ONTOGENY

Tuesday, May 20, 2008

Tasmanian tiger gene lives again

Via: Nature

The extinct Tasmanian tiger (Thylacinus cynocephalus ) has been resurrected — or at least part of its DNA has — in a mouse. Typically of Australia's weird and wonderful animals, the Tasmanian tiger, also called the thylacine, wasn't actually a tiger. It looked like a dog, but was in fact a marsupial, complete with a pouch for rearing its young. The last known Tasmanian tiger died in Hobart Zoo, Tasmania, in 1936, after the species was hunted out of existence in the wild. By resurrecting part of its genetic sequence in a mouse, researchers have found a way to study how the species evolved, in the hope of learning its place in the tree of life. The technique could also be applied to other extinct animals.

Some preserved remains of the Tasmanian tiger exist, including those of the young from the pouch of an adult, collected 100 years ago and kept in ethanol in the Museum Victoria in Melbourne. Andrew Pask at the University of Melbourne and colleagues at the University of Texas in Houston took samples from this specimen, and from some 100-year-old Tasmanian tiger skin held in the same museum, and extracted DNA from them.

Pask and his colleagues used a portion of a gene called Col2a1 , which regulates the development of cartilage and bone. They injected it into a mouse embryo in place of the mouse’s corresponding section of Col2a1 . The mouse embryos grew, complete with their exchanged genetic information, and proceeded to develop cartilage and bone as normal. The results are reported in the journal PLoS ONE .This is the first time DNA from an extinct animal has been shown to perform its intended function in a living animal. “Until now we have only been able to examine gene sequences from extinct animals,” says Pask. “This research was developed to go one step further to examine extinct gene function in a whole organism.”

"I think that it is important that one takes the step into an organism to try understand how ancestral or extinct genes and genetic elements worked," comments Svante Pääbo, director of the Max-Planck-Institute of evolutionary Anthropology, Leipzig, Germany. But before fans of Jurassic Park get too excited, this gene resurrection doesn’t mean that we will be able to recreate a Tasmanian tiger any time soon. The exact pathway for this gene’s activity could be very different for the two animals, the researchers say, and the precise function of the gene in the Tasmanian tiger is impossible to work out without looking at every step in the pathway.

So the authors urge caution in interpreting the results, but say their method could ultimately allow access to genetic information thought to be forever lost when the last of a species drew its final breath.

*
References
1. Pask, A. J. , Behringer, R. R. & Renfree, M. B. PLoS ONE 3, e2240 (2008)

‘At least 12% of US biology teachers are creationist’

Via: Nature/ PLoS Biology

A worrying number of American teachers appear to be pushing creationism and intelligent design on high school biology students.

“Three different survey questions all suggest that between 12% and 16% of the nation’s biology teachers are creationist in orientation,” write study author Michael Berkman and colleagues in PLOS Biology. “Roughly one sixth of all teachers professed a ‘young earth’ personal belief, and about one in eight reported that they teach creationism or intelligent design in a positive light.”

They conducted what is claimed to be the first ever nationally representative survey of biology teachers’ views on evolution and found 16% of them believe “God created human beings pretty much in their present form at one time within the last 10,000 years or so”. This is way down on the general population, which picks this option 48% of the time.

Still these views appear to be filtering through to lessons, with 18% of teachers spending at least an hour on creationism, 5% spending at least three hours and 3% spending over six hours.

Of course, as the authors point out: “these numbers can be misleading because while some teachers may cover creationism to expose students to an alternative to evolutionary theory, others may bring up creationism in order to criticize it or in response to student inquiries”.

Although the survey is small to my mind, involving only 939 participants, it is quite worrying that 13% of teachers thought an excellent biology course “could exist without mentioning Darwin or evolutionary theory at all”.

“It seems a bit high, but I am not shocked by it,” past president of the National Science Teachers Association Linda Froschauer says of the survey numbers (New Scientist). “We do know there's a problem out there, and this gives more credibility to the issue.”

Over on Wired, Brandon Keim says:

Longtime Wired Science readers know that I'm less bothered than many science writers at the possibility of evolution being under-taught in science and biology courses: so long as a teacher imparts a sense of wonder and curiosity, the details will follow. However, teaching creationism or intelligent design alongside evolution, as if religious explanations had even a fraction of the scientific validity of evolution, is unacceptable: it promotes fatally flawed, uncritical thinking.

Britain Rules: Cells from 'cytoplasmic hybrids' won't make it into humans

Via: The Times

Parliament’s decision to approve research using “admixed embryos” that contain human and animal material is not going to lead to immediate medical breakthroughs.

Cells taken from “cytoplasmic hybrids” or “cybrids” - the main type of admixed embryos - are never likely to be transplanted into sick patients. Any insights that they might offer into diseases such as Parkinson’s and Alzheimer’s, too, are probably years away.

The outcome of last night’s vote, however, is still a watershed for British science. First, it clears the way for experiments that could advance understanding of several devastating conditions, and the prospects of using all types of stem cell, embryonic and adult, in therapies.

Just as importantly, it confirms the value placed on free scientific inquiry in Britain, where regulation rather than prohibition is deemed the proper approach to ethically contentious research.As cybrids are supported by all the country’s leading scientific institutions, a ban would have suggested that this considered consensus matters less to Parliament than the vocal concerns of a religious minority. That would have led researchers in this field, and perhaps in others, too, to question whether the UK remains a good place to pursue a scientific career.

By placing the nuclei of human cells into empty cow eggs, scientists hope to create cell models of diabetes or motor neuron disease, using DNA from patients with these disorders. These could be used to investigate how these conditions progress, and to develop and test new drugs.

Human eggs could be used for these experiments, but as these cannot be donated without risk to women, they are always going to be in short supply. Animal eggs, which are plentiful, can now be used.

Scientists do not know yet if the cybrid approach will work, though early indications are positive. That, though, is why they want permission to do these experiments – without them, we will never find out.

Much was said in the debate about the benefits of adult stem cells, which are already used to treat dozens of conditions. MPs who oppose embryonic research also talked up the promise of induced pluripotent stem (IPS) cells, made by reprogramming adult skin cells into a versatile embryo-like state, and stem cells from umbilical cord blood.

All these approaches are exciting, but they are no reason not to proceed with embryonic stem-cell and cybrid research. This is a young field, and it is too early to pick winners. That is why the Medical Research Council splits its budget roughly equally between embryonic and adult stem-cell research.

Cybrid and embryonic research is actually likely to assist adult stem-cell research: parallel studies can reveal important details about how all these types of cell give rise to more specialised tissue.

IPS cells may well be the future of regenerative medicine, as they do not require the destruction of embryos, but they would not exist without the past decade of embryonic work. They are also not close to being ready for therapeutic use. As cybrids also involve reprogramming of the nucleus, they could inform new approaches to turning back the clock on adult tissue.

The defeat of the move to ban true hybrids is also welcome. Though no experiments with these embryos are yet planned, they will help research into male infertility, in which scientists can study how sperm works without needing scarce human eggs.

The vote is significant for another reason: it will encourage scientists to speak out more about their research. The Government intended to ban cybrids, but changed its mind when stem cell experts such as Stephen Minger and Lyle Armstrong took time to say what they planned to do, and why.

OKLAHOMA EVOLUTION NEWS: 19 May, Kern and more..

Thanks to Dr. Vic Hutchison at the OESE for these regular updates!

In This Posting:
1. Status of Kern’s HB 2633: On Governor’s Desk!
2. Eyeing “ID.”
3. Antievolution Legislation in South Carolina.
4. Alabama Antievolution Bill Dies.
5. Anti-science Law Threatens Tech Jobs of Future.
6. Anti-Kern’s HB 2633 on Oklahoma Blogs.
7. Support Kern’s Opponent in Next Election.
8. Kern Generates Animosity Toward Oklahoma & Oklahomans.

1. STATUS OF KERN’S HB 2633: ON GOVERNOR’S DESK!
[HB 2633 passed the House last week and has been sent to the Governor, hopefully where it will be vetoed. As soon as Governor Henry acts on the bill, we will send out a special notice on this list serve. IF YOU HAVE NOT ACTED TO ASK THE GOVERNOR TO VETO, PLEASE DO NOW! Go to the Governor’s web site , click on ‘Contact’ in the ribbon near the top, scroll down on the left and click on ‘Send the Governor a Message.” ALSO, make a phone call and let his office no that he should veto HB 2633.

It would also be a very good idea to encourage House members to uphold a veto, should the Governor decide it should not become law. Email addresses and telephone numbers are on the House web site .]

2. Eyeing “ID.”

While legislatures focus on antievolution bills, a new video helps students see how evolution works. [From NCSE .]

Oakland, California, May 6, 2008 — As attacks on evolution education remain in the news, with proposed antievolution legislation in Alabama, Florida, Louisiana, Michigan, and Missouri in the headlines, a new video rebutting the basic premise of “intelligent design” creationism is now available on www.ExpelledExposed.com .

“Creationism Disproved” is the third in a series of short videos commissioned by the National Center for Science Education, a non-profit organization that defends the teaching of evolution in the public schools. The video focuses on the evolution of the eye — a favorite target of creationists.

“It’s common for creationists, especially ‘intelligent design’ creationists, to claim that complex structures like the eye or parts of the cell couldn’t have evolved step by step,” explains NCSE’s executive director Eugenie C. Scott. “It’s a tired objection — indeed, Darwin himself anticipated, and refuted, the argument. But opponents of evolution continue to insist that such structures had to be assembled all at once.”

Ken Dill, a researcher at the University of California, San Francisco featured in the video, adds: “In fact, complexity can evolve through small steps. We can infer the evolution of a very complex organ, like the eye, by looking at intermediate stages preserved in animals alive today. And just as a baby’s eye is built up step by step over nine months in the womb, the eye evolved in small steps over millions of years.”

Noting that the latest advances in science have only confirmed Darwin’s insights, Josh Rosenau, a biologist at NCSE, observed, “Scientists recently traced the evolution of a protein crucial to vision by comparing the genomes of many species, showing that the molecule, opsin, existed in the common ancestor of hydras, jellyfish, flies, fish, and people. Other researchers have traced the evolution of genes critical to the growth and development of eyes in different branches of the tree of life. All those lines of evidence match the predictions of evolution.”

Louise S. Mead, a biologist and teacher who heads NCSE’s outreach to educators, hopes that students and teachers will use the video to dispel a common misconception about evolution. “Evolution can be tough to learn and tough to explain, even independently of the prevalence of creationist misconceptions,” she explains. “Videos like this can help students see things in a new light.”

----------------------------

3. ANTIEVOLUTION LEGISLATION IN SOUTH CAROLINA .
[From NCSE 5 may 2008]

Senate Bill 1386 , introduced in the South Carolina Senate on May 15, 2008, and referred to the Senate Committee on Education, is the newest so-called "academic freedom" bill aimed at undermining the teaching of evolution, joining similar bills currently under consideration in Louisiana, Michigan, and Missouri. Similar bills in Florida and Alabama died when the legislative session in those states ended. The South Carolina bill contends that "[t]he teaching of biological and chemical evolution can cause controversy, and some teachers may be uncertain of administrative expectations concerning the presentation of material on these scientific topics" and that "public school educators must be supported in finding effective ways to present controversial science curriculum and must be permitted to help students understand, analyze, critique, and review the scientific strengths and weaknesses of theories of biological and chemical evolution in an objective manner."

Accordingly, S. 1386 would, if enacted, amend the state's education code to provide: "The State Board of Education, superintendents of public school districts, and public school administrators may not prohibit a teacher in a public school of this State from helping his students understand, analyze, critique, and review the scientific strengths and weaknesses of biological and chemical evolution in an objective manner. This act does not condone the promotion of religious or nonreligious doctrine, the promotion of discrimination for or against a particular set of religious beliefs or nonreligious beliefs, or the promotion of discrimination for or against religion or nonreligion. By no later than September 1, 2008, the State Department of Education shall notify district superintendents of the provisions of this act, and each superintendent shall then disseminate to all employees within his district a copy of the provisions of this act."

The lead sponsor of S. 1386, Senator Michael Fair (R-District 6), spearheaded a number of previous antievolution efforts in the legislature. In 2003, he tried to amend a bill dealing with instructional materials and textbooks to require a disclaimer about the origin of life as "not scientifically verifiable"; withdrawing the amendment, he then successfully amended the bill to establish a nineteen-member South Carolina Standards Committee to "(1) study science standards regarding the teaching of the origin of species; (2) determine whether there is a consensus on the definition of science; (3) determine whether alternatives to evolution as the origin of species should be offered in schools." The Greenville News (May 1, 2003), reported that Fair "said his intention is to show that Intelligent Design is a viable scientific alternative that should be taught in the public schools." The bill died, however, when the legislature adjourned.

Fair was quickly at it again, however, introducing a bill in the next legislative session that would have established the South Carolina Standards Committee. The language about "alternatives to evolution" was removed from the bill in committee, however. Regrouping, Fair then introduced S. 909, a bill modeled on the so-called Santorum language stripped from the federal No Child Left Behind Act of 2001. If enacted, S. 909 would have required, "Where topics are taught that may generate controversy, such as biological evolution, the curriculum should help students to understand the full range of scientific views that exist, why such topics may generate controversy, and how scientific discoveries can profoundly affect society." The bill failed, but Fair won himself a description as "the dominant voice advocating for S.C. schools to teach more than Charles Darwin's theories of evolution," according to The State (June 17, 2005).

In 2005, Fair also launched a campaign against the treatment of evolution in the state's science standards. As a member of the state's Education Oversight Committee, he pressed for the expansion of "critical analysis" language already present in the standards dealing with evolution, despite the criticism of then State Superintendent of Education Inez Tenenbaum, who told The State (February 13, 2006), "'Critically analyze' is not just wordsmithing ... It carries with it a whole campaign against evolution." After a seven-month delay during which Fair and his confederates unsuccessfully lobbied for insertion of "critical analysis" language into all of the evolution indicators, the EOC approved the standard as submitted. But even here Fair claimed victory, telling AgapePress (June 15, 2006) that it was a precursor to allowing the teaching of "intelligent design" in South Carolina's public schools.
--------------------------------
4. ALABAMA ANTIEVOLUTION BILL DIES.

House Bill 923 was among the hundreds of bills that died in the Alabama
legislature "because they did not pass in the house where they were
introduced," the Associated Press (May 7, 2008) reports. The latest in
a
string of "academic freedom" bills aimed at undermining the teaching of
evolution in Alabama, HB 923 purported to protect the right of teachers
in
the state's public schools (including both K-12 and colleges and
universities) to "present scientific information pertaining to the full
range of scientific views in any curricula or course of learning,"
especially with regard to topics that "may generate controversy, such as
biological or chemical origins." The bill also purported to address the
rights of students, providing that "no student in any public school or
institution of higher education ... shall be penalized in any way
because he or she may subscribe to a particular position on any views." In 2004,
a cosponsor of a previous version of the bill, SB 336, told the Montgomery
Advertiser (February 18, 2004), "This bill will level the playing field
because it allows a teacher to bring forward the biblical creation story
of humankind."

For the Associated Press story . (via AL.com).
-------------------------

5. ANTI-SCIENCE LAW THREATENS TECH JOBS OF FUTURE.

Originally published in The Times-Picayune [New Orleans, LA] on 2008/05/06

Re: "Religious instruction doesn't fit in science class," Your Opinions, April 30.

The 21st-century economy will require a new generation of scientists and engineers, and signs point to trouble ahead for New Orleans and Louisiana. Employers already are struggling to fill science and tech jobs, and recent test scores show that 53 percent of the state's eighth-graders -- the workforce of tomorrow -- lack basic competence in science.

It is therefore alarming that the Louisiana Senate has passed a bill that directly threatens science education.

Proponents offer deceptive arguments about encouraging students to think critically. But Louisiana's education standards already do that.

The real intent is to introduce classroom materials that raise misleading objections to the well- documented science of evolution and offer a religious idea called intelligent design as a supposed alternative. That would unleash an assault against scientific integrity, leaving students confused about science and unprepared to excel in a modern workforce.

The intelligent design campaign has spent millions to invent a so-called scientific debate about evolution that does not exist in the scientific community. In fact, every major science and medical society in the world embraces evolution as the explanation for how life has developed on Earth.

Of course we all have a right to interpret the origins of life based on our faith. But there's no need to pit religion against science. The Catholic Church and thousands of U.S. religious leaders from many denominations say evolution and faith are compatible.

Can intelligent design be discussed in schools? Perhaps in humanities class. But courts repeatedly have ruled that creationism and intelligent design are religious arguments that can't be taught in science class.

Rather than provoke an expensive, divisive legal fight, we'd be better off doing everything we can to ensure the best possible science education for the next generation of problem-solvers.

Alan I. Leshner, Chief Executive Officer, American Association for the Advancement of Science
Washington, DC
-----------------------------------------
6. ANTI-KERN’S HB 2633 ON OKLAHOMA BLOGS.
[ The analysis of why Sally Kern’s HB 2633 is a very bad piece of legislation that should be vetoed by Governor Henry was posted earlier on this list serve and that is now on the Oklahomans for Excellence in Science education web site . The 16 reasons were also posted on the DemOkie Forum and have now been posted and discussed on the blogs OkieFunk , BlueOklahoma , MiddleAgePunk, and Ontogeny . Kurt Hochenauer of Okie Funk writes commentaries for the Oklahoma Gazette, including a column against Kern’s bill that was posted here earlier. On Monday 19 May at 2:00 PM this list manager’s post on DemOkie had been read almost 1,124 times and had 39 comments.

There have also been many posts on national blogs about HB 2633 and Sally Kern. Quite a few commenters have made nasty remarks about Oklahoma and Oklahomans. Krazy Kern lately has likely done as much (or more) to harm the reputation of this state than has our Congressional delegation!]
----------------------------------------
7. SUPPORT KERN’S OPPONENT IN NEXT ELECTION.
[Ron Marlett, a Democrat, has announced that he will oppose Rep. Sally Kern for the District 84 House seat in the next election. Marlett, a social worker, has established a web site HERE where you can go to make a contribution to help him. Three well-known national science bloggers have promised to post a notice on how folks from around the country can help. Several comments on national blogs have statements that there is a willingness to help get rid of Kern. Abbie Smith, who blogs as ERV , and Ed Brayton, who operates the Dispatches from the Culture W ars, has already posted an item on helping Ron against Silly Sally. Those in District 84 and others can help by volunteering in his campaign. Surely, if people in other states are willing to help Oklahomans who care about the State can do the same.]
-----------------------------
8. KERN GENERATES ANIMOSITY TOWARD OKLAHOMA & OKLAHOMANS.
[Following also posted on DemOkie . ]

[I have been surveying national blogs, especially those that cover science and religion, and found numerous comments that made awful aspersions about Oklahoma and Oklahomans. Most were in response to posts about Kern's HB 2633. Kern lately has probably done more with her gay bashing and religious bill to harm the State's reputation than our Congressional delegation! If HB 2633 becomes law, we can expect more derogatory remarks.

Here are some nasty comments about the State resulting from Sally Kern’s HB 2633 as posted as comments on Pharyngula ( http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/ ), just one science blog are below. Pharyngula is one of the most popular science blogs. I did not list some with foul language. Similar comments are on other blog sites.

COMMENTS MADE IN RESPONSE TO A POST ENTITLED “GET READY OKLAHOMA – SALLY KERN IS ABOUT TO SCREW YOU OVER”

“And I thought Texas was bad!”

“{Oklahoma is} working hard to become a very stupid state.”

“I was happy to escape Oklahoma.”

“This is insane.”

“I am proud to live in the relatively progressive state of Tennessee.”

“This country is going to hell. Or at least Oklahoma! Is.”

“My six years in Stillwater was as close to the mythical hell as I ever hope to get.”

“I live in Oklahoma and I can tell you she SCARES me. Luckily I am moving to Portland, OR, as soon as I can.”

“Oklahoma for all the hard work done in [list of other states], still stands in quietconfiDUNCE as the dumbest state in our union.”

“… the supporting cast of ignornat and evil in OK’s state and national politics appear unrivalled.”

“I will do everything I can to avoid Oklahoma.”

Tonight on PBS Nova: "Lord of the Ants"

Next on NOVA: "Lord of the Ants"

http://www.pbs.org/nova/eowilson

Tuesday, May 20 at 8 p.m.
(Check your local listings as dates and times may vary.
Broadcast in high definition where available.)

At age 78, E.O. Wilson is still going through his "little savage"
phase of boyhood exploration of the natural world. In "Lord of the
Ants," NOVA profiles this soft-spoken Southerner and Harvard
professor, who is an acclaimed advocate for ants, biological
diversity, and the controversial extension of Darwinian ideas to
human society. Actor and environmentalist Harrison Ford narrates this
engaging portrait.

Here's what you'll find on the companion Web site:

Watch the Program
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/eowilson/program.html
"Lord of the Ants" will be available to view online starting
May 21.

A Conversation With E.O. Wilson
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/eowilson/biophilia.html
Do humans have "biophilia," a built-in love for living things?

The Boy Naturalist
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/eowilson/naturalist.html
In this excerpt from his autobiography, 15-year-old Ed "Snake"
Wilson meets his match in a swamp.

Man of Ideas
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/eowilson/ideas.html
Sample high points in Wilson's remarkable half-century career
through an overview of 12 of his books.

Amazing Ants Game
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/eowilson/game.html
Match eight ants -- the trap jaw and honey pot among them -- to
their unique behaviors.

Also, Links & Books, the Teacher's Guide, the program transcript,
and more:

http://www.pbs.org/nova/eowilson

Monday, May 19, 2008

Nissan Plans Electric Car in U.S. by ’10

Via: NYT

The Nissan Motor Company plans to sell an electric car in the United States and Japan by 2010, raising the stakes in the race to develop environmentally friendly vehicles.The commitment — expected to be announced Tuesday by Nissan’s chief executive, Carlos Ghosn — will be the first by a major automaker to bring a zero-emission vehicle to the American market. Nissan also expects to sell a lineup of electric vehicles globally by 2012.

In an interview Monday, Mr. Ghosn said Nissan decided to accelerate development of battery-powered vehicles because of high gasoline prices and environmental concerns, not just because of the need to meet stricter fuel-economy standards.

“What we are seeing is that the shifts coming from the markets are more powerful than what regulators are doing,” he said.

Mr. Ghosn said Nissan envisioned a broad range of electric vehicles, starting with small cars, and adding: “It’s not only about a small city car or a small minivan. It can also be about a small commercial vehicle and a small crossover.”

Mr. Ghosn was not always enthusiastic about alternative-fuel technology. In a 2005 speech to the National Automobile Dealers Association, he called gas-electric hybrids “niche products” useful only to meet strict fuel-economy and emission standards in states like California.

“It wasn’t long ago that Carlos Ghosn was a big naysayer about the role of electric vehicles,” said John O’Dell, senior editor at the auto Web site GreenCarAdvisor.com. “Obviously, something has opened his eyes.”

Other automakers like Mitsubishi Motors and Fuji Heavy Industries are testing versions of electric cars, and General Motors and Toyota are working on battery-powered vehicles that have small gasoline engines for recharging. G.M. plans to start producing the Chevrolet Volt in 2010, while Toyota expects to offer a similar, so-called “plug-in” hybrid around the same time.

But Nissan, which a decade ago was on the brink of bankruptcy, is the first manufacturer to say it will sell mass market, all-electric vehicles worldwide. The zero emissions refers to those from the car’s tailpipe and not those from the production of electricity used to power the car.

Still, Mr. O’Dell said: “Nissan is upping the ante tremendously. They are the first to put it on the line and say we’re going to have an all-electric vehicle for a certain market by a certain date.”

Mr. Ghosn declined to disclose details of the electric products and said initial quantities would be small. “We’re talking about hundreds of vehicles first,” he said.

But he said that the company was determined to achieve “zero-emission-vehicle leadership.”

With customers in emerging markets like China and India clamoring for cars, the industry has a responsibility to invest in the cleanest vehicles possible, he said, adding, “The question is how we participate in the growth of emerging markets, while doing it in a way that is not in contradiction with the fact that a lot of people are sensitive to the emission levels and the preservation of the planet.”

Early this year, Nissan and its French alliance partner, Renault, signed a deal with the California-based Project Better Place to produce electric cars for sale in Israel and Denmark.

Renault will provide the cars and Nissan will supply lithium-ion battery packs. Mr. Ghosn, who also serves as chief executive of Renault, said the Israeli government would encourage sales of electric cars by sharply cutting taxes to levels below those on gasoline-powered vehicles.

“We would never have done this if the Israeli government was not encouraging it,” he said. “Whoever puts the most incentive on the table is going to get the technology first.”

The goal to sell electric vehicles is part of a new five-year business plan, called Nissan GT 2012, also to be announced Tuesday. It contains goals that are among the most ambitious set by Mr. Ghosn since he took the reins at Nissan in 1999.

In previous plans, Mr. Ghosn set strict targets for cost cuts, profit and return on investments to turn around the company’s lagging fortunes.

But now Nissan is healthier. It is expected to report a profit in the most recent fiscal year of $4.1 billion.

The next five years, Mr. Ghosn said, would focus on growth and trust. “Trust is about sustainability,” he said. “It’s about return, it’s about loyalty. In our industry, the companies that are performing best are the ones that have established a high level of trust with the different stakeholders.”

The goals also call for Nissan to match the best industry standards in vehicle quality and to increase its revenue by an average of 5 percent each year.The company plans to introduce 60 models worldwide by 2012. Several new products are planned for the United States market, including a new Maxima sedan, the Cube small car and a new version of the Z-family sports cars.Renault and Nissan have also joined with an Indian carmaker, Bajaj Auto, to produce a $2,500 car by 2011.

The new business plan and electric-car pledge represent a comeback effort of sorts for Mr. Ghosn, whose status as an industry superstar was tarnished in an aborted effort to extend the Nissan-Renault alliance to General Motors in 2006.

The alliance talks were spurred by the investor Kirk Kerkorian, who was then a major G.M. shareholder. Though Mr. Ghosn was willing to conclude a deal, G.M. management rebuffed him.

Nissan recently struck joint ventures with the now-private Chrysler to build vehicles in each other’s plants, but Mr. Ghosn played down the chances of bringing the American automaker as a full partner into the Nissan-Renault alliance.

“We’re not in a hurry,” he said, “but if we feel there is a good opportunity for us to add a North American partner, we need to take it seriously. For now, we have to be very cautious.”

But Nissan is being more aggressive about its electric-car efforts. Mr. Ghosn declined to say how much an electric vehicle would cost, but stressed that they would be affordable and comparable with other vehicles in the marketplace.

“We are not interested in some ‘Stars Wars’ prototype,” he said, “but in really bringing a mass market product that everybody can buy. It’s really a new chapter in the life of this industry.”

He said that as many as 10 million of the 69 million vehicles produced each year worldwide could ultimately be electric-powered, with a concentration in urban areas. “We think that cars sold in cities are the obvious first starting point,” he said.

Electric cars are typically recharged by plugging the vehicle into an electrical outlet at home or elsewhere overnight. But previous attempts at electric vehicles were hampered by the length of time needed to recharge the battery, and the limited distances the cars could travel on a single charge.

How customers will respond to a mass market electric car is still unknown, Mr. O’Dell said. Concerns about driving range and reliability, he said, would generate a “healthy skepticism.”

Sunday, May 18, 2008

Blame It on the Beetles

Via: Science

Frustrated that there aren't more dinosaur bones at your local museum? Blame beetles. A team from Brigham Young University (BYU) in Provo, Utah, has examined thousands of dino bones from the Jurassic and Cretaceous periods and found that flesh-eating bugs devoured them by the mouthful, erasing part of the fossil record in the process. One family of beetles called dermestids--and those related to a species called Dermestes maculatus in particular--did quite a number on overripe dinos. Waiting until the first round of scavengers had eaten their fill, the beetles would lay their eggs on a body days or weeks after it had died. Then, slowly and methodically, their hungry larvae reduced what was left of the carcass to bare bone, and then some.

That's the scenario crafted by paleontologist Brooks Britt of BYU and colleagues in the current issue of the journal Ichnos. Britt first suspected the work of insects when he was in high school and found a fossilized bone that contained strange markings. Back then, he explains, "I said, 'Wait a minute, these bones have been consumed by some type of insect.' " Later, in college, when Britt asked paleontologists about the markings, he just got blank stares. So eventually, he conducted further studies with BYU colleagues, including one on a fossilized bone from a herbivorous dinosaur called Camptosaurus, found near Medicine Bow, Wyoming. The specimen revealed telltale scrapings that matched the work of dermestid beetles on contemporary samples. The team's examination of 5000 more bones produced frequent evidence of degradation by dermestid larvae as well as other species. "About one-eighth of the specimens have been degraded by insects," Britt says. "They're surprisingly common."

Britt says that the findings also confirm that the beetles lived about 150 million years ago, or nearly 50 million years earlier than their own fossils have suggested. He says that he and his colleagues plan to examine even older fossils to see how far back the dermestids lived.

Vertebrate zoologist Edward "Ted" Daeschler of the Academy of Natural Sciences in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, calls the examinations "a classically simple way to interpret material in the fossil record." He adds that the presence of carrion-feeding insects in the dinosaur age is no surprise because they act as "nature's recyclers," but it's always interesting to see confirmation of modern insects "going back deeper in time."

Lord of the Wings

Via: Science

The dragonfly is an aerial acrobat. It's able to fly fast and slow, backward and forward, and even stay aloft while copulating. Where does the energy for all of these stunts come from? A new report in today's issue of the Journal of the Royal Society Interface suggests that the answer has to do with the insect's four independently moving wings. Most flying insects use only a single pair of wings. Some, like butterflies and bees, use two pairs but synchronize their motion so that the effect is akin to having just two wings. Dragonflies and damselflies stand apart: Unusual musculature allows them to move each of their four wings independently. Computer modeling has shown that such out-of-phase flapping comes at a cost, however, reducing the amount of lift the insect is able to generate.

To see if these computer models hold up in the tangible world, James Usherwood, a biologist at the Royal Veterinary College in London, and Fritz-Olaf Lehmann, a biologist at the University of Ulm in Germany, built a robotic version of a dragonfly. They immersed the robot in mineral oil seeded with air bubbles to allow them to visualize the movement of the fluid around the flapping wings. Sensors at the base of the robot's wings recorded lift and drag forces, which allowed the team to calculate its aerodynamic efficiency.

Flapping four wings actually achieved lift with more efficiency than flapping just two wings. When the robot's hind wings flapped one-quarter of a wing beat ahead of the front wings, the team reports, the hind wings were able to capture the rush of air sent by the front wings and produce lift with 22% less power than two-winged insects require. Flapping in phase has benefits, too: When real dragonflies synchronize their wing beats, they are able to lift off and accelerate better than if they used only two wings or four out-of-sync wings, the authors say. Engineers may be able to apply these findings to building the next generation of flapping micro air vehicles, says Lehmann.

Jane Wang, a mathematician at Cornell University, says that the data agree with her own computer models of hovering dragonflies and that the new study elucidates why out-of-phase flapping is so efficient. Richard Bomphrey, a biologist at the University of Oxford in the U.K., cautions that scientists need to validate the findings in living insects. Still, he agrees that the research could ultimately aid engineers. The main difficulty facing the designers of micro air vehicles is that battery life limits how long the devices stay aloft, he says, so "any tips or tricks which enhance aerodynamic efficiency will be warmly welcomed."

Saturday, May 17, 2008

Sloths Aren't So Slothful After All

Via: Science

It's time to retract those disparaging comments about sloths: They actually don't sleep all the time. Sloths are certainly not insomniacs, but a new miniature brain-recording device shows that, in nature, the animals snooze a respectable 9.6 hours per day. Researchers previously believed that sloths slept nearly 16 hours per day. That figure was based on studies of captive sloths using electroencephalograms (EEGs), which detect brain activity associated with slumber. The animals might sleep differently in nature, but good luck keeping a wild sloth wired to the usual heavy EEG equipment.

Enter the portable EEG recorder. Developed in part by neurophysiologist Alexei Vyssotski of the University of Zürich, Switzerland, the apparatus is housed in a cap that fits on top of an animal's head. Small wires placed just under the skin of the scalp detect brain waves and send the numbers to a data logger hidden inside the device.

A team led by Niels Rattenborg, a sleep researcher at the Max Planck Institute for Ornithology in Starnberg, Germany, caught three brown-throated three-toed sloths (Bradypus variegatus) in Panama and installed the mini EEG recorders, a process that took about 1 hour per animal. After 5 days, the researchers tracked down the sloths and retrieved the data loggers. "The thing that really astonished us," Rattenborg says, "was that they slept just nine and a half hours per day."

It's not obvious why sloths would sleep less in nature than they do in captivity. The need to find food and look out for predators could be one reason. Alternatively, boredom or depression might increase sleep in captivity. The authors also note that the EEGs of captive sloths included some young animals, which may have needed more sleep than the adults in this study.

Rattenborg, whose team reports its findings online 14 May in Biology Letters, says the technology could be used to accurately gauge just how much sleep wild animals are getting. As with sloths, most of what we know about animals' napping habits comes from studies of their captive counterparts. Such data could be misleading, Rattenborg says, hindering efforts to understand the function of sleep in humans and other animals.

Chiara Cirelli, a sleep researcher at the University of Wisconsin, Madison, says the study is a "wonderful" proof that it's possible to get high-quality EEG data from sleeping wild animals. The method might also be used to gauge sleep intensity, she says, another important measure for understanding the function of sleep. "We just need many, many more" studies like this, says Cirelli. Rattenborg and his team are up to the challenge: Ostriches are next.

Climate scientists call for major new modelling facility

Via: NYT

Climatologists have called for massive investment in computer and research resources to help revolutionize modelling capabilities. The eventual aim is to provide probabilistic climate predictions that are as useful, and usable, as weather forecasts. At the end of a four-day summit held last week at the European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts in Reading, UK, the scientists made the case for a climate-prediction project on the scale of the Human Genome Project. A key component of this scheme, which would cost something up to, or over, a billion dollars, would be a world climate research facility with computer power far beyond that currently used in the field.

Questions on how severe the effects of global warming will be, and which regions will be hit in what ways, are beyond the capabilities of current climate science, at least in part because of computing constraints. Today's climate models are run on computers in the 10-teraflop range, meaning they are capable of 10 trillion operations a second. Despite this speed, models on these computers are still coarse-grained, cutting the world into cells more than 100 kilometres across.

Increasing computing power 10,000 times — to speeds in the hundreds of petaflops — would allow modellers to study simulations at the kilometre scale, enabling better predictions on the activity of hurricanes and, eventually, the local deep convection that transfers much energy into the upper atmosphere (see 'A real solution?'). This research could then be fed into operational models.

The scientists think they could answer at least some of the 'big' questions on the effects of global warming if the technology was available. But national climate-modelling efforts, such as those of the Met Office in Exeter, UK, or the National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR) in Boulder, Colorado, aren't attracting the required level of funding. Although Japan's Earth Simulator in Yokahama was once the world's fastest computer, there are now 29 faster ones, with the first petaflop machines only months away.“We need to be breathtakingly bold, frankly, in terms of some of the calculations that we're going to do in order to push the climate-prediction effort forward,” says Leo Donner, a physical scientist at the Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory of Princeton University, New Jersey. Antonio Navarra, a climate modeller at the National Institute of Geophysics and Volcanology in Bologna, Italy, spells out the implication: “We're reaching the point where national resources are insufficient to answer the scientific questions.”

More money and cutting-edge challenges would also provide some hope of retaining highly trained programmers with expertise in climate modelling. Conference chair Jagadish Shukla of the Institute of Global Environment and Society in Calverton, Maryland, says this resource is “decreasing faster than the sea ice” as staff are lured from research by the financial rewards and job security provided by companies such as Google.Addressing the summit on its opening day, economist Jeffrey Sachs, the director of the Earth Institute at Columbia University, New York, said that there would be “a lot of interest among politicians in investing the hundreds of millions of dollars necessary, if scientists can provide answers to key questions … such as future food supply”. Although governments are the obvious source of funding, Lawrence Gates, a now-retired climate scientist from the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in California, urged the attendees to explore philanthropic options.

How increased investment is divided between new facilities and existing ones is likely to be controversial. Some fear that a single global institute could threaten national centres, potentially taking the onus off governments to fund the institutions that are closest to stakeholders and could be expected to provide the predictions that have most real-world use. “Everyone is agreed that there needs to be a substantial investment in climate modelling, but whether a single centre is the solution is another question. There may be other ways,” says John Mitchell, the chief scientist at the Met Office. Donner says that a sketch, presented on the conference's last day, of how the global facility might fit into the research world “seems to relegate national centres to little more than distributors of data”.

However, Shukla was adamant that “every science breakthrough leads to the formation of an institute to address the problem”. “We are facing a darwinian change in the way we are working and we shouldn't be afraid of that,” says Navarra. The meeting could have come to grief on such differences, according to Julia Slingo, the director of the Centre for Global Atmospheric Modelling at the University of Reading, but in the end the level of consensus, she says, was “fantastic”. Various attendees expressed frustration at the fact that the new facility could not be funded purely on the basis of the world-class science it would do — and indeed the fact that it would produce great research might count against it, making it seem more like a “toy for the boys” than a policy-informing instrument.

“If we just ask for enhanced understanding, then we have very little chance of getting the necessary funding,” warned Shukla. But as Mitch Moncrieff from NCAR put it “we need a quantum leap in research to provide better predictions, even if the politicians don't get that”. And there was widespread agreement that they need to get it fast. “We need a revolution as it has got to be done extremely quickly”, said Brian Hoskins, director of the Grantham Institute for Climate Change at Imperial College London, UK.

Friday, May 16, 2008

Fifty years of DARPA: A surprising history

Via: New Scientist

In 1957, the Soviet Union caught the US completely off-guard. Its military launched Sputnik – the world's first artificial satellite – heralding the dawn of the space age. President Eisenhower's response was to create the Advance Research Projects Agency (ARPA) with a clear mission: "prevent technological surprise". Eisenhower hoped that the agency would produce revolutionary technologies and thus guarantee that never again would the US military be caught with its technological trousers down. Now in its 50th year, the Defence Advance Research Projects Agency has an impressive list of accomplishments behind it. After playing an integral role in the fledgling US space programme, DARPA gave us the satellite-based global positioning system (GPS), stealth aircraft and the precursor to the internet. So it is hard to argue that the agency hasn't lived up to Eisenhower's early dream.

Freedom to fail

But DARPA has produced its fair share of clangers too. Over the years it has been widely criticised for investing millions of dollars in some pretty harebrained research schemes from futures markets aimed at predicting assassination attempts, to mechanical elephants that could barge through jungle terrain unsuitable for wheeled vehicles.

Read about some of DARPA's most spectacular successes and failures

Those supportive of the agency's unique approach argue that such failures are important to the culture that has made DARPA so successful. Tony Tether, DARPA's director, says it is a "freedom to fail" that lets his staff discover truly revolutionary new technologies "And fail we do," he told an audience of 3000 potential recruits at the DARPATech Symposium last year. "But that's OK – failure sometimes happens when you are bringing new capabilities into reality," he said. "You only really fail if you don't learn what happened and stop trying to succeed – you have to try again, and again, and again." This attitude undoubtedly sets DARPA apart from other research agencies. Indeed DARPA has no laboratories or scientists of its own. Nor does it use any kind of peer review for assessing the viability of a project or programme.

Flexible approach

Instead, the agency employs "programme managers" who fund universities and businesses to carry out research that might otherwise be too risky for research agencies to back. Currently 140 programme managers disseminate some $2.9 billion of funding each year. Programme managers act as judge, jury, and, if the research doesn't go well, executioner. This simple set-up lets DARPA enter new areas quickly, and pull out just as fast if the research turns out to be going nowhere. Ephrahim Garcia, a mechanical and aerospace engineer at Cornell University, Ithaca, New York, has worked on DARPA-funded research, and also served as a programme manager for DARPA between 1998 and 2002. During his time at the agency, Garcia ran five programmes on research such as morphing aircraft and exoskeletons, managing a budget of $20 to 30 million a year. Garcia says the limit to what gets funding is the imagination of each programme manager and their ability to convince the director that an idea could improve US military capabilities.

Creating surprise

But, with the director's calendar always full, just getting an appointment to discuss a new programme can be tough. "You definitely had to have your elevator speech ready, so you could pitch it to him in 25 seconds or less," he says. "I sometimes wished we had a taller building." The agency took just 3 months to set up back in 1958 and has not changed its way of doing business since. The only major change was the addition of the word "Defense" to its name in 1972, its removal in 1993, then its reinstatement in 1996. Another more subtle change in DARPA's mission is to not only prevent technological surprises but, as Tether puts it, "create them". Most of what sets the agency apart remains, however. In the years to come it seems destined to carry on inventing, innovating and surprising. In the process it will doubtless continue to come up with some notable howlers. But this is all part of the process, says Garcia "If one out of 10 hits, and hits big, then it's worth it," he says. Read about DARPA's greatest hits, misses and ones to watch.

Einstein: 'God is human weakness'

Via: Nature

Einstein’s often-debated views on religion look to have been made clearer by a document up for auction tomorrow. “The word god is for me nothing more than the expression and product of human weaknesses, the Bible a collection of honourable, but still primitive legends which are nevertheless pretty childish,” he writes in the 1954 letter to philosopher Eric Gutkind. Bloomsbury Auctions, which is selling the letter, expects it to go for between £6000 and £8000 (press release). If you don’t have that much spare change, you can always read Einstein’s 1940 Nature article ‘Science and Religion’ (subscription required).

In that piece he notes:

During the youthful period of mankind’s spiritual evolution, human fantasy created gods in man’s own image, who, by the operations of their will, were supposed to determine, or at any rate to influence, the phenomenal world. ... The idea of God in the religions taught at present is a sublimation of that old conception of the gods.

The Guardian has more extracts of the letter than the press release, and its coverage quotes John Brooke of Oxford University thus:

Like other great scientists he does not fit the boxes in which popular polemicists like to pigeonhole him. It is clear for example that he had respect for the religious values enshrined within Judaic and Christian traditions ... but what he understood by religion was something far more subtle than what is usually meant by the word in popular discussion.

UPDATE - The letter sold to an anonymous bidder for £170,000, over 20 times more than expected. With fees included the actual price is over £200,000.

A Pest Without a Name, Becoming Known to Ever More

Via: NYT

Look out, Texas Gulf Coast, here comes Paratrechina pubens, or something like that. Scientists do not quite know what to call them, they are so new. But folks in the damp coastal belt south of Houston have their own names (some of them printable) for the little invaders now seemingly everywhere: on the move underfoot; infesting woodlands, yards and gardens; nesting in electrical boxes and causing shorts; and even raising anxiety at Hobby Airport and the Johnson Space Center.

“We call them running ants,” said Diane Yeo, a homeowner in suburban Pearland, turning over a planter by her swimming pool to reveal a seething carpet of ants, yes, running, each about the size of the letter “i” on this page.

That was not the worst of it. “Looks like they’re carrying eggs,” said her husband, Bob.

The ant is a previously unknown variety with a staggering propensity to reproduce and no known enemies. The species, which bites but does not sting, was first identified here in 2002 by a Pearland exterminator, Tom Rasberry, who quickly lent his name to the find: the crazy rasberry ant.

“I sprayed some pesticide just to knock them down,” Mr. Rasberry recalled on Thursday. “But the next year I went from seeing a couple thousand to millions of them.”

Mr. Rasberry demonstrated in a patch of woods not far from his business, Budget Pest Control, that the ants were swarming under every clod of grass and over every tree branch and limb.

And the ants’ seasonal gestation period, which reaches its peak in the summer, is just beginning, said Paul Nester, a program specialist for the Texas AgriLife Extension Service of Texas A&M University.

“They’re the ant of all ants,” said Dr. Nester, who said they had infested five coastal counties, “and are moving about half a mile a year.” But he said broad areas of Texas and beyond were probably not threatened because the ants preferred the warmth and moistness of the coast.

Variants of the species found in Colombia have been known to asphyxiate chickens and even attack cattle by swarming over their eyes, nasal passages and hooves, according to the Center for Urban and Structural Entomology at Texas A&M, which is conducting much of the research on the ants. It lists some of the findings on its Web site: urbanentomology.tamu.edu/ants/exotic_tx.cfm.

Jason Meyers, a doctoral student in urban entomology at Texas A&M who is writing his dissertation on the ants, described them as enigmatic and confirmed that they were discovered by Mr. Rasberry. They belong to the genus Paratrechina, like others seen in Colombia, the Caribbean and Florida, Mr. Meyers said, but are different enough for entomologists to only guess at their species, listing them for now as “near” pubens.

“It’s a very fecund species, with multiple queens,” Mr. Meyers said.

The ants often eat fire ants, with which they are sometimes compared, and they “outcompete” fire ants for the food supply and reproduce far faster, Mr. Meyers said.

They are vulnerable to some pest control poisons — Mr. Rasberry uses products containing the chemicals fipronil and chlorfenapyr — but given the ants’ staggering proliferation and environmental restrictions on the products, not enough of the chemicals can be put down to make a difference, Mr. Meyers said.

Some might think the infestation an exterminator’s dream, but it is not so, said Mr. Rasberry. While an ordinary treatment might cost $85 every three months, treating for the rasberry ants costs up to $600, he said. Yet the efforts are so arduous and ineffective and have left customers so dissatisfied “they are actually costing me money,” Mr. Rasberry said.

Downtown Houston seems to have been spared, though the ants have been spotted scurrying thickly across suburban roads. But news accounts of the scourge have spread widely, said Frank Michel, spokesman for Mayor Bill White.

“The Russians are concerned,” Mr. Michel said. “I got a call from Moscow wanting to know if NASA was safe.”

“I reassured the Russians we’re O.K.,” he said.

Monday, May 05, 2008

Oklahoma Evolution News: 5 May 2008

Via: Dr. Vic Hutchison at the OESE

OKLAHOMA EVOLUTION LIST SERVE 3 April 2008

[Clickable links in BLUE and underlined. Oklahoma specific items in GREEN . Comments by list manager in brackets do not necessarily represent the views of any organization.]

CHECK THE OESE WEBSITE: http://www.biosurvey.ou.edu/oese/

for news, announcements, teaching resources, books, more.

In This Posting:

1. HB 2633 with Kern’s Language Will Pass House, Go to Governor: Please Take Action Now!

2. Faith Freedom Measure Rapped (Tulsa World ).

3. NCSE Videos on the Expelled Movie.

4. Institute of Creation Research Fails to Obtain Certification in Texas.

5. Evolution: 24 Myths and Misconceptions.

6. John Derbyshire on Creationist Inteligent Design.

7. Florida: “Evolution Bills Die in Legislature as Session Ends.” (Florida).

8. AAAS Statement Decries "Profound Dishonesty" of Intelligent Design Movie.