Australian Science

Category: Biology

  • How Have Marsupials Evolved?

    How Have Marsupials Evolved?

    The phylogenetic relationships between two orders of marsupials have been intesively debated. Authors benefited from recent sequencing projects which provided two marsupial genomes: this of the South American opossum (Monodelphis domestica) and the one of a kangaroo, the Australian tammar wallaby (Macropus eugenii). Retroposons are suitable and homoplasy-free markers: their insertion sites are random; parallel insertions or exact excisions are very rare.

    Thus, if one finds a retroposon in the homologous genomic loci of both species this indicates a common ancestry; on the contrary: if the marker is missing in one of the species, it means prior divergence. Moreover, one retroposon can insert into another: this situation is called transposition into transposition. These nested mobile elements insertions provide precious information about the relative times during which given retroposon families integrated into genomes: young elements can insert into older ones, but the reciprocal is impossible.

    After complete screening of the opposum and kangaroo genomes, authors found ~8,000 and ~4,000 nested retroposon insertions, respectively. Then, the frequencies and time scales of SINEs (Short INterspersed Elements) were calculated (using TinT software) and 3 groups identified:

    1. SINEs specific to the lineage leading to opossum => phylogenetically informative markers present in the opossum lineage;
    2. SINEs specific to the lineage leading to kangaroo => phylogenetically informative markers present in the kangaroo lineage;
    3. SINEs active in both species => phylogenetically informative markers present in both lineages .

    Also, ~220,000 genomic loci containing retroposons were detected using three different strategies. After screening and experimental confirmation, a total of ~440 marsupial sequences were aligned and analyzed to reveal 53 informative markers. Ten of those confirmed again the monophyly of marsupials. The other 43 phylogenetically informative retroposon markers provide significant support for most of the basal splits within marsupials.

    Phylogenetic tree of marsupials derived from retroposon data.
    Phylogenetic tree of marsupials derived from retroposon data.

    Authors did not find any loci containing elements present in opossum plus Paucituberculata but absent in kangaroo, which would have supported the alternative of a close relationship between Didelphimorphia and Paucituberculata. They screened for markers that would support the alternative hypothesis of Paucituberculata being the sister to all marsupials: experimental verification showed that all of the putative elements were also present in the order Paucituberculata (Rhyncholestes), thus supporting the monophyly of marsupials, but not the basal divergence.

    Furthermore, 13 of the original 53 markers were present in the South American Microbiotheria and the 4 Australasian orders but not in either Didelphimorphia or Paucituberculata: this significantly supports the monophyly of Australidelphia. The branch separating Australidelphia from Didelphimorphia and Paucituberculata is one of the strongest supported as well. Nevertheless, poor fossil record from South America, Antarctica, and Australia does not allow to assess Australidelphian early realtionships and biogeography.

    Two competing hypotheses exist regarding Microbiotheria: the latter are either excluded from the Australasian order (based on nuclear protein-coding genes) or embeded into it (completely or partially based on mitochondrial data). No reliable marsupial phylogeny is established up to now. In the present study, authors provide evidence for 4 independent diagnostic retroposon insertions which allow to place Microbiotheria within South America marsupials. Thus, authors propose the new name Euaustralidelphia for the monophyletic grouping of the four Australasian orders Notoryctemorphia, Dasyuromorphia, Peramelemorphia, and Diprotodontia. In total, 18 out of the initial 53 retroposon markers provide significant support for the monophyly of each of the five multi-species marsupial orders.

    Authors conclude: “the retroposon marker system identified a clear separation between the South American and Australasian marsupials. Thus, the current findings support a simple paleobiogeographic hypothesis, indicating only a single effective migration from South America to Australia, which is remarkable given that South America, Antarctica, and Australia were connected in the South Gondwanan continent for a considerable time.”

    Nilsson MA, Churakov G, Sommer M, Tran NV, Zemann A, Brosius J, & Schmitz J (2010). Tracking marsupial evolution using archaic genomic retroposon insertions. PLoS biology, 8 (7) PMID: 20668664

    (This was originally published on the author’s personal blog. Image is from the original article.)

  • Great danger for the Great Barrier Reef

    Great danger for the Great Barrier Reef

    The Great Barrier Reef is easily among the world’s great natural wonders. A world heritage site since 1981, it’s known everywhere as a showcase for the beauty which Earth’s oceans are capable of producing. The world’s largest system of coral reefs, it’s actually composed of over 2900 smaller reefs, stretching along Australia’s coastline for 2600 kilometres. In modern times, it’s a major tourist attraction, and for a lot longer, it’s been part of the culture of Aboriginal Australian people. Unfortunately, the modern world hasn’t been kind to the Great Barrier Reef. A variety of environmental factors are conspiring to make the future for these Australian corals look rather bleak.

    Alarmingly, in a study run by the US National Academy of Science earlier this year, it was found that over the past 27 years, the Great Barrier Reef has lost 50% of its corals. Half of the corals in the sites surveyed have disappeared since 1985, and it’s unlikely to be any better in any other locations. Alarmingly, two thirds of the corals lost, have been lost since 1998. Instead of slowing down, it seems that the damage is becoming more rapid over time.

    The Great Barrier Reef is, in effect, the Amazon Basin of the Ocean. It’s a huge and bustling hub of biodiversity, rich with all manner of aquatic plant and animal species. Like a land-based rainforest, a vast number of self-contained ecosystems can be found within the reef, and many vulnerable and endangered species make their homes there. Species known to depend on the reef include turtles, crocodiles, dugongs, and sharks, as well as thousands of species of fish and invertebrate – including, of course, the corals themselves.

    Climate conditions have been increasingly harrowing for the denizens of the reef, however. Inclement weather, including tropical cyclones, can cause severe damage to coral growths. Global warming is having a lethal effect on corals living near the edge of the reef, which are already at the high end of their temperature tolerance. The warm waters cause corals to expel their zooxanthellae (the symbiotic organisms with live with the coral, photosynthesising and providing around 90% of the coral’s energy requirements) resulting in coral bleaching and, eventually, death as the corals die of starvation. And then there’s the crown of thorns starfish, a natural predator of corals which has seen a sharp increase in numbers in recent years. While the starfish is actually in indigenous inhabitant of the reef, some suspect that overfishing of the starfish’s natural predators has contributed to their recent population explosion.

    In light of the troubling findings, Australia’s Environment Minister, Tony Burke, said in an interview to ABC news that “We’ve all heard about damage to the reef over the years, but that 50 per cent figure, I think, rang a warning bell loud and clear for many people.” He also admitted that “there’s no doubt that there’s been a level of neglect for decades which, if it had been dealt with otherwise, we’d be in a much better situation now,” which is at least a sign that the problem is being given the recognition it deserves.

    Australia has, in fact, put together its Reef Rescue programme over the past 5 years, spending millions of dollars on protecting the reef from human activities such as run off from land. While there’s not much which can be done about the cyclones which have done the most damage, work is also underway to cull the starfish which are currently the reef’s second biggest threat. Unfortunately, this is painstaking work, as each starfish has to be individually removed by hand. There’s simply no other suitable method.

    The question then is how to safeguard the reef in the long term and hopefully help it to recover to its former glory? With one of the biggest future threats to the reef is global warming and the warmer waters which it causes, the method to be used to protect the reef is still under debate. Natalie Ban, who works for the ARC Centre of Excellence in Coral Reef Studies, is reported as saying, “In some areas summer is coming earlier and lasting longer; in others, both summers and winters are warmer than in the past.” Currently, there are two schools of thought on how to go about this – some argue that the most protection should be given to the areas which have suffered least, so that they can act as a haven for reef animals to help repopulate the area; while others would prefer the most vulnerable reef areas to receive the most protection.

    Whatever means is chosen, it’s safe to say that Ban speaks for many of us in saying that she hopes for the best way of managing and protecting the reef during “what will undoubtedly be momentous environmental change.”

    Images:
    Top – Eric Johnson/NOAA
    Middle – NASA
    Bottom – Toby Hudson/Wikimedia Commons

  • The Continuing Saga of the Genetically Modified Plant

    The Continuing Saga of the Genetically Modified Plant

    Mutant Fruits, Photo Source: Wikipedia

    GM (Genetically Modified) Foods

    “Jack! Did you see that potato move?! He’s a GM, that one, he’s sprouted eyes and I bet he’ll grow legs next! He’s gonna round up his buddies and take over the farm!

  • The evolution of human mortality

    The evolution of human mortality

    How long until we live forever?

    The general consensus is that we are getting older and living longer. Despite consequences and kryptonite, it is getting easier to stay alive. Heaven can wait, it seems. Every year each baby born is expected to live 3 months longer than its predecessor of the previous year. This has been the case for the last 160 years. A stunning display of the ability we humans have to prolong the length of life. And it is this simple fact of life that economists and politicians are struggling to deal with — an ageing population and not enough resources to go around.

    But outside of this there are some interesting and important questions to pose when thinking about human mortality. Does our mortality have a basis in our genetics? Researchers, publishing in PNAS, wanted to know if this reduction of mortality was as a result of a possible genetic shift or something much simpler. They wanted to understand the evolutionary context for variation in human mortality patterns — particularly comparing those of today to hunter-gatherer populations. Modern-day hunter-gatherer populations which are used as a proxy in evolutionary terms.

    What they found was a significant decrease in human mortality. The vast majority of this mortality reduction has only occurred since 1900 and has been experienced by only about 4 of the 8,000 human generations that have ever lived. An astounding fact.

    The average age-speci

  • Snappy meals for a hungry plant

    Snappy meals for a hungry plant

    Image: SatuSaro/WIkimedia Commons

    I’m a big fan of carnivorous plants. Seriously, they’re plants which eat animals, placing them oddly higher up the food chain than other plants – That always fascinated me. But a recent study on one Australian sundew has shown it to be even more fascinating than was previously thought.

    This sundew, with the rather poetic latin name of drosera glanduligera, has an edge over other sundew species. Most sundews wait patiently for insects to be lured to their sticky doom on those drops of “dew” on the plant’s glue tentacles. In the meantime though, they don’t have much other choice than to sit and wait for their meals to arrive. D. glanduligera here, has an added bonus to its traps – dubbed snap tentacles, which serve to keep this plant particularly well fed by helping to ensnare prey.

    Fast motion in plants is an exceptionally rare trait. Most people will be familiar with venus flytraps, or the “sensitive plant” mimosa pudica. With sundews, only the tropical species move particularly fast – sundews in colder climates are in no hurry to digest their doomed prey. But for a long time, d. glanduligera was something of a mystery. The exact purpose of the long tentacles, with their curious jerking motions, growing on the undersides of the traps was difficult to fully fathom. Difficult, that is, until a recent study showed that these snap tentacles are extremely efficient catapults which help this hungry little plant survive by flinging the plant’s prey directly into the gaping maws of those traps.

    The reason for d. glanduligera’s unusual traps are because this plant needs to be active to survive. It grows fast and lives for only a year, so it needs a good supply of nutrients and can’t afford for its food to get away. Thomas Speck, a co-author on the paper, pointed out how this plant’s catapult system is so effective that the insect virtually never escapes, joking that were the plant a hundred times larger he’d rather not walk around South Australia! What’s more, its environment is steady and unchanging, allowing this plant to become such a specialist without the fear of any surprises. It’s a rather fantastic little example of the sort of things evolution can come up with when it has the chance.

    Image: Poppinga et al (2012)/PLOS One

    Snap tentacles make this sundew much more deadly than most other carnivorous plant species. They’re highly sensitive and have a response time of around 400 milliseconds making them among the fastest traps known – faster than our beloved venus flytraps. Before an insect knows what’s happening, it’s already too late. Once catapulted into the glue tentacles on the upper side of the plant’s leaves, the insect’s fate is sealed. Those glue tentacles, also remarkably fast for a sundew, rapidly move the insect to the centre of the trap, where it is digested by the plant. If you’re curious, you can even watch a video of the plant in action!

    It’s amazing what plants can be capable of, given the right opportunities. The full study is published for all to see, through PLOS One, doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0045735.g001

    Image: MFdeS/Wikimedia Commons
  • Weekly Science Picks

    Weekly Science Picks

    So much science, so little time… – Photo credit, Leo Reynolds

    Sigh, my photo caption sums it all up…

    But here are the news stories that caught my eye and I hope you find them interesting as well. Maybe reading them will inspire your own work or to dig deeper for answers. In any case, enjoy!

     

    This is one of my favorite topics because it offers up rampant debate on so many topics – society, education, cognition. You’re just going to have to read it for yourself.

    This Is Your Brain on the Internet (Maybe) by Kyle Hill

    So what is the Internet doing to our thinking? It is hard to say. Current research has a hard time keeping up with the break-neck pace of online culture, and only the more conventional mediums like television and newspapers have been evaluated in any rigorous sense.

     

    Newspapers might be old school, but they do have an online media presence as well these days. This article was published in The Australian this week and concerns Australia’s own CSIRO. Genetically modified crops and foods have been a part of our collective diet for many years, whether or not some want to admit it. And they are here to stay. I am of the opinion that they play an important role in our food security given a number of ever changing variables in our environment. The usual characters are depicted in this piece and it will be interesting to follow this story and hear the response from CSIRO.

    Scientists Wary of CSIRO GM Crop by Adam Cresswell

    SCIENTISTS from three countries are warning a CSIRO-led push to make Australia the first nation in the world to introduce genetically modified wheat crops could pose a significant health threat to humans and other animals.

     

    If you haven’t heard, NYC Mayor Mike Bloomberg has banned sugary soft drink sales in cups larger than 16 0z. in his efforts to personally tackle the obesity epidemic. I feel some disclaimers are in order: One, this story did appear on www.bloomberg.com, but you could have found it in a variety of online publications; and two, I serve on the Mayor’s Best Practices Partnership to identify strategies to combat childhood obesity. That being said, I find the details of the ban interesting as you can see in the quote below. I personally do not see the need for a a 32 oz. soda, but people who want their sugary fix will do some quick addition, carry more cans or bottles and walk to get more refills. Oh, how long must we wait for data on this?!

    NYC Health Panel Backs Bloomberg Ban on Super-Size Sodas by Henry Goldman and Leslie Patton

    Restaurants, movie theaters and other outlets have six months to comply or face a $200 fine each time there’s a violation, the health department said. The ban doesn’t apply to convenience stores and groceries that don’t act primarily as purveyors of prepared foods, which are regulated by New York state. The rules do allow consumers to buy as many of the smaller drinks as they want and to get refills.

     

    To continue with the discussion on obesity, this is an interesting read which once again highlights the genetics vs. environment debate.

    What’s the Main Cause of Obesity – Our Genes or the Environment? from ScienceDaily with resources from the BMJ (British Medical Journal)

    The ongoing obesity epidemic is creating an unprecedented challenge for healthcare systems around the world, but what determines who gets fat?

     

    And one last article that I thought was noteworthy, and a bit on the strange side by the title:

    Chemists Develop Nose-Like Array to ‘Smell’ Cancer from ScienceDaily, findings appear in the current issue of the journal ACS Nano

    The chemist says, “Smell ‘A’ generates a pattern in the nose, a unique set of activated receptors, and these are different for every smell we encounter. Smell ‘B’ has a different pattern. Your brain will instantly recognize each, even if the only time you ever smelled it was 40 years ago. In the same way, we can tune or teach our nanoparticle array to recognize many healthy tissues, so it can immediately recognize something that’s even a little bit ‘off,’ that is, very subtly different from normal. It’s like a ‘check engine’ light, and assigns a different pattern to each ‘wrong’ tissue. The sensitivity is exquisite, and very powerful.”

  • BioGrid and Victorian Cancer BioBank Join Forces for Cancer Research

    BioGrid and Victorian Cancer BioBank Join Forces for Cancer Research

    September 7 2012
    Cancer research has taken a major step forward in Victoria as the Victorian Cancer BioBank and BioGrid Australia join forces to improve bowel cancer management.

    The collaboration allows researchers for the first time in Australia to access detailed data associated with tissue and blood samples.

    Maureen Turner, CEO of BioGrid Australia, said today: ³Our collaboration opens up new possibilities, further strengthening the work that is underway to establish an integrated technology platform for cancer research in Victoria,² she said.

    The Victorian Government announced in the 2012 Budget the development of an integrated cancer research platform under the umbrella of the Victorian Cancer Agency.

    Bowel cancer research will be the first to benefit from the new association. Led by Dr Jeanne Tie, up to 13 sites are involved in the project, including clinicians from Royal Melbourne, Western, Austin and Box Hill Hospitals are examining whether circulating tumour DNA (ctDNA) is a reliable blood biomarker for the presence of colorectal cancer.

    The clinicians are currently recruiting suitable participants for the study before taking serial blood samples.

    Up to 900 blood samples over four years will be processed by Victorian Cancer Biobank staff across all four sites within three hours of collection. The plasma samples will be stored on ice before being shipped to the research laboratory for ctDNA analysis.

    Dr Anne Thompson, CEO of the Victorian Cancer BioBank said: ³Interpreting the clinical usefulness of this biomarker relies on correlating ctDNA levels with the histopathology of the tumour, the treatment given to the patient and imaging results used to monitor effectiveness of treatment.²

    ³With the link now in place, researchers are able access secure, ethically approved data provided through BioGrid Australia to learn more about disease recurrence and survival.²

    ³This type of approach was not available before in Victoria, and it seemed logical to join forces for better cancer research results,² she added.

    This new data linkage service between BioGrid and Biobank is available to all Australian researchers. The Victorian Cancer BioBank and BioGrid Australia chose bowel cancer as the first cancer to be supported through the collaboration because Australia has one of the highest rates of bowel cancer in the world and bowel cancer is the second most common type of newly diagnosed cancer and causes the second highest number of cancer deaths in Australia. Around 14,225 Australians are told they have bowel cancer every year but it is one of the most curable types of cancer if detected early, however, fewer than 40% of bowel cancers are detected early.
    The collaboration has other immediate benefits for Victoria, according to Ms Turner. ³While Victoria is actively securing clinical trials to take place in Victoria, trials can and do have their limitations,² she said.

    ³For instance, often older or frail patients are excluded from trials leaving doctors uncertain as to whether trial results are relevant to many of the patients they see in routine practice.²

    She says the approach that BioBank and BioGrid is taking ensures that biospecimens together with data will inform data analysis across all ages and stages of cancer through translational research projects and multi-centre clinical trials. ³What we have together is a very powerful draw card for attracting international research to Victoria, as larger numbers of patients participating in our services can be amassed more rapidly.²

    BioGrid Australia
    BioGrid Australia (www.biogrid.org.au) is an innovative health research platform that facilitates ethical privacy-protected research across many hospitals and medical research institutes. BioGrid provides a web-based Access Request System by which researchers can apply for access to specific databases. Sometimes additional ethics approval is required. Through this system, the data custodians authorise access to their data and a Scientific Advisory Committee assesses the proposed investigation.

    Victorian Cancer BioBank
    The Victorian Cancer Biobank is a not-for-profit consortium of tissue banks, supported by the Victorian government through the Victorian Cancer Agency. Our coordinated and integrated program collects and distributes tissue samples to researchers in Victoria, Australia and throughout the world. Our purpose is to provide high quality, ethically obtained biospecimens to support research that will lead to improvements in cancer diagnosis and treatment and deliver better clinical outcomes to people with cancer.

    Media inquiries: Penny Underwood, MediaWise, on 03 9818 8540.

  • Social networks and culture among dolphins

    Social networks and culture among dolphins

    Recently published research in Nature Communications ‘Social networks reveal cultural behaviour in tool-using using dolphins‘ is exploring social networks of dolphins. In particular, it finds evidence for homophily on a learned skill which leads that there’s an exclusion and cultural contagion even among cetaceans.

    Abstract

    Animal tool use is of inherent interest given its relationship to intelligence, innovation and cultural behaviour. Here we investigate whether Shark Bay bottlenose dolphins that use marine sponges as hunting tools (spongers) are culturally distinct from other dolphins in the population based on the criteria that sponging is both socially learned and distinguishes between groups. We use social network analysis to determine social preferences among 36 spongers and 69 non-spongers sampled over a 22-year period while controlling for location, sex and matrilineal relatedness. Homophily (the tendency to associate with similar others) based on tool-using status was evident in every analysis, although maternal kinship, sex and location also contributed to social preference. Female spongers were more cliquish and preferentially associated with other spongers over non-spongers. Like humans who preferentially associate with others who share their subculture, tool-using dolphins prefer others like themselves, strongly suggesting that sponge tool-use is a cultural behaviour.

    Photo by Ewa Krzyszczyk; http://www.monkeymiadolphins.org.
    For centuries, philosophers and scientists have debated whether cultural behaviour distinguishes Homo from all other taxa1, 2. Whether non-human animals have at least rudimentary culture is contested, partly because scholars disagree on the definition of culture and/or what type of supporting evidence is needed2. To empirically investigate whether or not a given species has ‘culture,’ the term must be operationally defined. Regardless of discipline, scholars agree that some form of social learning is a prerequisite and that culture is a source of uniformity within groups and differences between groups3, but the consensus ends here. Social learning is defined as learning (behaviour matching) that is influenced by observation of, or interaction with another animal or its products4, 5. Some definitions of culture require more complex cognitive social learning mechanisms, such as pedagogy, theory of mind and imitation6, 7. In most animal culture studies, examination of behavioural variation within and between groups is fairly straightforward as animals are either geographically or socially segregated2. However, ‘group’ is not easily defined in all animal societies. Like humans, Shark Bay bottlenose dolphins live in an open community, characterized by high fission–fusion dynamics where members maintain long-term preferential bonds, but associations are temporally and spatially variable across minutes, days and years8. The question is therefore whether dolphins that use sponge tools (spongers) to extract prey9, 10 exhibit homophily (the tendency to associate with similar others), based on this socially learned foraging tactic10, 11.

    In Shark Bay, Australia, a subset of the community of Indo-Pacific bottlenose dolphins (Tursiops sp.) procure and wear basket sponges on their beaks while lightly scouring the seafloor for prey in deep (8–13 m) channels (Fig. 1)9, 10, 11, 12. Sponging is the best-documented case of tool use by wild cetaceans and is unique among wildlife in that only a small subset of the population uses tools. This exceptional case of tool-use heterogeneity allows us to test for preferential affiliation based on tool-use. To date, 55 dolphins have been documented habitually using sponges in the eastern gulf of Shark Bay12, although sponging also occurs in the western gulf13. Only calves of spongers become spongers (24 offspring to date), but 8 offspring of spongers never adopted sponging. Sponging is a solitary activity, but calves accompany their mothers during sponging and vertical social learning is strongly implicated as the primary mechanism of transmission10, 11, 14, consistent with mitochondrial DNA analysis13, 15

    Full paper link.

  • The Devil’s Technology

    The Devil’s Technology

    Biotechnology is rarely considered to be good for the environment. In fact, environmental campaigners frequently claim that genetically modified organisms represent a major threat to biodiversity and ecosystems. However, the study of the Tasmanian Devil Facial Tumour disease (DFTD) using genetic technologies is an example where biotechnology has been used to create a definite environmental benefit.

    The Tasmanian Devil (Sarcophilius harrisi) is Australia’s largest surviving carnivore and endemic to the island of Tasmania. DFTD induces cancerous tumours on the face and inside the mouth of affected animals which die within months. The condition was first observed in north-eastern Tasmania in 1996. DFTD, like other cancers, is caused when mutations within a cell prompt it to switch from normal function into tumorous growth. Cancers are considered non-contagious as the tumour is contained within the body and is unable to spread to alternative hosts. Furthermore, the immune system of any alternative host would normally recognise any foreign tumour cells that managed to invade the body, and quickly kill them before the disease becomes established. However, the DFTD is exceptional in that it is readily transmitted between individuals of the same species, and this has resulted in the disease rapidly sweeping across the island and threatening the entire species with extinction.

    In order to better understand the DFTD, an international team of scientists has sequenced the entire genome of the Tasmanian Devil and identified mutations underlying DFTD. The results were recently published in the scientific journal Cell. This biotechnological research surprisingly identified that none of the tumours originated in any of the hosts examined. Instead, they were able to trace them all back to one cancerous cell from within a female devil, possibly in the early 1990s. This radical and unusual tumour had developed the ability to jump from individual to individual in a uniquely contagious manner, so spreading the disease across the species.

    The Tasmanina devil facial tumour.

    Using the genetic sequence information, the researchers were able to discount the involvement of a virus in the transmission of DFTD. Instead they were able to identify a new and radical form of transmission. Devils often bite each other in the face during eating and feeding behaviours. During biting, fragments of tumour from an affected individual become implanted in an almost vampiric manner in a new and healthy individual.

    The scientists also discovered that the DFTD tumour carries a mutation in a gene that plays a critical role in regulating the host’s immune reaction. From this, they concluded that the tumour cells are able to interfere with the host’s immune system immediately after implantation, The disrupted immune system is unable to kill the tumour, thereby ensuring the survival of the disease in the new individual.

    The results of this study have provided valuable insight into the management of the DFTD and the conservation of the Tasmanian Devil. Because the condition is only transmitted through the bite from a diseased individual, the disease can be effectively controlled by quarantining healthy populations from diseased. The condition will then be naturally eliminated as diseased individuals die off from within the affected population. Such a policy has already been implemented with the Tasmanian Department of Primary Industries, Water and Environment who have been identifying and quarantining disease free populations within the island. Individuals from the protected population may then be re-introduced into the Tasmanian Devil’s former habitat once the disease threat has passed.

    Despite the frequently cited threats that biotechnology poses to the environment, the application of gene sequencing technologies to the DFTD is an example of how biotechnology might be adopted to solve major environmental problems. In fact, the outcome of this gene sequencing project has contributed to a management plan that might yet save the Tasmanian Devil from extinction and conserve an important component of Australia’s unique biodiversity.

    Image source

  • Who Doesn’t Love a (Penguin) Parade?

    Who Doesn’t Love a (Penguin) Parade?

    Penguins marching home from a long day at sea.

    It’s not just 5-year old children who get excited by the sight of penguins; on no, penguins have been “all the rage

  • The clues to human uniqueness

    The clues to human uniqueness

    Over 2 million years ago, before the emergence of the genus Homo, within the rift valleys and savannah grasslands of Africa during the Pliocene period, a unique event took place. One that, with some hyperbole, admittedly, shaped the course of human evolution. The event was on a molecular scale but had its bearings on what we now call and search for as the “human condition

  • The EMBO Meeting 2012 – Call for Participation

    The EMBO Meeting 2012 – Call for Participation

    EARLY REGISTRATION & ABSTRACT SUBMISSION: 12 JUNE 2012
    ON-LINE REGISTRATION: 4 SEPTEMBER 2012

    UPDATE: Late abstract deadline 12 August 14:00 CEST (Berlin)

    SUBMIT ABSTRACT | REGISTER

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

    http://www.the-embo-meeting.org/

    This annual conference attracts 1,500 scientists working in the life sciences. Featuring an impressive line-up of more than 120 world-class scientific speakers, including: Paul Nurse, Linda Partridge, Kari Alitalo, Steven Henikoff and Rob Singer. The programme includes three plenary lecture sessions devoted to genomics, RNA and oxygen sensing, vasculogenesis and disease. 20 concurrent sessions juxtapose classical fields of research with those exploring new frontiers in molecular biology. Daily meet the speaker lunches, giving access to leading researchers, and poster sessions extend the scientific programme.

    Latest News:

    Brisbane Times:

    Scientists closer to elixir of youth

    A FUTURE where Australians can pop a pill and significantly delay the effects of ageing – from hair loss to the onset of dementia – may be only about a decade away, one of the world’s leading evolutionary biologists predicts.

    Professor Dame Linda Partridge, who heads research teams at University College London and is the founding director of the Max Planck Institute for Biology of Ageing in Cologne, has been selected to give the prestigious Graeme Clark Oration in Melbourne next month.

    She predicts that at some point in the next 10 years drugs will be available that could keep us healthy in body and mind long into old age.

    More: http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/act-news/scientists-closer-to-elixir-of-youth-20120616-20h6o.html

    Latest Videos:

     

  • The pitcher plant, the beetle, and relying on rain for your next meal

    The pitcher plant, the beetle, and relying on rain for your next meal

    It’s a trap!

    In the fields of Brunei Darussalam in North Borneo, once a crown colony of Great Britain, lies the pitcher plant. The pitcher plant is carnivorous, capturing and devouring insects that seek to harvest its nectar.

    The pitcher plant is beguiling, attractive, and has evolved many ways to seduce its predator. Insect prey is captured within the wells of its pitcher-shaped leaves, when insects crawling along it slip on the wax crystals of the inner wall, and fall into the digestive fluids at the bottom. A dense layer of platelet-shaped wax crystals, orientated perpendicularly to the surface for a reason — to essentially make it difficult for insects to grip — especially when wet.

    The wax crystal layer is a common feature to many species of the pitcher plant. One such species, Nepenthes gracilis, is unusual in the fact that the crystals are also present on the underside of the pitcher lid.

    This was the observation that led to recently published research describing a new way the pitcher plant captures its prey.

    The lead author of the paper, published today in PLoS ONE, Dr Ulrike Bauer from the University of Cambridge’s Department of Plant Sciences, said: “It all started with the observation of a beetle seeking shelter under a N. gracilis lid during a tropical rainstorm. Instead of finding a safe — and dry — place to rest, the beetle ended up in the pitcher fluid, captured by the plant. We had observed ants crawling under the lid without difficulty many times before, so we assumed that the rain played a role, maybe causing the lid to vibrate and ‘catapulting’ the beetle into the trap, similar to the springboard at a swimming pool.”

    In effect, it’s a clever strategy on the part of the pitcher plant. At times, mostly when the weather is dry, insects have no problem gathering nectar from the plant. This allows “scout

  • How Much is that Green Algae in the Window?

    How Much is that Green Algae in the Window?

    Whoever thought you could make money in biology, right? Turns out, there is quite a bit of money to be made in this field. And I think we are realizing more than ever the importance of the life sciences and the contribution it offers to society and the economy.

    “I think the biggest innovations of the 21st Century will be the intersection of biology and technology. A new era is beginning, just like the digital one was when I was his age.