Seaweed Revelations Part 2

I know you were all right on the edges of yours seats waiting to hear about the life cycles of seaweed so I will get right to the point. Here is also where I get to clarify things I learned way long ago but didn’t look at again because I’m not a botanist.

I know many of you are still reeling from yesterday’s revelation that algae are not and have never been a member of the Communist party Plant kingdom. But you’ll have to sit down and clutch your pearls again because I have more news (“news”). Now I must tell you that all plants and many algae display alternating generations. “What is that?” you ask, “Where did I get these pearls I am now clutching??” you exclaim. All will be answered in due time. The phrase ”alternating generations” indicates that the plants or algae alternate haploid and diploid generations. So one generation has double chromosomes (one set doubled, like you’re supposed to) the next has only half/one set of chromosomes (like gametocytes, that is, cells like sperm or eggs, are supposed to). So you have one organism with the appropriate number of chromosomes (2n, with n being one set of a given number) that produces spores to grow into ANOTHER organism with half the chromosomes of its parent (n chromosomes), which in turn produces sperm or eggs to help produce a new, diploid generation. The haploid generation producing the sperm and eggs may be a distinct organism or it may be closely associated/attached to its diploid parent (although subsequent diploid generations will not be). OK, this explanation is all well and good for biologists, but how can everyone else understand it?

First, look at this diagram:

LOOK AT IT.
This will give you an illustration of things to come.

 

Now stick with me for a very bizarre analogy. Imagine your reproductive bits are not an organ. You produced them, they are a part of you (they’re attached to you, anyway), but you can’t control them directly. They are their own entity. Creepy, huh? That is how MANY plants and algae function, they grow their haploid generation on the diploid generation. Now for the REALLY weird part: imagine those reproductive bits DO NOT remain a part of you. Once you have grown them, they live freely. That is how other plants and algae live. To summarize both: the children are like the sexual organs and the grandchildren are new organisms. This system seems confusing, but it does help weed out deleterious genes (haploid generations being more vulnerable to the effects of bad genes) while still allowing for either self-fertilization or non-self-fertilization (plants and algae can effectively mate with themselves or other, unrelated plants and algae). Advantages to self-fertilization would be preventing introduction of bad genes while non-self fertilization means the possibility of BETTER genes being introduced. Basically, all the options are still available, so it’s a win-win situation.

I hope that all makes some (albeit VERY WEIRD) sense. Let me know if it doesn’t. I’d like to do another algae-related thang, but I just had some projects come up so WE SHALL SEE.

 

Source

–. 2010. GRE Subject Test: Biology 5th Ed. Kaplan, New York.

 

Photo credit Pearson Education.

Seaweed Revelations Part 1

Continuing with my topic suggestions, here is one from my sister from another mister who’s doing top-secret research in the North Pole (probably spying on Santa Claus) which you can read about on her blog here–> Snow Kidding

“I want to know more about macro algae… life cycle, what it needs to live, where it grows etc.”

That is not actually a question, Angie-bear, but I will let it slide cause you’re cute.

The term macroalgae encompasses the many species of large, multicellular algae found in marine and freshwater environments. For now I am going to focus on the marine species, but most of the information is applicable to freshwater species.

Now, before I go any further I need to say something important: algae are not plants. Sorry to shatter all y’all’s dreams (assuming you dream of algae-plants), but it’s true, ALGAE ARE NOT PLANTS. Don’t feel bad if you didn’t figure this out before, I only learned this when I took marine biology. Even college-level high school science classes can have gaps (I would say this is a pretty tiny one, anyway) and besides, algae are just not a thing most people think about.

Algae actually belong in the kingdom Protista, along with the animal-like protists (protozoans) and the fungus-like protists (slime molds). Because algae photosynthesize using chlorophyll, we say they are plant-like protists. Besides seaweed, this includes diatoms and dinoflagellates. Seaweed are divided into three main divisions (term for taxonomic rank equivalent to phylum but used in for plants, fungi and protists) that are defined by their photosynthetic accessory pigments. These divisions are chlorophyta (uses chlorophyll a and b), phaeophyta (uses uses chlorophyll a, chlorophyll b and fucoxanthin) and rhodophyta (uses chlorophyll a, chlorophyll b, phycoerythrin and phycocyanin). Algae in these divisions are called green, brown and red algae, respectively. Why? Because, well, they are green, brown and red, respectively.

See?

In general, the structure of macroalgae includes leaf-like blades (for photosynthesis), a gas-filled float (to raise the blades closer to the light) and the stipe (basically a stem, it’s not present in all species) that leads down to the holdfast (which anchors macroalgae to the seafloor). Although many of these structures seem analogous to those in plants, realize that the holdfast is NOT an algal root system. Macroalgae do not uptake nutrients from the seafloor so the holdfast is really just an anchor. Besides that important difference, the leaves and blades of plants and macroalgae are very different on a cellular level. Plant leaves, besides having more complex and complexly arranged tissues (includes vascular system, spongy layer and palisade layer, besides epidermis), have distinct functions for their different sides. The top side of the leaf takes in light and have a waxy cuticle to limit water loss, while the under side only takes in CO2 through the stoma (openings in the leaf). Conversely, macroalgae blades are composed of simple layers of epidermal, cortex and medullar cells with zoospores on theoutside surface. Furthermore, the blades are double-sided so that macroalgae can take in light, nutrients and H3CO from both sides.

Macroalgae also have some life cycle similarities to plants, but I will be getting to that tomorrow. So sit tight, folks.

Sources

-. 2010. GRE Subject Test: Biology 5th Ed. Kaplan, New York.

Yancey, Paul. “Macroalgae adaptations.” Marine Biology. Whitman College. Walla Walla, WA. 5 4 2011. Lecture.

Photo credit

–. “Marine Algae” Marine Education Society of Australasia. Jan 13, 2014 < http://www.mesa.edu.au/marine_algae/default.asp&gt;

–. 2013. “Canadian Aquaculture R & D Review 2011.” Fisheries and Oceans Canada. Jan 13 2014 <http://www.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/science/enviro/aquaculture/rd2011/cimtan-rcamti-eng.html&gt;

Q & A

Like I said yesterday, I’ve got a lot of suggestions for topics. Because some of them have pretty short and sweet answers, I’m going to post them all here.

“How does ink come out of pens?”

Depends on the pen! I have calligraphy styluses that draw ink up grooves in their metal tips via capillary action (motion of liquid in a tube as a result of surface tension) and then pressing them to paper (which is at least a little absorbant) similarly draws ink out.

Ballpoint pens on the other hand, have a tiiiny ball at the tip that rolls as you write or draw. It brings a little air into the ink reservoir as you push the tip against paper. Then, some of the ink in the reservoir sticks to the ball and is rolled out and onto paper. Ta da!

“Have you done bioluminescence?”

BAM: Bioluminescence.

“Do jellyfish dream?”

There’s no way to know for sure, considering they don’t talk or even make sounds  (besides SQWSSSH when you step on them), but I highly doubt they dream, or even sleep. Jellyfish have no true organs, so instead of a brain, they have a simple nerve net that allows them to react to their environment. Besides box jellies, most don’t even have eyes.

“Bananas. They constantly confuse me.”

What about them?

“Everything! WHY ARE THEY YELLOW?!?!? AND BANANA SHAPED?!?!”

BECAUSE THEY’RE BANANAS. PLEASE STOP YELLING.

EXHIBIT A. WILL YOU STOP YELLING NOW.

“Volcanism!”

Volcanism is anything involved in the processes or formation of volcanoes. Volcanoes are formed as a result of subduction, in this case, the movement of oceanic tectonic plates beneath continental plates. This occurs near underwater spreading centers, where magma from the earth’s core moves up, is cooled by the water and spreads out to form new section of plate. The subducted plate pushes magma toward the surface and explodes from volcanoes formed by the buckling of colliding plates. Mt. St. Helens is one such volcano.

You can also find volcanoes at “hot spots”, non-moving magma chambers away from plate margins where magma has risen to the surface and explodes out, rather than form a spreading center (Ex: Hawaii). Subduction of oceanic plates can also lead to volcano formation, as in the Aleutian and Japanese island volcanoes.

“Vulcanism!”

Another word for volcanism. Not a Star Trek reference, sorry.

“What are the most common chemical reactions in cooking?”

The chemistry of cooking merits a long post, if not an entire class. However, there are a few common chemical reactions I can think of right off the bat: denaturation of proteins (with heat or acid), osmosis, diffusion and controlled burning (of non-proteinatious things). Also controlled spoilage, as with cheese.

Hope this answered all y’all’s burning questions that keep you up at night. I know I will rest easier.

Sources

“volcanism”. Encyclopædia Britannica. Encyclopædia Britannica Online.
Encyclopædia Britannica Inc., 2014. Web. 09 Jan. 2014
<http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/632078/volcanism>.

Laidler, Keith. 2009. Animals: A Visual Guide to the Animal Kingdom. Quercus Publishing Plc, London.

Yancey, Paul. “Environmental Factors- Tectonic Factors.” Marine Biology. Whitman College. Walla Walla, WA. 5 4 2011. Lecture.

Schrodinger’s Cat- Now You See Me…

Finally got some topic requests! Some of which are pretty brutal and some are just full of it (you know who you are). First up is Schrodinger’s Cat.

This one is brutal for me because I am not a physics or quantum anything sort of person. However, a lot of people like talking about Schrodinger’s poor, pent up kitty, so I’m going to try and clear things up a little. If anyone has any questions or corrections, please let me know; I am by no means an expert.

First of all, here is the original scenario by Schrodinger, translated from German:

“A cat is penned up in a steel chamber, along with the following device (which must be secured against direct interference by the cat): in a Geiger counter there is a tiny bit of radioactive substance, so small, that perhaps in the course of the hour one of the atoms decays, but also, with equal probability, perhaps none; if it happens, the counter tube discharges and through a relay releases a hammer which shatters a small flask of hydrocyanic acid. If one has left this entire system to itself for an hour, one would say that the cat still lives if meanwhile no atom has decayed.”

Although it may not be clear immediately, this is a model intended to describe the state of sub-atomic particles, such as electrons. Schrodinger used the cat to make a point and to get people thinking about applying the existing modes of thought to something from “real life”. At least as “real life” as a cat in a box with acid and radioactive matter can be.

Anyway, one of the existing modes of thought was the “classical model”, which said you could predict whether the cat is alive or dead based on models. However, Schrodinger points out that people made these models and you can’t expect reality to conform to a man-made model. The cat’s conformity to the model’s prediction would be arbitrary (as would that of the subatomic particles), that is, it may or may not follow the prediction and whether it does or not is random. So the classical model is not helpful.

Another idea follows the concept of the wave function, also called the psi-function. This would say that the cat’s state is blurred between all possibilities, “mixed or smeared out in equal parts” between living and dead, as Schrodinger put it. You could say the cat is undead, but that would have to encompass a complete range, from completely living to completely dead. So whether or not you believe in zombies, that’s a pretty hard concept to envision (let alone accept). Schrodinger invented the cat because he agreed: this isn’t how life works. Psi-function assumes the blurring of states is confined to a sub-atomic scale, when in reality, sub-atomic particles affect macroscopic objects and systems. A particle can no more be in two places at once than a cat can be dead and alive at once.

Schrodinger’s solution is simply that the cat is dead or alive. The only way to discover its state is to open the box and observe it. In a similar way, sub-atomic particles may be anywhere, but we only know where when we try to observe them.

So how is any of this useful? Consider the various models of the atom. The first models you see of atoms show sort of an onion, with protons and neutrons at the center, and electrons arranged in layers surrounding them. Getting into college chemistry, you understand that electrons have “atomic orbitals”, regions in which you are most likely to find the electrons. Diagrams show the orbitals as specific shapes, but that’s just the shape of the area the electron moves around in. So while you have a certain probability that the electron will be in a given location, you can’t predict it. Neither can you say the electron is smeared around its orbital. It is the cat, but rather than alive or dead, it is in this spot or somewhere else, and you won’t know until you look at it.

Hope that helps a little. Now that I’m done, I think I’ll have lunch, maybe draw, or return some books. You won’t know which unless I’m observed.

But that would be creepy, so please don’t.

Sources

Kramer, Melody. 2013. “The Physics Behind Schrödinger’s Cat Paradox.” National Geographic. Jan 8 2014. < http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2013/08/130812-physics-schrodinger-erwin-google-doodle-cat-paradox-science/&gt;

Schrodinger, Erwin. Trans. John D. Trimmer. 1996. “The Present Situation in Quantum Mechanics: A translation of Schrodinger’s ‘Cat Paradox Paper’.” Technical University of Hamburg-Hamburg. Jan 8, 2014. <http://www.tuhh.de/rzt/rzt/it/QM/cat.html&gt;

Diagram credit to Dhatfield, Wikimedia Commons.

Things You Need to Be Aware Of: Serpentine Book Review

Ladies, gentlemen, crazy chicks, less-than-gentle-men, there is something you need to be aware of, and that something is Mark Laita. Specifically, you need to be aware of his book, Serpentine.

People, I love me some good photography, particularly animal photography. If you know anything about my family, you know that camera film runs in our bloodstream. For those of you born in the nineties, camera film was the memory card of ye olden camera that also didst not come with thy phone. Phones also were on cords. Barbaric, huh? Anyway, though I love photography and wildlife photography in general, I do not own much in the way of photography books. Probably because those wildlife photographers fill their books with majestic as hell animals, in majestic as hell landscapes but zero info on any of said majesty. Occasionally you get a caption, something like, “Honey badger at rest” or “Honey badger eating grubs” or “Honey badger not caring”. You know, things you could tell from looking at the photo. So I generally enjoy looking for animal encyclopedias or guide books with good photography. It doesn’t always work out, but sometimes I find things like Serpentine.

Serpentine presents snakes in a more vivid and natural way than I have ever seen in a book. Laita dispenses with distracting scenery so the snakes are all viewed against a black background. This makes colors pop in such a way that even typically drab species stand out (like the king cobra, below) while bright snakes shine with colors you can almost taste (though I would advise against tasting the above Vogel’s pit viper).

Furthermore, there is real motion in the snakes’ poses. I don’t just mean that the snakes seem to have been moving when the camera went off, although it is obvious most of them were (unlike many guidebooks I’ve seen that utilize a lot of resting photos). I mean Laita seems to have captured the way the snakes move in these still shots. Sorry if that’s confusing, but there’s really no other way to describe it. These photos move.

The back pages of the book even contains a photographic index (useful considering there are no page numbers) of all the featured snake species, with a brief set of facts for each. My only disappointment (besides the randomly placed and semi-pertinent quotes) is that the fact sets for each species are pretty short (name, genus, species, habitat, food, danger to humans, etc). I haven’t heard of many of the snakes featured and would love to know more.

Regardless, this is a thing that I think everyone needs to be aware of. I completely adore Serpentine and I already have my eye on his other book, Sea, for my birthday (which is like, 7 months away, so you can tell how excited I am about this).

Info

Laita, Mark. 2013. Serpentine. New York. Abrams Publishing.

 

NOTE: I did not receive any compensation for this review, but if Abrams Publishing is feeling grateful, Sea would be a great way to say “thank you”.

Sharks Have A Crap Life

Let’s have a show of hands: who here is afraid of sharks? Now, who is afraid FOR sharks? Uh huh, cool…OK, who here is wondering why I’m telling people I can’t see to raise their hands? Excellent question.

OH LOOK A SHARK.

WHAT. WHERE.

For those of you afraid of sharks, I understand. They’re big and scary and carnivorous and they’re real shitty at telling the difference between fat seals and skinny guys on surfboards. So a strong respect for the shear carnage they can wreak upon your person is good, healthy, even. But trust me, when it comes to human-shark relations, sharks deserve much more concern for THEIR well being than you do for yours. Hell, they deserve more concern in general.

Sharks have a crap time of it from day 1. I don’t mean from the minute of they’re out of mama, I mean the moment they’ve developed enough inside mama to wriggle around. Because if they have any siblings in there, the fight for survival has BEGUN. Sand tiger and mackerel shark pups have been known to eat one another WHILE STILL IN THE WOMB. How metal can you get? They’ll even eat unfertilized eggs until only the strongest pups remain (the uterus is divided or there would be only one). Cue sick guitar solo.

Although this just occurs in viviparous (live-bearing) and ovoviparous (eggs hatch in the uterus), oviparous sharks have it rough too. Their little egg cases are just left behind, abandoned in the sand or reef to hatch alone…

Cue sad violin.

However! At least when they hatch it’s not a race to escape mama. Shark parturition (birth) actually induces feelings of satiety in mama so that she’s not tempted to eat her pups. Not like they’ll stick around to test that.

If you want still more reasons to feel for the sharks, consider our interactions with them. In China, shark fin soup is a delicacy (despite the fin being mostly cartilage) and fisherman will catch sharks just to cut off the dorsal fin and leave the shark to die. Now, I am no vegetarian, but I believe that if you’re going to eat an animal, it’s life should not be so miserable that death is a mercy (see treatment of veal calves, if you can) and the method in which the animal is killed should be quick and relatively painless. Not to mention the rest of the shark is edible too. Not that we should be eating sharks anyway, because between our weird eating habits and shark-killing freakouts every time one wanders near a tourist site, there are many threatened and endangered shark species. Shark attacks are terrible, but more people are mauled by dogs and killed by cows each year than are attacked by sharks. That’s right, cows are the real Public Enemy Number One. Sharks are just more exciting and gruesome so they make the news. No one wants their family to be The Guy That Got Killed By a Cow Last Yeat; they hush that shit right up.

There are plenty of resources out there for avoiding shark encounters. Beach signs, defense tips, checklists shark threat level (Murky water? Fishing nearby? Maybe read on the sand today)…some beaches even have Twitter feeds for alerting beach-goers of shark sightings. It’s OK to be cautious, but when you’re feeling scared and wish they’d all just disappear, remember: sharks have a crap life.

So don’t hate a shark, hug a shark!

But like, one of the little ones, maybe a dogfish.

Cause let’s not tempt fate here, people.

Also those guys are pretty damn cute.

If you don’t think this is cute, then we’re not friends.

Sources

Frances, Peter and Angeles Gavira Guerrero. 2008. Ocean: The World’s Last Wilderness Revealed. 1^st American ed. New York. DK Publishing

Greven, H. 2000. “Viviparous Sharks.” Shark Info. Jan 3 2014 < http://www.sharkinfo.ch/SI1_00e/vivipary.html>

Photo Credit

Franco Banfi/Barcroft Media, Matthew Oxley and Doug Perrine.

Oh Baby

Today I would like to speak with you all about reproduction. Not sex or any of that fun stuff, procreation! Procreation is serious business. All organisms want to make a lot of babies and ensure that as many of those babies survive as possible. But how? Resources and time are limited so you can’t pump infinite babies out indefinitely and expect to be able to provide enough care that they all survive. Choices must be made. And by “choices”, I of course mean reproduction patterns. And by “made”, I mean evolved.

So organisms evolve these different reproduction strategies. At the heart of it, the strategies are based tendencies toward quantity or quality.

By the way, those are squid egg CASES. Meaning each of those holds hundreds of eggs.

 

Not too say that species tending towards larger quantities of offspring will then have lower quality offspring. No, it’s really a question of large quantity reproduction vs. high quality parental care. To get really technical, we say species are r-or K-strategists. “r” as in population growth and “K” as in carrying capacity. For my own memory, I find it useful to think of these as rapid reproduction vs. karing for the kids.

Species in unstable habitats with non-limiting resources (not unlimited resources, but resources where the amount or access to resource is not limiting to population growth) that can rapidly respond to disturbance and can experience rapid population growth are typically r-strategists. Habitat will limit population as opposed to competition within the habitat. Other typical traits of r-strategists include early and frequent reproduction with many offspring that have a high mortality rate. These species also tend to be small and semelparous (adults reproduce once and then die).

Conversely, species with growth limited by competition, in stable environments and that possess a slower growth rate will be K-strategists. K-strategists will live longer, but they will not reproduce as much or as early and offspring have much longer development. However, offspring survival is much higher due to extensive parental care and smaller “litter” sizes. These species also tend to be iteroparous; they’ll reproduce many times over their lifetime.

Of course, nothing in biology is set in stone. There are small starfish that brood over hundreds of eggs and large sharks that leave their young right away (life is unnecessarily hard for shark babies, but that is a tale for another day). So consider r and K reproduction strategies as on a spectrum. A spectrum with some little loops and fangly bits. Because life ain’t simple.

 

Sources

Bohn, K.M. 2011. “Life History Patterns”. Ecology. Whitman College. Walla Walla, WA.

I am a Terrible Person

I know I said I would write more, but between holidays and becoming unemployed, then getting employed again for only a few hours each week, I have had a lot on my plate. Which leads me to my new donation button on the sidebar. These posts do take a chunk of time and research and also I need to eat and pay off my student loans. So if anyone feels so inclined, I would greatly appreciate a few dollars tossed my way. If you don’t feel so inclined, I understand. I am just some weird stranger on the internet, after all.