Invasion of the body Snatchers??!!

One of the most notorious invasive species known is the Cane toad in Australia,
If not mistaken cats on the Island of Tasmania

Cane toads were originally imported to Aus in the 1980s to control the cane beetles... which are decimating the budding sugarcane industry.

Much to their horror, the toads do not prey selectively upon the beetles, despite their name!




Due to their size, they consume pretty much anything and everything... especially the native Australian frogs which are outcompeted and displaced! The wreak havoc on the Australian Native system and cause a number of species of animals to be threatened.

If that isn't the end of their problem, the toads secrete a noxious substance that cover their bodies... killing anything that tries to eat them! This of course leads to a population explosion and pretty much all of Australia has been colonized...



--G'day Mate! They Call me Toadzilla--


This ecological disaster has not yet been adequately rectified... conservationists are resorting to the last strategy...fencing up un-invaded ponds to protect the native froggies... this time its the size that plays to the toads disadvantage.



and in Malaysia itself....
The red ear terrapins!

Those terrapins or sliders or tortoises.. whatever you call them.. can be found in almost all petshops in Malaysia.

Cute while they are tiny... many outgrow the space in the house and in the hearts of their owners and get abandoned Throughout Malaysia

All the Rivers, Streams, ponds, Lakes are infested with these alien species...
causing native species like the Malayan Box Turtle to be outcompeted and threatened.



PLease educate your friends, relatives and monyet-hood to not buy these little critters if they do not plan to keep them for life.

you are indirectly destroying Malaysian wildlife... Based on limited data.. we known our own turtle is threatened... but how much more impact is undetected?

Stop the invasion of Alien Species...

IN the same vein... Protest against Malaysian Government's repeated attempts to replant all the highways roadsides with ACACIA trees! (as if the Palm Oil plantations are not ENOugh!!

All that glitters is.....

From an interesting E-mail...






Looking like giant leaves floating in the sea, thousands of Golden Rays are seen here gathering off the coast of Mexico . The spectacular scene was captured as the magnificent creatures made one of their biannual mass migrations to more agreeable waters.


Gliding silently beneath the waves, they turned vast areas of blue water to gold off the northern tip of the Yucatan Peninsula . Sandra Critelli, an amateur photographer, stumbled across the phenomenon while looking for whale sharks.
She said: 'It was an unreal image, very difficult to describe. The surface of the water was covered by warm and different shades of gold and looked like a bed of autumn leaves gently moved by the wind.

'It's hard to say exactly how many there were, but in the range of a few thousand'






'We were surrounded by them without seeing the edge of the school and we could see many under the water surface too. I feel very fortunate I was there in the right place at the right time to experience nature at its best'
Measuring up to 7ft (2.1 meters) from wing-tip to wing-tip, Golden rays are also more prosaically known as cow nose rays.

They have long, pointed pectoral fins that separate into two lobes in front of their high-domed heads and give them a cow-like appearance. They are known to be shy and non-threatening when in large schools.

The population in the Gulf of Mexico migrates, in schools of as many as 10,000, clockwise from western Florida to the Yucatan .

Evolution...

Shedding the weight of exams, my mind is once again allowed to wander and I am thus
reminded of one great example of evolution in progress.

Evolution comprises of a few concepts

1. Random mutation occurs in a species (occuring at a genetic level- unobservable)
2. the mutation gives rise to observable traits, features and characteristics
3. Some traits are beneficial to life, others have no effect whatsoever, some however are downright detrimental
4. Species adapt to the environment
5. Those that are suitably adapt to a particular environment by virtue of their traits survive, are able to produce more offspring and in the process pass their genes on to the next generation (which will inherit the traits)

Examples of the above are plenty
Including adaptive radiation among the Finches of the Galapagos, the change in the dominant colour pattern of moths living in industrialized areas

but what about humans?

This can be observed in the inheritance of the Sickle Cell Trait.
Sickle cell Disease

Sickle cell Disease affects the red blood cells where a genetic defect causes the formation of defective haemoglobin that causes red blood cells to be deformed (sickle shaped) (defective polymerisation)



There are homozygotes - having both defective alleles
And heterozygotes - having a single defective allele

Excerpts from the article in wikipedia:

"In people homozygous for HgbS, the presence of long-chain polymers of HbS distort the shape of the red blood cell, from a smooth donut-like shape to ragged and full of spikes, making it fragile and susceptible to breaking within capillaries"
This condition predisposes the patient to disease states called crises.

Carriers have symptoms only if they are deprived of oxygen (for example, while climbing a mountain) or while severely dehydrated.

One-third of all aboriginal inhabitants of Sub-Saharan Africa carry the gene because in areas where malaria is common, there is a survival value in carrying only a single sickle-cell gene (sickle cell trait). Those with only one of the two alleles of the sickle-cell disease are more resistant to malaria, since the infestation of the malaria plasmodium is halted by the sickling of the cells which it infests.



Thus the mutation causes the characteristic change in the property of red blood cells in the affected person.

This property while homozygous causes a marked reduction in life-expectancy and substantial morbidity

Whereas when heterozygous causes minimal ill effects while conferring a survival advantage in malaria endemic areas in Africa.

Thus those people with sicke cell trait are able to survive longer, produce nmore offspring and will successfully pass the gene on to their progeny...

Resulting in

One-third of all aboriginal inhabitants of Sub-Saharan Africa carry the gene


-distribution of sickle cell trait


-distribution of malaria

Simple and elegant example of the theory of evolution
applied onto humans!

Evolution X3 - My article was accepted, it seems.

DANIEL Vijayaruban Samuel’s letter The case against Mr Darwin (Your Say, Feb 15) provoked a strong reaction. Here are some of the views expressed.

PLEASE allow me to respond to Mr D.V. Samuel’s scathing attack on Charles Darwin.

Creationism has a legacy of persecuting its own scientists, only to later embrace their “heresies” as facts. Darwin was fortunate. Had he been born two centuries earlier, his persecution would have been horribly harsh.

The theories of Copernicus and Galileo are now accepted as facts (or are they still being considered as another can of worms by Mr Samuel?). Creationists should ask themselves: This about-turn from heresy to belief is for whose benefit? Isn’t it for survival?

Darwin’s theory doesn’t have a role for God. The process involves two stages. The first stage, mutation (variation) is a random process, and the second stage is non-random natural selection. His book, The Origin of Species, a masterpiece, is 150 years old. Even now, it is being aggressively attacked and ridiculed by defenders of the faith. They called themselves Scientific Creationists and Intelligent Design proponents. “Instantaneous Creation” is now “guided evolution” where (to quote from a science book) “God is smuggled in by the back door to supervise the evolutionary process”.

If we care to find out, there are creatures on Earth whose “designs” are so weird and bizarre that they violate our standards of morality. Would one call such creatures the work of God’s Intelligent Design?

Despite the relentless and vigorous attempts to discredit scientific works perceived as “threats” by the defenders of the faith, it is heartening to note that The Star continues to publish news items such as Hawking told not to study start of universe (by Pope John Paul II, June 2006), Okay to believe in aliens – Vatican scientist (May 15, 2008) and, Church of England apologises to Darwin over theories (Sept 15, 2008).

Thank you for celebrating 150 years of Darwinism.

Darwinist, Selangor

D.V. SAMUEL says Darwin had “absolutely no science degrees” and therefore had no “scientific authority”. He equates scientific aptitude and rigour with something that must be taught in a particular manner, yet cites Albert Einstein who was a very distracted student.

“Absolutely no science degrees” is not the same as no degrees at all. Darwin collected his degree from one of the most excellent universities on Samuel’s list, Cambridge. A very naughty attempt at discrediting him from the outset.

Thirdly, he cites Nobel Prize winners as having some special weight when it comes to forming arguments. Possibly, but I would like to remind readers that several prize winners of the Nobel Prize in Economics, adhering to their false models of economics, ignorantly walked into the recent global banking crisis, while others, non-Nobelled, clearly more intelligent, predicted it in published form prior to its occurrence; eg, Nassim Nicholas Taleb. Innate intelligence seems an excellent way of discovering, i.e. thinking out-of-the-box rather than that dull educational process where you come out the same as everybody else and possibly misinformed to boot.

Darwin “went outright against the Bible” because his explanation is much neater, accepts the utter randomness that surrounds us and doesn’t rely on what somebody taught him. He thought about it rather than just accepted. Galileo and Copernicus shook the religious world but hundreds of years later their ideas proved to be simply correct. Darwin will be vindicated too.

Next, and most importantly, Samuel takes Darwin’s “fairytale” and replaces it with the religious version where one is required to “believe that man is God’s work”. “Believe”? If one is fairytale, then sir, so is the other.

It is clear to me, that the arrogance displayed in calling humans the “supreme being” is beyond a science fiction fairytale and strays into that delusion where we are so much greater than the animals that there must be a more supreme “supreme being” who created us. Appalling. We are animals too, and we’re not very clever at that. Finally, this supreme being God creates a universe that “ultimately falls apart and disintegrates”. Not a great piece of intelligent design.

Adam Kopystynski, BSc MSc, Kuantan, Pahang

WRITING off Darwin’s credentials is a lowly tactic used by many pro-Creationists after they fail to refute evidence of the theory of evolution nor are able to, by any extent, prove their own.

Creationism was drilled into Darwin from the start and that he, by his own initiative, found proof to refute all he had believed to be true means a lot.

Indeed, after being provided with facts, figures and scientifically quantifiable methods to prove Darwin’s point – for example the carbon dating method that puts the age of the Earth at about 4.5 billion years old – pro-Creationists simply wave it all off.

When asked for a semblance of proof for creationism, no scientifically measurable methods are forthcoming leaving Creationism to be just a belief, a theory.

With the discovery of DNA, so much has been explained. Human DNA is also found to be 96% similar to that of many apes and 99% similar to chimpanzees. Man have been found to have originated from the continent of Africa and branched out from there, settling all across the globe. Proof that man evolved from another species can be found in the discovery of Homo erectus, Homo habilis and Australopithecus africanus.

In contrast, how does the Bible explain away the tens of thousands of prehistoric fossils if the Earth were only 6,500 years old? Unless you subscribe to the lie that the fossils are nothing more than plaster of Paris, made up by artists to beguile the faithful.

To all pro-Creationists out there, it is time you come up with proof for your theories instead of doing nothing but undermining the efforts of real scientists! Till then, I’m a monkey’s uncle.

Medical student, Muar, Johor

Evolution X2

This letter was posted to Starmag, Dated 15th of February, 2009

and below it would be my response(s).

____________________________
I WAS very much intrigued by the article Celebrating a revolutionary by Richard Ingham (People, StarMag, Feb 8). Charles Darwin who was a seminary drop-out with absolutely no science degrees or any scientific authority at all, is exalted to the same status as Isaac Newton, Albert Einstein, and Galileo.

Many eminent scientists say because of Darwin, many groundbreaking discoveries were made in the realm of science. A mere “theory” has evolved and made its way into today’s science books as the absolute answer to the origin of man.

On the contrary, what was regarded as the truth since the beginning involving the master designer and creator of life is now considered a religious belief and therefore not scientific.

As a believer of creation science, I reckon that Darwin’s theory is more of a fairytale than science. Darwin’s theory is no different from the fairytale of a frog that became a prince when kissed by a princess except for the added ingredientof “millions and millions of years”.

The “origin of species” requiring billions of years to support the plausibility of life’s emergence and of subsequent evolution from “amoeba” to man is considered science today!

Before I open the Darwin can of worms, let me make clear that creationists are not a bunch of religious evangelists who know nothing about science.

Many Nobel Prize winners in science and scientists from renowned universities such as Oxford, Cambridge, Harvard, and Yale are great writers and contributors to creation science. Browse the following website to discover great creation scientists who have made significant contributions to science: http://www.creationinfo.com/list.htm.

Three major religions of the world believe that man is God’s work. Christianity, Islam and Judaism believe this awesome truth, that man was uniquely created and did not come into existence by chance or evolve from an ape.

Darwin’s theory advocates that out of nothingness came matter and life, which evolved from the most primitive single cell organism to a supreme being like the human. It advocates that billions of things are supposed to have developed upward, becoming more orderly and complex.

This totally contradicts the Second Law of Thermodynamics, where it’s partially a universal law of decay; the prime cause of why everything ultimately falls apart and disintegrates over time, and so does life.

Darwin went outright against the Bible, the Quran, and the Torah in presenting his theory and thus creating a religion called Evolution, luring many “weak links” into believing his folly.

Daniel Vijayaruban Samuel,
Kajang, Selangor

__________________________________________________
This is based on my limited knowledge on the subject.

I take special objection to the letter by Daniel Vijayaruban Samuel (Starmag 15th February)
He starts by writing off the credentials of Darwin, a lowly tactic used by many pro-creationists(As should be known, Darwin studied at a clergy. He was brought up with Christianity. That creationism was drilled into him from the start and he by his own initiative, found proof to refute all he had believed to be true means a lot) after failing to refute evidence of the theory nor able to by any extent, prove their own.

Indeed, after providing facts, figures and scientific quantifiable methods to prove Darwin’s point- for example the Carbon Dating method that predicts the age of the earth to be about 4.5 billion years old. The pro-creationists simply wave it off as “there may be possible mistakes in carbon dating”, citing the biblical flood as a cause of discrepancy.

When asked for a semblance of proof for creationism, no scientifically measurable methods are forthcoming leaving Creationism to be just a belief, a theory.

With the discovery of DNA, so much has been explained. Human DNA is also found to be 96% similar with many apes and 99 per cent similar with chimpanzees. Man have been found to have originated from the continent of Africa and branched out from there settling all across the globe. Proof that man evolved from another species can be found in the discovery of Homo erectus, Homo habilis and Australopithecus africanus.

In contrast, how does the bible explain away the tens of thousands of prehistoric fossils if the earth were only 6500 years old? Unless you subscribe to the lie that the fossils are nothing more than plaster of paris, made up by artists to beguile the faithful.

A side question here, following the discovery of human migration trails above, were Adam and Eve Black? To swerve away from responding to the question by questioning the accuracy of it would once again prove that pro-creationists have used the same outdated ammunition ever since 1857 over and over again- to brush off all new and fresh efforts made by the scientific community while having nothing new of their own. To agree with that statement would start a whole new debacle.

Starmag’s allocation of 3 pages for the issue is sorely inadequate yet in keeping with the limitations of a newspaper I will have to keep my respond brief.

Finally, a bid to all pro-creationists out there, it is time to come up with proof for your theories instead of doing nothing but undermine the efforts of real scientists! Till then, I’m a monkey’s uncle.

Pseudonym: Medical student
Yong Kuan Yew

_________________

My other article in support of evolution

http://resonating-ripple.blogspot.com/2008/11/selfish-gene.html

The Selfish Gene

The Selfish Gene

The Selfish Gene is a book on evolution by Richard Dawkins, published in 1976.

What it essentially states is that... this is a difficult concept to explain and I apologise if I am unable to do justice to the term.

What it means, as far as I understand is that a gene seeks to propagate itself, ensures that it is further replicated through future generations, ensure that it (i.e. a species) lives on.

Survival of the fittest, a quote by Darwin touts that in a competitive situation of limited food and adverse conditions, only the best adaptable will be able to survive and produce offspring to carry on the gene. Thus, only the best will go on living.

So essentially the best gene among a pool of genes- Ie one carried by the alpha male of a troupe of monkeys-the leader of the pack-usually the strongest and healthiest monkey among the group- will be the one being propagated into the next generation. It is indeed so, considering the fact that in certain animal colonies, (case in point-wolves) only the alpha pair have the right to mate and produce progeny.The rest of the wolf pack are childless for they serve as nannies to the alpha pair's cubs. This is nature's selection process.

Okok.. Enough of the preamble... This is actually a post about the intelligence of... I'll give the chance for all to warm up to this thought.... ready? Set? Go!
THE INTELLIGENCE OF PLANTS

Has it sinked in? Or are you shaking your head in disbelief? Hopefully after the rather strainful paragraphs above you still have the will to read on.. keeping my fingers crossed!

(p.s.- I Just handed in my Case write up this afternoon at 5pm.. I slept at 3.30a.m. this morning and woke at 7.30am so pardon me if the quality of this article is off)

(p.p.s- I have never read an article on the same topic so i'll try my best here)

We usually think that plants have no intelligence. Structurally this is true as they don't have a bundle of nerve cells that constitute what we call a brain and technically they are just plain growers reacting to light, water and gravity-(tropisms)

We think that they are the silliest lot in nature... what?... producing fruits only to be eaten by others... They are at the mercy of everything else under the sun- the weather, insects, animals that eat the plant and fruits and leaving nothing behind.

but careful contemplation will reveal that plants apply the concept of the selfish gene and they have the intelligence needed to make sure they are passed on.

Consider the duku (ok, Langsat/ dukong) if you will... and recall the time you absent-mindedly chewed hard enough to break the seed. What follows next is a reflex action of wanting to spit/vomit. The plant wishes that you eat the pulp of the seed but not the seed itself. By being Sour and Bitter it sends the message ---" I AM NOT TO BE EATEN". So you end up eating up the pulp and tossing the seed behind your back.. just what the plant wanted. 'toing!' it lands on a soft spot on the ground and sprouts! (not so if youre living in an apartment la. what happens is your mum comes round and pulls your ears)

The same rule applies to citrus fruits. Then consider this. Ever tasted a green orange? Or a unripe banana? (I will explain the banana story later) They taste sour or in the case of banana what we chinese call "siap-siap"- it leaves a bad sensation on our tongue and mouth.

Again, the plant is trying to say "I AM NOT TO BE EATEN" or perhaps "I AM NOT TO BE EATEN, YET". Before the seed within the fruit is mature, animals (humans ARE animals) are not allowed to consume the fruit. What good to the gene there will be if the unripe seed is strewn around and allowed to rot? A waste of time and resources. Plants spend almost 80-90% of their energy forming flowers and then seeds. A immature seed is a season's toil gone down the drain.

-Bananas used to have seeds. Ask your granddad or grandmum and they will testify not all bananas can be swallowed whole without thinking. Human selection has selected or modified the plants that root sprouting has become the choice method of reproducing instead of seeds. A relief to many that used to chew hard onto the seed and regretted it. Try any jungle bananas- the ones allowed to grow on their own without human intervention and you may still find great big seeds inside, compared to the tiny-weeny seeds we see now.-

So the above illustrates how a plant protects its investment. There are more examples to come. Now. Certain plants "know" that their fruits are going to be eaten. In fact they come prepared for this. Some seeds of certain plants do not germinate unless they past thru the gut of some animals and the acid within the stomach breaks down the waxy coating over the seed allowing the micropyle to absorb water and expand, thus breaking the seed covering and allowing the radicle(root) to burst forth!


An extreme of this example is the the Australian eucalyptus whom seeds only germinate, after a fire. This is a product of generations of survival of the fittest, evolution at its best. Australian bushfires are notorious for the havoc they wreak. And plants living in the outback have thus grown tougher tougher throughout the generations, having roots that withstand fires or thick barks that can stand intense flame. The pinnacle of this form of evolution- being through the (to quote an archaic expression) baptism of fire is the fire-proof seed. The reason is simple. After a fire breaks out the entire landscape is burnt down and there is no competition. There is the added bonus that the ashes of the plants that once stood now become instant fertilizers! These flame-hardy seeds stand to gain the most from a fire. You can imagine them hoping for a blaze to happen soon so that they can sprout and free themselves from the confines of a seed.

Starting to believe that plants are smart and may have a brain or two tucked somewhere?

I hope to convince you even further.
Sometimes there are plants that depend solely on an animal for its pollination.
You would think "oh the poor poor plant, having only a sole pollinator... its entire species depends on a single animal... it's like having its life controlled forever"
But in reality it is the plant which controls the animal. It enslaves it with sugary nectar or delicate fruits. The animal is entirely reliant on that plant having adapted mouth parts uniquely suited to draw nectar from a unique flower, while the plant may have a host of pollinators to show off with.

An example of a superbly unique evolutionary relationship

The Angrecum Orchid in Madagascar.
A simple demonstration of the relationship between forest plants and animals comes from the night-blooming Angrecum orchid. The yellow-flowered beauty has a nectary at least 8 inches long -- meaning that its pollinator needs a snake-like tongue to reach the delicious, high-sugar nectar inside.

No less a naturalist than Charles Darwin, who saw the Angrecum in Madagascar in the 1860s, correctly predicted that a moth with a 22-centimeter tongue must exist in the forest. Fifty years later, the moth was found -- with a rolled-up tongue that snoots out like a Hong-Kong New Year's party favor.

For the explanation of symbiotic evolution refer the link below
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20081006081631AAdNBhN

Now... For the grand story... accelerated evolution- hard to imagine without the plant having a brain!

What is this?

Yup this is a Passion fruit. Recently being imported to Malaysia and planted here. This fruit has an unique taste like no other. If you want a sample ask one from me the next time I come back from Muar. I passed quite a few to a few friends and one to a midwife that allowed me to conduct a delivery. To my horror she said:

"Apa ni? ada jampi ke?"

Oh well.. I hoped she liked it!

The passion fruit comes from the...teng teng teng teng... the passion vine! No prizes for guessing it right! I have one of them at home and it is currently sprouting ten passion fruits!!! Hohoho...


Back to the story....
There is a strain of wild passion vines in the forests of...uh... I can't remember... south america maybe? that has the unfortunate luck of being favored by a particular species of caterpillar and gets eaten all the time. So the poor plant starts to think... of the available options...

1) have toxic stem and leaves! that should keep the moth away!
But the plant thought that wouldn't work. The caterpillar would soon grow resistant to the toxin. (Meerkats and Scorpions have this arms race in that the scorpion tries ever so hard to produce a new poison that the meerkat isn't resistant from. But the meerkat gets sick once, twice and if it doesn't die passes the immunity on to its progeny. So here's a super resilient baby meerkat. The scorpion doesn't concede defeat and rebrews its venom so that it is more toxic or works faster ... and the race goes on until today where same species of scorpions from different regions in africa have different toxic cocktails within their tails... evidence that they are adapting, changing the venom to counter the meerkat's immunity.) (Kinda like how the arms race between Russia and the US during WWII works)

So what do you think the plant do that doesn't involve cooking up cauldrons of toxins?
It starts to look like this!


Nope, that isn't a bud about to grow. In fact it serves no purpose but to trick the moth/butterfly into thinking that this plant has already been visited by many moths before and if she lays her egg on this plant... her baby caterpillars will have to compete with dozens and dozens of other caterpillars that will definitely hatch sooner than hers... so off she goes in search of a less tasty plant to lay her eggs on. Brilliant, isn't it?

I may not be a good story teller so here goes

"Interesting associations have developed between plants and insects like that of the Heliconid butterflies and passion flower vines of the genus Passiflora. Passion flower vines contain cyanide-based compounds for protection against predators. However, Heliconid caterpillars have adapted to these compounds and are able to eat the vine's leaves. Therefore, Heliconid butterflies lay their eggs directly on the passion flower vine, so the larvae will have easy access to their food source. Passion flowers have counter-adapted to the behavior by developing mechanisms to discourage Heliconid butterflies from laying eggs on their leaves. Some Passiflora have evolved structures (actually nectaries) that create housing and produce excess nectar for ants. In return, the ants attack anything, including butterfly eggs, that intrudes on their host. One- upping their predators, some Passiflora have structures that mimic the eggs of Heliconid butterflies. Since a Heliconid butterfly will not lay its eggs on leaves that already have (or appear to have) these eggs, she will move on to another plant. In this manner, Passiflora deter Heliconid butterflies without devoting any resources to the production of nectar for a guard of ants, a technique of protection adopted by many other plants as their primary means of defense."

So there you go! I hope I did justice to the subject... There are plenty of examples out there that I have no idea off... this is just a limited selection of "plant cleverness" that I know off. I hope my short article successfully piqued your interest in finding out more about the weird and wonderful world of nature that we are losing fast... please do your part to preserve this lovely story so that we can show them to our children!

:-)