3 posts · 1,889 views
The Science Pundit
3 posts
Sort by Latest Post, Most Popular
View by Condensed, Full
by The Science Pundit in The Science Pundit
A few years ago, a cousin of mine told me the story of the time she was at a public swimming pool (in Utah, I believe) when her infant son demanded to be fed. She did what came naturally: she began to breastfeed her son. This act didn't go over very well with at least one of the pool's patrons, who came over to my cousin and sneered "That's disgusting! I have young children and they don't need to see that!" My cousin mused on how curious it was that this lady wasn't bothered by her children seeing dozens of women and girls of various ages walking around the pool in scant string coverings, but a mother breastfeeding her infant was disgusting. (For the record, The Science Pundit is okay with both breastfeeding mothers and scantily string-clad bathers.)
What is or isn't disgusting is a matter of subjective opinion, but breastfeeding--or more generally, lactation--is a natural process for all mammals. Many animals don't care for their young, but those that do have evolved a variety of strategies for feeding and protecting their progeny. Lactation is the strategy that mammals have evolved for that purpose. The "most primitive" mammals, the monotremes such as the duck billed platypus, give us a clue as to how lactation might have evolved. Suckling probably started as young proto-mammals liking their mother's skin to gain moisture and nutrients from the oils and perspiration exuded from the pores. Something similar to this (but more evolved) is seen today in the platypus. The most highly developed lactators (by which I mean the most developed mammary glands) are the placental mammals (which includes we humans). The milk we feed our youngest contains not only nutrients, but antibodies to help with immunity development. I wouldn't dream of calling this disgusting.
When I think disgusting, I think of something that promotes the gag reflex, in other words: puking. This brings me to the next strategy for feeding one's young. The simplest and most obvious strategy is for the parents to go get food and put it into their offspring's mouth. This strategy is also practiced by many species of mammal during a period known as weaning. This strategy does have some shortcomings, though.
For one, it can be quite cumbersome carrying around food. Also, infants or hatchlings often need time for their digestive systems to fully develop, particularly if the animal relies on gut microbes to help digest its food. So what could be a good way for a mother or father to help its young digest food, while introducing beneficial microbes to its system, and making the journey easier? If you're thinking of vomitting, then you get a cigar (which curiously enough creates a smoke which triggers the gag reflex in some people). Personally, I think that when it comes to disgusting, regurgitation beats breastfeeding hands down.
So do we have a champion? Not by a long shot. Let's not forget that there is another way for the body to release nutrients which is intimately tied to the digestive system. I am of course speaking of excrement.
Eating excreta is a time honored tradition in the animal kingdom. The most famous coprophages are green fly larvae and the esteemed dung beetle. And some animals even eat their own droppings. Rabbits, for example, unlike their grass eating cousins the ungulates, have only one stomach and so can't adequately digest their meals in a single pass. Bugs is left with little choice but to consume his own cecotropes.
But is there an animal out there that actually craps out a partially digested meal to feed its young? Behold Ctenocephalides felis, the common cat flea!
The cat flea is the most common flea found biting pets and people. Even though there is a dog flea (Ctenocephalides canis) and human flea (Pulex irritans), the fleas you are most likely to find sucking away human or canine blood are cat fleas. So let's talk a little about our friend's life cycle.
Let's get a couple things clear. The male cat flea is a blood sucking and pooping machine (as evidenced in the picture to the left), and the female cat flea is a blood sucking, egg laying, and pooping machine. Adult fleas are constantly shedding eggs and doodies. The flea dingleberries naturaly outnumber the eggs since (a) only females lay eggs, and (b) the nutrition required to produce a single egg results in several berries. It is also worth noting that female fleas will lay eggs even if they haven't mated, and mated females will lay non-viable as well as viable eggs.
While adult fleas have hooked barbs on their feet and legs to keep them attached to their host (not to mention mouth parts), eggs and scat don't avail of such adhesives. So what happens is that eggs and turds drop off the animal with the largest concentration (as statistically expected) falling off where the pet spends most of its time. The viable eggs then hatch into worm like larvae, a good proportion of which will find themselves surrounded by huevos and caca. This is a veritable smorgasbord for the larvae since that is what they eat.
It seems that the larval diet shifts from primarily feeding on stools in the first stage to actively seeking out eggs and sucking out their yolks in the third. I suppose that this is an improvement since being told to go suck an egg isn't quite as insulting as being told to eat shit. But this raises the interesting question: are fleas not only blood suckers and shit eater, but also cannibals? As long as you don't consider eating non-viable eggs as cannibalism, it seems the answer is yes, but they keep it to a minimum. There is some evidence that non-viable eggs are stickier than viable eggs and so easier for a larva to latch on to, but I think that the primary explanation is one of statistics. Viable eggs hang out for a limited period of just a few days, while non-viable eggs hang around until either they're eaten or sucked up by the pet owner's vacuum cleaner (I was taught that if you have fleas, you should put moth balls in your vacuum cleaner bag. That makes sense now.)
So which is the more important part of the flea larva diet: eggs or droppings? That's the question Drs. Hsu, Hsu, and Wu looked into back in 2002. The flea larvae were divided into five groups based on diet. The MF group was fed exclusively adult male feces. The FF group was fed exclusively adult female feces. The NE group was fed exclusively non-viable eggs. The FF+NE group was fed a mix of adult female feces and non-viable eggs. And the control group PBCP group was fed exclusively porcine blood curd product (The Science Pundit hereby renames the control group "bacon eaters"). There were thirty larvae in each group, which is large enough to see patterns, but The Science Pundit (that's me) would like to see a larger more comprehensive study. The FF+NE and bacon eaters both did fairly well with 90% & 83% survival to adulthood, respectively. The MF group did a bit more poorly with a 13% survival rate, but both the FF and NE groups were completely wiped out.
I guess the lesson here is that if you're a cat flea larva you should eat shit and suck eggs, but if you can only do one, then eat your daddy's poop.
... Read more »
Hsu, M., Hsu, Y., & Wu, W. (2002) Consumption of flea faeces and eggs by larvae of the cat flea, Ctenocephalides felis. Medical and Veterinary Entomology, 16(4), 445-447. DOI: 10.1046/j.1365-2915.2002.00388.x
by The Science Pundit in The Science Pundit
Meet Ida! a.k.a. Darwinius masillae. Ida is a 47 million year old fossil primate that was discovered in the Eocene fossil beds in Messel Germany. Ida was 24 cm. (~10 in.) from head to tail, meaning that--by some estimates--she probably weighed a little over a pound. In the picture below you can see the whole skeleton. It is fairly rare to find complete Eocene mammal skeletons--particularly primates. You can read online research paper about Ida here.And Ida is just wonderful! On the downside, her skull was crushed, but on the upside, you can actually see where her fur was! (click on picture to embiggenize) Kewl!!!You might have noticed that Ida kind of looks like a lemur. But there are morphological traits there that put her into the Cercamoniinae, from which modern anthropoids (monkeys and apes) evolved. In other words, we have ourselves a complete transitional primate fossil. This is super exciting! Another thing we know abot Ida is that she was a juvenile. How do we know that, you ask? Check out her teeth!You can clearly see that she has a mix of fully developed and developing teeth. For example, the M1 molars above are developed and in place but the M2 molars are still moving and the M3 molars probably haven't broken through the gums yet. We can compare this pattern to the dental development of similarly sized modern primates to estimate that Ida was about 80% of the way to full maturity when she died. And as I said before, there's much more in the paper.Yay for science!Franzen, J., Gingerich, P., Habersetzer, J., Hurum, J., von Koenigswald, W., & Smith, B. (2009). Complete Primate Skeleton from the Middle Eocene of Messel in Germany: Morphology and Paleobiology PLoS ONE, 4 (5) DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0005723... Read more »
Franzen, J., Gingerich, P., Habersetzer, J., Hurum, J., von Koenigswald, W., & Smith, B. (2009) Complete Primate Skeleton from the Middle Eocene of Messel in Germany: Morphology and Paleobiology. PLoS ONE, 4(5). DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0005723
by The Science Pundit in The Science Pundit
The proper preparation of giant cuttlefish (Sepia apama) for consumption requires at least two steps. The unpalatable ink must be drained from the hapless cephalopod and the cuttlebone must be removed. Of course if you're planning on dining with a fork and knife, then step #2 isn't strictly necessary. But for the Indo-Pacific bottlenose dolphin (Tursiops aduncus), which swallows its meals intact, cuttlebone removal is obligatory.This is what researchers Julian Finn, Tom Tregenza, Mark Norman have reported in a paper published today in PLoS ONE. The researchers--in SCUBA gear--positioned themselves in dolphin feeding grounds near Whyalla, Spencer Gulf and caught the feeding behavior with an HD video camera. They observed how the dolphins corralled the cuttlefish out into the open, pinned them to the ground, hammered them to death, shook the ink out of them, scraped them on the bottom to remove the cuttlebone, and finally bon appétite.(clicking on image takes you to the full Fig. 1 image at PLoS ONE)Here's how the researchers describe the steps involved: Prey positioning: Cuttlefish prey were typically hiding amongst dense brown algae. On encountering the cuttlefish, the dolphin flushed the prey away from algal cover into areas of open sand (Fig. 1a). Prey restraint: The dolphin then adopted a vertical position in the water column and pinned the prey down against the sand substrate. Pinned thrust kill: A rapid downward vertical thrust was effected by the dolphin using a powerful tail beat (Fig. 1b, 2a), accompanied by a whole body twist that broke the cuttlebone and/or cephalic cartilage (with a loud click audible to divers), instantly killing the cuttlefish. ‘Snout beating’ of the corpse: The corpse was then lifted into the water column on top of the beak (Fig. 1c, 2b) and repeatedly hit with the snout (up to 6 times), until dense clouds of ink were released (Fig. 1d, 2c). Beating continued until ink release diminished. Removal of intact cuttlebone: The dead prey was then returned to the sand where it was inverted and the dorsal surface of the cuttlefish body forcibly pushed into and along the sand substrate (Fig. 1e), thus scraping off the thin dorsal skin of the cuttlefish and releasing the cuttlebone, which then floated to the surface. Ingestion: The prepared cuttlefish was then consumed whole (Fig. 1f, 2d), or when the head and body were separated during beak beating, only the head was consumed (with attached digestive tract organs). (clicking on image takes you to the full Fig. 2 image at PLoS ONE)Naturally there are still questions to be answered. Two important ones are (1) Is this practice widespread or just limited to the dolphins observed? and (2) If it's widespread, is it inherited behavior or passed on culturally? The evidence seems to suggest that the practice is indeed widespread.Repeated above-water observations of clean cuttlebones bobbing to the surface in association with passing pods of dolphins suggest that some or all of this behavioural sequence is not restricted to a single individual dolphin.Whether the behavior is taught or inherited is still up in the air (or down in the water) and will require more research.EDIT: This post is my very first Blogging Peer Reviewed Research post (Did you catch the nifty icon?). So as the total n00b that I am, I did things backwards: I wrote and published the post, then checked the guidelines to make sure that it conformed. You can imagine how aghast I was when I read this.7. The post should contain original work by the post author -- while some quoting of others is acceptable, the majority of the post should be the author's own work.A quick perusal confirmed that my post was closer to 50/50 than "the majority of the post being my own work." While I had a high degree of confidence that--as a first timer--they would let me slide, the prudent action is to add more of my thoughts.It has long been known that dolphins can perform intricate tasks. It has been demonstrated that they can solve problems (such as navigating mazes) as well as perform stunts which they have been trained to do. This particular behavior can be broken into six distinct steps, most of which are each themselves intricate. Given the complexity of the behavior as well as what we know about dolphins, I feel pretty safe ruling out instinctual behavior. More research needs to be done of course.An observation which I believe would support this hypothesis is if we found the behavior widespread among groups of dolphins who intermingle, but lacking in other groups of the same species who aren't in contact with the group who we prepares cuttlefish this way.This brings up a question #3 for me. Is this behavior passed on by "passive" imitation or by active teaching? This is the question that I would really like an answer too. I've blogged in the past about how I think that the combination teaching and blind imitation is the root of human culture. In other words, despite my skeptic inclinations to "think for myself" and not just do as I'm told, it takes less energy and time to fill our huge cerebrums with knowledge if just soak up what we're taught than if we try to figure everything out ourselves. And that only works efficiently in a culture if we're also actively teaching what we know to others in our group.But back to the dolphins, I just don't know-and this paper has only intensified my curiosity. I can't imagine that dolphins teach their young the way we (and apparently there's evidence that some other primates, such as japanese macaques, also) do. Anyway, hopefully now I'm within the required guidelines.Julian Finn, Tom Tregenza, Mark Norman (2009). Preparing the Perfect Cuttlefish Meal: Complex Prey Handling by Dolphins PLoS ONE, 4 (1) DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0004217... Read more »
Julian Finn, Tom Tregenza, & Mark Norman. (2009) Preparing the Perfect Cuttlefish Meal: Complex Prey Handling by Dolphins. PLoS ONE, 4(1). DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0004217
Do you write about peer-reviewed research in your blog? Use ResearchBlogging.org to make it easy for your readers — and others from around the world — to find your serious posts about academic research.
If you don't have a blog, you can still use our site to learn about fascinating developments in cutting-edge research from around the world.