I offer you two interesting articles from the realm of natural science today. They are both rich with concepts for your contemplation. Have some fun and let your imagination expand and play with the possibilities that your new awareness of these latest revelations might create in your personal world.
Nature at it's Best with a twist~
I usually note instances of what I call 'Nature at It's Best' in the form of photos of animals of different species demonstrating kindness and compassion to one another. Some favorite images are those of animals nurturing the young of other species. Here's an article that focuses on how some of these traits have evolved into the human animal.
I note this because it's promising in terms of the new humans that we must become if we wish to continue to exist. The article reveals that we already possess the qualities that would make us more like our animal brothers and sisters in knowing how to share, respect and be concerned for the well being of the Homo Sapian genus of the animal kingdom.
by Marlowe Hood
Paris (AFP)
27, Aug. 2008
Humans are selfish in earliest childhood but by the age of seven or eight are keen to share equally, a developmental change so sudden that it can only be explained, at least in part, by genes, according to a study released Wednesday.
Behavioural scientists and sociologists have quarrelled for decades as to whether generosity and selfishness are inherited or result from social conditioning.
But new experiments with 229 Swiss children between the ages of three and eight suggest that Homo sapiens is probably somewhere in between: humans look out for No. 1, but also express, if not outright generosity, at least an aversion to inequality.
The study, published in the British journal Nature, could help explain how humans developed the ability to cooperate in large groups of individuals who are unrelated, the researchers say.
The children were asked to take part in three different games.
In each game, the child was confronted with two options as to how to distribute portions of jelly beans and other small sweets.
He or she was faced with another kid, shown only in a photo to avoid complications arising from face-to-face encounters.
One of the options was the same in all three games: divide the sweets equally.
In the first game, the child had the alternate option of keeping a single portion of sweets for himself and giving nothing for the other child.
In the second, more sweets were added, and the child had the option of giving the other child two portions and keeping one.
And in the third game, the child had the choice of taking two portions and leaving the other child empty-handed.
Lead researcher Ernst Fehr of the University of Zurich said the three- and four-year-olds were consistently motivated by self-interest, with almost no regard for the well-being of the other. The next age bracket was almost as selfish.
"But if we look at the seven-to-eight year olds, a different picture emerges," Fehr told AFP.
In the first game, nearly 80 percent of the older kids made sure the other child got the same amount of sweets rather than none at all.
And in the last game, more than 40 percent of them refused to let the other go away with nothing even when they had the opportunity of gaining a double portion by doing so.
By comparison, less than nine percent of three- and four-year-olds were willing to do the same.
But generosity had its limits. In the second game, the older children were reluctant to let their counterpart have twice as many as themselves.
'If I can't have more,' their actions seemed to say, 'I don't see why he or she should.'
In an e-mail exchange with AFP, Fehr said the results suggest that Nature and Nurture jointly shaped behavioural responses, although the study was not designed to calculate the share of each influence.
"I think that both genes and culture play a role," Fehr said. The results, he added, suggest that "social norms of equality can come into being even without extended forms of cultural transmission."
"Nobody would dispute that the sexual maturation of children is driven by biology and genes, so why should other phenotypes -- like those associated with fairness behaviour -- not also be driven by biology and genes?", he asked rhetorically.
At least one result was unexpected, said Fehr: children with no siblings were more, rather than less, generous.
Copyright © 2008 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved.
Don't think all viruses are bad
It's a pretty common thing to look upon a virus as something negative that you don't want to be infected with. Whether it's dealing with our bodies, or one's favorite tool of staying in touch with the world --- the computer --- we do everything we can to thwart the 'attack' of a virus in our system. Check out this article to get a more balanced view of these living organisms.
We cling to many perceptions about Life and our existence, but like Sammy sang in the character of Sportin' Life, in Porgy and Bess...."it ain't necessarily so....."
Viruses are hidden drivers of ocean's nutrient cycle
PARIS (AFP)
27, Aug. 2008
27, Aug. 2008
Scientists on Wednesday said they had discovered deep-sea viruses to be an unexpectedly potent driver of the so-called carbon cycle that sustains oceanic life and helps dampen global warming.
Under the carbon cycle, microscopic algae at the sea surface suck up carbon dioxide from the atmosphere.
Many of these microscopic creatures, called prokaryotes, become infected by naturally-occurring marine viruses.
When they die, their carbon-rich remains gently sink to lower depths, where they are then cannibalistically gobbled up by other bacteria.
These prokaryotes in turn become a meal for a larger life form and so on, up the food chain.
Researchers long ago grasped that viruses on the sea surface play a Dr.-Jekyll-and-Mr.-Hyde role, killing biomass while at the same time sustaining it.
Now, though, evidence has emerged that these tiny bacterial pathogens also carry out unsung work at the ocean depths -- a dark, inhospitable, nutrient-poor place that counts as last great unexplored ecosystem on the planet.
Marine scientists led by Roberto Danovaro of Italy's Polytechnic University of Marche in Ancona sifted through samples of sediment hauled up from scores of sites from around the world, at depths ranging from 183 metres (595 feet) to a bone-crushing 4,603 metres (14,959 feet).
Team member Antonio Dell'Anno said the virus count was astonishingly high.
"We found surprising results," he told AFP in an interview.
"In the deep ocean, there is a strong interaction between viruses and prokaryotes, which helps sustain the deep-sea ecosystems independently of the nutrient inputs coming from the surface waters.
"It's a sort of self-sustaining mechanism, helping the ocean depths to overcome severe nutrient limitations."
The virus work has "huge implications" for understanding the ocean carbon cycle, he said.
It not only helps to sustain life at great depths, he said.
Beyond 1,000 metres (3,250 feet) or so, prokaryotes account for 90 percent of the total biomass.
Humans are among the indirect beneficiaries of the process, because the abyssal nutrients help sustain the seafood that ends up on our plates.
Another big question is what role viruses may play in the complex arithmetic of global warming.
The sea absorbs billions of tonnes of atmospheric CO2 each year, thus acting as a cushion for man-made emissions of heat-trapping greenhouse gases. The carbon detritus from prokaryotes killed by viruses on the ocean floor is mostly respired thus not effectively stored there forever.
Viruses are by far the most abundant "life form" in the oceans, according to the study, which appears in Thursday's issue of Nature, the London-based science weekly.
They number roughly 4 X 10 to the power of 30 -- a four following by 30 zeroes.
Globally, as much as 630 million tonnes of carbon are taken up each year by "viral shunt," when the remains of one microscopic organism, which has been killed by a virus, are later snapped up by another one.
Copyright © 2008 Agence France Presse.
No comments:
Post a Comment