Science – Page 79 – Southern Fried Science

Sharks and CITES

March 15, 2010April 21, 2010 David Shiffman 1 Comment

The 15th meeting of the Convention on the International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora, also known as CITES, has begun, and representatives of 175 countries are meeting in Doha, Qatar. CITES rules have the power to make international trade of plant and animal species illegal, which has enormous significance for their conservation. 8 shark species have been proposed for CITES protection under appendix II- oceanic whitetip sharks, porbeagle sharks, spiny dogfish (commonly used for fish and chips in the UK), dusky sharks, three species of hammerheads (great, smooth, and scalloped), and my study animal the sandbar shark.

The Cove, Dolphins, and Mercury

March 15, 2010October 20, 2011 Bluegrass Blue Crab 6 Comments

Popular Culture, Science

The Cove has recently collected a long list of awards including most notably an Oscar for best documentary. These well-deserved accolades reward the filmmakers for risky and groundbreaking filming in a highly protected cove in Japan where a dolphin fishery thrives, both to feed the aquarium trade and citizens wishing to enjoy a dolphin dinner. However, I caution viewers, as with most works of art that rely heavily on scientific information, that you should use the movie as inspiration but turn to the scientific literature for accurate information, especially in terms of mercury concerns within the dolphins. Mercury poisoning is scary, but it is only one amongst a long and growing list of toxicological concern. Its effects are relatively well-understood and known to be primarily of concern for pregnant women and small children.

10 things I hate about sharks

March 14, 2010March 14, 2010 Andrew Thaler 7 Comments

Science

Although vertebrates, sharks have cartilaginous skeletons. Why can’t they make up their minds? Sharks don’t fly anymore. Seriously, there used to be flying sharks. Flying Sharks. You can’t make this stuff up. Shark fins have no flavor. None. I mean what’s the point? Dermatologists get confused. Teeth for skin? What’s up with that? Sharks aren’t … Read More “10 things I hate about sharks” »

Summary of tweets from Benthic Ecology 2010

March 14, 2010 Andrew Thaler

Conservation, Science

If you were follwing along on Twitter this weekend, you know that all three of us were at the Benthic Ecology 2010 meeting in Wilmington, NC. Below are some of the more interesting conversations that occurred while livetweeting the event.

Why sharks matter: a reply to “sharks are sub-par at best”

March 13, 2010April 4, 2010 David Shiffman 45 Comments

Science

Recently, Andrew attempted to correct several commonly-held misconceptions about sharks. He raises some good points, but I disagree with his conclusions. I believe that sharks are incredible animals, but I think it is far more relevant that sharks are important animals.

Sharks are sub-par, at best

March 12, 2010 Andrew Thaler 15 Comments

Science

In honor of the world premier of David Shiffman’s first major motion picture, “Four things everyone needs to know about sharks,” we are proud to repost our original response to the article, “Sharks are sub-par, at best.” Enjoy!

For too long have I sat idly by as my co-blogger has waxed poetic on the glories of sharks. How great they are as predators, how perfectly they’ve evolved. They’re ancient, pre-historic, haven’t changed in millions of years. They’re the ultimate predator, and champion in the ocean. Unchallenged, unmatched, awesome. A wonder of evolution.

It’s time to clear up some of those -other- myths about sharks.

1. Sharks are ancient creatures that have lived unchanged for millions of years.

While technically true that sub-class Elasmobranchii has been around for hundreds of millions of years, modern sharks are, well, modern. They’ve been evolving for exactly as much time as just about everything else currently alive. And they are far from unchanged. Modern sharks, though they may resemble some older models (just like modern lemurs resemble Ida), are much different beasts then their Silurian cousins. Ancient sharks occured in a diversity of forms, back when they actually dominated the ocean. These modern sharks are just the scruffy leftovers.

Shark conservation news: Fisheries closures, fish and chips, and a new shark sanctuary

March 12, 2010 David Shiffman

Conservation, Science

It has been an exciting week for shark conservation! We can only hope that this provides some momentum for CITES, which begins tomorrow. And now, for this week’s shark conservation news: The Indian Ocean Tuna Commission declared a ban on commercial landings of all thresher sharks (each of the three thresher shark species is considered … Read More “Shark conservation news: Fisheries closures, fish and chips, and a new shark sanctuary” »

Hawaii’s shark fin bill: Public comment period closes Monday

March 6, 2010April 4, 2010 David Shiffman 3 Comments

Conservation, Science

The government of Hawaii has proposed a bill banning the sale of shark fins within their state. It currently has the catchy title of “SB 2169: A bill for an act relating to shark fins”, and you can read it here.

This bill is progressing much faster than my shark conservation friends working in Hawaii suspected. The public comment period closes Monday at 8:00 a.m. Hawaii time! If you have something you’d like to say about this bill, please do it soon.

You do not need to be a Hawaii resident to submit a comment!

Here’s how to submit a comment:

Ethical Debate: Animal rights, human health, and government understanding of science

February 25, 2010November 8, 2010 David Shiffman 111 Comments

Science

I am, in general, a supporter of animal rights. Animal abuse sickens me, and I really believe Ghandi’s famous quote that “you can judge a society by how it treats its weakest members”. That said, while it’s disturbing to see a rabbit which has gone blind from exposure to a potential new shampoo, I’d rather have a rabbit go blind than a human child. More importantly, while it is troubling to infect a chimpanzee with a disease in order to study how to cure that disease, such research unquestionably saves human lives. That’s why I was surprised to learn about the Great Ape Protection Act.

Why a DNA database is a very bad idea

February 24, 2010February 24, 2010 Andrew Thaler 12 Comments

Science

Imagine this scenario: A murder case that went cold 20 years ago is reopened thanks to newly available DNA-based forensics. The state, lets say Arizona, has a large database of DNA. This isn’t the DNA deposited from newborns that David discussed a few weeks ago, but DNA from convicted criminals and really anyone who’s been brought up on charges in the last few years, whether or not they were eventually found innocent. DNA from a piece of evidence in that 20-tear-old case matches DNA in the database, the suspect is brought in a questioned. He has no alibi for what he was doing on day X 20 years ago. Charges are filed, a jury is called, and the suspect is convicted on the strength of a DNA match. Justice is served, right? Maybe, but maybe not.

So here’s the funny bit. The problem with this scenario has nothing to do with genetics, forensic science, or data storage and access. It’s really not even about crime and justice. It’s about your birthday.