My research has officially made it into the news! Yesterday, an article (below) was published about my research on Safari Club International Foundation's online news source. No too major but it's one heck of a start and very exciting! Now I guess I better produce because we've officially told the world. No turning back now. Weekly Update: SCI Foundation Funds Lion Genetics Project Despite the array of propaganda in today’s media that paints a bleak picture for African lion populations, the truth is, most of the facts are false. We don’t know how many lions lived in Africa a century ago. We don’t even know how many lions existed a quarter-century ago. And for genetics, there currently is a lack of knowledge about genetic diversity of lions. Genetic diversity is directly related to a species’ ability to survive and thrive. Generally speaking, the higher the genetic diversity in a population, the more resilient that population is to threats on their survival. Threats may include in-breeding depression, disease, competition from other species, and changes in habitat, among others. Understanding the resiliency of a species can give great insight into the future of that animal. Therefore, SCI Foundation has recently funded a study to examine both historic and present day African lion (Panthera leo) genetic samples to determine whether any changes in the genetic make-up of this species over the last 100 years has any indication on its ability to thrive. Using modern biotechnology, this collaborative study with Texas A&M is using genetic samples dating back to the early 1900s to document historical lion population numbers and changes in overall genetic diversity. Tissue, bone and hide samples will be collected from over 10 museums in the U.S., Europe and Africa. With this information, researchers will compare levels of genetic diversity from lions in the past to provide a baseline for determining the genetic health of current populations. Ultimately this project has the ability to set the record straight amongst the emotional cries about the downfall and genetic vulnerability of the lion. Science is the cornerstone of wildlife management and this research could provide much needed insight into an issue where feelings often trump fact. Twice a week, SCI Foundation informs readers about conservation initiatives happening worldwide and updates them on SCI Foundation’s news, projects and events. Tuesdays are dedicated to an Issue of the Week and Thursday’s Weekly Updates will provide an inside look into research and our other science-based conservation efforts. Follow us on Facebook and Twitter for more SCI Foundation news.
0 Comments
This video is a great demonstration of how awesome population genetics is! Enjoy! By the way, the 2013 census has 17.1% of the US population being Hispanic - a group everyone recognizes as being a minority. According to this source, my blue eyes puts me in a category representing only 16% of the population. That's a difference of more than 3 million people. But, unfortunately, I can't go applying for any minority scholarships making that claim. My application would be laughed right into the trash. Culturally, being a minority is strictly a race distinction, but, from a genetic perspective, my genotype is actually more rare. Interesting to think about.
Su Lin, third cub to Bai Yun and second of the Bai & Gao Gao super team, has given birth to twins! This boy and girl pair are her second and third contributions to the panda gene pool. Su Lin was one of the pandas I was trained on. From 2007 to 2010 I watched her grow from a newly weaned cub to a full grown, independent panda before being sent to China. All captive pandas are owned by China, on loan as part of a research agreement. Part of the agreement requires all pandas born to loaned research pandas to be returned to China when they turn 3. Su Lin's 3rd birthday, however, was only a matter of months after the Sichuan earthquake of 2008 which leveled much of the Wolong National Nature Reserve and the Panda Research Center where she was supposed to be sent. So, Su Lin stayed with us at the San Diego Zoo until she was 5 and traveled to China along side her sister Zhen Zhen shortly after her 3rd birthday. Turns out twins might run in the family. This was actually Su Lin's second set of twins. Her first had one healthy cub and a still born. Her older half-sister, Hua Mei, has given birth to three sets of twins and Bai Yun, although none came to term, has been suspected to have been developing twins when vets did ultrasounds during pregnancy. In the wild, having twins isn't advantageous. The amount of energy it takes to raise two cubs far exceeds what mom is capable of providing so the panda mother is forced to pick the stronger cub to raise. Lucky for these ladies, they are part of breeding facilities equipped with all the "energy" needed to provide for both cubs. It is so wonderful to see all the success of the San Diego Zoo's Panda Research Facility's breeding program. Not only have six cubs been born in the program but they have given birth to 14 cubs of their own! So many sets of twins really help them up their numbers. An article published last week by the Conversation UK presented the idea of using captive breeding to help the Asiatic (or Iranian) Cheetah in its fight against extinction. Captive breeding for bringing endangered species “back from the brink” isn’t a new concept. In fact, it has been done multiple times through San Diego Zoo Global alone, bringing back species which were once extinct in the wild. Previously, I have talked about the Scimitar Oryx. Also, in 1982 the last remaining 22 California Condors were brought to the Wild Animal Park (now the San Diego Zoo Safari Park) to start a captive breeding program which has been a smashing success, growing the total population to 435 birds, 237 of which are flying wild. The Asiatic cheetah has a small and shrinking population with only 50-70 animals remaining within 15 reserves in Iran. Could captive breeding be the answer? When a species’ population count is this incredibly small this type of a program seems both reasonable and manageable. And, with successes like the Scimitar Oryx and California Condor, it even sounds achievable. But, are captive breeding programs a reasonable option for large carnivores? Captive breeding programs like this are tricky and there is no guarantee for success. When the intention is releasing them back into the wild to live on their own, the animal has to be cared for in a completely different manner than their captive-living counterparts. They can’t be too habituated to humans and, when it comes to carnivores, they need to have the strength, agility, stamina and cunning to hunt for themselves. Both would be difficult to accomplish in a captive setting, especially without a wild mama-hunter to teach them the ways of the world. Not to mention the amount of space it would require. Unlike the Scimitar Oryx, an Asiatic cheetah program couldn’t take place at a zoo. It would need to be implemented within their natural habitat with enough room to emulate wild living while still being able to carefully manage breeding. It could be possible to have the entire population as the captive population (as what we population geneticists call the founding population) meaning the entire gene pool of the species would need to be managed. Care would have to be taken to prevent accidental selection for tameness while preserving the genetic variation of the species (Frankham et al 1986). There have been captive cheetahs who have been successfully released into the wild. In 2006, the Cheetah Conservation Fund released a female cheetah, Shiraz, and her cubs, Sheya, Linyanti, Omukumo and Nehale, after “training” in a fenced game farm. While mama had been captive for many years, she was wild-born herself and was able to successfully teach her captive-born cubs how to hunt. This could have been the key element that contributed to the cub’s success after being released at Erindi Private Game Reserve in Namibia. A seemingly common issue which has been seen with the release of captive cheetahs, whether they were wild- or captive-born, is they have a higher propensity to become a “problem animal” hunting livestock instead of wild game. Proper “training” and placement of release could reduce this risk. As they say in dog training, “set them up for success.” Something like this will also cost a bloody fortune, especially if it’s to be managed properly. With the Asiatic cheetah population so small, I believe a carefully managed captive breeding program could be possible as long as someone can find the funding, space and personnel needed to pull the operation off in the Middle East.
Today I got the results back from testing my blood for Rickettsial antigens and while looking up the species of Rickettsia my blood was tested against I discovered a very interesting fact which totally blew my lab-mate and my mind. R. prowazekii is the closest free-living relative of mitochondria. Let me translate... The statement above is saying that an ancestral strain of a current species of parasite called Rickettsia prowazekii is the closest common ancestor of mitochondria. This ancestral species was a Rickettsia-like intracellular symbiont, meaning it relied on its relationship with another organism (in this case another cell) to live. The term "free-living" is a little misleading, as R. prowazekii cannot live outside of a host or vector, but, R. prowazekii is "free-living" in the fact that it is no longer intracellular, as its closest common ancestor to mitochondria was. As scientists studying DNA we learn a lot about mitochondria (circular DNA within eukaryotic cells responsible, in most part, for energy production). We are taught that the most likely origin of mitochondria was when one single-celled organism engulfed another creating an endosymbiont (cell living within a cell). There are multiple theories about the engulfing versus the engulfed cells but the typical explanation is an anaerobic (can live without oxygen) bacteria was engulfed by a nucleus-bearing cell. This cell-in-a-cell combo evolved to be able to create its own energy and later developed the capability to become multicellular organisms. So, this ancestral species evolved into both mitochondria and R. prowazekii: mitochondria when it became fully incorporated into the other cell (mutual symbiosis) and R. prowazekii when it became a parasite (non-mutual symbiosis). In all of the times we have been taught about the origins of mitochondria, it was never mentioned that the common ancestor isn't just any bacteria but the common ancestor of a parasite. It puts a whole new dynamic on the origin story and the evolution of symbiotic relationships as well. The original statement was found on Wikipedia but was verified by this scientific publication: |