Turns out there aren’t plenty of fish in the sea.
Recent evidence suggests humans evolved their big brains not on a diet of red meat after all, but on a diet of fish. Yes, fish is a great source of protein for all animals. Yes, unaffected by microplastics, pollutants and heavy metals, fish is good for us, ‘us’ being the ever-increasing human population of 7.6 billion and rising (and let’s face it, fish is no longer safe to eat).
Plenty of marine conservation organisations, such as Sea Shepherd, have been saying for decades that while we allow industrial trawlers and fleets of thousands of unregulated fishing boats to ravage the oceans with trawler nets and insidious ghost nets, fish stocks will collapse and there will be devastating implications for all marine life and human populations that rely on fish as a source of protein. Even some marine conservation orgs hadn’t fully understood the role that overfishing plays in the decimation of the oceans – and its impact on local human populations – and are still not condemning overfishing or advising their relatively affluent members to cut out fish from their diets as an effective way of ending their contribution to the terrifying problem of global overfishing.
Anyone can stop contributing to ending overfishing by not eating fish, wherever you are in the world, and by writing to relevant businesses and governmental departments (and your MP), and by boycotting companies which contribute to global (and local) overfishing.
“Almost one-third of the fish and nearly half of the seal-faeces samples contained one to four plastic fibres and fragments. Among the most common was polyethylene, which is found in plastic bags and bottles.“
Where have all the hedgehogs gone? shutterstock
When the humble hedgehog was crowned “Britain’s national species” in a BBC Wildlife Magazine poll and “Britain’s favourite mammal” in a Royal Society of Biology poll, no doubt, sentimentalised memories of Beatrix Potter’s The Tale of Mrs Tiggy-Winkle, played a role in swaying public opinion.
Ecologist and author Hugh Warwick explained how:
Beatrix Potter managed to sprinkle some magic over the hedgehog, transforming it into the irresistible companion of our gardens.
But despite their popularity, hedgehogs are now something of a rare sight in British gardens – and are in fact disappearing at the same rate as tigers worldwide. Rural hedgehogs in the UK have halved in number since 2000, while urban hedgehogs have declined by a third. More widely, UK hedgehog numbers have dropped from an estimated 30m in the 1950s to under a million today.
So what’s to blame? We are. Well, the changing lifestyles and tastes of people, to be precise. Farming methods have changed dramatically over recent years – becoming increasingly intensive. This has led to the removal of many hedges, an important habitat for the British hedgehog. It has also had negative implications on their main diet of worms, beetles, slugs, caterpillars, earwigs and millipedes.
The country’s roads are also busier. Hedgehog road deaths are estimated to exceed 100,000 a year in Britain. Road networks also cut through habitats leaving hedgehogs isolated, while our gardens are increasingly becoming more humanised. Lawns have been turned into tarmac for cars, foliage has been torn out, decking added, garden borders peppered with slug pellets, and hedges replaced by impenetrable fences and walls. All of which mean that hedgehogs are not only losing their habitats, but also their chances of survival.
Hedgehog friendly gardens
The plight is such that the British Hedgehog Preservation Society and People’s Trust for Endangered Species launched Hedgehog Street in 2011 to encourage people to champion the species and its habitat.
At the RHS Hampton Court Palace Flower Show in 2014, designer Tracy Foster made Hedgehog Street a reality, creating a summer garden to demonstrate “how neighbours can work together to help hedgehogs by providing routes through garden boundaries”. Sharing slogans such as “no one garden is enough” and “make a hole, make a difference”, the hedgehog haven won People’s Choice for Best Small Garden and the coveted RHS Gold medal. The first permanent Hedgehog Street garden was unveiled at RHS Harlow Carr, in North Yorkshire in April 2017.
“Dr. Josiah Zayner, a scientist, biohacker, and founder of the biotech company, The Odin, is a member of this futuristic group and the first person known to have edited his own DNA.”
This article clearly overstates the “results” of Zayner’s human experiments on himself for click-bait value, as the results are presently unknown.
After studying Genetics as part of my BSc. Zoology degree, we were asked to write an essay on the ethical implications of the new CRISPR-Cas9 gene editing tools (happily, I got a first class mark). Indeed CRISPR raises a host of ethical questions and considerations. CRISPR (Clustered Regularly Interspaced Short Palindromic Repeats) was discovered and developed by two scientists in separate universities from naturally occurring gene editing systems within bacteria. The scientists were Jennifer Doudna and Emmanuelle Charpentier. They saw the simple yet effective method by which bacteria’s immune defence systems literally cut out invading viruses using enzymes, including the Cas-9 enzyme. It cuts viral DNA when encountered and creates CRISPR arrays which allow the bacteria to ‘remember’ the virus. When encountering the virus again (or something similar) the bacteria then use RNA segments from these CRISPR arrays to target the viral DNA and cut it up, rendering it safe.
It is not dissimilar to mammalian immune systems, where proteins (immunoglobulins) are created in response to encountering antigens (foreign bodies), which can then be triggered if encountering the same (or similar) foreign bodies again. The CRISPR-Cas9 system can be likened to the cut, copy and paste tools in editing software – it is exactly what CRISPR does with genetic material. Scientists have worked out a way of utilising this system in the lab to edit genomes. It can cut out, put back and move genes around.
The downside? Research has some way to go before we fully understand what all of our genes do, and how they interact with each other. A gene in one location on a strand of DNA may interact with and affect a gene in another location far away on the same strand. We don’t yet understand all of the complex interactions between genes. We do know that there are usually many dormant genes within a genetic strand, remnants of the evolutionary past of an animal or plant. So if you cut out a gene, how might that affect other genes? If you put one in, will it trigger a dormant gene? In some cases, scientists know exactly how to trigger dormant genes.
It is somewhat reassuring to know that experimentation is primarily limited to somatic cells and that it is uncommon in most countries to carry out genome editing on germline or embryonic cells. There are countries which practice outside of any agreed ethical codes, or any rules are largely unenforceable, so that some scientists may already be carrying out genome editing experiments on embryos and germ cells. However, allowances have already been made for genome editing to be carried out on early embryos in the UK and other countries. What is truly terrifying is that all other animals are at the mercy of our whims in the world of genome editing experimentation.
It is clear that we are fairly radically playing with a puzzle without the benefit of the full picture to work with. Gene editing is still firmly in the experimental stages of its evolution, with some amazing results, and some truly horrifying results which the general public never see or hear about (think cloning labs – they exist and the success rate is very, very low).
This is the stuff of the future, of history, of nightmares and dreams…and of Marvel comic books. Bio hacking meet the world, a world full of unethical, immoral practices and people only too happy to abuse and destroy for short-sighted greed. What could go wrong? Zayner (and others) is literally opening Pandora’s box by making gene editing kits available to anyone who can afford the price of the kit. However, what’s in the box is incredible and has almost unlimited potential for a world where disease is non-existent, where some of the damage we’ve done can be rectified, and where humans might be altered in ways limited only by imagination.
Personally I’m still holding out for those wings, and an echolocation system.
I briefly researched acidification in a corals essays I wrote last year (for which I got a first class mark); this study looks in-depth at the impacts of acidification on marine life.
Ocean acidification is deadly threat to marine life, finds eight-year study
These images are just stunning.
“U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) scientists and collaborators discovered that long-wave ultraviolet (UV) light directed at the wings of bats with white-nose syndrome (WNS) produced points of distinctive orange-yellow fluorescence. The orange-yellow glow corresponds directly with microscopic skin lesions that define the current “gold standard” for diagnosing WNS.”
Hybridization patterns in two contact zones of grass snakes reveal a new Central European snake species | Scientific Reports
This is amazing news. Natrix natrix -previously thought to be the only grass snake in the UK – has been found to be genetically distinct from what was previously thought to be a variation rather than separate species, the newly named Natrix venaticus. Studies sampled mtDNA from existing skins and specimens and found clear genetic differences between the two, confirming Natrix venaticus as a separate and distinct species. No living snakes were harmed for the study either, which is always good news.
So I’m writing an essay about drivers of coral reef bleaching, and reading about acidification and its effects on marine mammals that secrete calcium carbonate, and this new research pops up. Interesting immediate adaptation to cope with lower pH levels in marine environments; although I’m not sure how long-term (and effective) an adaptation it might be. Similarly, some coral species and their symbionts are more tolerant of some drivers of bleaching than others. Again, in the short-term that helps those species, but it’s not clear how far beyond their normal thresholds for CO2, irradiance, thermal stress and acidification they can survive. And then there’s coral diseases… We are pushing the limits, changing environments and testing tolerance thresholds for so much of the world’s wildlife, and not in a good way.