Tuesday, July 14, 2009

Migration: lemurs & dragon's wings

Indian Ocean migrations: Madagascar lemurs, Maldive dragonflies

New theory on why male, female lemurs same size, matriarchal


Rice University link

Why are male and female lemurs the same size?

In most primate species, males have evolved to be much larger than females. Size is an advantage for males that guard females to keep other males from mating with them, and evolutionary biologists have long wondered why lemurs evolved differently. Some theories have suggested that environment played a role or that lemur social development was altered due to the extinction of predatory birds.

"Scientifically, this is quite a big question that researchers have debated for over 20 years," said Dunham, assistant professor of ecology and evolutionary biology. "I actually started doing research on lemurs as an undergraduate, working in Ranomafana (National Park in Madgascar), and the question about size monomorphism has bugged me since then."

In a paper featured on the cover of this month's Journal of Evolutionary Biology, Dunham offers one of the first new theories on lemur monomorphism in more than a decade. After an exhaustive review of the observational work done on lemurs, Dunham came to the conclusion that male lemurs do guard their mates, just like other primates. But unlike gorillas and other primates that fight for mating rights with females, male lemurs have evolved to passively guard their mates.

They do this by depositing a solid plug inside the female's reproductive tract just as they finish mating. The plug is deposited as a liquid protein but quickly hardens and stays in place for a day or two. Since many female lemurs are sexually responsive to males for only one day out of the entire year, the plug serves the purpose of preventing other males from mating with the female, while also freeing the male to mate with other females during the brief time they are available.

"If the female has a short receptivity period, as most lemurs do, then we hypothesize that this is likely to be an advantageous strategy," said Dunham, who co-authored the paper with Rice evolutionary biologist Volker Rudolf.

To test their hypothesis, Dunham and Rudolf examined 62 primate species and found that copulatory plugs were most likely to occur in species where female sexual receptivity was very brief and where males and females were the same size. This was true both for lemur species and for a few other species, like South American squirrel monkeys.

"Our idea needs further testing because it's new, but it's more parsimonious than some of the old theories, and we're very excited about looking into it further," Dunham said. "We've made some explicit predictions about the conditions where this strategy should be favored, so there are plenty of ways it can be tested." Dunham said she hopes to travel to Madagascar within the next year to begin gathering data for a new project that will examine the impacts of climate change on lemur populations.

Lemurs evolved on the African island in isolation from other primates for 65 million years, and they are well-known for having odd traits not found in other primates. For example, some lemurs hibernate, storing fat in their tails, and all have toothcombs -- teeth that are perfectly shaped for grooming. Lemurs also differ from other primates in another key respect that has also stymied primatologists for years: The females are usually the dominant sex.

Dunham's investigations into the long-standing mystery of female dominance among lemurs led her to put forward another important theory last year. Published in the journal Animal Behavior, the theory suggests that female lemurs tend to dominate males because the females do all of the work in rearing the young and therefore have more will to fight and win.

"Game theory predicts that when the fighting abilities of two contestants are comparable, the outcome will depend upon the value that each contestant places on the resources they are fighting over," she said. "In this case, the females clearly have more at stake, but the only reason the females are in a position to compete for dominance is because they're roughly the same size and strength as the males."

[A parallel to Bonobo chimps, where female-female relationships are tight. Both lemurs and bonobos are likely derived from an ancestral pregnant female isolated by water from the normal society producing a matriarchal society. This has happened in human populations as well.]
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dragons fly from Asia to Africa and back link

Matt Walker, Editor, Earth News



Globe skimmers (Pantala flavescens)
Globe skimmers rest up

Every year, millions of dragonflies fly thousands of kilometres across the sea from southern India to Africa. So says a biologist in the Maldives, who claims to have discovered the longest migration of any insect. If confirmed, the mass exodus would be the first known insect migration across open ocean water. It would also dwarf the famous trip taken each year by Monarch butterflies, which fly just half the distance across the Americas. Biologist Charles Anderson has published details of the mass migration in the Journal of Tropical Ecology. Each year, millions of dragonflies arrive on the Maldive Islands, an event which is well known to people living there.

"But no-one I have spoken to knew where they came from," says Anderson, an independent biologist who usually works with organisations such as the Maldivian Marine Research Centre to survey marine life around the islands.

Their appearance is especially peculiar because the 1200 islands that make up the Maldives lie 500 to 1000km from the mainland of southern India, and all are coral cays with almost no surface freshwater, which dragonflies need to complete their lifecycle. Anderson noticed the dragonflies after he first arrived in the Maldives in 1983. He started keeping detailed records each year from 1996 and now collates data collected by local observers at other localities in the Maldives, in India and on vessels at sea.

When Anderson compared these observations with those made of dragonflies appearing in southern India, he found a clear progression of arrival dates from north to south, with dragonflies arriving first in southern India, then in the Republic of Maldives' capital Male, and then on more southern atolls.

Each year, dragonflies first appear in Male between 4 and 23 October, with a mean arrival date of 21 October. Dragonfly numbers peak in November and December, before the insects then disappear once more. The insects arrive in waves, with each staying for no more than a few days.

Over 98% of the dragonflies recorded on the islands are Globe skimmers (Pantala flavescens), but Pale-spotted emperors (Anax guttatus), Vagrant emperors (A. ephippiger), Twisters (Tholymis tillarga) and Blue perchers (Diplacodes trivialis) also appear in some numbers. The dragonflies then reappear between April and June.
The dragonflies are clearly migrating from India across the open sea to the Maldives, says Anderson. That by itself is fairly amazing, as it involves a journey of 600 to 800km across the ocean," he says.

Quite how they do it was a bit of a mystery, as in October at least they appear to be flying against the prevailing winds. However, in October, and continuing into November and December, a weather system called the Inter-tropical Convergence Zone moves southwards over the Maldives. Ahead of the ITCZ the wind blows towards India, but above and behind it the winds blow from India. So it seems that the dragonflies are able to reach Maldives by flying on these winds at altitude above 1000m.

Globe skimmers are renowned for their ability to fly long-distances They can fly up to 6300m high, the highest of any dragonfly species With a tailwind of 10m per second, a dragonfly could cross from India to Male in 24 hours Maldivians consider the dragonflies' arrival to be a harbinger of the north-east monsoon But that is not the end of the animals' epic adventure. "As there is no freshwater in Maldives for dragonflies, what are they doing here?" asks Anderson.

"I have also deduced that they are flying all the way across the western Indian Ocean to East Africa." Anderson has gathered a wealth of circumstantial evidence to back his claim. Large numbers of dragonflies also start appearing in the northern Seychelles, some 2700km from India, in November, and then in Aldabra in the Seychelles, 3800km from India, in December. That matches the slow southerly movement of the Inter-tropical Convergence Zone weather system, behind which winds blow steadily from India to East Africa.

It is also known that Globe skimmers appear in large numbers through eastern and southern Africa. In Uganda, they appear twice each year in March or April and again in September, while further south in Tanzania and Mozambique they appear in December and January. That strongly suggest that the dragonflies take advantage of the moving weather systems and monsoon rains to complete an epic migration from southern India to east and southern Africa, and then likely back again, a round trip of 14,000 to 18,000km.

"The species involved breeds in temporary rainwater pools. So it is following the rains, taking sequential advantage of the monsoon rains of India, the short rains of East Africa, the summer rains of southern Africa, the long rains of East Africa, and then back to India for the next monsoon," says Anderson.

"It may seem remarkable that such a massive migration has gone unnoticed until now. But this just illustrates how little we still know about the natural world." The monarch butterfly is often cited as having the longest migration of any insect, covering around 7000km in an annual round trip from Mexico to southern Canada.

On average, it takes four generations of butterflies to complete the journey.
Anderson believes that the dragonflies survive the ocean flights by gliding on the winds, feeding on other small insects. They too, take four generations to make the full round trip each year. He says the migratory paths of a number of insect-eating bird species, including cuckoos, nightjars, falcons and bee-eaters, follow that of the dragonfly migration, from southern India to their wintering grounds in Africa. That suggests the birds feed on the dragonflies as they travel.

"They [fly] at the same time and altitudes as the dragonflies. And what has not been realised before is that all are medium-sized birds that eat insects, insects the size of dragonflies," he says. "There are earlier records of swarms of Globe skimmers flying out to sea, and at sea," Anderson continues. "But it was always assumed that those dragonflies were doomed. Which says rather more about our earth-bound lack of imagination than it does about the globe skimmers' extraordinary flying abilities."

Friday, July 3, 2009

Aquatic frog of the Congo



The African dwarf frog, a member of the Pipidae, is an aquatic animal living its life entirely underwater, but needs to rise to the surface to breathe atmospheric air because they have lungs and not gills. They "breathe" water in through their skin. They are fairly small in size and don’t weigh more than a few ounces. (Wikipedia)

They produce vocal clicks and trills, rather than the more typical croaks of more terrestrial/arboreal frogs, due to a lack of long extensible tongue and throat sac.


Jamaican tree frog lacks vocal sac yet vocalizes
"Hyla marianae lacks a vocal sac" yet calls during mating season in arboreal wet bromeliads.
Treefrog without throat sac

So we see a precise parallel regarding water & foraging:
benthic foraging frogs & humans lack throat sac, lack tail
surface foraging frogs & large apes have throat sac, lack tail
arboreal foraging frogs & canopy gibbons lack throat sac, lack tail

benthic foraging salamanders & monkeys lack throat sac, have tail
arboreal foraging salamanders & *monkeys lack throat sac, have tail

*atellid howler monkey.
all wading/swimming/diving monkeys have medium or long tails.

---

Clicking for echolocation by dolphins and humans
http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2009/06/echolocation/

Frog hydrodynamic streamlining:
Not linear in their resting position, no, but well streamlined and linear at
times when leaping and swimming.
http://www.funfacts.com.au/images/leaping-frog1.JPG
http://www.northrup.org/Photos/frog/low/frog-swimming-underwater.jpg

The frogs legs can spread wide, then clap together while pushing against the water.
http://t3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:oTBfOGA5itQV5M:http://afrogpond.com/files/motorbike-frog-eaparry.jpg


Some frogs/toads walk or gallop briefly rather than hop. Many treefrogs mostly climb on 4 limbs, boreal toads tend to walk more than hop on the ground. The natterjack ground gallops briefly on all four, and burrows into drying salt-mires with forelimbs initially and then rear limbs.
http://scienceblogs.com/tetrapodzoology/2009/10/natterjack_life_and_times.php

This parallels primates/hominoids again, the change from ancestral long-tail locomotion (monkeys/salamanders) to non-tail hydrostatic foraging results in modified locomotion (leaping/swinging) which in some species returns to near-ancestral qpal locomotion in some species (natterjack/knucklewalking apes). The only missing parallel remaining is the possible frog which developed bipedal gait, so far not found in nature. Possibly long-tailed proto-archosaurs (ancestors of crocs, T rex, birds) developed from a coastal arboreal salamandrid, which in the avian line lost the long tail after branch vertical perching and reversed toe evolved.

Friday, June 12, 2009

Parallel convergence

Sit float feeding in warm water -> hominoid, absent tail, air sac

Sit grass feeding on dry ground -> gelada, long tail, no air sac


Sit float feeding in warm water -> LCA toad/frog, throat sac, croak, long
prehensile tongue, rear feet similar to other frogs

Dive & swim in water -> diving frog, no throat sac, no croak, trill, no more
long prehensile tongue, rear feet differs from other frogs
Diving frog
This most-aquatic frog has a unique immunity to the fungi that is killing
amphibians around the world. Breath control.

Dive & swim in water -> human, no throat sac, no croak, speech/click
no prehensile toes, rear feet differs from other hominoids
Diving hominoid
This most-aquatic hominoid has a unique condition (domestication) that is
killing hominoids around the world. Breath control.

Parallel convergence among tetrapods.

-

Orang-utans: Our Closest Relative?

Lluc

I find it odd that Lluca was pictured as a flat faced orangutan, considering
that it is the most distant of all hominoids from the current location of the
orangutan populations. Yet if it was merely the westernmost kin of a ring
species of base Pongid-Hominid apes which distributed along the Tethys shores
with localized dietary and predatory adaptations, and varying degrees of
bipedality, it is not so surprising.

IMO the question is not "are humans and orangs most closely related?" but
rather, "why do people insist on placing human ancestors geographically next to
chimps and gorillas, despite the gross differences in morphology?". Two closely
related species living in the same environment do not change drastically their
morphology, see gorillas and chimps.

Since lowland gorillas forage for floating AHV in brackish water, mountain
gorillas forage in highland fog forests for ground THV, savanna chimps forage in
open woodlands, forest chimps forage for small invertebrates in shallow water
and rainforest bonobos forage in the sub-canopy, we know that human ancestors
must have done something different (or in addition) to account for the extreme
morphological changes.

Crocs and hippos dominate the tropical waters of Africa except for small puddles
and highland waters, notably they lack both fur and SC fat, like manatees, they
rely on the sun's warmth in shallow water. Beavers and otters have thick fur and
live in sub-tropical and temperate waters, with the habit of cool water diving.

Humans, unlike all other great apes, fit in between these two groups, sun
basking (ashore and afloat in warm water) and cool-water deep-diving (deeper
than body length).

That this would have developed after the Orangutan had split eastwards and the
African apes split westwards, seems most parsimonious. The human ancestor seems
to have done neither, until they had well adapted to and dominated their new
African and Asian niches.

Rather, human ancestors seem to have paralleled the crab eating macaques (and
possibly Allen's swamp monkey), foraging both at the shoreline and beneath the
water surface, but still retaining the primate ability to climb. (also
paralleling the African clawed frog and marine otters, which can climb but not
as well as treefrogs or stoats.)

Why would human ancestors have generally stopped climbing and hanging from tree
branches and reeds while foraging? Because they brought their sticks with them
into the water to get food, just as chimps bring customized sticks to spear
bushbabies, to gather termites, to collect honey, to dig tubers in the wet
season. Orangutans don't customize sticks, though they use twigs to get neesia
seeds from spiny fruit, using their lips since one hand and both feet are used
to keep them in position in the high forest canopy.

Human ancestors didn't need their hands and feet to keep in position in the
canopy, because the canopy was low at shorelines, and because the food was as
much under the water surface as above, including later ambushed prey.


I can think of an interesting parallel here, whereby the young and old males
both compete individually and cooperate societally,

Gorilla: young lighter males climbing to canopy, older large males actively
ground foraging and in bais shallows

Orangutan: young lighter males climbing to canopy to forage, older larger males
lower (and if no cats) on ground foraging in swamps.

Aquarboreal ape: young males more mobile fruit foraging, older larger males at
tidal waterside peeling mangrove oysters and papyrus.

He: young males climbing coconut palms, older larger males more in water diving
for longer periods.

Hn: young males in waterside trees leaping onto and stabbing thirsty animals
into the water, older larger fatter males backfloating camouflaged with long
spears aimed at the prey's throats and chest as they dash into deeper water away
from the airborne ambush.

Hs: young trim males as paddlers/sailors/fishers, older larger males as ship
builders/captains/bankers.

A bit simplified but interesting. Not sure what happened to the "harem" and size
dimorphism, seems variable depending on climate, but otherwise a sort of
continuum. I'd think the shoreline would make for weaker harem/dimorphism
societies than the inlands where drought would be more drastic. The very deep
diving elephant seal harems seem to contradict this, but that may be due to
quite different constraints (simultaneous birthing, cyclical food supply) than
an aquatic ape (with hidden estrus and year around birth) which could forage
above, below and along the surface, and travel far inland during the muddy
coastal rainy season.

Friday, June 5, 2009

Spiral garden



My interpretation: A screened geodesic bubble frame with wind-spinning spiral ramp garden, fish & seafood pond below, ballasted with coral-crete and anchored offshore.

From here: plantagon

Wednesday, April 22, 2009

From sit-float-feeding to backfloat-dive-feeding to boat-net-feeding

AAT ~20ma initiation, 5ma immersion, 2ma dive/backfloating

I've no argument with Hardy's 20ma and Filler's date of ~20ma as initial aquatic
era, in an evolutionary sense. Upright posture, proconsul/morotopith wetland
sit-float-feeding as a change from its predecessor of upright dry sitting
(geladas) indicates daily aquatic foraging (surface feeding with gradually
enlarging air sacs and shrinking tail, maintained even in today's lowland
gorillas).
Homo Genus 5ma developing estuarine submersion foraging (crouch plucking), 3ma
seashore diving, 1.5ma diving/backfloating ARC cycle around the Levant and
former peri/tethys and upper Rift, gradual increase in waterside group ambush
improved tool technologies, which eventually took them to cooler rougher
predator-filled waters where rafts and boats were advantageous.
-
This from PZ's blog:
http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2009/07/the_evolution_of_hedgehog.php#more
"As usual, it starts on a sound foundation of confirmed, known evidence, makes a reasonably hypothesis on the basis of the facts, and then proposes a series of research avenues with predicted results that would confirm the idea."

Non-scientists take note: this is a category of paper that is usually titled "hypothesis" or "insight," as opposed to a peer-reviewed research paper or a literature review, although it is more similar to the latter. PLoS Biology uses the term "unsolved mystery:"

Unsolved Mysteries discuss a topic of biological importance that is poorly understood and in need of research attention.
-

Re: From sit-float-feeding to backfloat-dive-feeding to boat-net-feeding

PAs can argue forever about details when evidence is scattered and lacking, and
topography and climate changes at varying rates.

I've produced a simple explanation, of how hominoids differentiated from other
primates (tail loss, air sacs), how Homo differentiated from other hominids (ARC
diving, low UV saltwater backfloating), and how Homo sapiens differentiated from
other Homo (mass harvesting -> trade -> transport).

Of the question 'What happened?' the missing pieces of the puzzle have been
found and placed, they fit.

Other explanations for the unique characteristics of humans compared to our genetic kin fall short by not taking into account various behaviors and vestigial traits common to humans but not to other primates. That doesn't mean they are insignificant or incorrect, just incomplete.

The story is a bit more complete now.


Prose of human speciation

Hominoids vs other primates (sit/float/eat, tail loss, air sacs),

Homo vs other hominids (ARC diving, low UV saltwater backfloating),

Homo sapiens vs other Homo (mass harvesting/transport).

---

Hominoids sit/floating on flooded ground,
hands to pluck/peel/pull/pinch,
calls/splashes/thumps to warn,
sleep in tree hollows, forks (damp), beaver dens
eat meat without bones (eggs, pith, larvae, seeded fruit)

Homo going deeper into water/caves, while apes went higher,
Homo crafted long/sharp fangs/claws of sticks/stones/shells.
Using pebbles to crack, flakes to cut, bifacials to bait, branches to bash,
spears to probe/pry/poke, lords of the ring/pond/pool
eat meat/nuts with shells/bones to be removed and reused.

Hs brought sunlight into cold night (fire),
and dark into hot day (shelter), and wet into dry.
Bags/baskets/boats processed (cut, woven) to transport, harpoons/atlatls to
launch spears/darts.
Meats/grains to guide/process (planting/herding), grinding masses, soaking,
heating, storing, exchanging, comparing.
Rings concentrically ordered, become overly congested and condense into
rectilinear patterns and vertical double-storied dwellings and overlapped social
groupings and finally oral-named individuals become anonymously writ-numbered
cells in the spherical body of humankind and beyond.


Compare these two shelters: entry routes, protection from bears/cold
link
link

Mammoth bone lodge of Central Russian floodplain 15ka, summer doorway
link

22ka camp huts & bedding at upper Rift waterside link

seal ancestors link

DDeden

Thursday, April 16, 2009

Tuesday, April 7, 2009

Bio-convergent parallel: Anuroid & Hominoid

Arkive Video: Gorillas vertical wading and wet-sit-eating

left: dryland gelada, long-tailed, vertical-trunk, dry-sit-eat grasses, no air sac
right: lowland gorilla, tail-less, vertical-trunk, wet-sit-eat sedges, air sac


Another Video: Lowland Gorillas eating sedge rhyzomes and high-protein AHV (Aquatic Herbaceous Vegetation) while sitting-floating in forest open wetland Arkive video link

DD: The question is not "do air sacs always cause loss of tail?", but "is the complete loss of tail in hominoids due (in part) to laryngeal air sac?" The answer is clear, yes, float-sit-feeding with inflatable air sac selects for tail loss.

MV: Not so clear IMO: may depend on body size, size of airsacs, terrestrial vs aquatic milieu, salt vs fresh water milieu, time spent in trees & water, arm-hanging vs hopping vs above-branch, etc.

DD: parallel convergence at forest-waterside (swamp, wetland, shore):

left: Axlotl, long-tailed 'tadpole' with external gills and legs, swims but doesn't sit
right: Macaque, long-tailed, with lungs and legs, swims but doesn't feed sit-floating



Tadpoles with long tail swim, they don't sit partially feeding in water, they don't have prehensile tongue; frogs with no tail sit partially in water, and use long prehensile tongue to eat. Some frogs then evolved more arboreal traits (better climbing skills, less swimming), others spend much time on lake bottoms and developed more aquatic traits (skin 'gill' breathing)

left: tree frogs have since further specialized to arborealty, more 'spidery' and colorful
right: aquatic frog with hydrodynamic red external gills re-adapted to full submersion



Monkeys with long tails swim (Nasalis, Long-tailed macaque); while Ndoki swamp gorillas
(~LCA H-oid) with no tail sit partially in water while feeding.

left: tree apes have since further specialized to arborealty, more 'spidery' and colorful
right: aquatic apes (humans) with hydrodynamic hair re-adapted to submersion diving



AFAIK, neither spidery tree frogs nor deep-submersion frogs inflate their throat air sacs as much as forest-waterside frogs.

AFAIK, neither spidery tree apes (gibbon) nor deep submersion apes (humans) inflate their throat air sacs as much as forest-waterside apes.

Parallel pattern. Partial sit-float eating -> air sac -> tail lost; eventually species body size may enlarge at forest-waterside, OR become full-time spidery at arboreal canopy OR adapt deep submersion with active skin glands* or skin gills* as per photos.

DD: Complete loss of tail = vertical-trunk float-sitting while plucking-foraging. Laryngeal air sacs. Compare to long tailed gelada sitting while plucking-foraging grass on dry ground. No air sacs there, of course.

MV: Some baboons have short tails IIRC?

DD: None lost their tail, many highland monkeys (cold nights select for short tails) with non-prehensile tails have short tails. Tail covers peri-anal region, in water, muscle valves and tissue close peri-anal region.

Dry-sit-eating (no air sac, long-tailed) savanna gelada vs wet/float-sit-eating (air sac, tail-less) Ndoki swamp gorilla
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/AAT/message/49817

* frogs and salamanders may respire via gills, lungs or skin. I conjecture that the eccrine skin glands of humans (inactive in African apes except volar eccrines) function in very limited respiration. link

Evolution Canyon European-African micro-climates in Jordan Rift Valley

Flowering plants & veination 140ma:
http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2009-12/w-hdf120109.php
The study, by Dr Tim Brodribb and Dr Taylor Field of the University of Tasmania and University of Tennessee, used plant physiology to reveal how flowering plants, including crops, were able to dominate land by evolving more efficient hydraulics, or 'leaf plumbing', to increase rates of photosynthesis.

"Flowering plants are the most abundant and ecologically successful group of plants on earth," said Brodribb. "One reason for this dominance is the relatively high photosynthetic capacity of their leaves, but when and how this increased photosynthetic capacity evolved has been a mystery."

Using measurements of leaf vein density and a linked hydraulic-photosynthesis model, Brodribb and Field reconstructed the evolution of leaf hydraulic capacity in seed plants. Their results revealed that an evolutionary transformation in the plumbing of angiosperm leaves pushed photosynthetic capacity to new heights.

The reason for the success of this evolutionary step is that under relatively low atmospheric C02 conditions, like those existing at present, water transport efficiency and photosynthetic performance are tightly linked. Therefore adaptations that increase water transport will enhance maximum photosynthesis, exerting substantial evolutionary leverage over competing species.

Saturday, April 4, 2009

Aquanautical microbiota: Green Algae


Spirogyra reproduction, reminds one of double helix DNA, chromosome replication


Dancing spheres: volvox rotates, oscillates

Volvox reproduction, note the triangulation of cytoplasm threads, geodesic structure



volvox A large sphere colony with daughter sphere colonies containing small granddaughter colonies. Both male and female colonies form inside the equator of the parent colony. Volvoxes are hollow spheres of independent cells that each have an eye spot, the colony develops a light-polarity, where half of the colony has larger eye spots, making a supercell eyeball of sorts. Click the link to find out more. volvox wikipedia
nuther volvox tale


Pediastrum algae, a flat disk star


These outstanding photos are from this site: The Micropolitan Museum

Hydrodictyon reticulatum, Hexa-penta Water net algae, from: Hydrodictyon, Wikipedia


Protists: dinoflagellate plant/animal (planimal?) in toxic red tide, endosymbiont coral bleaching, some photosynthesizers and some with eyes (retina), have minicircles of 12 genes.
http://madlabrat.blogspot.com/2009/10/protists-and-their-plastids.html

Marimo Moss balls (Chladophora)

from cell to super-cell organism to super-organism society: colonial ants
-

Nutrition: Seaweed gardens

Naturally growing seaweeds are an important source of food, especially in Asia. They provide many vitamins including: A, B1, B2, B6, niacin and C, and are rich in iodine, potassium, iron, magnesium and calcium.[50] In addition commercially cultivated microalgae, including both Algae and Cyanobacteria, are marketed as nutritional supplements, such as Spirulina,[51] Chlorella and the Vitamin-C supplement, Dunaliella, high in beta-carotene.

Algae are national foods of many nations: China consumes more than 70 species, including fat choy, a cyanobacterium considered a vegetable; Japan, over 20 species;[52] Ireland, dulse; Chile, cochayuyo.[53] Laver is used to make "laver bread" in Wales where it is known as bara lawr; in Korea, gim; in Japan, nori and aonori. It is also used along the west coast of North America from California to British Columbia, in Hawaii and by the Māori of New Zealand. Sea lettuce and badderlocks are a salad ingredient in Scotland, Ireland, Greenland and Iceland.
Dulse, a food.

The oils from some Algae have high levels of unsaturated fatty acids. For example, Parietochloris incisa is very high in arachidonic acid, where it reaches up to 47% of the triglyceride pool.[54] Some varieties of Algae favored by vegetarianism and veganism contain the long-chain, essential omega-3 fatty acids, Docosahexaenoic acid (DHA) and Eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA), in addition to vitamin B12. The vitamin B12 in algae is not biologically active. Fish oil contains the omega-3 fatty acids, but the original source is algae, which are eaten by marine life such as copepods and are passed up the food chain.[55] wikipedia: algae nutrition

Friday, March 27, 2009

Asian small clawed otter pups

teh cuteness
LOL-otterz at San Diego Zoo

Coastal Forest Giants: leave some for the future
Northern California Redwood trees
Tasmania Eucalyptus trees

Monday, March 16, 2009

water



Come gather 'round people
Wherever you roam
And admit that the waters
Around you have grown
And accept it that soon
You'll be drenched to the bone.
If your time to you
Is worth savin'
Then you better start swimmin'
Or you'll sink like a stone
For the times they are a-changin'.

Bob Dylan
deep time

World Water Day @ 'All my faults are stress related'

The Water Management Cluster is concerned about inland water supplies and their continued availability and quality. Existing water management activities through the NASA-funded WaterNet and the EPA-funded Midwest Spatial Decision Support Systems Partnership will be central to the work of this cluster.

The Water Management Cluster has focused its initial activities on inland basin water pollution and on drought and its impacts. Of special interest to the cluster is the NOAA National Integrated Drought Information System (NIDIS) portal being developed.



Oil companies buy water supplies big oil and little water

Sunday, March 1, 2009

Bay side base site


Boat house harbor (my boat in my father's boathouse) at Bay point park, Mississippi river, between the bluffs & tracks & bikes & trucks & traix archipelago (riparian).

boathouse village between MN & WI





Marine science program at College of the Redwoods CR link

Sunday, February 22, 2009

Aquabase






http://technology.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/tech_and_web/microtrends/article5693274.ece

A house by the sea is a common dream. But in it? Surely that's only for James Bond baddies. Not so... an article by Murad Ahmed

Once the preserve of Bond villains, “semi-submerged environments”, or aquabases, to give them a more memorable name, are the latest projects being addressed by architects.

– These are homes that float on water, but with a submerged basement that can give you a great view of the ocean floor.

– One example is the Trilobis 65, designed by Giancarlo Zema. This amphibious home has four levels, half of which are a few metres underwater, and it can house a family of six. In fact, it’s a form of boat and can move at seven knots, although criminal masterminds may find it is not suited to making a quick getaway.

[DD: The dock reminds me a a floating dome I designed earlier. Don't take the trilobis near coral or rocky reefs in heavy surf!]

– Even more ambitious are the designs of Vincent Callebaut. His Lilypad is a floating eco-town that can accommodate 50,000 people. Self-sufficient, it runs on renewable energy and has a central freshwater lagoon that collects and purifies rain water. Huge shopping malls come built in as standard.

Comment: There's much more info available on this topic. Look up for instance "The Seasteading Book," a detailed online text about how to move beyond far-out utopian projects into something practical. Seasteading presents a new possibility for building a free society while socialism eats the West. Comment by Kris, Lancaster, Pennsylvania, USA

home offshore? Not for me, thanks, I like trees and sandy beaches. Maybe an island anchored to a seamount, with sliding dome cover for typhoons, with beach and coconut palms and lagoon and freshwater waterfall?



Water & Human Evolution

SOUTH AFRICA'S FAMOUS fossil apeman sites - Taung near Kimberley,
Sterkfontein, Swartkrans and Kromdraai near Krugersdorp, and Makapansgat
near Pietersburg - are situated in what is today the dry hinterland of the
subcontinent. So is the Olduvai Gorge on the Serengeti Plain of Tanzania,
Koobi Fora in the north and north-east of Kenya, and Bahr-el-Ghazal in the
Chad Republic in the Sahara Desert.
Yet, wherever the early members of the human family were evolving, they
needed water to drink and to keep cool. Proximity to water was the most
important factor in the location of an evolving group like the early
hominids. They must have lived near springs, rivers, lakes and freshwater
estuaries. Denied water in warm, tropical or sub-tropical climates, humans
quickly become dehydrated and death may follow in days. Water is necessary
for survival and an essential ingredient for evolutionary change.

Water and human dispersal
Water helped distribute humans across the planet, along seashores, lakes and
river banks. This would have accounted for the prehistoric peopling of most
of the Old World, from Africa to Europe and mainland Asia. Strolling or
swimming along the beach would have been sufficient to carry mankind from
the Horn of Africa to the Peloponnesos of Greece, from the Levant to the
Korean Peninsula, from Singapore to Siberia. When much water was bound up on
land as glaciers in the Ice Ages, sea levels were lower than they are today,
and previously submerged land-bridges appeared, helping spread humans to new
parts of the earth. At such times, it would have been possible to walk
dryshod from Tripoli and Tunisia to Malta and Sicily, from South Korea to
South Japan and from the Sakhalin Peninsula to Hokkaido, North Japan, from
Malaysia to Sumatra, Java and Bali and from Siberia to Alaska over the
500km-wide land connection called Beringia.
At some stages and in some places, humans learned to cross the water, even
without a land-bridge. Java and Bali were periodically connected to the
Asian mainland, so that animals, including humans, could easily cross to
them. However, the Indonesian island of Flores could be reached only by sea
crossings even when the sea level was lowest. Yet stone tools and fossil
bones on Flores show that humans (probably Homo erectus) and archaic
elephants (Stegodon) must have crossed this 19km-wide, deep oceanic channel
900 000 to 800 000 years ago. There is no evidence that they knew how to
make boats so early. Either they floated across using tree trunks and logs
as rafts, or they swam.
Another deep oceanic channel - the Strait of Gibraltar - lies between Ceuta
and Morocco in North Africa and Gibraltar and Spain. The strait today is
about 13 km at its narrowest point but when the sea-levels of the Atlantic
and Mediterranean were lower, the distance across was smaller and a few
islands (presently under water) would have appeared. The greatest sea
crossing then would have been only five kilometres. Stone tools and probable
fossil hominid remains between 1.5 and one million years old have been found
in south-eastern Spain near the village of Orce and the city of Murcia. For
a long time, the question has been: how did these earliest Europeans get to
the Iberian Peninsula from North Africa? There are two fairly obvious
overland routes ­ one through the Middle East across Suez and the Levant,
and one from Tripoli, via Malta, Sicily, the Strait of Messina to Calabria,
the toe of Italy. To get to the south of Spain from either of these two
passages would have involved taking the long way round, including the
crossing of the Pyrenees in a southerly direction. Several of us have been
pursuing the option of the short cut ­ the water traverse from Ceuta to
Spain. If people and elephants could get across a wider channel to get to
Flores just under a million years ago, I believe it is very likely that the
smaller water crossing of the Strait of Gibraltar would have been within
human capacity just over a million years ago. Again, floating, rafting on
flotsam and possibly even swimming seem to have been early acquisitions in
human cultural and behavioural evolution. Boats are technologically advanced
inventions which probably came much later.
These are details. The principle remains that water must have played a
crucial role in the distribution of humanity across the planet.

Semi-aquatic human ancestors?

The third way in which water is thought by some to have affected human
evolution is a nearly 40-year-old proposal, the Aquatic Ape Theory (AAT),
which holds that mankind evolved some of its distinctive features in an
aquatic environment and that ancient human ancestors spent more time in the
water than present-day descendants. As Graeme Addison explained in Out There
(January 1998), Sir Alister Hardy put forward the idea that man was more
aquatic in the past, following Max Westenhöfer's 1923 proposal that some
modern human anatomical features indicate an aquatic form of adaptation.
The idea was largely ignored by Hardy's contemporaries. There are two ways
in which a new idea in science is rejected: one is by direct confrontation
and attempts to refute it; the other is by turning a blind eye to it and
hoping that it will simply go away.
Among those who opposed the AAT, some pointed out that there were no fossils
to support it. One is tempted to ask what sort of fossils did they expect?
Those fossils already discovered in South and East Africa, four to three
million years old, show signs that they belonged to erect bipedal hominids.
One of the things the AAT proposed was that the early hominids developed
uprightness to hold the head above water while wading. Claiming that
water-adapted fossils had not been found, amounts to a circular argument
when the theory of water-adaptedness purported to explain the very erectness
of those fossil skeletons that had been found!
When a new idea is rejected, it is frequently because it flies in the face
of an accepted prevailing paradigm, in this case the Savannah Hypothesis
(SH).

The Savannah Hypothesis
From 1925 to 1995 almost everyone grew up on the "received wisdom" that the
Hominidae (the family of mankind) was born on the savannah, believed to have
been the ideal crucible in which the strange form of locomotion known as
bipedalism came into being. The idea is an old one. Robert Broom, in his
1933 book The Coming of Man: was it Accident or Design? stated: "Before
Australopithecus was discovered some of us believed that the ancestor of man
would be found in an anthropoid ape which had left the forest and taken to
living on the plains and among the rocks; and here (in Australopithecus, the
Taung child) we have just such a form."
Raymond Dart's 1925 paper, that announced the features of the little fossil
child from Taung, included this passage: "For the production of man a
different apprenticeship was needed to sharpen the wits and quicken the
higher manifestations of intellect ­ a more open veldt country where
competition was keener between swiftness and stealth, and where adroitness
of thinking and movement played a preponderating role in the preservation of
the species... in my opinion, Southern Africa, by providing a vast open
country with occasional wooded belts and a relative scarcity of water,
together with a fierce and bitter mammalian competition, furnished a
laboratory such as was essential to this penultimate phase of human
evolution." (Emphasis mine)
From the animal remains found with the Australopithecus child, Broom (1933)
wrote, "... we can safely infer that the rainfall was then, as now, scanty,
and that there were no forests in that region, only grassy and bushy plains
from which the hills and krantzes arose."
My generation grew up steeped in what more recently has been called the
Savannah Hypothesis. As Elaine Morgan has chronicled in her book, The
Aquatic Ape Hypothesis (1997), this view was supported, directly or
indirectly, by numerous scholars, including Sherwood Washburn, Kenneth
Oakley, Richard Leakey, Peter Wheeler, Alan Walker. It was a paradigm that
lasted for about 70 years of this century.
In 1980, the Africanist archaeologist J. Desmond Clark put forward a
modified version of SH which favoured a mixed ecology. He said "there is
little doubt that proto-hominids (ancestors of hominids) were widely
distributed throughout the tropical savannahs. It seems certain that it was
within habitats consisting of mosaics of grassland, woodland, and forest
that the hominid line first became differentiated from that of the pongids
(the apes)." Clark singled out not only the great richness and diversity of
plant and animal resources in the savannahs compared with the forest, and
the fragmentation of the forest cover during the later Miocene-early
Pliocene, which isolated some hominid populations, but also the progressive
expansion of grasslands from that time onward, which made available "empty
niches" into which hominids could expand. These factors, he believed, "can
be expected to have led to a number of adaptations".
In 1985, Elisabeth Vrba suggested that the family of man was probably a
"founder member" of the African savannah fauna! That year, I published a
chapter called "The conquest of the savannah and the attaining of erect
bipedalism" in which I expressed the old idea: "The living apes of Africa
are to be found exclusively in the wet forest of the middle reaches of the
continent. It is likely that ancestral apes, too, were forest-dwelling
creatures...The spread of lighter woodland and savannah and the retreat of
the margins of the primaeval forests could well have created conditions in
which the tendency to uprightness and bipedalism was favoured. The ability
to run across the high grass cover of the savannah, perhaps from one
woodland-girt stream to another, might have held advantages for those apes
which could 'walk tall'. Uprightness gave its possessors a chance to see
over the tall grass and to watch out for predatory enemies like the lions
and sabre-toothed big cats. Seemingly it was under just such a set of
conditions that the Hominidae made their appearance upon the face of the
earth."
That statement may well be the quintessence of the SH - and I believe it was
my last statement in support of it. By 1995, when I gave the Daryll Forde
Memorial Lecture at University College, London, I stated of the SH, "We were
all profoundly and unutterably wrong!"

Repudiation of the Savannah Hypothesis
My disavowal of SH was based in the first place on evidence which had been
coming forth from excavations in South and East Africa. From Sterkfontein,
suggestions of greater woodland cover at the time when Australopithecus was
deposited in Member 4, had emerged from studies on fossil pollen, but these
were not compelling. Then Wits team member Marian Bamford identified fossil
vines or lianas of Dichapetalum in the same Member 4: such vines hang from
forest trees and would not be expected in open savannah. The team at
Makapansgat found floral and faunal evidence that the layers containing
Australopithecus reflected forest or forest margin conditions. From Hadar,
in Ethiopia, where "Lucy" was found, and from Aramis in Ethiopia, where Tim
White's team found Ardipithecus ramidus, possibly the oldest hominid ever
discovered, well-wooded and even forested conditions were inferred from the
fauna accompanying the hominid fossils.
All the fossil evidence adds up to the small-brained, bipedal hominids of
four to 2.5 million years ago having lived in a woodland or forest niche,
not savannah. The evidence for the presence of big forest trees supports the
idea we had gleaned from the bones of "Little Foot" that tree-climbing had
been a part of the lifeways of these early African hominids. At least, one
could conclude, there had been trees big enough to bear the weight of the
Australopithecines (for which stunted acacias of the savannah would have
been unsuitable).
To a large London audience in 1995 I said: "All the former savannah
supporters (including myself) must now swallow our earlier words in the
light of the new results from the early hominid deposits... Of course, if
savannah is eliminated as a primary cause, or selective advantage of
bipedalism, then we are back to square one."

Humans are not savannah-adapted animals
In rejecting the SH, I was moved primarily by the evidence unearthed in
South Africa and East Africa. Meanwhile, Elaine Morgan had been piecing
together a number of other arguments against the SH, based on some
anatomical, biochemical and physiological data of modern humans, much of
which was collected by Belgium's Dr Marc Verhaegen, which contrast sharply
with the traits in present-day animals that are truly adapted to savannah
life.
As examples, modern humans lack sun-reflecting fur and are virtually
hairless. The cooling system in our skin is quite unfit for hot, dry,
exposed environments: we have numerous sweat glands and we waste water and
sodium - not very suitable for life on the savannah. Our ability to
concentrate our urine is poor and too low and if ever our earliest ancestors
were savannah dwellers, we must have been the worst, the most profligate
urinators there.
Adapted savannah-dwellers need to drink more water at a time, but most
humans are not able to drink much at a time. The quantity of our
subcutaneous fat, which would insulate us against heat loss, is never found
in truly savannah-adapted animals.
In our bodily functions, chemistry and microscopical anatomy, we should be
hopeless as savannah-dwellers. So Marc Verhaegen and Elaine Morgan, in her
remarkable book, The Scars of Evolution, came to the same conclusion that we
had reached from quite different lines of evidence: the old Savannah
Hypothesis was not tenable. All former savannah supporters must recant ­ and
this I did in London. It was an exciting moment - living through a change of
paradigm.
Max Planck, the German physicist and Nobel laureate, once wrote these words
on the replacement of an outworn paradigm: "A new scientific truth does not
triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but
rather because its opponents eventually die, and a new generation grows that
is familiar with it."
That must be one of the masterpieces of cynicism on the scientific process.
Paradigm changes, I like to think, flow overwhelmingly from new evidence
and, where the evidence is sound and even irresistible, they should be
embraced just as lief by the old as by the young. It was three weeks after
my 17th birthday and I went on to declare, "A change of paradigm shakes us
up; it rejuvenates us; and, this above all, it prevents mental
fossilisation - and that is good for all of us."

What the demise of the SH means for the AAT
My formal slaying of the SH removed a key objection to the AAT. Supporters
of the Hardy-Morgan concept hailed this event as my espousal of the aquatic
ape hypothesis. This was not strictly correct for there were other theories
on the “primary causes” of bipedalism, though, to my knowledge, there was
none to explain those physiological and biochemical aspects which seemed to
ally us to marine mammals. Now, at least, anthropologists should be able to
examine this with a more open mind than previously when the thinking of so
many was clouded by the SH.
It seems, however, that the name Aquatic Ape Theory has become a handicap.
For nearly 40 years since Hardy first put the idea forward, AAT has been a
bit of a joke to many scientists, conjuring up visions of a creature that
spent all - or almost all - of its time in the water. Yet Hardy's original
1960 article was modestly entitled, "Was man more aquatic in the past?" In
scientific writing a name can send very misleading messages and the term
"Aquatic Ape" does just that. Replace it with something else, I urged Elaine
Morgan. Then, I think the implications of those apparently water-adapted
features like humans' loss of hair will receive less cynical attention from
those who have hitherto smirked at the mere mention of "The Aquatic Ape"!
At the Dual Congress at Sun City in 1998, Marc Verhaegen and Pierre-François
Puech of France summed the evidence that hominid evolution did not begin in
warm and dry, but in warm and wet conditions. This included new thinking on
what one can infer from the micro-wear on the teeth as to the food of early
hominids: they found signs of marshland plants, molluscs, aquatic herbs.
Dr Michael Crawford of the Institute of Brain Chemistry and Human Nutrition,
London, Dr L Broadhurst of the USA., and other collaborators presented an
unexpected and fascinating study. In his book The Driving Force: Food,
Evolution and the Future (1989), Crawford explores many issues around "the
land-water interface". To develop the large brain characteristic of the
hominids, a chemical known as DHA was necessary. The lack of DHA in savannah
food may explain the "degenerative evolution" of the brains of savannah
species and the reason why Homo sapiens could not have evolved on the
savannahs. The marine food chain, on the other hand, has an abundant supply
of DHA. Early hominids had to make use of the marine food chain to enable
the evolution of brain and brain size to keep pace with body size. Their
claim that the human brain depended on the marine food chain suggests
independent evidence in support of the importance of water in human
evolution.
In the face of all this evidence, old and new, it is time for human
evolutionists to open their minds and give fair and objective thought to the
role of water in the evolution of mankind. We need a new holistic emphasis
on water: first for drinking, secondly as a source of food from aquatic
plants and animals and, thirdly, as waterways facilitating - or impeding -
the spread of humanity across the globe. Fourthly, we may no longer shy away
from the questions posed by those especial features of the human skin,
sweat-glands, chemistry of sweat, body temperature control and fluctuations,
heat and radiation tolerance and water consumption, which in modern humans
appear so different from those of savannah-adapted mammals and so
reminiscent, in some cases, of aquatic mammals.
As the Savannah Hypothesis still held sway when the Valkenburg Conference on
AAT took place 11 years ago, many arguments raised at that meeting are no
longer tenable. Another international forum should be set up to explore the
whole question in the light of the demise of the SH - but please, let it be
under a different name! Tobias, Paleoanthropologist

Tuesday, January 27, 2009

Peri-Tethys hominoids

The Caspian never dried out, it is more than 1km deep at its south portion, the south shore is always warm (never colder than 10 deg C), about 3ma it included the Aral sea.

temp
depth
paleo-caspian
Peri-tethys/para-thetis Euxine-Caspian prehistory

Some 50-60 million years ago, before the beginning of the Tertiary Period, a vast oceanic basin extended from west to east across Southern Europe and Central Asia, linking the Atlantic Ocean and the Pacific Ocean. It was the salty Tethys Sea. By the middle of the Tertiary Period, as a result of crust upheavals, the Tethys Sea had become separated first from the Pacific Ocean and later from the Atlantic.

Major crust movements led to mountain-building in the Miocene (from 5 to 7 million years ago) and the formation of the Alps, the Carpathians, the Balkan Mountains and the Caucasus Mountains. As a result the Tethys Sea shrunk in size and became divided into a number of brackish basins. One of them, the Sarmatic Sea, stretched from the present location of Vienna to the foothills of the Tien Shan Mountains and included the modern Black Sea, the Azov Sea, the Caspian Sea and the Aral Sea. The Sarmatic Sea was separated from the ocean, and gradually its salinity fell as a result of the inflow from rivers. It is assumed that the salinity in the sea was even lower than in the modern Caspian Sea. Much of the marine fauna endemic to the Tethys Sea became extinct. However, it is interesting to note that typically oceanic animals, such as whales, manatees and seals, continued to inhabit the Sarmatic Sea for a long time, before they too disappeared.

The Caspian Sea's bed is below sea level and this is true of the land on some of its shores because this is still a low spot on the earth, unlike Death Valley, of course, it is filled with water. The drawing I made from the satellite photos shows clearly how Arabia, as it is shoved harder and harder into the last of the Tethys' basin, has raised a ridge of mountains on one side of this basin and the European side is also high mountains, the Caucasus range. It is interesting that the point where these continents collide still has a deep depression instead of it just building up as mountains directly.

http://elainemeinelsupkis.typepad.com/earth_news/2007/02/elaine_meinel_s_1.html

http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.zin.ru/projects/caspdiv/img/cbd_21.gif&imgrefurl=http://www.zin.ru/projects/caspdiv/biodiversity_report.html&usg=__u5PjSe-ZVOf1YuUJ760ecLZVhRU=&h=354&w=700&sz=12&hl=en&start=14&sig2=tHUngSI_9RRbzbjGW31hIg&um=1&tbnid=ESaj8XH5HgrcJM:&tbnh=71&tbnw=140&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dcaspian%2Bpliocene%26hl%3Den%26client%3Dfirefox-a%26rls%3Dcom.ubuntu:en-US:official%26um%3D1&ei=33ohS53QAp6ysQO3l4TWBA





The Akchagyl reservoir emerged approximately 3m years ago, right at the beginning of the Pliocene and can be regarded as the brightest page in the history of the Caspian. The waters of Akchagyl Lake penetrated into the Aral depression, which at that time used to occupy the Black Sea or Euxine basin via the Manych hollow drained into brackish Kuyalnits basin. Extensive lowland stretches of trans-Caspian, Azerbaijan, Dagestan and Volga were flooded. It is believed that northern border of the reservoir lied in region of the river Kama. Obviously, that Akchagyl Lake had the highest level and area, and by its sizes considerably exceeded, for example, Khavalyn Lake, which emerged in the Later Pleistocene epoch. Akchagyl Lake existed for a bit less than 1m years and left a thick complex of deposits relating to a lower layer of the Upper Pliocene. Akchagyl strata were discovered in the beginning of the 20th century by N. I. Andrusov, who showed that they contain fossil fauna of a semi-marine type. This fauna originally lived under the salinity of 20-25 gr/l, however, later, as a result of large inflow of fresh waters, Akchagyl lake desalinized up to 5-12 gr/l. The character of microsculpture of shells of Cyprideis torosa testifies about very low paleohalinity, not higher than 5-6 gr/l. Thus, the paleohalinity of Akchagyl Lake, reconstructed using this method, appears to be a little bit lower than that determined using fauna fossils, mainly, molluscs.

Speaking about Akchagyl fauna and flora, it is necessary to note that there are two points of view on their origins. In the first case, when a semi-marine type is postulated, implying a genetic connection with Sarmatian fauna and flora is implied. In the second case, a marine type is defended assuming introduction of fauna and flora from the Arctic Ocean, Persian Gulf, Indian Ocean or Mediterranean Sea and Atlantic Ocean. The obtained data on rather low - 4-6 gr/l salinity in Akchagyl Lake prove that Akchagyl fauna and flora is mostly of semi-marine origins rather than marine. This point of view is also supported by the fact that endemic development of Caspian malacofauna in the Pleistocene was always characterized by survival of more ancient relicts in successive basins (Starobogatov 1970). In our opinion, basic elements of Akchagyl fauna and flora lived in Balakhany Lake, which later freshened and turned into a huge Akchagyl reservoir.

The post-Akchagyl reservoir appeared more than 2m years ago. It used to occupy only basins of the Middle and Southern Caspian, and it should be regarded as the maximum regression of the Akchagyl basin. It is difficult to say how long post-Akchagyl lake existed, as its deposits have been very poorly investigated. Most probably, the low level occurred for a short period, approximately 50-150 thousand years, and it was supplanted by the next transgression. Unfortunately, we did not manage to find valves of Cyprideis torosa in available collections, in order to determine paleohalinity of this lake based on their microsculpture. However, it is possible to suggest with confidence that the salinity of post-Akchagyl lake was much higher than that of Akchagyl, but lower than the salinity of Balakhany.

The Absheron reservoir emerged approximately 2m years ago. By its sizes, the lake was less than Akchagyl, however, its waters also penetrated into the Aral basin and drained into the Black Sea or Euxine depression which was accupied by the Guriy basin at that time. The cis-Caspian lowland was completely flooded and the Kura lowland and Karakum were partially inundated. Absheron Lake existed for more than 1m years and left a thick complex of deposits relating to an upper layer of the Upper Pliocene. Fauna fossils show that it had similar salinity to Akchagyl lake i.e. within 5-12 gr/l. It is also believed that the waters of Absheron Lake occupying the Aral basin were the most desalinized the salinity of about 5 gr/l. Those representatives of Absheron fauna, which were able to survive the greatest level ofdesalinization, occured here (Federov, 1983; Rubanov et.al. 1987). The character of microsculpture of valves of Cyprideis torosa shows the salinity level of about 7 gr/l. The materials from Absheron deposits, discovered in northern regions of the Aral basin, were analysed in addition to shells from the Caspian basins. These shells were found in detrital limestone of the Absheron epoch in the region of the gulf Shevchenko and peninsula Kokturnak of the Minor Aral Sea. The microsculpture of valves of Cyprideis torosa corresponds to the paleohalinity of 3-4 gr/l, and even about 1 gr/l.

The Turkan reservoir emerged a bit less than 2m years ago. It developed on the background of climate aridity and drastic reduction of freshwater inflow. Obviously, by its sizes, it resembles the post-Akchagyl reservoir i.e. occupied only basins of the Middle and Southern Caspian. Abrasive surface of Turkan lake is situated at the depth of 200-300 ì of the present Caspian Sea (Aladin, Carpenters, 2000). However, it would be a mistake to consider that the level of this ancient water body was so low. In Federov’s opinion (1983), such deep location is accounted for recent tectonic subsidence, and the real difference of levels of the present Caspian and Turkan lake does not exceed 100-150 m. Apparently, this lake, as well as post-Akchagyl, existed for a rather short period of time. Such a low level could have persisted for some scores and may be hundreds millennia, and it was ensued by the next transgression. Speaking about Turkan Lake, we should especially note that original Caspian brackish fauna of molluscs appeared in this lake for the first time. Thus, the turning point in development of fauna took place during a regression, instead of a transgression (Federov, 1983). The microsculpture of valves of Cyprideis torosa refers to the paleohalinity of 26-30 gr/l.

The Baku reservoir emerged later, some 1.7m years ago, on the background of climate moistening and cooling. It was less than Absheron Lake, and its waters did not penetrate into the Aral basin, but along the Manych hollow drained into the Black Sea or Euxine basin, where at this time the Chaudine basin was situated. Baku Lake occupied western stretches of lowland Karakum, completely Caspian and partially Kura lowland. It existed for about one million or half-million years, leaving a thick stratum of marine deposits, which was named the Baku layer. This layer is of the Quaternary age, and these deposits are usually compared to those of Likhvin glaciation on the Russian plain. However, we should note that lower part of Baku layer, probably, belongs also to an earlier period. Baku Lake went through three transgressions and two regressions. The long developing Early Baku transgression followed by the Late Baku and Urunjick transgressive phases. These phases were divided by two small regressions: post Early Baku and post Late Baku. It is considered that Baku lake had the biggest surface during the Urunjick transgressive phase and Early Baku had the smallest surface. The Late Baku transgressive phase took an intermediate position. As it was mentioned above, during all three transgressive phases, Baku Lake was bigger than the present Caspian and use to discharge its waters into the Chaudine basin. However, this discharge ceased during the Post Early Baku and Post Late Baku regressive phases. We can assume that during a low level period, the surface of Baku Lake was to that of the present Caspian Sea or even a little bit less. Unfortunately, because of short duration of these regressive phases of Baku Lake, it is very difficult to identify precise boundaries of the reservoir. Speaking about Baku Lake, it is necessary to note that except for the rivers, traditionally feeding the Caspian, such as the Volga, Ural, Emba, Atrek, Kura, Samur, Terek, Kuma etc., the Amu Darya also used to be its tributatry. At that time, this river did not flow into the Aral, but flowed through the lowland Karakum and entered Baku Lake at eastern part of the cis-Balkhan lowland.





http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/AAT/message/49480

Oreopithecus, island, ape, hominins
They are characterized by lack of predators and limitation of space and thus of trophic resources (23, 24). Whereas the absence of predation removes the need for adaptations related to predator
avoidance, intraspecific and interspecific competition for food resources increases (23, 24). Both factors impose specific selective pressures that favor, on the one hand, adaptations linked to low
energy expenditure, namely those related to energetically less expensive locomotor activities (flightless birds, ref. 25), and to reduction of bone mass in the locomotor apparatus at the expense of mobility and speed (26) (reduction of limb lengths in all mammals, fusion of limb elements in ruminants, elephants, and hippos, ref. 23).
On the other hand, they select for feeding strategies that increase the efficiency of resource utilization (increase in hypsodonty, rodent-like continuously growing incisors in bovids, reduction of premolars in many groups, etc.) (23). These adaptations are universally found in all mammal faunas of small islands. These selective pressures probably played a crucial role in the evolution of Oreopithecus, too, because the accompanying bovid fauna clearly exhibits the typical traits of insularity (27), such as strongly reduced limb bones and continuously growing incisors (28). In
Oreopithecus, the lack of predators may have led to a decrease of energetically expensive (29, 30) and risky (31) climbing activities, while favoring significant terrestriality. Bipedal standing while foraging, combined with bipedal shuffling during frequent short distance travel during food gathering [in water], as recently described for wild chimpanzees (32), could have increased the
harvesting efficiency for this ape. The postcranial morphology of Oreopithecus clearly reflects such bipedal terrestrial activities. The peculiar feet, less suitable for fast walking or running than
those of early hominids, yield, however, an especially well designed platform for stable postural harvesting, as the tripod formed by the deviated metatarsals and the widely abducted hallux provides a large area of support. Short legs further increase stability during bipedal stance because the center of gravity is low. Both features, short legs and short lever arm of the feet, indicate short stride length and low speed and suggest bipedal shuffling.
http://www.pnas.org/content/94/21/11747.full

This sounds right, bipedal shuffling in freshwater swamps, while holding overhanging branches or cane stems, using one hand to hold it and the other to peel/pluck the bark/skin/fruit/oyster off and eat. This would select for better balance when reaching one hand above the head while the foot or feet were on soft substrata, rather than for walking in a straight line like at Laetoli. The straighter feet of apiths and Homo probably reflects predation, but doesn't eliminate wetland wade foraging in them similar to Oreopith.

The straighter feet (= adducted hallux?) (also?) suggest more swimming (paddle).

The long fingers and short toes of Opith may reflect crocs, where the ability to quickly get above the water was more significant than tree canopy climbing for food where long toes would be useful, as in siamangs.

Humans also have very short toes, but elongation hind feet, which makes the foot sole larger/longer for paddling?

Vegetation rafts may lack pure clay mud, but might have rotting organic material and very stinky & slimy mucky mud. But this does depend on the local environment, possibly it wasn't so bad. I know that cattail swamps are mucky and mosquito filled, I used to duck hunt in them autumns after it got cold. Significantly, being in a shallow boat was ok, it was the wading that was nasty. This was in the upper Mississippi river bottoms, somewhat equivalent to the Sudd, not
the Nile Delta. Elephants & hippos have extremely thick skin AFAIK, humans don't, neither do furry chimps. Mosquitoes, leeches, ticks, lice, fleas, parasitic worms, Schistomiasis, are all freshwater - forest related, they can't survive repeated saltwater submersion & sunlight UV
drying AFAIK.

I'm sorry if this sounds too negative. Perhaps the Mesopotamia marsh & Sudd was better than this, especially 5 Ma, who knows? I'm just saying that freshwater swamps are good for people but GREAT for some nasty things that are not good for people. Maybe the apiths had special adaptations that we don't know about, like manatee-style dense collagen skin or thick fur that was bug proof. Or maybe they had controlled smoky fires. Or push-pole rafts?

We don't know whether apiths were naked, but it's not unlikely: great apes are born with naked bodies.

If any hominoids became naked, it occurred in brackish/saline water I'd think, or else had very dense skin much thicker than humans. The infant apes I've seen have fluffy fur after the mother licks off the birth mucus. AFAIK apes have no other protection against mosquitoes and other parasites.

I guess it occurred at the Tethys coasts somewhere between 18 & 14 Ma or so. At first they lost body hair but kept head hair & pubic hair: this could have been where the hominid louse split into scalp louse Pediculus & pubic louse Pthirus.
---
Their estimate for the Pediculus-Pthirus divergence is 13 million years. Thirteen million is as much as twice the age of the human-gorilla common ancestor. This estimate is probably biased toward the recent side, since it is calibrated against a divergence between hominoid and baboon lice assumed at 22.5 million years ago -- probably more recent than the true hominoid-baboon divergence.
http://johnhawks.net/weblog/reviews/genetics/divergence/lice_gorilla_reed_2007.html
>
I don't know if the lesser apes have lice, but the orangutan doesn't IIRC. The Asian apes have sternal gland/pit which may be anti-mosquito anti-lice secretion (or possible attractant to bring mosquito/lice towards the chest to kill/eat).

A guess: the LCA HPGPo lived in the Caspian/black/Medit. and Tethys coast and had long red-brown body/head hair (mammoth like) and light skin. Po, Hn & Hs with red hair is primitive, black hair is derived from Africa post-fur loss.

To add to this, 700ka hippos were in London.

So about +/-20ma, the PeriTethys may have been subtropical, and the early Hominoids (various spp.) there may have had long thick red body hair, and fed on the AHV and reeds/sedges along the brackish but freshwater-fed inner sea coasts along with the woolly mammoths and hairy rhinos, all of which probably had some SC fat deposits (note fat pads of adult dominant male orangs, which may have assisted the then-growing laryngeal air sacs for flotation. Baby Asian elephants and young Sumatran rhinos have long red hair so are probably derived from the PeriTethyan kin after following the Tethys coast to India and Malay peninsula, possibly migrating along routes which were blocked during the ice ages and periodic droughts,
forcing alternate routes.

I don't know if European miocene ape (Dryopith, etc.) vertebrae have been found to compare with the Morotopith, they may have been identical or similar. Oreopith may have been a western variant, merely continuing the wetland foraging.

At some point, a "wetland bridge" connected Africa to Eurasia (elephants, rhinos, dryopith-HPG), much later a dry land bridge connected (ostriches?), resulting in two directional traffic. Today, the vast reed marshes of the Caspian, Aral and Black sea are on
the northern side of the seas, at that time perhaps also, with the caucasus mountains being small hills.

If true, the Dmanisi Hg may have had long red hair, and may have been more closely related to Hjava or Hflores or Hpeking than to derived HAfrica. The color of dried reeds is yellow/brown, not black, the flowers are light toned, so red/blonde hair on head would camoflage well. If If
the Miocene-Pliuocene-Pleistocene anthropoids did weave and sleep on reed nests, it would explain woven nests/baskets in HPGPo. Since lesser apes don't make nests, they may have been a dwarf ape specialized for eating the umbrels (flower/nut) at the stem top,rather than eating the lower pith and rhyzomes like the larger ones, that would explain why the gibbons prefer the canopy. Again, perhaps a parallel to some coastal lemurs.

I credit Falasha with part of this idea, since she brought up the sedge habitat concept and great illustrations.

My guess is HPG lost body hair while adapting to reed nests and float foraging but retained scalp hair (now lowland gorilla red patch, black body fur is new) to protect head while air sacs were inflated in water, but before entering Africa they had no lice (like the orang).

The LCA HPG lost both the sternal organ and long red fur coat due to long period of brackish immersion feeding of sedge rhyzomes and inverts./oysters while vert. sit/floating at tethys coastal wetlands. Upon contact in Africa or Arabia with OWM baboons, got head lice.

Increased hanging fruit foraging and improved tree climbing developed more and melanistic body hair with associated axillary/pubic apocrines due to sleeping in tree nests. Gorillas moved inland, getting a new black fur coat except on the chest (which attracts mosquitoes for killing?
Gorilla habit of slapping their chests?), gorilla fur is most similar to human pubic/axillary coarse hair, rather than human long scalp hair. HP at mangrove coasts, scalp hair became selected for black due to camouflage in shaded lower tree trunks and waterside foraging. P eventually moved more inland losing the tidal effect permanently but staying often at the lower understory rather than the upper canopy except to sleep in the thin branches at night. H stayed at shores most
of the time, dipping but not yet diving, so H head hair was more similar to P head hair until H began diving and backfloating, when the head louse evolved to attach to nest/net/clothing or long hair.---

When they got a fur again later, in gorillas the pubic louse replaced the scalp louse, in chimps the scalp louse replaced the pubic louse. Human kept a naked body, with scalp & pubic hair apart, so
scalp louse & pubic louse stayed where they were (but our pubic louse got recently
a sidebranch that adapted to clothing).

I accept periodic treks to freshwater cane/forests for ancient human ancestors, as in the Sudd, but not as permanent residents, until they had reed houses & reed boats. There's good reasons that apes don't spend so much time in freshwater, and choose a few selected spots, as opposed to hippos, elephants, pigs, rhinos which just make their own water holes in swamps, so as to avoid hidden crocs.

Lowland gorillas often spend a few hours in swamps.

Ndoki swamp seems to have no crocs for some reason? Nor hippos?

I have no idea. Elephants in deeper swamps are aggressive towards hippos & crocs??

I think that apiths, like apes, gave birth out of the water, though not sure. I think that Homo spp gave birth in calm saltwater lagoons, ringed by wave-stopping reefs. Possibly, they (a midwife/aunty) made a birthing pool with pebbles or used a tidepool. They weren't ignorant,
probably had a bunch of people with weapons around to watch out for predators. The afterbirth could be buried in the sand, I think thats what sea lions do. The blood dissipates within minutes in the sea. I just think that cane would be convenient to cut & bundle & float downstream to a bay or lagoon, maybe the first deliberate rafting? If a cane stem is broken or cut off with a sharp blade, and stored, how long will it last if unpeeled? Probably the cut-end would seal up,
and the pulp will stay moist for quite a while. Many people eat seaweed today, coconuts too.

The big toe of O'pith is an adaptation for verticle climbing for a species that never developed opposable hallux. Perhaps there was a particularly tastey fruit high up in a tree on their predatorless island?
Mosquitos could be alleviated by mud dressing such as elephants & hippos have accomplished with far lesser intelligence. If their rafts broke up they could just find another. Apparently
there are so many they create problems. I have a hard time imagining a mother giving birth to a baby in the ocean. Elaine has proven, to my satisfaction, that we went through a period of water births.

Did she? AFAIK she's not fond the hypothesis? It seems a better fit for a mother to have
food and protection at her disposal. If a mother gave birth in the ocean she would attract predators galore! And would have to hunt for food; either catch fish, bust open shellfish, smething! I have not seen any evidence that we consumed seaweed. How could a mother do
this?
Sudd (Arabic for Dam) is a floating papyrus island that can be 20ft deep and miles across. It is so strong that men AND ELEPHANTS can walk across. It's called plant rafts.
http://www.fao. org/DOCREP/ 006/X7580E/ X7580E08. htm

Ok, I misunderstood your meaning. You are saying that the hominids could climb onto the vegetative rafts of papyrus (not that they could climb up stems of papyrus) in order to escape predators such as leopards, hippos and crocs? And this parallels other areas like the Nile estuaries & the swamps of Mesopotamia & other areas like that. But a fur coat would seem mandatory since the mosquitos & water pathogens are thick there, and also the divergent big toe of Oreopithecus would seem advantageous for balance, just like wading & swimming birds have which frequently nest on floating vegetation rafts. I didn't see any mention of trees or wood on these isles, so wading stick spears & stones & shells would need to be gotten elsewhere.
If these types of vegetative rafts are washed into the ocean,they tend to break up quickly, unlike timber rafts.The once annual rainy season (per one site) & stagnant waters differ from the tidal coastal swamps & wetlands which flush daily bringing oxygen & nutrients. If Australopithecus was furred like a chimp and possessed airsacs, as Dik-1-1 indicates, then perhaps this type of habitat might have been productive foraging environment, in association with climbable
waterside trees. Despite the C4 food link, I have difficulty seeing how this Sudd habitat as primary home could have led to human descendants. Australopith did not lead to Hs, but to the Afr.apes lowland gorillas are still +-abundant in swamp forests, where they eat aq.herbs. Yes, I don't know if any hominoid or OWM lives in the Sudd swamps.

The mosquitoes alone would be problematic for altricial infants, thin yet furless skin would be an invitation for them, well scented adults would draw them in. Smoky fires would prevent them, but that requires fuel, fire making gear & knowledge.

In Egypt papyrus was a fuel for fires. Re our ancestral line, I can imagine with dugouts or reed bundle boats going there to harvest papyrus & fish, but not staying there. Before boats, perhaps foraging bundles of sedges, to be carried to the seashore at times, to supplement their seashore/frugivorous diet and provide bedding at shore caves? Perhaps inland apiths did develop at these wetlands.

Yes, likely: early gracile apiths (4-3 Ma) in denser swamp forests, later robust apiths (2-1 Ma) in more open wetlands. Thick enamel (not super-thick) in all hominids = part-time sedges?
I still have no idea what the thick enamel was for: protection against small
snails etc on aquatic herbs? a diet of hard-shelled invertebrates? for racking nuts? parts of palms? of sedges?? of bamboo?? It's usu.thought it was for very hard (not tough) plant foods, but another possibility is very calorie-poor plant parts. Orangs eat nuts, heard exocarps etc. Why did robusts (& Ouranopith in Greece) have even thicker enamel than the gracile
apiths & humans & orangs?
The late-Miocene apes in Africa also had (very?) thick enamel: Chorora-, Nakali- & Samburupith, but Samburupith is doubted by some to be hominid

http://jambo.africa.kyoto-u.ac.jp/kiroku/asm_suppl/abstracts/pdf/ASM_s32/51-62.pdf
See also"Phyletic affinities of Samburupithecus kiptalami: a late Miocene proconsulid"
AJ Olejniczak, DR Begun, E Mbua & J-J Hublin 2009 AAPA abstracts... Results reveal many characters in common between Samburup & early Miocene proconsulids ... The unique combination of these traits suggests affinities to proconsulids & precludes a close relationship to
Afr.apes & humans ...

http://books. google.com/ books?id= Vj7A9jJrZP0C& pg=PA227&
lpg=PA227& dq=papyrus+ taxonomy& source=web& ots=zr-_qizBLt&
sig=mr-jFNSsxV7K JRaszFlDpzpqaSg& hl=en&sa= X&oi=book_
result&resnum=
7&ct=result# PPA227,M1
"shallow rooted, small feeble stalk, large head," unlikely to have grown in the main stream of the Nile, due to current. doesn't sound easily climbable for a Hominid (with non-divergent big
toes). (Apparently Papyrus cyranus is not a biological taxon.)