.T., Wakefield, M.J., Olender, T., Lancet, D., Huttley, G.A., Smit, A.F., Pask, A., Temple-Smith, P., Batzer, M.A., Walker, J.A., Konkel, M.K., Harris, R.S., Whittington, C.M., Wong, E.S., Gemmell, N.J., Buschiazzo, E., Vargas Jentzsch, I.M., Merkel, A., Schmitz, J., Zemann, A., Churakov, G., Ole Kriegs, J., Brosius, J., Murchison, E.P., Sachidanandam, R., Smith, C., Hannon, G.J., Tsend-Ayush, E., McMillan, D., Attenborough, R., Rens, W., Ferguson-Smith, M., Lefèvre, C.M., Sharp, J.A., Nicholas, K.R., Ray, D.A., Kube, M., Reinhardt, R., Pringle, T.H., Taylor, J., Jones, R.C., Nixon, B., Dacheux, J., Niwa, H., Sekita, Y., Huang, X., Stark, A., Kheradpour, P., Kellis, M., Flicek, P., Chen, Y., Webber, C., Hardison, R., Nelson, J., Hallsworth-Pepin, K., Delehaunty, K., Markovic, C., Minx, P., Feng, Y., Kremitzki, C., Mitreva, M., Glasscock, J., Wylie, T., Wohldmann, P., Thiru, P., Nhan, M.N., Pohl, C.S., Smith, S.M., Hou, S., Renfree, M.B., Mardis, E.R., Wilson, R.K. (2008). Genome analysis of the platypus reveals unique signatures of evolution. Nature, 453(7192), 175-183. DOI: 10.1038/nature06936

-END

Unless the post above is followed by '-END' then CLICK HERE to read more!

For bats the nose knows...

Delimiting one species from another can be a difficult thing for biologists to do. This is especially true when the criteria researchers use to define one species from another may not be among the same criteria used by the organisms in question to distinguish themselves from other species. This can result in hidden or cryptic species being subsumed by biologists into a common grouping. Cryptic species lumped together as a single species by morphological data can be discovered through studies of DNA.

Recently Sarah Weyandt of the University of Chicago and the Field Museum visited the Cincinnati Museum Center’s Zoology Collection to look at cryptic species in horseshoe bats from the Philippines. Horseshoe bats (family: Rhinolophidae) are insect eating bats characterized by large ears and elaborate folds of skin forming other structures around their noses called noseleaves. Biologists use these structures, along with other traits, to distinguish between one species and another. However, sometimes two different species can have very similar noseleaf patterns and be difficult to distinguish. There are two varieties of noseleaves in the Philippine bat Rhinolophus arcuatus that differ in very subtle ways (see photos of two Cincinnati Museum Center specimens illustrating these two varieties of noseleaf structure to the left). However, despite very little difference in their morphology these two varieties of bat differ considerably in their genetics, as much as either Rhinolophus arcuatus variety differs from members of another Rhinolophus species.

Sarah is delving deeper into the genetics and morphological variation of this group of bats. To those ends the Cincinnati Museum Center’s Zoology Collection provides valuable specimens for morphological studies and frozen tissue for genetic studies.

-END

Unless the post above is followed by '-END' then CLICK HERE to read more!

Ecuador: Part II

One group of birds Ecuador has in abundance are the hummingbirds (family: Trochilidae). If you live in the Eastern United States you typically can only see one species of hummingbird, the Ruby-throated Hummingbird (Archilochus colubris). Rarely one may encounter a second species, the Rufous Hummingbird (Selaphorus rufus) or one of a handful of other rare vagrants from the Western US. However, Northwestern South America is the world hotspot for hummingbird diversity. Hummingbirds are confined to the Americas and of the more than 300 hummingbird species over 120 species can be found in Ecuador.

During our trip to Ecuador we saw more than 30 species of hummingbirds. These included large showy species such as the Collared Inca (Coeligena torquata) to species in which males sport spectacular, long tail feathers like the Long-tailed Sylph (Aglaiocerus kingi) to smaller iridescent green hummingbirds like the Andean Emerald (Agytria franciae) and the Rufous-tailed Hummingbird (Amazilia tzacatl, see photo left). The Andes accounts for much of the diversity in hummingbird species, and diversity in other organisms. One can encounter different assemblages of hummingbirds at different altitudes. One can encounter 10 species at a site at 1,000 meters and then a completely different 10 species when one moves to 2,000 meters. Also, the eastern and western slopes of the Andes will be home to different hummingbird species.

This amazing diversity draws hummingbird enthusiasts from around the globe. Hummingbird feeding stations are common in Ecuador, particularly in tourist areas, making for some very relaxed birding ticking off species from the comfort of a deck while sipping Ecuadorian coffee, or in my case a cold Coca-Cola. Cincinnati Museum Center, with the help of the Jocotoco Foundation and the Neblina Forest birding tour company, is currently planning future museum led ecotours to Ecuador where museum patrons can see the amazing biodiversity Ecuador has to offer. Until then check out the video below of a hummingbird feeder at the Jocotoco Foundation's Tapichalaca Reserve. Enjoy!



-END

Unless the post above is followed by '-END' then CLICK HERE to read more!

Cincinnati Museum Center enters the genomic age...

The beginnings of a working molecular genetics laboratory has been built in the zoology department at Cincinnati Museum Center. Frozen tissue collections are central to a modern natural history collection and typically the most active collection in terms of loans and exchanges between museums. This weekend we extracted our first DNA samples for the new lab. This should be the first ever DNA extractions at Cincinnati Museum Center.

The first step in converting a frozen piece of tissue into genetic data is the extraction of DNA from the tissue cells. DNA (short for DeoxyriboNucleic Acid) is the primary stuff of heredity. Within living cells are long stretches of DNA passed from parent to offspring that provides the information used in the development of the organism. Analysis of DNA can provide researchers with many things, from the action of genes to the evolutionary history of species. Removing the DNA from the cell involves bursting the cell open with soaps (known as cell lysis) and then separating the DNA from the myriad of proteins and other biological compounds that make up the cell. This is done by mixing the soup of cellular compounds from cell lysis with an organic solvent (phenol) and spinning it in a centrifuge. A tube with this cellular soup that has been mixed with phenol when spun down in a centrifuge separates into two layers; the bottom layer and the interface between the two layers contains all the proteins that you want to remove and the top layer is essentially water with the stuff you do want, namely nucleic acids like DNA. Remove the top layer and you have DNA cleaned of all the other cellular material you don't want. Repeating this process gets the sample cleaner and cleaner with each spin.

After a few rounds of these phenol extractions one takes the top layer containing the DNA, moves it to a new tube and adds ethanol. At this stage a neat thing happens. The DNA is not soluble in ethanol and together with salts that also are removed in the top layer of a DNA extraction, it becomes visible to the naked eye as a white, cottony mass. The photo to the right is the genomic DNA from a House Finch (Carpodacus mexicanus) extracted here at Cincinnati Museum Center. These samples will be part of a collaborative research project between Auburn University, University of Minnesota and Cincinnati Museum Center to understand the relationships among populations and the genetic history of both native and introduced house finches in North America.

Hopes are that genetic-based research will continue to grow in the zoology collection. Certainly this is a good start in bringing Cincinnati Museum Center into the age of modern, collection-based genetic research.

-END

Unless the post above is followed by '-END' then CLICK HERE to read more!

DNA adds some 'mussel' to conservation efforts

The Southeastern United States is a center for biodiversity in North America. This is particularly true for freshwater mussels. The Ohio Valley is home to numerous species of freshwater mussels (family: Unionidae; class: Bivalvia) and the upper Coosa River basin in Tennessee, Georgia and Alabama was once home to over 40 species of freshwater mussels making it among the most biologically diverse freshwater habitats on Earth. Unfortunately, however, human activity in the great watersheds of the Southeast have had devastating effects on freshwater mussel diversity. The building of locks and dams, agricultural and industrial run-off and urbanization along rivers have all contributed to the extinction of many species of freshwater mussel. In the Ohio valley species like the Clubshell (Pleurobema clava, see photo left) exist in populations that are considered highly vulnerable to extinction and other species, like the Tubercled Blossum (Epioblasma torulosa, see photo bottom right, both specimens are from the Cincinnati Museum Center Zoology collection), are likely extinct already. For freshwater mollusks in general over 70% of the known species are extinct or in danger of extinction.

Identifying one mussel species from another can however be difficult. Mussels are typically identified on the basis of the size, shape and texture of their shells, however, within populations these traits can vary significantly and often vary in response to variation in the environment. The difficulty in identifying one species from another confounds conservation efforts to identify threatened populations and leaves open the possibility that species thought to be extinct may persist in populations with aberrant characteristics making them difficult to distinguish from more common species.

In a recent paper by University of Alabama researcher David Campbell and his colleagues, DNA barcoding was used as a tool in identifying freshwater mussel species in the Coosa basin. DNA barcoding involves sequencing a segment of DNA common to all organisms. In general, sequences should be unique to a species, although there is often some sequence variation within species as well. DNA barcodes can be used in addition to analysis of morphological characteristics as a tool in identifying species. Focusing on the freshwater mussel genus Pleurobema, DNA barcoding revealed the existence of four species thought to be extinct from the Coosa basin; Pleurobema chattanoogaese, P. hanleyianum, P. troschelianum, and P. stabile. The DNA evidence showed that all of the Coosa basin specimens previously identified as Peurobema perovatum were actually the supposedly extinct P. hanleyianum. Also, the Warrior Pigtoe (Pleurobema rubellum), a mussel species currently listed as extinct, was identified using DNA barcoding from the nearby Black Warrior River system.

This study shows the utility of DNA analyses in conservation efforts. With the growing emphasis on DNA techniques here at Cincinnati Museum Center plans are underway to adopt DNA barcoding protocols on threatened and difficult to identify groups, like freshwater mussels, in the Ohio Valley.

CAMPBELL, D.C., JOHNSON, P.D., WILLIAMS, J.D., RINDSBERG, A.K., SERB, J.M., SMALL, K.K., LYDEARD, C. (2008). Identification of ‘extinct’ freshwater mussel species using DNA barcoding. Molecular Ecology Resources DOI: 10.1111/j.1755-0998.2008.02108.x

-END

Unless the post above is followed by '-END' then CLICK HERE to read more!

University of Cincinnati Drawing Class

Museum collections have many uses, and not all of these uses for museum specimens are scientific. The zoology collection at Cincinnati Museum Center is often used by local artists to create biologically accurate wildlife art. Field guides are an excellent example of the synergy between art and science in museum collections. Jim Day of Talon Wildlife Creations is one such local artist who regularly uses the collection to create life-like reproductions of birds from domestic bird feathers. Other well known artists such as John Ruthven and the late Charley Harper have used the zoology collection extensively as reference material for their artwork.

The next generation of artists are utilizing the zoology collection as well. Led by instructor Courtney Bennett students from the University of Cincinnati visited the collection in late February (see photo right). The students were sketching everything from mounted Ring-tailed Cats to primate skulls to Harpy Eagle study skins. Courtney recently sent us photos of some of the student work (see photo above left). We hope to host many other local artists, both professional and student, and provide them with many subjects for biological illustration and wildlife art.

-END

Unless the post above is followed by '-END' then CLICK HERE to read more!

Ecuador: Part I

We just returned from the tropics and the beautiful country of Ecuador. As it's name suggests Ecuador straddles the equator and is one of the most biodiverse countries in the world. For birds alone the tiny nation of Ecuador boasts over 1,600 species, compare that to just over 900 for all of North America north of Mexico. The Northern Andes form the spine of Ecuador running along the middle of the country. To the east is the Amazon basin and to the west the Pacific coast and in Northwestern Ecuador is the Choco, a very biodiverse region with many endemic species, extending from Panama, through Columbia and into Ecuador.

Our trip began in the cloud forests of the Andean slopes of Southeastern Ecuador at the Jocotoco Foundation's Tapichalaca Reserve located in the Podocarpus National Park. Montane cloud forests form in areas where warm air masses cool as they rise in the face of high mountain slopes. Moisture condenses in these rising air masses and blankets the forested slopes in clouds, mist and rain. Cloud forests are some of the wettest environments on Earth and provide the perfect environment for moisture loving plants, especially mosses, bromeliads and orchids (see photo above left). Many of these plants are epiphytes, growing on the trunks and branches of trees (see photo right). Despite being near the equator the elevation of these forests keeps the temperatures comparatively mild year round. Our time at Tapichalaca was during the tail-end of the rainy season and rain fell regularly during our stay making the steep mountain trails a muddy slog through the forest.

The cloud forests of Ecuador are home to many unique animals. The near constant wet conditions provide an ideal habitat for high humidity loving animals such as frogs and land snails. Many bird species are also found exclusively in tropical cloud forests. The recently described Jocotoco Antpitta (Grallaria ridgelyi, see photo left) is a ground bird found only in a small area around the Tapichalaca Reserve. Birds like the Jocotoco Antpitta make the region a Mecca for birdwatchers around the globe. Other cloud forest specialties include the Black-billed Mountain Toucan (Andigena nigrirostris), the Hooded Mountain Tanager (Buthraupis montana) and Collared Inca (Coeligena torquata).

Steep mountain forests in the tropics remain some of of the most well preserved natural ecosystems in the world, however, threats to these seemingly inaccessible habitats remain. Greater awareness through research, conservation and carefully controlled ecotourism can help preserve these unique montane forests. Cincinnati Museum Center plans to organize future trips to Ecuador for area birders and other nature enthusiasts. This trip represents the initial exploratory forays into a new tropical montane biodiversity program. Stay tuned for upcoming reports from our expedition to Ecuador and news on future ecotourism opportunities to visit Ecuador with Cincinnati Museum Center scientists.

-END

Unless the post above is followed by '-END' then CLICK HERE to read more!