Sunday, August 25, 2013

Toxic Birds Make For Sad Lice



Toxic Birds Make for Sad Lice.


Photo by John Dumbacher from
the California Academy of Sciences
SEM photograph from phthiraptera.info

Today's entry is a bit divergent from the norm.  I saw a giant biting fly nipping at one of my dogs this morning.  Besides pharmaceuticals, I wanted to know what natural defenses against insects were out there.  Alas, no toxic dog fur existed in my brief literature search, but I did come across toxic bird feathers that combat lice.

So without further delay, I present the birds with toxic (to insects) feathers.

Birds are host to an impressive diversity of external parasites, from insects (including lice, fleas, bugs and flies) to mites, ticks and even fungi and bacteria. These parasitic organisms can have severe negative effects on host fitness. Therefore, it is not surprising that birds invest a lot of time engaged in behaviors such as grooming, preening, dusting and sunning in attempts to rid themselves of their ectoparasites. A handful of unique birds from the genus Pitohui have an interesting physiological adaptation that may assist in the fight against parasite infestation: feather toxins.

Yes, toxic birds. The six species of Pitohui, which are endemic to New Guinea have been found to carry in their skin and plumage. These are the same potent toxins as those found in the skin of poison dart frogs (Phyllobates spp.) and are some of the most toxic natural substances known. The toxin present in the Pitohui is known as homobatrachotoxin and like all batrachotoxins is a neurotoxic steroidal alkaloid capable of de-polarising nerve and muscle cell membranes. The level of toxins present in Pitohui tissue varies between species and geographic location. The most toxic species is the hooded pitohui (Pitohui dichrous), from which merely handling an individual can cause numbness, sneezing, and irritation of the eyes and sensitive mucous membranes. It has been hypothesised that the high proportions of toxin present in the Pitohui skin and feathers could provide the bird with a barrier from ectoparasites that live and feed on skin, feathers and subdermal blood supplies.

A curator and department chair of Ornithology and Mammology at the California Academy of Sciences was the first to test if the presence of toxins in Pitohui feathers and skin would deter or kill chewing lice (order Phthiraptera). In order to investigate this he conducted a series of choice and lifespan experiments. Dumbacher found that when individual lice in the laboratory were given a choice of two feathers (one toxic Pitohui feather and one non-toxic non-Pitohui feather) there was a statistically significant preference against feeding or resting on the toxic feathers. Lice exposed to the highly toxic feathers of P. dichrous rarely showed signs of eating, with many becoming immobile and inactive. In some cases the louse would simply drop off the toxic feather. In a natural setting, immobility and lower feeding rates reduces the damaging effect of the lice and may even allow the birds to more easily remove or dislodge the parasites mechanically by preening or flying. Since this part of the study showed that the lice exhibited an active choice against the naturally toxic Pitohui feathers we can conclude that homobatrachotoxin has the potential to act as a repellent against these parasites.

The Curator also determined that the natural levels of homobatrachotoxin in Pitohui feathers greatly increased louse mortality. The results of the lifespan experiments showed that the mean lifespan of lice exposed to feathers of either high or low level toxicity was half that of those on nontoxic feathers. Interestingly, the mean lifespan of the lice on the toxic feathers was similar even though the toxin levels in P. ferrugineus are ten times lower than P. dichrous. Therefore, Pitohui feathers with lower toxin levels may not have been potent enough to repel lice during the choice experiments but were as effective in increasing louse mortality as the highly toxic feathers. Increased mortality in lice could have many benefits for the host. Less time spent on the host will reduce the negative effect of each individual louse.

One observation from the study was that non-toxic feathers showed obvious damage from lice feeding. This may be due to the extended life span offering additional feeding time, or the lice simply find nontoxic feathers more palatable. Further investigations may provide insight into additional  benefits, for example whether or not the potent toxin is able to reduce louse fecundity. If mating in lice is decreased then subsequent generations of lice are also reduced. Smaller populations would cause less irritation to the host and also be less visible to potential mates. Additionally, less ectoparasites would reduce time spent mechanically removing them and more time to invest in other activities. The results of Dumbacher's study suggest that the naturally occurring homobatrachotoxin found in the skin and feathers of the Pitohui repels and kills lice. The presence of a powerful toxin in skin and feathers has the potential to create a formidable barrier and protect the bird against infestation from ectoparasites.

Reference:

Sunday, August 4, 2013

How much water is there on Planet Earth?


How much water is there on Earth?

We often hear people say 70% of the Earth's surface is covered by water. Oceans and seas constitute the largest amount of water, roughly 96.5%. The rest exists in lakes, rivers, underground water sources, in our body, and in your pets.

That does sound a lot isn't it? In reality, it's really not that much.
The blue spheres in the picture above show the relative amount of Earth's water in comparison to the size of the Earth. Surprisingly small isn't it? But we have to remember that water spreads evenly over the entire planet forming a thin layer of liquid, and that's how the little blobs colour our Earth blue.

Let's start with the smallest blob, the one hanging above the state of Georgia. It represents the surface-fresh water sources in all the lakes and rivers on the planet, i.e. the water that we use everyday. The diameter of this sphere is about 56.2km, and the volume of this sphere is about 93,113 km3.

The intermediate sphere, above Kentucky, shows the Earth's liquid fresh water in groundwater, swamp water, rivers, and lakes. We get our fresh water from rivers and lakes, but underground water sources are most of the time unavailable. This sphere has a 272.8 km diameter, and a volume of 10,633,450 km3.

The largest blue sphere represents all the water on Earth-seas, oceans, lakes, rivers, underground water. That sphere has a radius of 1385 km, and the volume would be 1.386 billion km3.
So when you compare the amount of water that can be used to the amount of water that cannot be used, the percentage is pathetically meagre-only 0.0067% of the water on Earth is reachable and usable by humans and land animals. What's worst, a large amount of that water is heavily polluted especially those in congested cities in India and China, rendering them essentially unusable.
Image: healthfactshealthtips.com
Unfortunately there are still intellectually-retarded rich capitalistic buffoons somewhere who love to stand (or sit?) for hours on end in their showers and waste clean water needlessly while they imbibe in their sordid fantasy.

But to think on the positive side, it's amazing so many water-carrying asteroids actually hit the Earth during its infancy to result in that much water on Earth today.

So the factoid that the Earth is COVERED by water on about 75% of its surface is in fact still valid, but this does put that precious resource into perspective.


info: http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/80beats/2012/05/14/this-tiny-sphere-is-all-the-worlds-water/

8 Glasses of Water A Day--How Did It Come About?


I have always heard you need 8 glasses of water a day.  I nag my own children to come close to this level of H2O consumption. 

I prefer to get my liquids via Diet Peps but most if not all the medical advisers I've met thus far have said that drinking 8 glasses of plain water a day is a must, in addition to other liquid like coffee and soup. That sums up to like... 10 glasses of liquid a day?
Image: www.just-eat.co.uk
Do we really need that much water in our system everyday? Who proposed that ludicrous idea anyway?

It turns out that there is no scientific proof to back the "8 glasses of water a day" rule. It was first written by Dr. Frederick J. Stare, one of the top nutritionists in the U.S in a book co-authored with Dr. Margaret McWilliams in 1974.

Dr. Stare wrote that:

“How much water each day? This is usually well regulated by various physiological mechanisms, but for the average adult, somewhere around 6 to 8 glasses per 24 hours and this can be in the form of coffee, tea, milk, soft drinks, beer, etc. Fruits and vegetables are also good sources of water.“

So what he meant was actually:
You are recommended to gulp down 6 to 8 glasses of liquid per 24 hours and this can be in the form of flavored drinks, plain water, soup, or even fruits and vegetables.

But how did that become "8 glasses of water a day"?
Another nutritionist, Dr. Irwin Stillman, who created the populat "Stillman Diet" in 1967 was the one who actually propagated the idea of drinking 8 glasses of water a day.

 “[Dr. Stillman] insisted on a minimum eight 10-ounce glasses of water daily… The reason for the eight glasses of water is to provide sufficient water for the kidneys to use in washing away the fatty acids resulting from the breakdown of fat, says Dr. Stillman. A bit later, however, he writes, “The ‘why’ of this functioning is not fully understood.”“

So how much exactly the liquid do we need each day?
Well that depends on a plethora of factors: your activity level,  job, your routine, your health, the weather, etc. Athletes and  people who work out a lot obviously need more water. People who live in warmer regions obviously need more water. But for the average person, the amount of water needed is proportional to the amount of liquid excreted via urine, sweat, and evaporation, which is about 3 liters for men and 2.2 liters for women per day. That translates into roughly 9.23 glasses (325ml) and 6.77 glasses of liquid for men and women respectively. So the numbers stated by Dr. Stare are still valid.

But remember, 9.23 glasses of either tea, coffee, soup, or plain water.



info: http://www.mindthesciencegap.org/2012/10/22/you-need-to-drink-8-glasses-of-water-a-day-a-history-lesson/