Hantu Dive Blog Log, 27 June 2009 (Part 2)
from Pulau Hantu and Black-tipped reef shark caught at Pulau Hantu
Olive-backed Sunbird: Removal of faecal sac
from Bird Ecology Study Group
The Flying Lemur
from Urban Forest
TeamSeagrass is now certified!
from teamseagrass
Twittering science meetings – nature podcast
from Otterman speaks
Birds and droppings everywhere at this once-beautiful park
from The Lazy Lizard's Tales and why so many dead fish at Kallang
Straits Times Forum 2 Jul 09;
I REFER to the Forum Online letter by Mr Patrick Low, 'Why fine owner $6,000 for felling trees on his property?' (June 24).
Singapore is a densely built city-state that has achieved international recognition as a garden city. This did not come about by chance. The luxuriant greenery Singapore enjoys today is a result of the Government and community's deliberate efforts and commitment in planting and painstakingly maintaining trees over many years.
Singapore's tree conservation policy underpins this commitment. To preserve the ambience of areas where there are many mature trees, two Tree Conservation Areas were designated in the 1990s. The felling of healthy trees above 1m in girth without approval is not allowed within the designated Tree Conservation Areas, and offenders can be fined up to $50,000 under the Parks and Trees Act.
In the case of Mr Low's friend, he was fined for the unauthorised felling of three trees, with girths above 1m, in a Tree Conservation Area. Action was also taken against his contractor, which was not an NParks contractor, for the unauthorised felling of the trees. NParks met Mr Low's friend, his contractor as well as his architect to explain the seriousness of felling the three trees, and Mr Low's friend paid the fine.
Lee Pin Pin (Ms)
Deputy Director/Corporate & Marketing Communications
National Parks Board
Tommy Koh & Leong Ching, Straits Times 2 Jul 09;
WATER is a common but very precious asset. Without water, human beings cannot survive. Without water, the planet's ecosystem, which sustains life, will be destroyed. Without water, there will be no agriculture and no industry. Without water, life on planet Earth will perish.
We regard the right of a person to safe and affordable water as a basic human right. It is a great shame that, at the beginning of the 21st century, about one billion out of six billion people do not enjoy this right. In Asia, about 700 million people do not have access to safe and affordable water.
In Singapore, all citizens have access to clean water at an affordable price. The water from our taps is safe to drink. In spite of this fact, many Singaporeans still boil their water. In recent years, partly because of our growing affluence and partly because of the influence of the West, Singaporeans are drinking more and more bottled water. In 2007, Singaporeans spent $98.3 million on bottled water, an increase of 80 per cent over 10 years. We observe that some of our ministries and universities serve bottled water instead of tap water. In many restaurants, the waiters pressure their customers to order bottled water.
We want to start a campaign to persuade Singaporeans to drink tap water instead of bottled water, whenever possible. The following are our reasons.
First, it is a waste of your money. Bottled water is more expensive than petrol. For one bottle of water you buy off the shelf (at 50 cents), you can get 850 bottles off the tap (at $1.17 per cubic metre).
Second, the tap water is as safe as bottled water. In Singapore, the water in our taps is safe to drink and subjected to daily checks. Health-wise, there is no difference between drinking tap water and bottled water. On the contrary, tests in the United States have shown that sometimes harmful chemicals, such as bisphenol-A (BPA), can leach from bottled water. Other tests in the US have shown that expensive bottled water is no better than tap water.
Third, bottled water uses energy unnecessarily. To make water bottles, you need polyethylene terephthalate or PET, a derivative of crude oil. In the US, 1.5 million barrels of oil are used each year just to make bottles for the water industry. This is enough oil to power 100,000 cars for a year.
Fourth, bottled water is bad for the environment. In Singapore, most of the bottles are not recycled but incinerated. This uses energy and produces carbon dioxide, adding to our carbon emission. Some bottled water travels great distances to Singapore. We are importing bottled water from as far away as France, Italy, Fiji and Serbia. Transport consumes energy and produces carbon dioxide. This is another reason bottled water is not a friend of the environment.
Fifth, you should drink tap water because it is the right thing to do. We can understand the need to drink bottled water in places where the tap water is unsafe to drink.
In Singapore, there is no good reason to drink bottled water. It costs you more, but it does not make you healthier. It is unfriendly to the environment.
By all means boil your water if that makes you feel better, but please do not buy or serve bottled water if you can help it. If a waiter asks you, 'still water or bubbly water', you should politely say you prefer PUB water.
We think the Government should lead by example.
We therefore urge the Ministry of the Environment and Water Resources to write to all ministries, statutory boards, agencies, Temasek-linked companies and educational institutions to consider stopping the practice of serving bottled water.
Professor Tommy Koh is the chairman of the Governing Council of the Asia Pacific Water Forum and chairman of the 2008 and 2009 Water Leaders Summits in Singapore.
Leong Ching is a PhD student at the Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy.
This is a revised version of an article appearing in the PUB publication Pure this month.
The right of a person to safe and affordable water is a basic human right. It is a great shame that, at the beginning of the 21st century, about one billion out of six billion people do not enjoy this right. In Asia, about 700 million people do not have access to safe and affordable water.
Encouraging tap water consumption
'The Government should impose an environment tax on bottled water.'
Straits Times Forum 6 Jul 09;
MR SEAH LEONG KHAI: 'Last Thursday's article by Professor Tommy Koh and Ms Leong Ching ('Forget bottled water, tap water as good as it gets') rightly points out the advantages of drinking tap water over bottled water in terms of cost and environmental impact. Tap water in Singapore is clean and can be consumed directly from the tap without boiling. So why do people still insist on bottled water? One reason must be bottled water's perceived cleanliness, and the other is convenience. As a good environmental practice, we should reduce the consumption of bottled water when clean tap water is available. People could carry a re-usable bottle to fill with tap water, and malls could install drinking fountains so shoppers can drink from them or refill their bottles there. Perhaps the Government should impose an environment tax on bottled water, similar to the water conservation tax consumers pay for piped water.'
Today Online 1 Jul 09;
FROM today, consumers will get some help in choosing water efficient products for their homes.
All taps, mixers, flushing cisterns and urinals must now carry a water efficiency label ranging from three ticks (uses the least water), to zero.
The impact on water consumption - and utility bills - is more than just a trickle. Those who use a dual-flush, low-capacity flushing cistern (LCFC) with three ticks, for example, can save about 2,600 litres of water annually, according to national water agency PUB.
About 16 per cent of water consumption in a typical Singapore household goes to toilet flushing, and 22 per cent for kitchen use.
There will be "no significant cost increase" for consumers purchasing the labelled products, said PUB.
The Mandatory Water Efficiency Labelling Scheme is an extension of the Voluntary Water Efficiency Labelling Scheme introduced in October 2006.
The voluntary scheme will continue for the labelling of showerheads and washing machines for clothes.
In addition, all taps and mixers, urinals and LCFCs installed in all new developments and existing premises undergoing renovation must have at least a one-tick water efficiency rating. These LCFC installations also must be a dual-flush type from today.
Mangrove-dependent animals globally threatened
EurekAlert 1 Jul 09;
Extinction looms for amphibians, reptiles, mammals, and birds restricted to declining mangrove forests
More than 40 percent of a sample of amphibians, reptiles, mammals, and birds that are restricted to mangrove ecosystems are globally threatened with extinction, according to an assessment published in the July/August issue of BioScience.
The study, by David A. Luther of the University of Maryland and Russell Greenberg of the Smithsonian Migratory Bird Center, was based on an extensive literature search and expert consultations. The conclusions emphasize the vulnerability of animals that are dependent on a habitat rapidly being lost or degraded through coastal development, overexploitation, pollution, and changes in sea level and salinity.
Mangroves, which are salt-tolerant woody plants concentrated along coastal margins, generally in warm regions, have long been known to support many species of animals. Hundreds of vertebrates are sometimes found in mangroves, but Luther and Greenberg concentrated on the 69 terrestrial vertebrate species and subspecies that seem restricted to mangroves: 48 birds, 14 reptiles, 6 mammals, and 1 amphibian. These include several species with striking adaptations, such as specialized glands to excrete salt. The ground foragers among them feed primarily on crabs, but many of the birds feed on insects. For unclear reasons, mangrove-restricted species and subspecies are concentrated in Asia and Australia.
Between the early 1980s and 2001, between 19 and 35 percent of the world's mangrove forest area was lost. At this rate of loss--about 2 percent each year--mangroves could be extinct in 100 years. Only 27 of the terrestrial vertebrates that are dependent on mangroves have been assessed by the IUCN (International Union for the Conservation of Nature), and 13 of those are classified as threatened on the IUCN Red List, Luther and Greenberg report. They urge research aimed at predicting how continuing changes to mangrove forests are likely to affect the species found there: such information could guide attempts to conserve these specialized ecosystems.
###
After noon EST on 1 July and for the remainder of the month, the full text of the article will be available for free download through the copy of this Press Release available at http://www.aibs.org/bioscience-press-releases/.
Mangrove-dependent Animals Globally Threatened
ScienceDaily 1 Jul 09;
Substantial numbers of terrestrial vertebrates are restricted to mangrove forests. Many of these specialized species are listed as threatened by the International Union for the Conservation of Nature. Prospects for mangrove-restricted animals are bleak, because more than two percent of mangrove forests are lost each year.
More than 40 percent of a sample of amphibians, reptiles, mammals, and birds that are restricted to mangrove ecosystems are globally threatened with extinction, according to an assessment published in the July/August issue of BioScience. The study, by David A. Luther of the University of Maryland and Russell Greenberg of the Smithsonian Migratory Bird Center, was based on an extensive literature search and expert consultations.
The conclusions emphasize the vulnerability of animals that are dependent on a habitat rapidly being lost or degraded through coastal development, overexploitation, pollution, and changes in sea level and salinity.
Mangroves, which are salt-tolerant woody plants concentrated along coastal margins, generally in warm regions, have long been known to support many species of animals. Hundreds of vertebrates are sometimes found in mangroves, but Luther and Greenberg concentrated on the 69 terrestrial vertebrate species and subspecies that seem restricted to mangroves: 48 birds, 14 reptiles, 6 mammals, and 1 amphibian. These include several species with striking adaptations, such as specialized glands to excrete salt. The ground foragers among them feed primarily on crabs, but many of the birds feed on insects. For unclear reasons, mangrove-restricted species and subspecies are concentrated in Asia and Australia.
Between the early 1980s and 2001, between 19 and 35 percent of the world's mangrove forest area was lost. At this rate of loss--about 2 percent each year--mangroves could be extinct in 100 years. Only 27 of the terrestrial vertebrates that are dependent on mangroves have been assessed by the IUCN (International Union for the Conservation of Nature), and 13 of those are classified as threatened on the IUCN Red List, Luther and Greenberg report. They urge research aimed at predicting how continuing changes to mangrove forests are likely to affect the species found there: such information could guide attempts to conserve these specialized ecosystems.
Journal reference:
1. David A. Luther and Russell Greenberg. Mangroves: A Global Perspective on the Evolution and Conservation of Their Terrestrial Vertebrates. BioScience, July/August
Adapted from materials provided by American Institute of Biological Sciences, via EurekAlert!, a service of AAAS.
Animals of the Disappearing Mangroves
As mangrove forests shrink worldwide, a menagerie of specially adapted animals that depend on them are at risk, too
Katherine Harmon, Scientific American 3 Jul 09;
In the watery limbo between sea and river, where salt and fresh water mingle in the roots of mangrove trees, a handful of uniquely adapted species—terrestrial and aquatic—have evolved to fill the novel niche.
But more than 40 percent of the land-dwelling animals that live in mangrove forests are now under pressure from habitat loss, concludes an analysis published this week in BioScience.
"Mangroves are threatened by development, pollution, mariculture and changes in sea level and salinity," wrote David Luther, an ecology researcher at the University of Maryland, College Park, and Russell Greenberg, head of the Smithsonian National Zoo's Migratory Bird Center. The impact on creatures that depend on mangroves remains poorly documented.
Tangled woody mangrove forests cover about 65,637 square miles (170,000 square kilometers) around the world, but they're quickly disappearing. A 2007 United Nations report noted that 20 percent of the globe's mangrove forests had vanished in the 25 years between 1980 and 2005, a rate that the U.N. Food and Agriculture Organization's director called "alarming."
Here's a look at the forests and some of the animals that are now threatened by their rapid disappearance.
Slide Show: Vanishing Animals of the Mangroves
Jyoti Shelar, DNA 2 Jul 09;
Mumbai: Even after losing over 40% of its mangrove cover in the last decade, the reclaimed city refuses to learn. Now, in a bid to prevent the land mafia from killing mangroves and grabbing the land surrounding it, police have now formed a dedicated mangrove squad which will keep vigil on illegal dumping of debris in mangrove zones. In the first phase, the squad will be positioned in North Mumbai areas like Borivili and Dahisar.
The squad, which was formed last week by zonal deputy commissioner of police Sanjay Banerjee, has already fined four dumper drivers for driving in the Coastal Regulatory Zone (CRZ). They have also registered five cases under theenvironment protection actagainst persons who were found dumping debris.
The squad consists of two sub inspectors from MHB colony and Gorai police stations. The sub inspectors have 10 policemen each under them. "The squad patrols the mangroves at night when the dumpers and trucks usually attempt to dump the construction debris," said Banerjee, adding that dumping is done to convert the mangroves into construction sites.
The initiative was taken after Banerjee received a letter from
the New Link Road Residents Forum highlighting the issue. SP Matthew, one of the members of the forum, said, "We had submitted a letter along with two photo proofs of the dumping activities." Mathew said that the miscreants had created earthen bunds inside the mangroves to block water flow and thus arrest the growth of flora.
The members of the forum, consisting over 50 housing societies along the Link Road in Borivili and Dahisar, had kept a watch on the activities in the mangroves and later decided to take up the matter with the authorities. "We submitted the letter two weeks ago and the DCP assured us immediate action," added Matthew.
Banerjee is now also communicating with the civic authorities to work out a solution to stop theentry of dumpers, trucks and other heavy vehicles into mangrove areas. "I have advised them to erect concrete blocks on mangrove roads to block entry of heavy vehicles. Only bicycles or motorcycles can pass through such narrow routes," said Banerjee, who is planning to appoint more such squads in areas likeMalvani in Malad which too has several mangroves.
Tiong Hiew King, founder of giant Asian logging conglomerate Rimbunan Hijau, a company accused of systematically stripping the "paradise" forests of Indonesia, Papua New Guinea and the Solomon Islands
John Vidal, guardian.co.uk 1 Jul 09;
Environment groups around the world have called for a billionaire businessman to be stripped of his knighthood after claiming that his fortune has been built on the systematic destruction of tropical rainforests.
Tiong Hiew King, the founder of giant Asian logging conglomerate Rimbunan Hijau, was awarded an honorary knighthood "for services to commerce, the community and charitable organisations in Papua New Guinea" in the Queen's birthday honours list last month.
Rimbunan Hijau, which has hundreds of subsidiaries, operates in south-east Asia and Africa, and is the biggest extractor of tropical timber from Papua New Guinea.
The company has also been highly active in the Solomon Islands, which campaigners say has been stripped almost bare of its indigenous forests by a handful of Asian logging syndicates including King's companies.
The award to Tiong, whose personal wealth is estimated at over $2.7bn, escaped notice until now - having not been published in any British newspaper.
Honorary awards for foreign nationals are not published in Britain and are made public only at the discretion of foreign governments.
Yesterday both the UK government and Buckingham palace distanced themselves from the appointment.
"The palace would have decided on the award," said a spokesman for the Foreign Office.
"The prime minister of Papua New Guinea, supported by the governor general, would have made the recommendation to the queen. It would then have been cleared by the Foreign Office and the Malaysian government," said a spokesman for the palace.
Survival International and other groups today accused Tiong's timber companies of systematically stripping the "paradise" forests of Indonesia, Papua New Guinea and the Solomon Islands for over 30 years.
"It's outrageous that Tiong Hiew King has been given an honorary knighthood. His company is responsible for the destruction of vast areas of forest belonging to the Penan tribe in Sarawak, Borneo, many of whom now have difficulty finding enough food as the animals they hunt have fled Tiong's bulldozers. Britain must stop honouring people who abuse tribal people's rights," said Stephen Cory, director of Survival International.
"His global logging empire is responsible for the destruction of huge swathes of pristine rainforest in south-east Asia. If the Queen knew what he was responsible for she would have knighted him with a chainsaw, not a sword," said a spokesman for Greenpeace.
"Tiong Hiew King is unfit for a knighthood. He is commonly known to be one of the chief people responsible for widespread logging in both Papua New Guinea and other countries," said Lukas Straumann of the Bruno Manser Foundation, which was set up following the death of the Swiss environmentalist.
"We are shocked by the award and would like to write a formal letter of protest to Prince Charles and Queen Elizabeth to deprive him of this honour as it is a joke based on the record of his company's activities in our country," said a spokesman for the Papua New Guinea Eco-Forestry forum.
Prince Charles, who visited south-east Asia last year to plead with government leaders to protect forests has led a global initiative to defend tropical rainforests which are being felled at an alarming rate.
A spokesman for Clarence House, which represents Prince Charles, today declined to comment.
The Rimbunan Hijau company website says the jobs it creates for local communities improves their quality of life and that welfare and environmental protection of societies is a major driving force for the company.
Tiong declined to comment.
Yahoo News 1 Jul 09;
MANILA (AFP) – Wildlife officials have foiled an apparent attempt to smuggle rare 200-year-old trees out of the Philippines, the government said Wednesday.
Officers seized 35 Podocarpus costalis trees at a gardening shop in Calamba, south of Manila after the government rejected their owner's application for a permit to transport the rare conifers, considered an endangered species, to the port of Manila.
Known locally as "igem-dagat", the short evergreen trees grow only in the tiny northern Philippine island of Calayan and nearby Taiwan, and are prized as garden plants, the environment and natural resources department said in a statement.
The conifer grows up to three metres (10 feet) tall and has a smooth, greenish bark, horizontally spreading branches and foliage buds of long, triangular scales.
"Igem-dagat is included in the list of threatened species being protected by the government. Its trading is strictly regulated," Environment and Natural Resources Secretary Joselito Atienza said.
The government suspects the trees would likely have been shipped abroad. It did not reveal the exact date of the seizure.
The person seeking to transport the trees, a local official in the northern province of Cagayan, claimed they were planted on private land in the north in 1975.
However, government experts estimate the slow-growing trees could be anywhere between 70 and 200 years old and could have only been taken from the wild.
"Some of the trees would take two pairs of arms to encircle their trunks. As such, these trees could not have been planted in 1975," according to the report of the officials who seized the trees.
Jonathan Wootliff, Jakarta Post 30 Jun 09;
Conservation campaigners in Britain are calling on supermarkets to stop selling products that contain palm oil harvested from environmentally sensitive areas in Indonesia.
Palm oil is widely used in everything from chocolate cookies and potato crisps to detergent and lipstick, and Indonesia is the world's largest producer of this much prized commodity.
The target of this current campaign is the major London Stock Exchange-quoted conglomerate, Jardine Matheson, which is the majority shareholder in an Indonesian palm oil company that plans to convert sections of the Tripa swamp forest in Aceh, Sumatra into palm oil plantations.
Environmentalists claim that the venture will destroy a biologically rich ecosystem that is home to more than 6,000 orangutans.
Although more commonly known as one of Borneo's most endangered species, orangutan populations in Sumatra are dwindling at an even more alarming rate. Experts say that the species found on the island - which is more intelligent and sociable than its Borneo cousin - is well on the way to becoming the first of the great apes to go extinct.
Greenpeace is one of a number of international organizations condemning the Jardine Matheson controlled Astra Agro Lestar palm oil venture, which is headquartered in Jakarta.
It is emotively accusing the company of bankrolling the obliteration of a vital part of Indonesia's rainforests, right in the heart of the region that bore the brunt of the 2004 tsunami which claimed the lives of nearly a quarter of a million people.
Ironically, Jardine's, which is one of the world's oldest companys, was established in Canton in 1832 partly for the purpose of importing opium in to China. Today, it is one of the most respected international businesses in the world, owning a myriad of interests including the prestigious Mandarin Oriental hotel chain.
Its Website states that the company "has always been committed to making a positive contribution to the communities and regions in which it operates."
Astra Agro Lestari (AAL) robustly denies any wrongdoing, claiming its activities are in full compliance with Indonesian law, which requires comprehensive environmental studies that take into consideration any stakeholder concerns prior to the development of any plantations.
AAL says that these studies must cover the potential impact on endangered species, thereby discrediting allegations that its activities have any adverse impact on the orangutan.
The company claims to have set aside thousands of hectares of forest deemed to be of so-called High Conservation Value (HCV), and that the decision to go ahead with the Tripa project was based on the findings of an independent environmental study. In this instance it plans to convert only half of its 13,000-hectare concession as a consequence of conservation concerns.
Less than a quarter of Indonesia's palm oil producers have joined the Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil, the global organization which promotes sustainable practices in the industry. And yet AAL claims to fully endorse the principles of the Roundtable, although curiously, it is not yet a member.
Nothing is simple when it comes to environmental protection in Indonesia, as this Green-Watch column regularly attests. In Sumatra, locals call oil palm the "golden plant", thanks to the income that the fast growing industry delivers.
But conservation groups say the economic benefits come at a high price. In spite of their call for more responsible practices and stronger government action, even the governor of Aceh, known for his green credentials, seems unwilling to intervene.
It may be hard to judge the rights and wrongs of this particular confrontation, but it is clear that conservation groups must fight to protect Sumatra's rapidly depleting natural forests. I have been flying over the island for nearly a decade and have witnessed the clearing of massive areas of forests to make way for palm oil plantations.
The palm oil industry has its rightful place in Indonesia, and responsible development of well managed plantations that do not impact on biodiversity are a necessary if Indonesia's economy is to flourish.
But there is widespread disregard for the needs of the environment with weak enforcement of regulations and laws being all-too-commonplace. It would be far better, therefore, to entrust the palm oil industry to large businesses like AAL, which can be held account for their actions, than to allow an inevitable chaotic free-for-all to take place.
There is a disturbingly large gap between the accusations coming from environmentalists and AAL's counter claims.
It is in the best interests of the orangutan, local people and the company, that this serious dispute be resolved.
There has been a breakdown of trust that must be urgently addressed. It is surely beholden on AAL, and its highly competent parent company, to urgently execute a comprehensive engagement strategy with all of the concerned stakeholders.
Jonathan Wootliff is an independent sustainable development consultant specializing in the building of productive relationships between companies and NGOs. He can be contacted at jonathan@wootliff.com
One of the largest groups of dolphins ever seen in British waters has been observed off the Welsh coast.
Murray Wardrop, The Telegraph 1 Jul 09;
Conservationists carrying out a coastal survey found their boat surrounded by a pod of around 1,500 dolphins off the coast of Pembrokeshire.
The eight volunteers from the Sea Trust described the scene as a "mile-long wall of dolphins" near the Smalls Lighthouse in the Irish Sea.
The charity's founder Cliff Benson said in wildlife terms the sight "was like winning the lottery".
The team was first alerted to the giant group when they saw what looked like a "blizzard" of Gannets on the horizon.
Mr Benson said: "Beneath them was a living wall of dolphins – a mile long and several deep.
"They just kept on coming pod after pod passing by the boat. It was a wonderful thing to see. It was possible to see all ages of dolphins from big adults to tiny babies."
Experts believe that the group consisted of many smaller pods, which had joined together to exploit a large "bait ball" of fish passing through the stretch of water.
Matt Walker, BBC News 1 Jul 09;
A single mega-colony of ants has colonised much of the world, scientists have discovered.
Argentine ants living in vast numbers across Europe, the US and Japan belong to the same interrelated colony, and will refuse to fight one another.
The colony may be the largest of its type ever known for any insect species, and could rival humans in the scale of its world domination.
What's more, people are unwittingly helping the mega-colony stick together.
Argentine ants ( Linepithema humile ) were once native to South America. But people have unintentionally introduced the ants to all continents except Antarctica.
These introduced Argentine ants are renowned for forming large colonies, and for becoming a significant pest, attacking native animals and crops.
In Europe, one vast colony of Argentine ants is thought to stretch for 6,000km (3,700 miles) along the Mediterranean coast, while another in the US, known as the 'Californian large', extends over 900km (560 miles) along the coast of California. A third huge colony exists on the west coast of Japan.
While ants are usually highly territorial, those living within each super-colony are tolerant of one another, even if they live tens or hundreds of kilometres apart. Each super-colony, however, was thought to be quite distinct.
But it now appears that billions of Argentine ants around the world all actually belong to one single global mega-colony.
Researchers in Japan and Spain led by Eiriki Sunamura of the University of Tokyo found that Argentine ants living in Europe, Japan and California shared a strikingly similar chemical profile of hydrocarbons on their cuticles.
But further experiments revealed the true extent of the insects' global ambition.
The team selected wild ants from the main European super-colony, from another smaller one called the Catalonian super-colony which lives on the Iberian coast, the Californian super-colony and from the super-colony in west Japan, as well as another in Kobe, Japan.
They then matched up the ants in a series of one-on-one tests to see how aggressive individuals from different colonies would be to one another.
Ants from the smaller super-colonies were always aggressive to one another. So ants from the west coast of Japan fought their rivals from Kobe, while ants from the European super-colony didn't get on with those from the Iberian colony.
One big family
But whenever ants from the main European and Californian super-colonies and those from the largest colony in Japan came into contact, they acted as if they were old friends.
These ants rubbed antennae with one another and never became aggressive or tried to avoid one another.
In short, they acted as if they all belonged to the same colony, despite living on different continents separated by vast oceans.
The most plausible explanation is that ants from these three super-colonies are indeed family, and are all genetically related, say the researchers. When they come into contact, they recognise each other by the chemical composition of their cuticles.
"The enormous extent of this population is paralleled only by human society," the researchers write in the journal Insect Sociaux, in which they report their findings.
However, the irony is that it is us who likely created the ant mega-colony by initially transporting the insects around the world, and by continually introducing ants from the three continents to each other, ensuring the mega-colony continues to mingle.
"Humans created this great non-aggressive ant population," the researchers write.
Every year, scientists recognize 15,000 new animal species— each one needs a new name. With so many species, scientists are bound to turn to popular culture for inspiration. Here, we've compiled a list of famous (and infamous) people and the often quirky species named after them.
Lisa Merolla, Popular Mechanics 1 Jul 09;
What do George W. Bush, Roy Orbison and Darth Vader have in common? All three have had new beetle species named after them.
Naming species after celebrities is one seriously effective way for scientists to draw attention to taxonomy. Giving species a famous name for more public interest is "shameless self-promotion," says Quentin Wheeler, the director of the International Institute for Species Exploration in Arizona (whose names populate four of our top-15 list). "When you are a taxonomist and are mentioned in Rolling Stone," Wheeler says, "you know you have arrived."
Scientists are given free rein with naming, as long as they abide by guidelines set by the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature. The rules for patronyms—or scientific names in honor of people—do not limit which names are used. They just provide a uniform naming method. In general, an animal species ending in 'i' is named after one man. The ending 'ae' is for species named after one woman; 'orum' is reserved for species named after couples. Plant species operate under slightly different rules because the gender of the species must match that of the genus.
President Barack Obama is one of the latest to be immortalized in the taxonomic record. And the list of famous plants, bacteria and animals ranges in the hundreds, if not thousands—from the sea of many, here are our 18 favorite famous namesakes.
1. Barack Obama: Caloplaca obamae
Our current president's namesake is an orange-colored lichen. Discovered in California, the lichen was named this March. Kerry Knudsen, the lichen curator in the University of California, Riverside Herbarium, picked the name to "show my appreciation for the president's support of science and science education."
2, 3 and 4. George W. Bush, Agathidium bushi; Dick Cheney, Agathidium cheneyi; and Donald Rumsfeld, Agathidium rumsfeldi
All three members of the former administration have a slime-mold beetle named in their honor. Wheeler is responsible for this choice, which was meant as a compliment. He said President Bush called to thank him for the gesture.
5. Darth Vader: Agathidium vaderi
Wheeler named another slime-mold beetle in honor of the fictional Star Wars villain. The reasoning is that both Darth Vader and his namesake have broad, shiny heads and similar eyes.
6. Roy and Barbara Orbison: Orectochilus orbisonorum
In January of last year Wheeler and his colleagues named a whirligig beetle after legendary singer song-writer, Roy Orbison and his widow, Barbara Orbison. The beetle looks as if it is wearing a tuxedo.
7 and 8. Stephen Colbert: Aptostichus stephencolberti and Agaporomorphus colberti
The comedian, who has begged scientists to name species after him on The Colbert Report, has been honored twice—once with a spider and once with a Venezuelan diving beetle. The beetle species is notable for its male reproductive organs, which display a unique row of fine hairs.
9, 10 and 11. Frank Zappa: Phialella zappai (jellyfish), Pachygnatha zappa (spider), Zappa, a genus of Gobiidae (fish)
Guitarist, free-speech advocate and prolific song writer Frank Zappa is a popular inspiration for a number of species' names. In 1987, a scientist named a species of jellyfish after Zappa because a scientist he wanted to meet the artist (his plan was successful). Next, scientists named an entire genus of goby fish was after the musician, followed by an orb-weaver spider whose black markings reminded the researchers of Zappa's signature mustache.
12. John Cleese: Avahi cleesei
In 2005, scientists named woolly lemur species after the British comic actor to recognize his work in lemur conservation. Cleese promoted lemurs in the film Fierce Creatures and the documentary Operation Lemur With John Cleese.
13. Kate Winslet: Agra katewinsletae
This ground-beetle species is named after Kate Winslet because of her role in the film Titanic. The scientific paper describing the beetle said, "Her character did not go down with the ship, but we will not be able to say the same for this elegant canopy species, if all the rain forest is converted to pastures."
14. Hugh Hefner: Sylvilagus palustris hefneri
Scientists named the marsh rabbit, found in the southeastern United States, after the founder of Playboy. Hefner's organization has donated money to support research about the endangered "bunnies."
15. Greta Garbo: Rostropria garbo
This solitary female wasp reminded the scientists of the reclusive Garbo, who famously said, "I want to be alone."
16 and 17. Harrison Ford: Pheidole harrisonfordi (ant) and Calponia harrisonfordi (spider)
Two types of insects bear Ford's name. Scientists named a spider species after the actor to thank him for narrating a documentary for the London Museum of Natural History. The ant species was named after Ford to honor his conservation work.
18. Gary Larson: Strigiphilus garylarsoni
The creator of the Far Side comic strip, Larson's namesake is a species of owl louse. About the recognition, he wrote: "I considered this an extreme honor. Besides, I knew no one was going to write and ask to name a new species of swan after me. You have to grab these opportunities when they come along."
Posts
visitors since Nov 07