Why Evolution is True is a blog written by Jerry Coyne, centered on evolution and biology but also dealing with diverse topics like politics, culture, and cats.
Another photo post – this time it’s the GDT European wildlife photographer of the year 2012. You can find a range of the photos here, or go to the German GDT site. I find some of them a bit too impressionistic for my tastes, but here’s the winner, followed by three of my favourites:
‘The Stargazer’ by Tommy Vikars/2012 GDT European Wildlife PhotographerThe gourmet, by Leopold Kanzler /2012 GDT European Wildlife Photographer (Mammals, highly recommended)First kiss by Klaus Tamm, Germany (other animals, runner up), 2012 GDT European Wildlife PhotographerThomson’s gazelle being focused by Grégoire Bouguereau (Mammals, highly recommended). 2012 GDT European Wildlife Photographer
That photo of the cheetahs and gazelle is completely unrealistic. The gazelle is running fast, but cheetahs are standing still. Anyway, cheetahs are solitary hunters. Very occasionally in the wild you might get one mother with three nearly-grown young, but four adults together is ridiculous.
So what are you saying? It’s been ‘shopped? It’s in a zoo?
I suspect “shopped”. I have since noticed another problem: the heads of the cheetahs look large compared with their bodies, which suggests an extreme closeup. One of the striking features of cheetahs seen in the wild is how small their heads are.
The caption at the link provided by Matthew suggests otherwise:
“Thomson’s gazelle being focused by Bouguereau Gregoire, France ‘During the breeding season young Thornson’s gazelles are easy prey. They are also the first prey with which young cheetahs perfect their hunting skills. On that day in April 2011 in Tanzania‘s Serengeti national park, the adult cheetah had caught this fawn, and then let her four cubs finish the hunt. At first. they did not seem particularly interested in the fawn, but its attempt to escape suddenly aroused their natural predatory instincts. As luck would have it, I was right in the prey’s path of flight and was able to take this picture at the moment when the young cheetahs all focused in unison on the fleeing gazelle’ “
I’ve forgotten how many cubs cheetahs have but I’d be surprised if it’s as many as four at the same time.
Oh Their God! Why not just find out instead of making up a bunch of christian?
http://www.felineworlds.com/cheetah-reproduction.html
A female will carry the babies in her body for a period of 90 to 100 days. She can give birth to a single cub or to as many as 9 of them. They will weigh less than 1 ounce each and are very vulnerable at birth. Approximately 90% of the young will die within the first few weeks of life. This is often due to the various predators that are out there.
http://laurentmikhail.hubpages.com/hub/Cheetah-facts
Mating is possible for the Cheetah during any time of the year. They tend to reproduce at slow rates though. The males have low sperm count so not all mating will result in young being created. The genetic profile of them is extremely similar too which can create problems with inbreeding. The females can give birth to up to 9 cubs after carrying them for a period of 90 to 100 days.
And more but it seems I can’t link more than two.
Their heads appear comparatively large because they are juveniles. Their behavior in this picture seems fairly normal for juvenile cheetahs. The only surprising, though not unrealistic, thing is that four juveniles from the same litter have survived to that age.
Some really awesome photographs there.
To get these types of images takes time, patience and willingness to be out there for hours on end. And a large degree of skill for catching that single moment when it does come along. Hats off to the photogs.
I’m thinking the meteor-looking thing in the first photo is likely not a meteor but a passing Iridium satellite.
Or……, maybe a planet since it doesn’t show any streaking and it is a longish exposure.
The bright dot is definitely a planet – probably Jupiter, since Venus would likely be far brighter given the exposure time. I’d need to know the date of the photo to say absolutely.
The streak is just a meteor. An Iridium satellite would be much brighter.
I thought the “streak” was just an optical artifact due to the brightness (maybe?) of the reflection from the planet. If that is the streak you are both referring to? ‘Cause it goes right through the center of the planet which would be remarkable if it were a meteor. I don’t see any other streak, maybe I’m monitor unMittened or eyesight poor.
That is M45 also known as the Pleiades, aka Seven Sisters, about 1/8 down from top in the center isn’t it?
It may be a lens flare rather than a meteor, but I don’t find it at all improbable for the latter to cross in front of a planet.
I’m all but certain now that it’s Jupiter, and that the photo was taken close to the 12th of February.
Lesseee …. Pleiades, Hyades, Orion ; no Sirius though it can’t be far below the horizon. The bright spot is fairly close to the ecliptic – close enough that I couldn’t us it’s position to rule it in or out of being a planet. Without actually sitting down and working out it’s exact position, it’s too close to call. But the orientation of the streak is pretty close to perpendicular to the ecliptic. I’m trying to work out the geometry ; I can’t say for sure, but it certainly wouldn’t surprise me if the “flash” of an Iridium (or other satellite’s solar panels) would occur at a set position with respect to the ecliptic (and therefore to the position of the Sun on the celestial sphere.
I’d put my vote for a satellite flare, not a planet.
Oh, now I understand how that could work. Interesting, thanks!
I wouldn’t hang for it – it’s been that long since I had to do stereonet work that I’m really struggling to work out what the angles actually are. But I think that it works. There’s room for a degree of slop in there, because I don’t think that the Iridiums rely on having tightly-controlled orientation.
The photos are lovely
OMG that poor gazelle!
That photo of the cheetahs and gazelle is completely unrealistic. The gazelle is running fast, but cheetahs are standing still. Anyway, cheetahs are solitary hunters. Very occasionally in the wild you might get one mother with three nearly-grown young, but four adults together is ridiculous.
So what are you saying? It’s been ‘shopped? It’s in a zoo?
I suspect “shopped”. I have since noticed another problem: the heads of the cheetahs look large compared with their bodies, which suggests an extreme closeup. One of the striking features of cheetahs seen in the wild is how small their heads are.
The caption at the link provided by Matthew suggests otherwise:
“Thomson’s gazelle being focused by Bouguereau Gregoire, France ‘During the breeding season young Thornson’s gazelles are easy prey. They are also the first prey with which young cheetahs perfect their hunting skills. On that day in April 2011 in Tanzania‘s Serengeti national park, the adult cheetah had caught this fawn, and then let her four cubs finish the hunt. At first. they did not seem particularly interested in the fawn, but its attempt to escape suddenly aroused their natural predatory instincts. As luck would have it, I was right in the prey’s path of flight and was able to take this picture at the moment when the young cheetahs all focused in unison on the fleeing gazelle’ “
I’ve forgotten how many cubs cheetahs have but I’d be surprised if it’s as many as four at the same time.
Oh Their God! Why not just find out instead of making up a bunch of christian?
http://www.felineworlds.com/cheetah-reproduction.html
A female will carry the babies in her body for a period of 90 to 100 days. She can give birth to a single cub or to as many as 9 of them. They will weigh less than 1 ounce each and are very vulnerable at birth. Approximately 90% of the young will die within the first few weeks of life. This is often due to the various predators that are out there.
http://laurentmikhail.hubpages.com/hub/Cheetah-facts
Mating is possible for the Cheetah during any time of the year. They tend to reproduce at slow rates though. The males have low sperm count so not all mating will result in young being created. The genetic profile of them is extremely similar too which can create problems with inbreeding. The females can give birth to up to 9 cubs after carrying them for a period of 90 to 100 days.
And more but it seems I can’t link more than two.
Their heads appear comparatively large because they are juveniles. Their behavior in this picture seems fairly normal for juvenile cheetahs. The only surprising, though not unrealistic, thing is that four juveniles from the same litter have survived to that age.
Some really awesome photographs there.
To get these types of images takes time, patience and willingness to be out there for hours on end. And a large degree of skill for catching that single moment when it does come along. Hats off to the photogs.
I’m thinking the meteor-looking thing in the first photo is likely not a meteor but a passing Iridium satellite.
Or……, maybe a planet since it doesn’t show any streaking and it is a longish exposure.
The bright dot is definitely a planet – probably Jupiter, since Venus would likely be far brighter given the exposure time. I’d need to know the date of the photo to say absolutely.
The streak is just a meteor. An Iridium satellite would be much brighter.
I thought the “streak” was just an optical artifact due to the brightness (maybe?) of the reflection from the planet. If that is the streak you are both referring to? ‘Cause it goes right through the center of the planet which would be remarkable if it were a meteor. I don’t see any other streak, maybe I’m monitor unMittened or eyesight poor.
That is M45 also known as the Pleiades, aka Seven Sisters, about 1/8 down from top in the center isn’t it?
It may be a lens flare rather than a meteor, but I don’t find it at all improbable for the latter to cross in front of a planet.
I’m all but certain now that it’s Jupiter, and that the photo was taken close to the 12th of February.
Lesseee …. Pleiades, Hyades, Orion ; no Sirius though it can’t be far below the horizon. The bright spot is fairly close to the ecliptic – close enough that I couldn’t us it’s position to rule it in or out of being a planet. Without actually sitting down and working out it’s exact position, it’s too close to call. But the orientation of the streak is pretty close to perpendicular to the ecliptic. I’m trying to work out the geometry ; I can’t say for sure, but it certainly wouldn’t surprise me if the “flash” of an Iridium (or other satellite’s solar panels) would occur at a set position with respect to the ecliptic (and therefore to the position of the Sun on the celestial sphere.
I’d put my vote for a satellite flare, not a planet.
Oh, now I understand how that could work. Interesting, thanks!
I wouldn’t hang for it – it’s been that long since I had to do stereonet work that I’m really struggling to work out what the angles actually are. But I think that it works. There’s room for a degree of slop in there, because I don’t think that the Iridiums rely on having tightly-controlled orientation.