Spinops sternbergorum artistic reconstruction by Dmitry Bogdanov

The Victim - Spinops sternbergorum (artistic reconstruction by Dmitry Bogdanov, image from Science 2.0 story)

I don’t use this blog as a platform to rant very often, but a story published on Gawker this afternoon has me all riled up.

In “Moron Paleontologists Find New Species of Dinosaur in Their Own Museum“, author Max Read decides he’s fully qualified to judge how paleontology and taxonomy in general should be done, and criticizes a team of paleontologists for doing something every taxonomist does; study material housed in a museum. That’s right, Mr. Read snidely mocks the authors, who described a very cool new dinosaur species, for not undertaking a grand expedition to parts unknown to find this new species, instead discovering the species while re-examining specimens housed in the British Natural History Museum’s basement collections.

Nevermind the function of a museum is not just to provide a place for ignoramuses like Mr. Read to potentially learn something about natural history and gawk at fantastic displays, but also to actually house the raw data of biology; specimens. Or that people studying  specimens in museums would much rather be exploring exotic new localities but are handcuffed by a critical lack of monetary support for taxonomy, which cuts our ability search for new specimens (which are then brought back to the museum and ultimately stored, although I guess that fact never occurred to Mr. Read either). Or indeed that the process of taxonomy is not as straightforward as looking at a single specimen (or pieces of a specimen as is the case in much of paleontology) and instantly recognizing it as unique and in need of a new name.

The true shame of all this is the fact that the blog network Mr. Read writes for is composed of a number of blogs which routinely write well-versed and well-researched pieces on science and technology (io9 & Gizmodo to be precise). How this fascinating story was forwarded onto Mr. Read and not to authors in those other fine networks who I’m sure could have done it justice is almost as outrageous as Mr. Read’s story itself.

Natural history collections are one of the most valuable resources we have as a society, providing a link to the world around us, and to believe that people shouldn’t be studying the material contained within them is like believing that libraries shouldn’t be used for fact checking. Oh, wait…

(If you want to see how science journalism SHOULD be done, I encourage you to read Science 2.0′s version of the story)

Share

Remember that last ID challenge I put to you? The one at the end of August which I’m only now getting around to answering? Ya, that one.

With the best turn out of commenters willing to wager on their IDs, I’m sorry it’s taken me so long to award those hard earned points. But no fear, that day is finally here!

It seems that Hippoboscidae have a face that more than it’s mother can love, as everyone correctly guessed the right family! I can’t say I blame the enthusiasm surrounding this fly, as their morphological adaptations for living on birds are pretty amazing!

Icosta ardeae in a not-so-natural setting

Dorso-ventrally flattened to slide in amongst the feathers, plenty of thick setae on the thorax and abdomen which I assume are used for getting nestled in for the long haul, and trifurcated tarsal claws to hold onto their feathered hosts. Although I enjoy a morning bird watching from time to time, I’m not exactly a bird wrangler, so how did I come by this spectacular specimen? It seems my wife was putting out the bird vibes back in August while we were out hiking through Mono Cliffs Provincial Park (which is a fantastic hike by the way, definitely worth a visit if you’re in the area), and this fly latched on while we walked back to the parking lot.

Icosta ardeae bird louse on shirt

Renee wasn’t all too impressed with her little hitchhiker, but I was ecstatic! I quickly scooped it off and put in my camera bag for a few snaps, all the while expecting it to get away. With these photos in hand, I threw it in my bag anticipating another opportunity to shoot it when I got home, but I guess all this excitement was too much, as it didn’t survive the car ride. Oh well, it found a good resting place in the Guelph Insect Collection, and also gave me a chance to identify it back in the lab.

Of course, that would prove more difficult than I had imagined, and I’m still not 100% confident in my final identification. The genus ID was relatively easy using the Manual of Nearctic Diptera, and I quickly had it keyed to the genus Icosta. That’s where the “fun” began however, as I tracked down the authoritative paper on Icosta taxonomy and biology published in 1969 by T.C. Maa of the Bishops Museum. Although the keys were well written and relatively well illustrated for a 1969 key, the characters needed for identification were anything but simple! I eventually ended up at Icosta ardeae (Macquart), although from what I could tell it was Icosta ardeae ardeae, a subspecies recorded from much of the Old World, ranging from the UK, down to South Africa and as far east as the Philippines and Australia! The other subspecies, Icosta ardeae botaurinorum, is listed as being known from North America, including Ontario, but the abdominal setae and wing shape illustrated just didn’t fit. Both species are known to choose herons as their preferred host, with I. a. botaurinorum breeding almost solely on American Bittern (Botaurus lentiginosus), which could very well have been lurking in the pond near the parking lot.

So what’s the deal; is it I. a. ardeae, or I. a. botaurinorum? I’m not a big believer in the idea of subspecies, so I’m happy simply calling it Icosta ardeae, but it speaks volumes about our understanding of the taxonomy of the family. Often found on birds (one of the best studied groups on earth), you would assume these flies would be as well studied and well collected as their avian counterparts, and yet I can’t get a definitive ID on one found 30 minutes from Toronto! Without any further taxonomic work since Maa’s 1969 revision, and with Maa leaving numerous species unnamed in his paper, simply calling them Icosta sp. “S” or sp. “N”, Icosta seems like a great project for someone interested in fly and bird taxonomy, and I could see a cool phylogenetic comparison between hippoboscid species and their avian hosts!

With that suggestion for the future, lets finish off the past and allocate some BioPoints! Chris scores a cool 15 points (3 for family, 4 for subfamily, 2 for being the first to answer and 6 for the review of hippoboscid larval biology), Laurie Knight picks up 8 (3 for family, 2 for picking a related species, and 3 for sharing her awesome photos of hippoboscid’s with mallophagan lice attached), Miles scores 3 points for his family ID, and Matt grabs 5 points (3 for family plus 2 for providing the morphological characters he used).

Thanks for playing once again everyone, and watch for more ID challenges in the near future (I mean it this time, I swear…)

 

All notes on taxonomy and biology of these flies was found in:

Maa, T.C. 1969. Revision of Icosta (=Lynchia Auctt.) with erection of a related genus Phthona. Pacific Insects Monograph 20: pg. 25-203.

Share

Ryan FleacrestWhen I first found this song, I had to double check that the artist actually titled it “Call of the Beettle”, and sure enough, it was spelled that horribly. I guess it’s supposed to be “hip”, I don’t know.

With that settled, I was curious whether there was any scientific validity to a song about calling dung beetles, and it just so happens that there are plenty of dung beetles which signal one another through stridulation! Take for example Aphodius ater, a European dung beetle which has been shown to serenade ladies over a fine meal of barn yard waste (Hirschberger, 2001)!

 

Aphodius ater – photo by BioImages – the Virtual Fieldguide (UK) (CC BY-NC-SA accessed via EOL)

 

It seems that most (if not all) of the 1200 Aphodius species communicate in a similar manner (Kasper & Hirschberger, 2005). The sounds themselves are made by rubbing a file (found on the base of the membranous hind wings) against a structure known as the plectrum on the first abdominal segment. As can be seen, the structures are variable between species, and so are the resulting songs.

 

Aphodius Stridulatory Morphology from Kasper & Hirschberger 2005

Kaspar & Hirschberger 2005 Aphodius Stridulation Patterns

Aphodius Stridulation Patterns from Kasper & Hirschberger 2005

 

 

 

 

 

So now that we know that the artist can’t spell but does have  a solid handle on scarab beetle biology, lets check out the song!

I assume Aphodius beetles understand one another better than I understand that song… Reading the lyrics doesn’t help either, and may have confused me even more! Oh well, at least we learned about dung beetle dinner conversation!

 

This song is available on iTunes – Call of the Dung Beettle – Sonic Imperial – Sounds of the Prophets

 

 

ResearchBlogging.org
Hirschberger, P. (2001). Stridulation in Aphodius Dung Beetles: Behavioral
Context and Intraspecific Variability of Song Patterns
in Aphodius ater (Scarabaeidae) Journal of Insect Behavior, 14 (1), 69-88 DOI: 10.1023/A:1007801713479


Kasper, J., & Hirschberger, P. (2005). Stridulation in Aphodius dung beetles: Songs and morphology of stridulatory organs in North American Aphodius species (Scarabaeidae) Journal of Natural History, 39 (1), 91-99 DOI: 10.1080/00222930310001018877

Share

Ryan FleacrestToday marks the birthday of one of the most influential and important insect authors; Robert Evans Snodgrass (1875-1962). Snodgrass’ special interest was insect morphology, especially within an evolutionary context, as he sought to not only understand how insects are put together, but also how those structures contributed to the evolutionary history of species. His 1935 opus, Principles of Insect Morphology, is still relevant in many regards (my 4th year Insect Physiology professor referred to it several times throughout the semester), and can be considered one of the most important entomology texts of the 20th century.

Being a morphologist, Snodgrass would be an expert in insect dissection in order to examine the intricacies of insect muscles, nerves and exoskeletons. That being said, I’m sure his techniques were pretty refined and not quite comparable to ripping out the wings of a butterfly, but unfortunately there isn’t a song title “Careful Dissection of the Flight Apparatus of Lepidoptera”, so we’ll stick to some hard rock!

If you’re interested in learning more about PIM (instead of HIM), check out this post by Trichoptera grad student Zach Burington on his excellent blog, Trichopterology!

 

This song is available on iTunes – Wings of a Butterfly – Wings of a Butterfly – Single

Share

Ryan FleacrestIt’s National Pollinator Week in the US, and although Canada doesn’t have their own celebration of insect-facilitated sex, that doesn’t mean I can’t promote some sexy fly pollinators! Honey bees and their hymenopteran brethren get most of the credit for pollination, but flies are likely just as powerful pollinators, only underappreciated and understudied thus far. Some of the world’s most vital crops (i.e. chocolate) depend on flies for pollination (in this case a biting midge of the family Ceratopogonidae), while countless other plants find themselves in a veritable orgy of Diptera deliveries. Some of the more striking of these include the Syrphidae, conveniently known as flower flies for their propensity to visit flowers for pollen and nectar.

Parhelophilus laetus Syrphidae

Parhelophilus laetus

Toxomerus geminatus Syrphidae

Toxomerus geminatus

 

Toxomerus marginatus Syrphidae on flower

Toxomerus marginatus

While these 3 species are pollinators of compound flowers (like the ones in the last photo being visited by Toxomerus marginatus), some flower flies are specialists on plants which were typically thought to be wind pollinated, such as grasses.

Platycheirus sp. Syrphidae on grass

Platycheirus sp.

 

With around 900 species of Syrphidae in North America (and more than 6000 species around the world), not to mention the countless other fly families which visit flowers, there are plenty of flies available to act as plant escorts. You might say that fly pollinators do a little dance of love on behalf of the flowers. I can imagine these fast-flying flower phallus’ bumping and grinding to something a little like this…

 

 

The next time you stop to smell the flowers, don’t forget what it is you’re smelling, the sultry perfume of a flower looking for a little fly action!

 

This song is available on iTunes – Pollinator (Gary Beck Remix) – Global Underground – Tom Novy

If you’d like some more insect sexiness, check out Bug Girl’s excellent, innuendo filled explanation of pollination!

 

 

 

Share

Queen of the Sun movie posterWe’ve heard it repeated in the media before, with varying degrees of alarmism; honey bees are disappearing, and society better repent before we follow them. Termed Colony Collapse Disorder (CCD) in North America, the number of bee colonies which are dying or exiting en mass (swarming) leaving beekeeper’s hives empty has garnered a great deal of attention in the past few years. Of course there’s plenty of evidence that honey bee populations have been in decline for decades and CCD isn’t really a new phenomenon, but sometimes facts just get in the way of a good story, don’ t they?

That’s the way I felt after watching the new documentary Queen of the Sun: What Are The Bees Telling Us? – the production team didn’t want to weigh the audience down with actual evidence for theories proposed by featured beekeepers or even some of the “experts”. That’s not to say I didn’t enjoy the film, I did, I just left feeling that so much more could have been done to educate the audience.

The movie starts off with endless acres of almond trees in California and the bees trucked in from around the USA tasked with pollinating this giant monoculture. From here the film gathers the opinions of some of the most eccentric beekeepers I’ve seen (which is saying something, trust me) on why the bees are disappearing, with some input from “experts”. It was the beekeepers which make this movie worth a watch, and while each and every one of them personifies bees more than I’d like (damn my scientific objectivity), and there is a lot of Gaiaism and Druid religious undertones, meeting and watching these beekeepers work was a lot of fun. Whether it was the bee historian/Yogi who tickles his bees with his impressive mustache or the rooftop apiculturists in London, UK & Brooklyn, New York (where in the former city beekeeping is legal and the latter illegal), the filmmakers found some very interesting people who shared a passion for their hobby/trade.

The majority of the theories on what is causing the decline of the bees comes from the beekeepers with notes thrown in from the chosen “experts”. I’m using the term “expert” loosely, mainly because there were virtually no credentials or explanation about what made each person an “expert” on the topic. Some I recognized, like May Berenbaum from University of Illinois or Scott Black of the Xerces Society and trusted their opinions because of my knowledge of their work. Others, I have no clue why they were consulted; a physicist discussing genetically-modified plants transferring modified bacteria genomes to bees, without mention of why a physicist would be involved with this research or what institute she was associated with? Providing further credentials and background for each expert would allow the audience to make an informed decision on the information provided to them.

Overall, Queen of the Sun was an entertaining movie with some beautiful photography and fantastic people. If you’re looking for a movie which celebrates individuality and passion for apiculture, then this is your movie. If you’re looking for a scientific nature documentary, stick to David Attenborough and the BBC!

 

Share

Today’s special guest blogger is Jess Vickruck, a PhD candidate at Brock University. Jess studies twig nesting bee diversity and the impacts of nest choice on their biology.

When I first started my master’s project, my intention was to look at how nest choice affected fitness in twig nesting carpenter bees (genus Ceratina, family Apidae).  Little did I know that along with twigs full of bee larvae I would also get up close and personal with numerous uninvited house guests who all had one thing in mind – Ceratina are delicious!  Although my supervisor continually reminded me that my thesis was about the bees and not the species that eat bees, I wrote up the data, and lucky for me it appears in the 2010 edition of the Journal of the Entomological Society of Ontario.

Continue reading »

Share

Back in August, while at the International Congress of Dipterology in Costa Rica, I reported on a new species identification technique using some pretty sophisticated technology (i.e. a black piece of paper). The study was published today in PNAS (open access), so I thought I’d revisit it in more detail as our cool science of the week!

Shevtsova et al., Fig. G, 2011

Fig. G from Shevtsova et al., 2011

Continue reading »

Share

Milky Way Galaxy over the jungles of Costa RicaNASA has called a big news conference for this afternoon to discuss a new discovery in the field of Astrobiology (the science of extraterrestrial life) for this afternoon at 2pm. Leaked stories are reporting that NASA scientists have discovered a new life form in Mono Lake, California. Reportedly this life form is arsenic-based, unlike every other animal, plant, fungi and bacteria on the planet which is phosphorous-based. Tune in here to watch along.

The implications of such a find are beyond huge, if true! Does this mean life on Earth has arisen twice in 2 totally different ways (take that ecology and niche partitioning)? Is it extraterrestrial seeding (is the truth really out there)? Either way, phylogenetics and the taxonomic structure as we currently know it (Domain, Kingdom, Phylum, etc) has no room for independently derived life forms, necessitating an entirely new and parallel taxonomic lineage. Not to mention the fact that if it’s happened here there is no reason to assume that it hasn’t happened someplace else in the universe!

I’ll be live-blogging throughout the news conference and trying to provide insights into what this means for taxonomy and science in general. Stay tuned as the world learns of this new life! I encourage everyone to join the discussion below in the comments! Until then, live long and prosper and let the force be with you! (You knew the geek quotes were coming at some point didn’t you?)

Update (1:30pm, Dec 2, 2010): The cat’s out of the bag, and it’s certainly not the white tiger it was made out to be. While the early media reports I read ranged from the extremes of NASA actually finding life on other planets to the story I reported above, in actuality researchers did not discover a new arsenic-based life form, but rather forced an extremo-phile bacteria from Mono Lake to survive on arsenic rather than phosphorous. Even then there are conflicting reports on how much arsenic the bacteria are actually incorporating into their biochemistry. Needless to say I’m fairly disappointed, but I’ll leave that for a more in depth discussion later this afternoon. I’ll still be reading the paper and watching the news conference in case there is something interesting to report, but don’t expect a new taxonomic hierarchy this week!

Update (2:30pm, Dec 2, 2010): Well, that confirms it. The bacterial strain in question (GFAJ-1) was found to live in the mud of Mono Lake, where the concentration of arsenic is higher than most other aquatic habitats, and the researchers decided to see how far they can push the bacterium’s flexibility in accepting arsenic. By slowly weaning bacterium cultures from high phosphorous-content growth medium to low phosphorous-content they found the bacteria could survive and incorporate arsenic into the different cellular and molecular components necessary for life (nucleic acids, proteins, etc).

Update (2:35pm, Dec 2, 2010): I’m going to be candid here, and point out that the lead researcher, Felisa Wolfe-Simon, is coming across as really condescending. I imagine she’s trying to relate her results in a way that laypeople can easily understand (including referring to these bacteria as “bugs”… science fail) but her inflection and attitude is coming across as condescending in my mind.

Update (2:45pm, Dec 2, 2010): They’ve brought a phosphorous expert in who is going on and on about the potential for using arsenic-based life forms to solve the impending phosphorous shortages caused by the agricultural revolution. Not sure how he expects to incorporate arsenic-laden plants into our diet, seeing as it’s extremely toxic as repeatedly stated throughout the news conference. That’s also assuming that you could get non-arsenic adapted plants to accept it in the first place (remember, toxic).

Update (2:50pm, Dec 2, 2010): That was patriotic. She just made clear that all this research was done by Americans, on American soil, and using American dollars. I wonder if she’s worried about US congress criticizing her work on astrobiology like ant workers were criticized for working on ants from outside of the US of A!

Update (3:00pm, Dec 2, 2010): I believe it was USA Today that just phoned in and called out the research team of over-hyping their research and the reaction of the readers looking for proof of alternate life or aliens! I’ve got to agree with them on that (and I’ll bring that up when this circus is over). The researcher’s reply even included a plot line from Star Trek to explain how, although they didn’t find aliens, they now have more options when searching for life.

Final Update and Opinions: That brings this underwhelming scientific discovery to a close. When I first came across the story this morning, I was in awe that perhaps we’d have definitive proof of independently evolved life (whether native to Earth or elsewhere) and all of the implications I outlined originally. As more and more of the research was made available however, I couldn’t help but become frustrated and disappointed, not only with the media (which I expect to sensationalize news to garner attention), but especially with the scientists who allowed and, in some sense, promoted this wild speculation to increase their exposure. Is it any wonder that a large portion of the general public is dubious of science and it’s “wild” and “exaggerated” claims on climate change, extinctions, and now life? Perhaps it’s because I come from a scientific field that is largely ignored by the populace, but grandstanding with big claims and minor results seems like a waste of everyone’s time. Sure there are pressures on young researchers to establish a reputation for themselves, but at who’s expense? Their colleagues? The media? Or worst of all, the public? I’m of the firm belief that your science should speak for itself, without needing to resort to wild media campaigns, vague releases promising big results, or the fall back of “this has so much future potential”.

With that rant aside, I do think that this research is exciting (in a different way than originally), especially if they are able to back up their claims on the full integration of arsenic into biological systems. I’ve long been a believer that there is life in the universe beyond Earth, and have always been confused by astrobiologists saying that finding the exact conditions believed to be necessary for life (oxygen, phosphorous, liquid water, etc) are like a needle in a haystack. Why can’t something evolve to exploit a silicon environment where the mean daily temperature is 100°C? It’s often said that nature abhors a vacuum, so why provide limits on what conditions you believe are required for life to survive? This research lays the groundwork that these alternate hypotheses on the origins of life are feasible and that although alien life is still a matter for science fiction, the day is quickly approaching when we’ll be able to accept an independently evolved life form as scientific fact.

Share
I’d like to welcome Adam Brunke to Biodiversity in Focus as a special guest blogger today. Adam is a graduate student at the University of Guelph, and studies the diversity and agroecology of rove beetles (Staphylinidae) in Ontario.

North America’s insect fauna is changing rapidly. Many of us, however, are completely unaware of this: flies still land on our food, mosquitoes continue to feed on us and carpenter ants show up every year in our kitchens looking for something to eat. The truth is, something strange is happening to the insect communities in our backyards. So many foreign invaders have become established on this continent that it’s becoming a challenge in some places to find native species. In my experience this is especially apparent for beetles: firstly because there are so many exotic species here now; secondly because this is the group that I specialize in. If you casually surveyed your neighborhood for beetles, and sent the sample 100 years into the past to a taxonomist working in North America, they would probably complement you on your excellent reference collection of European Coleoptera!

Xantholinus elegans by Dave Cheung Staphylinidae Insect Beetle

Photo by Dave K.B. Cheung

Continue reading »

Share
© 2012 Biodiversity in Focus Blog Suffusion theme by Sayontan Sinha