Peregrines: a truly fantastic photo (and a discussion)

June 21, 2013 • 4:49 am

This is one of the best reader photos I’ve ever posted, and it comes from photographer John Chardine.  He described the scene in his first email (all posted with permission):

I’ve been photographing a pair of Peregrine Falcons at a nest not far from home.

Right now there is a single chick in the nest. The (much smaller) male is hunting for birds—mainly American Robins—and is bringing them back plucked and usually without the head (which he eats). The interesting part of the story is that rather than bring them back to the nest, the male transfers the prey to the female in mid-air, and the female then takes the prey item back to the nest and feeds the chick. All this happens in 5 seconds ± so you have to be quick on the the camera trigger!
In the image the smaller male is above with the food item in its beak. The female is reaching up with her talons to grab the food item.
Peregrein
The natural questions are these: is it normal in peregrines for females to do the feeding, even when males do the hunting? And, if so, why? Here’s John’s responses, which show that which sex does the hunting (they differ in size) depends on how old the chicks are.
There is pronounced (reverse) sexual dimorphism in the Peregrine with the male much smaller than the female. When the chicks are young the parents only need to bring in small prey like robins and the male is supremely built to kill small birds. Peregrines capture their prey by diving on them at incredible speeds—the fastest in the bird world. Later on when the chicks get older, they need more food delivered per unit time and sometimes the larger female will step in taking larger prey like for example ducks and gulls. A big problem for flying predators like Peregrines is “payload mass”. They have to be able to carry back the prey (payload) and if it’s too heavy they can’t do it. Larger females can fly with bigger prey than the smaller males.
I then asked John this:
But why doesn’t the male just feed the small birds he catches directly to the chicks? Why does he hand them over to the female?
And he replied:
That’s a good question and I don’t know the answer. There are many options for what the male could do. The simplest might be to do what you suggest- bring back the prey and feed the chick. The next obvious option might be for the male to deliver the prey to the female at the nest and then she feeds the chick. This is known to occur in some pairs. What I can say is that immediately after the food exchange in mid-air we see the male fly away and we assume he is traveling to his “kill” location. There is no lost time in doing this, which may explain why he does not stick around and feed the chick. If he stayed, the most efficient system would be for the female to fly out to hunt, and that is indeed an option that probably occurs when the chick is old and requires bigger meals. To have both birds attending the nest- one feeding and one hanging around- is inefficient and indeed may not allow sufficient power delivery (energy per unit time) to the nest. It should be mentioned that feeding takes time as the parent has to tear apart the prey in appropriately small morsels for the chick. Currently, with a chick about 12 days old, a complete feeding may take 20-30 minutes.
Reader speculation (or knowledge) is welcome.
John’s photography website is here; a visit will reveal many splendid images.

 

What to do if you find a baby bird

June 20, 2013 • 3:36 pm

by Matthew Cobb

Summer has officially begun in the northern hemisphere (you could have fooled me), so many of our birds will have finished rearing their young, but you still might find a baby bird on the ground.

This handy cut-out-and-keep piece of advice from birdandmoon.com tells you what to do:

h/t HPS_Vanessa

While we’re about it, here’s another piece of bird lore from birdandmoon – while evolution is most certainly true, it can also suck:

 

 

 

 

A parasitic red plant

June 20, 2013 • 11:17 am

I don’t feature nearly enough plants on this site, and that’s because I was trained as a zoologist and don’t know much about botany.

But here’s a nice specimen. It’s the beautiful snow plant (Sarcodes sanguinia), a plant without chlorophyll. It’s a saprophyte, which means it lives on dead or decaying organic mater, and steals nutrients from the roots of pine trees via a shared underground fungus.  

Let the rangers of California’s Yosemite National Park explain it to you:

By the way, my collections of fruit flies in America’s national parks taught me that the rangers, and especially the ranger-naturalists, are a tremendous resource for the visitor interested in science. By all means take advantage of their expertise if you visit the parks. They love to answer questions about geology and biology, which are a welcome break from inquiries like “where are the restrooms?” and “can we bring guns here?”

Girl guides drop allegiance to God (but keep it to the Queen)

June 20, 2013 • 8:47 am

Tuesday’s Telegraph has some heartening news from the ever-secularizing United Kingdom: the Girl Guides (the UK equivalent of the American Girl Scouts) have dropped their promises, when being sworn in, to “loving God” and “serving my country.” This also appears to hold for the nascent Girl Guides, known in both the US and UK as “Brownies.” Girl Guides have been around for over a century, and at last they’re going godless:

In one of the biggest changes in the organisation’s 103-year history, the promise to “love my God” is to be replaced with a more individualistic pledge to “be true to myself” and to “develop my beliefs”.

And a patriotic commitment to serving their country is to become one to the “community” in the oath taken by Brownies and Guides when they join the organisation.

But in a consultation which attracted almost 44,000 responses Guides made clear that they wanted to retain a public expression of allegiance to the Queen, who is also their patron.

A vow to “help other people” and to “do my best” are also to remain in the new promise, which will take effect from September.

It is not the first time that the organisation, founded in 1909 under the leadership of Agnes Baden-Powell, sister of Robert Baden-Powell, the creator of the Scouting movement, has altered the wording of its traditional promise over the last century but it is by far the most radical change.

The rethink followed the appointment of the group’s new chief executive, Julie Bentley, the former head of The Family Planning Association, who described the Guides as “the ultimate feminist organisation”.

I suspect there are some who will take issue with the last sentence.

But it’s all good, even though allegiance to the monarchy—indeed, the monarchy itself—is outmoded and should be dropped as well.

Before making this decision, the organization consulted with the Girl Guides themselves, and one outspoken young atheist weighed in:

Among responses to the consultation, one young girl wrote that she felt like she was “lying to the Brownies” by making a promise to a God in whom she did not believe.

But of course there’s the usual dissent:

Stephen Evans, campaigns manager at the National Secular Society, said: “By omitting any explicit mention of God or religion the Guide Association has grasped the opportunity to make itself truly inclusive and relevant to the reality of 21st century Britain.

“The new secular promise can now be meaningful and relevant to all guides and potential leaders, whatever their beliefs – and sends a clear signal that Girlguiding is equally welcoming to all girls.”

But Andrea Williams of Christian Concern said: “It sounds like jargon from a consumerist self-help manual completely at odds with the true ethos of the Guiding organisation which was set up to encourage belief in God and a corporate identity, not about individualism but to understand what it really is to be part of a community.”

Of course, the Girl Scouts in America must still swear fealty to an invisible deity. One of their websites makes this clear:

2.      Has Girl Scouts removed the word “God” from the Girl Scout Promise?

The Girl Scout Promise contains the word “God”.  According to the Girl Scout Constitution, “The motivating force in Girl Scouting is spiritual.  The ways in which members identify and fulfill their spiritual beliefs are personal and private.”

The Girl Scout Promise is as follows:

On my honor, I will try:

To serve God and my country,

To help people at all times,

And to live by the Girl Scout Law.

The Boy Scouts in the U.S. also continue to ban atheists, or at least force new Scouts to swear allegiance to God. And this despite their recent decision that gays could now be Scouts.

It’s time for America to follow the UK lead and drop the allegiance-to-God business. You can be a good Scout without God.

Uniforms_1985
A Girl Guide (l.) and a Brownie, showing off their uniforms and allegiance to Elizabeth Regina. Photo courtesy of Girl Guides of Canada.

h/t: Pyers

The view from Rocknest… on Mars

June 20, 2013 • 8:01 am

by Matthew Cobb

Last night NASA released this billion pixel image of the Martian landscape, from where Curiosity is sitting at the moment, in a place called Rocknest (it’s called that by NASA; we’re not sure what the indigenous inhabitants call it, what with them having a hundred words for ‘red rock’ and all).

Go on, click on that link and have fun. It’s astonishing – you will be investigating the surface of Mars from your earthbound desk, or even more amazing, a handheld device! We may not have jetpacks or flying cars, but the 21st century has certainly delivered on its promises here!

There are several different versions of the image, either a cylindrical one, or a straight zoomable/scrollable one. You may need Flash (grr) or Silverlight installed. Here’s what the opening page looks like:

Mars

And because the image is so dense, you find all sorts of weird things in there. Here’s something I noticed, which NASA has called a ‘white shiny object’. It’s to the left of Curiosity’s ‘head’, in the Panoramic viewer. See if you can find it. What is it?

mars1

And even weirder, this Martian bird, spotted by NASA in the sky about 15% in from the right:

bird

And here’s something that really IS true. It’s a dry waterfall on Mars, spotted by the HI RISE satellite in the Southern Branch of Kasei Valles (there’s a stereo pair of these images, so if you follow the links you’ll be able to look at it in 3-D…):

Dry Falls in the Southern Branch of Kasei Valles

What caused the Cambrian explosion?

June 20, 2013 • 5:14 am

The “Cambrian explosion” marked the rapid appearance of many animal phyla that persist today, and began about 570 million years ago (mya). Life itself appeared in the fossil record as simple cyanobacteria—”blue green algae”—about 3.6 billion years ago (bya); the first “true” cell with a nucleus probably arose about 2 bya; and the first multicellular organism between 1 and 2 bya.

The “explosion”, contrary to some creationists, wasn’t instantaneous, so it couldn’t have marked a single creation “event” at one time. Rather, the origination of many (but not all) modern phyla occurred between 570 and 540 mya. So the “explosion” took at least thirty million years.

Still, the reason why life lingered so long in a rather simple form, and then rapidly diversified into multifarious and complex forms, has been a long-standing puzzle in paleobiology. As I said, it can’t be due to an instantaneous creation, but intelligent-design advocate Stephen Meyer has a new book coming out that will claim that this rapid appearance reflects the action of the Christian God an unknown intelligent designer.  It’s likely to float yet another god-of-the gaps argument, but I’ll leave the assessment of its validity to the professional paleontologists who will undoubtedly review Meyer’s book. (Note to the DI, which loves to quote-mine me: my characterization of the Cambrian explosion as a “puzzle” does not mean that I think a naturalistic explanation will always elude our understanding, or that I give IDiots any credibility in your previous explanations involving a designer.)

Anyway, real scientists are at work on the problem, and have proposed many non-goddy solutions, including the accumulation of sufficient oxygen to allow the diversification of complex life, the advent of “toolkit genes”, like Hox genes, that could be coopted to build different body plans, the availability of empty niche space after the Ediacaran fauna went extinct, “arms races” between newly evolved predators and prey that drove things like the development of armor, and so on. Wikipedia has a list of competing explanations, and of course some could have acted in concert.

And new explanations continue to arise. One, proposed by geologists Robert Gaines and Shanan Peters, was just published as a short note in New Scientist, which, sadly, is behind a paywall. But I can summarize it briefly.

Being geologists, Gaines’ and Peters’ (G&P’s) hypothesis is geological, and rests on the observation that the geological strata reveal a huge section of missing rock, called the “Great Unconformity,” that may represent a billion lost years of Earth’s history.

G&P suggest that it is the weathering of this crystalline rock layer that gave the impetus to the Cambrian explosion. This erosion is likely to have filled the oceans with mienerals: calcium, magnesium, silicon dioxide, phosphates, and bicarbonates.

Eventually the accumulation of these minerals in the ocean might have permitted the already-present but simple life forms to cross the threshold of biomineralization: the incorporation of environmental elements into hard parts like shells, exoskeletons, bones, and teeth. It’s costly to make these parts, since it involves the use of metabolic pathways that can divert energy from reproduction, and perhaps the absence of minerals before the Great Weathering would have prohibited the evolution of hard parts. But the sudden influx of these compounds could have made the evolution of biochemical pathways for mineralization feasible, and their acquisition advantageous. Hard parts, like shells and exoskeletons, are useful in many ways: protecting you from the environment or predators, providing support, allowing larger body size, and so on.

As the authors note,

We suspect that the elevated concentration of ions in seawater effectively lowered the evolutionary barrier for biomineralisation. Today, most organisms invest energy in creating biominerals because hard body parts are so ecologically and evolutionarily advantageous. But evolution couldn’t “forsesee” how useful biominerals would be when shape into the teeth, claws, and shells we know today. [JAC: I’m not clear why the preceding sentence is in there. Clearly hard parts couldn’t evolve before the requisite minerals were available.] Instead, we think the ion influx promoted by the last stages in the formation of the Great Unconformity may have lowered the energy barrier to biomineralisation or caused biominerals to appear as metabolic byproducts. The usefulness of these new raw materials meant that natural selection could quickly take over.

Well, there you have it. I’m not a paleobiologist, so I can’t judge whether this explanation is a good one, or is contradicted by other observations.  Professionals in the area will undoubtedly weigh in. But one thing is for sure: if we’re going to have a satisfying explanation of the Cambrian explosion, it’s going to be a scientific one—one that is testable and does not invoke the action of the Christian God an intelligent designer.  Saying that “an intelligent designer did it” is the equivalent of saying “Sam did it.” It’s a non-answer, and yet another attempt to plug the gaps in our knowledge with God an intelligent designer.

National Geographic wildlife photos

June 20, 2013 • 4:21 am

BuzzFeed has compiled some lovely snaps: “The 35 most spectacular wildlife photos from the National Geographic Traveler photo contest.” You can see more entries over at National Geographic and vote for your favorite.  In the meantime, here’s a handful of my favorites from the BuzzFeed compilation.

(Click photos to enlarge: photo credits are in lower right corner.)

I suspect this first one is staged: how often do chameleons come down from the trees?

chameleon

This photo of a desert fox takes the prize for Cutest Entry, even though it’s a d-g. Look at those ears! (Desert mammals like the jackrabbit often have large ears, which act as radiators for excess body heat.)

fox

Gator in the rain:

gator

I don’t know how the photographer got this one unless he was buried in the ground and covered by glass!

Horses

No comment necessary:

lion

Lovebirds (well, I don’t know if they’re technically lovebirds, but they’re clearly affectionate):

loving parrots

Barn owl on the wing:

owl

More parrots; perhaps some reader can identify the species:

Parrots

Second prize for cuteness: baby penguins.

Penguins

This reptilian chapeau may be a Drosophila:

snake and fly

Again, I don’t know the species, but I’m sure a reader will oblige. An amazing photo taken at the moment of a fish strike:

raptor

h/t: Ed Yong via Matthew Cobb

The lost world of Fossil Lake

June 19, 2013 • 12:48 pm

by Matthew Cobb

In high desert of southwestern Wyoming in the USA there is a deserted town with the apt name of Fossil (pop: 5. Yes, 5). Around 52 million years ago, it was a subtropical lake surrounded by forests and lying in the shadow of a volcano. One of Jerry’s colleagues, Lance Grande of the fabulous Field Museum of Natural History in Chicago, has just published a beautifully-illustrated book on the amazing fossils to be found in the area, animals that were preserved at the bottom of the lake, and were then brought to light by the skill of paleontologists in an area now known as Fossil Butte, which is part of the famous Green River formation. Go look at it on Google Maps!

Here are just a few examples:

Arboreal Mammal
An arboreal mammal, Apatemys chardini. The fish is Knightia eocaena. © Lance Grande

Snakes

Two specimens of an extinct constrictor, Boavus idelmani. The bottom is the first fossil of this species, or ‘holotype’, which is now lost.
Monitor Lizard
A monitor lizard (can you see the preserved skin around its torso?)
Mini-Horse
An early relative of the horse – Protorohippus venticolus – about the size of a large d*g.

[JAC: Note the separate toes in the horse relative above: all but one of these toes would gradually disappear in the lineage leading to modern horses, leaving them with a single middle toe—otherwise known as the “hoof.” The vestigial remnants of two of the flanking toes can still be seen as the “splint bones” on the skeletons of modern horses.]

Stingray Sex
Two Asterotrygon maloneyi stingrays allegedly at it, or about to do it, or having just done it.

The book is published by University of Chicago Press (who else), and is entitled The Lost World of Fossil Lake: Snapshots from Deep Time. All photos here © Lance Grande

Here’s the fab cover. The book is out now, buy it from your local bookshop, who almost certainly pay their taxes and also need support!

9780226922966

The history of Fossil, and of the fossils, is tied up with the history of coal and of the railway which ran past the town and carried the coal. Miners were the first to dig out the fossils. The deserted railway depot is now being restored. You can see what the place looks like now, and the restoration work 52 million years after the  lake disappeared, in this YouTube video. These are our fossils: