2012年11月20日星期二

Great apes have midlife crises too, study finds


At middle age, a great ape will neither cheat on a spouse nor buy a red sports car on impulse. But researchers have found that chimpanzees and orangutans experience midlife crises just as surely as do humans.

That finding, published Monday in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, could upend firmly held beliefs about the roots of human happiness and the forces that influence its odd trajectory across the life span. If our animal relatives share our propensity for sadness, withdrawal and frustration at life's midpoint, perhaps the midlife crisis is actually driven by biological factors — not the wearing responsibilities of jobs and family and the dawning recognition of our mortality.
"This opens a whole new box in the effort to explain" the midlife dip in well-being, said senior author Andrew Oswald, a behavioral economist at the University of Warwick in England. "It makes one's head spin."
For men and women alike, social science researchers have located the winter of our discontent somewhere near the 50-year mark, wedged neatly between the vigor and drive of youth and the quest for meaning and happiness that marks the final decades of life. More than just a cultural cliche, the midlife crisis is the well-documented nadir of human well-being on the U-shaped curve of happiness that stretches between birth and death.
As happiness researchers have fanned out around the globe, they have documented this midlife trough in at least 65 countries, suggesting that it is a universal feature of human existence.
Until now, however, the social scientists that have dominated this burgeoning field of study have drawn on economic, psychological and sociological explanations. By midlife, youth's hot-blooded drive to mastery has driven off. Responsibilities abound. Decades of striving — to raise a family, to establish oneself in the community, to climb the professional ziggurat — have shown us the mountaintop and, with it, the limits of our reach and usefulness. A recognition of our mortality settles in.
In the years after midlife, the theory goes, humans shoulder fewer burdens for the care of others. Their time horizons are shorter, prompting them to focus on people and activities that give pleasure and meaning to their lives. They regret less.
Oswald had a hunch that these explanations were overlooking the fundamental role of biology in influencing mood. So he reached out to Alexander Weiss, a primatologist and evolutionary psychologist at the University of Edinburgh in Scotland who studies well-being in great apes.
The pair put together an international team of primatologists from Scotland, Japan and Arizona and devised an unprecedented census of well-being among 336 chimpanzees and 172 orangutans of all ages living in two research centers, one sanctuary and nine zoos across five countries.
To gauge the animals' well-being, the researchers turned to the keepers that knew them best and asked them a series of questions that might stymie even the most devoted dog or cat owner. Designed to capture the mood, sense of effectiveness and pleasure-seeking drive of apes across the life span, the questions were based on established methods of measuring human well-being but modified for this population.
Keepers were asked to rate the positive or negative mood of each subject and to gauge the degree of pleasure the animal derived from social situations. A third question was how successful each great ape was in achieving its goals — whether winning a mate, commanding the attention of a fellow member of its social group or gaining hold of an out-of-reach toy. Finally, the study authors asked keepers to consider how happy they would be if they had to live as their chimpanzees or orangutans for a week.
When the composite well-being score for each ape was plotted according to his or her age, the result was the same distinctive U-shaped curve seen universally in humans. Around the ages of 28 and 35 — roughly the midpoint of the chimpanzees' and orangutans' expected life spans — moods sagged, animals became less socially engaged and they were less likely to persist in attaining the things they desired.
"I certainly was shocked," Oswald said.
While highly sociable, great apes lack the hallmarks of humanity most often associated with a drop in mood and well-being at midlife — the ability to evaluate one's status relative to expectations, an awareness of one's mortality, and social and family responsibilities so burdensome they might induce stress.
And yet, noted Weiss, middle-aged chimps and orangutans experience more anxiety and less pleasure than their younger counterparts, and they're just not as successful at getting what they want. "You'd probably see it in their posture," he said: They are just not loving life.
For social scientists who saw shifts in happiness in strictly human terms, the findings were a forceful reminder that people have not evolved as far as we may think beyond the great apes, said Stacey Wood, a neuropsychologist at Scripps College in Claremont who wasn't involved in the study.
"It's a little humbling," said Wood, whose research focuses on the effects of age on happiness and emotional restraint.
For animals that live in mutually dependent societies, the findings suggest that a midlife drop in sociability serves some positive evolutionary purpose, she said.
"It pushes more toward the possibility that this is biological," added Arthur Stone, a professor of psychiatry at Stony Brook University in New York who was not involved with the study.
Whether it's hormones, brain structure, neurochemicals or some other factor that causes the middle-aged psyche to power down will require further research, Stone said. But from now on, he said, social explanations alone will not suffice.
Oswald, who describes himself as "58 and very happily accelerating," said that for forlorn midlifers, the study is a happy reminder that while humans may be programmed to suffer a dip in pleasure, it gets better.
"This suggests that it's completely normal, and that it's apparently out of your control," he said.



shopping ads:
                                 cheap fitflops
                         fitflop slippers

2012年11月12日星期一

China's endangered pandas face bamboo shortage threat


PARIS — Their numbers already threatened by a slow breeding rate and rapid habitat loss, China's endangered giant pandas now also risk losing their staple food, bamboo, to climate change, a report said Sunday.

A study in China's northwestern Qinling Mountains, home to around 270 pandas -- about a fifth of the world's wild population -- predicts a "substantial" bamboo decline this century as the globe warms.
"The pandas may face a shortage of food unless they can find alternative food resources," a team of researchers from the United States and China warn in the journal Nature Climate Change.
The international symbol of environmental conservation efforts, the giant panda is a picky eater.
Ninety-nine percent of its diet consists of bamboo -- devouring up to 38 kilograms (84 pounds) per day. This means the iconic black-and-white bear's survival is closely linked to a thriving bamboo habitat.
Bamboo itself also has a slow reproductive rate, flowering only every 30 to 35 years, which means it would be slow to adapt to a change in local climate, said a statement on the research.
Based on the data gathered for this study, researchers predict that three bamboo species which make up almost the entire diet of the Qinling pandas, will all but disappear in a warmer climate.
"Results suggest that almost the entire panda habitat in the region may disappear by the end of the 21st century," said the study report.
The calculations are based on different warming scenarios projected by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change -- ranging from rises of two to five degrees Celsius (35.6 to 41 degrees Fahrenheit) in summer by century's end, and three to eight degrees C in winter.
These projections were collated with data on rainfall and greenhouse gas emissions as well as historical growth patterns, to consider the future of bamboo.
Already, deforestation is threatening the survival of about half of all bamboo species worldwide.
The researchers say bamboo distribution has historically fluctuated in response to changes in the climate.
In the modern era, though, even if other areas were to become climatically more suited for bamboo growth, these would be far away and fall outside the present network of protected panda reserves.
The findings should be used "for proactive planning to protect areas that have a better climatic chance of providing adequate food sources or begin creating natural 'bridges' to allow pandas an escape hatch from bamboo famine," the statement said.

more:

2012年11月8日星期四

Dinosaur Named After Lord of the Rings' Eye of Sauron




Dinosaurs may have once ruled the Earth, but how many can say they have a connection to Middle-earth?
A 40-foot creature, who once made North America its home about 95 milion years ago, has been named after the Eye of Sauron in The Lord of the RingsNational Geographic reports.
The species is called Sauroniops pachytholus, which in Greek translates to "eye of Sauron," because the fossil of the species discovered only included one large eye socket.
Lady Gaga gets fern species named after her
"The idea of a predator that is physically known only as its fierce eye reminded me of Sauron, in particular as depicted in Peter Jackson's movies," says study leader Andrea Cau.
The flesh-eating dinosaur is believed to have rivaled the Tyrannosaurus Rex in size and shape.
Who knows? Maybe Jackson will return the honor and feature the behemoth in his upcomingHobbit trilogy?

more:

2012年11月4日星期日

20 Polar Bears Found Living on Iceberg Out at Sea



Conventional wisdom about polar bears is that they spend most of their time out hunting on the sea ice, except during the warm summer months when the sea ice recedes and the bears are forced to return to land as a final refuge. But a surprising new discovery by a group of filmmakers shooting on location in Greenland could challenge that idea, reports BBC Nature.
The filmmakers came across at least 20 polar bears living out the summer on a large tabular iceberg, called the Peterman Iceberg, in Baffin Bay, some 50 kilometers off the Canadian coast. This means that not all polar bears return to solid land when much of the ice melts. Large icebergs may therefore act as 'sanctuaries' for the bears, giving them someplace to hunker down and wait for the sea to freeze over again.
"What's there for them is security, and I think they are taking advantage of that," said Chris Packham, one of the filmmakers who made the discovery. "So I think they are living on this iceberg to stay safe, and just wait for the sea ice to come back in."
According to American polar bear expert Steven Amstrup, this is the first time a signifcant group of bears have ever been found eking out an existence on a large iceberg.
There are several explanations that could explain the new behavior, if in fact it is new. One theory is that the iceberg offers them safety from human hunters on land. Polar bears are hunted on both the mainlands of Greenland and Canada. Another possibility is that increased melting in the region is causing more large icebergs to become separated from the land, essentially 'stranding' the bears.
"In recent years we've been seeing a lot more big tabular icebergs come off the Greenland ice sheet and they're now ending up in Baffin Bay," said Dr. Keith Nicholls of the British Antarctic Survey, another member of the expedition.

more:
            50 Shades of Food: The ultimate burger fantasy

2012年10月30日星期二

Bees Also Have A Paralyzing Bite To Deal With Intruders




Though they’re one of the world’s most infamously well-armed insects, it turns out bees have only been turning half of their armory on us all these years. In addition to their famously venomous stingers, bees have a bite that delivers a paralyzing toxin to their victims, and researchers in Greece think the poison could one day be repurposed as a local anesthetic for humans.
The poison the bees use, 2-heptanone (2-H) is no mystery to science — it occurs naturally in some foods, such as beer and white bread, and is known to be secreted by some insects. Until this research, though, it was though that 2-H was a signaling molecule of some sort, though. A paper published in the online journal PLoS ONE , though, shows that 2-H acts as a paralytic poison when secreted though bees mandibles, though.
Researchers at Aristotle University of Thessaloniki made the discovery mostly by accident while studying wax moths, an invading insect that can damage bee colonies and honeycombs. Bees appear to use their poisonous bite as a weapon of first resort when dealing with wax moths and other small hive invaders, such as mites, which are not dangerous enough to be eliminated by the the bee’s stinger, but have to be dealt with before they can harm the hive.
Bees bite these invaders, releasing 2-H through their mandibles, which paralyzes the moths and mites. The non-fatal bites can keep the bugs out of commission for up to nine minutes, during which the bees act as bouncers, ejecting the troublesome pests from their hives. The next step in research is taking a look at the safety and clinical properties of the 2-H molecule in animals, which could eventually set the stage for it to be used to numb pain in humans.

more :
5 apps to get you through a natural disaster

2012年10月29日星期一

The whale can mimic human speech

It could be the muffled sound of singing in the shower or that sing-songy indecipherable voice from the Muppets' Swedish Chef.

 
Surprisingly, scientists said the audio they captured was a whale imitating people. In fact, the whale song sounded so eerily human that divers initially thought it was a human voice.
 
Handlers at the National Marine Mammal Foundation in San Diego heard mumbling in 1984 coming from a tank containing whales and dolphins that sounded like two people chatting far away.
 

It wasn't until one day, after a diver surfaced from the tank and asked, "Who told me to get out?" did researchers realize the garble came from a captive male Beluga whale. For several years, they recorded its spontaneous sounds while it was underwater and when it surfaced.

An acoustic analysis revealed the human-like sounds were several octaves lower than typical whale calls. The research was published online Monday in Current Biology.

Scientists think the whale's close proximity to people allowed it to listen to and mimic human conversation. It did so by changing the pressure in its nasal cavities. After four years of copying people, it went back to sounding like a whale, emitting high-pitched noises. It died five years ago.

Dolphins and parrots have been taught to mimic the patterns of human speech, but it's rare for an animal to do it spontaneously.

The study is not the first time a whale has sounded human. Scientists who have studied sounds of white whales in the wild sometimes heard what sounded like shouting children. Caretakers at the Vancouver Aquarium in Canada previously said they heard one of the white whales say its name.


more:

Guatemala excavates early Mayan ruler's tomb

2012年10月23日星期二

Raw Food Not Enough to Feed Big Brains


Eating a raw food diet is a recipe for disaster if you’re trying to boost your species’ brainpower. That’s because humans would have to spend more than 9 hours a day eating to get enough energy from unprocessed raw food alone to support our large brains, according to a new study that calculates the energetic costs of growing a bigger brain or body in primates. But our ancestors managed to get enough energy to grow brains that have three times as many neurons as those in apes such as gorillas, chimpanzees, and orangutans. How did they do it? They got cooking, according to a study published online today in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.
“If you eat only raw food, there are not enough hours in the day to get enough calories to build such a large brain,” says Suzana Herculano-Houzel, a neuroscientist at the Federal University of Rio de Janeiro in Brazil who is co-author of the report. “We can afford more neurons, thanks to cooking.”
Humans have more brain neurons than any other primate — about 86 billion, on average, compared with about 33 billion neurons in gorillas and 28 billion in chimpanzees. While these extra neurons endow us with many benefits, they come at a price — our brains consume 20 percent of our body’s energy when resting, compared with 9 percent in other primates. So a long-standing riddle has been where did our ancestors get that extra energy to expand their minds as they evolved from animals with brains and bodies the size of chimpanzees?
One answer came in the late 1990s when Harvard University primatologist Richard Wrangham proposed that the brain began to expand rapidly 1.6 million to 1.8 million years ago in our ancestor, Homo erectus, because this early human learned how to roast meat and tuberous root vegetables over a fire. Cooking, Wrangham argued, effectively predigested the food, making it easier and more efficient for our guts to absorb calories more rapidly. Since then, he and his colleagues have shown in lab studies of rodents and pythons that these animals grow up bigger and faster when they eat cooked meat instead of raw meat — and that it takes less energy to digest cooked meat than raw meat.
In a new test of this cooking hypothesis, Herculano-Houzel and her graduate student, Karina Fonseca-Azevedo, now a neuroscientist at the National Institute of Translational Neuroscience in São Paulo, Brazil, decided to see if a diet of raw food inherently put limits on how large a primate’s brain or body could grow. First, they counted the number of neurons in the brains of 13 species of primates (and more than 30 species of mammals). The researchers found two things: one, that brain size is directly linked to the number of neurons in a brain; and two, that that the number of neurons is directly correlated to the amount of energy (or calories) needed to feed a brain.
After adjusting for body mass, they calculated how many hours per day it would take for various primates to eat enough calories of raw food to fuel their brains. They found that it would take 8.8 hours for gorillas; 7.8 hours for orangutans; 7.3 hours for chimps; and 9.3 hours for our species, H. sapiens.


These numbers show that there is an upper limit on how much energy primates can get from an unprocessed raw diet, Herculano-Houzel says. An ape’s diet in the wild differs from a modern “raw food diet,” in which humans get sufficient calories from processing raw food in blenders and adding protein and other nutrients. In the wild, other apes can’t evolve bigger brains unless they reduce their body sizes because they can’t get past the limit of how many calories they can consume in 7 hours to 8 hours of feeding per day. But humans, she says, got around that limit by cooking. “The reason we have more neurons than any other animal alive is that cooking allowed this qualitative change — this step increase in brain size,” she says. “By cooking, we managed to circumvent the limitation of how much we can eat in a day.”
This study shows “that an ape could not achieve a brain as big as in recent humans while maintaining a typical ape diet,” Wrangham says.
Paleoanthropologist Robert Martin of The Field Museum in Chicago, Illinois, agrees that the new paper does “provide the first evidence that metabolic limitations” from a raw food diet impose a limit on how big a primate’s brain — or body — can grow. “This could account for small brain sizes of great apes despite their large body sizes.” But “the jury is still out” on whether cooking was responsible for the first dramatic burst of brain growth in our lineage, in H. erectus, Martin says, or whether our ancestors began cooking over a fire later, when the brain went through a second major growth spurt about 600,000 years ago.Hearths show up in the archaeological record 800,000 years ago and the regular use of fire for cooking doesn’t become widespread until more recently.
But to Herculano-Houzel’s mind, our brains would still be the size of an ape’s if H. erectus hadn’t played with fire: “Gorillas are stuck with this limitation of how much they can eat in a day; orangutans are stuck there; H. erectus would be stuck there if they had not invented cooking,” she says. “The more I think about it, the more I bow to my kitchen. It’s the reason we are here.”

more :
Why do dung beetles dance on balls of poop? To keep cool

Beluga whale 'makes human-like sounds'