Lesson 9 - and HSI Horizontal Situation Indicator crosswind
In this exercise, once intercepted the QDM 210 °, 225 ° pua I proceed to fight a wind of 30kt from 270 °.
The instrument used is the HSI is that the situation well is located in the plane.
For HD viewing video click on this link .
The spectacular simulator is Luiz Roberto Monteiro de Oliveira and you can use for free on the Internet at http://www.luizmonteiro.com .
E 'can also purchase an off-line version to be used without internet connection.
There are also other useful things such as aviation conversions, calculations and much more.
I FNAR plays an impor-
Saturday, December 18, 2010
Friday, December 17, 2010
Shortness Of Breath With Jelly Earphones
On the origin of bilateral symmetry
PaleoStoria We speculated on the importance of embodiment and what may have been the evolutionary steps that led to the development of this fundamental property of animal life.
Today, I will speak of another great achievement of development, another innovation that significantly changed the lives of animals: the development of bilateral symmetry. As we
seen in the post Basics Part 1 PaleoStories , most of the bodies with the body can be divided into two main categories, those whose body can be divided into two parts mirror for more than two or more axes, and those on the other hand whose body can be divided into two symmetrical parts (right and left) by a single axis of symmetry. (The situation is a bit 'more complicated, but I'll explain later). The former are such animals radial symmetry (or radial) and are, for example, current cnidarians (including jellyfish) and ctenophores, a bizarre group of marine animals tentacles.
to say so, it seems that the problem is only in the geometric concept symmetry, which in itself may seem irrelevant from the anatomical point of view.
However, if you look at the internal anatomy of animals radial symmetry and symmetry side, you'll immediately notice that the two different forms, there is a gap very meaning of anatomical complexity, two-sided with the animals that possess various anatomical features that the deletions do not have and which are of extreme importance from a functional standpoint. Data in hand, we note that over 99 percent of living species of metazoans are bilateral and that they have a much more complex structure and distribution and a much more diverse ecology than deletions.
then be a two-sided, it's not just!
But if the bilateral symmetry allowed the animals to develop an anatomically far more complex than that radiated, as we have moved from one floor to another body? You can trace the origins of bilateral symmetry, groped to understand when and how did this pass?
The answer is yes, but the question is rather complicated.
The starting point for all phylogenetic analysis (and then groped for something to understand the evolution of different groups) is to recognize what characteristics distinguish one group from another. In this case, therefore, we must consider whether apomorfici that allow us to separate the two-sided by the other animals.
Not all scholars agree in recognizing a set number of synapomorphies for the two-sided, but, in order of importance, we can divide the distinctive features (or rather deemed distinctive) of two-sided in three large groups, in order of consent:
1. Almost all scholars and phylogenetic analysis recognize that all have two-sided two orthogonal axes, an anteroposterior and a dorsoventrale, that just makes these animals "bilaterally symmetrical," a nervous system with a concentration of nerve cells in the central part, which is Then the nerves branch off towards the rear, and triploblastia (during the development of genetic forms a third layer, the mesoderm, deputy to the formation of some special structures, such as the axial skeleton - when present-the muscles, excretory system, and others. In animals not triploblastici we only have two layers, ectoderm and endoderm, whereas in the first two triploblastici addition, in the middle, the mesoderm. I do not want to dwell too much on these biological issues, but I hope to have been clear enough).
2. Other features that are sometimes considered to be distinctive for the two-sided are the presence of an excretory system, a real channel stomach (ie, mouth and anus), a primitive eyes and a set of genes including Hox genes at least 7-8 (I Hox genes are particular types of genes that play an important function to grow the cells and organs in their right place. Which are genes that regulate the development of the anteroposterior body, those that regulate the development of ventral spine, those who "say" in the arts where it grows, or where "should be placed" the eyes, etc.. Hox genes on a specific post will be discussed later)
3. Finally, some would be considered synapomorphies of Bilateria also possess a coelomic cavity, a heart, and a segmented body with appendages. On this third point, however, many scholars agree, and consider these features are not diagnostic for derivatives and Bilateria.
Why have I done here? Why on diagnosis of the distinguishing features of Bilateria run all the theories concerning the origin of bilateral symmetry. Numerous phylogenetic analysis indicate the presence of a common ancestor shared between the bilateral and the cnidarians, then, to understand the origin of the two-sided we groped to reconstruct the features of this common ancestor.
In particular, based on what features we take into account two different scenarios:
- A. The common ancestor of the animal was a simple two-sided, non-segmented and without cavities, similar to the planula cnidarians, and the distinctive features of two-sided would gradually appeared. In this case, therefore, the characteristics of the first two-sided were those of group 1, while those of group 2 and 3 would be appeared later. Note that the planula of cnidarians, which is one of them juveniles, has bilateral symmetry. In the figure we can see a body acelomato fitted with bilateral symmetry, mesoderm, but still simple.
-B. The common ancestor was an animal rather complex two-sided, with the characteristics of two-sided complex, derived from a large larva of a cnidarian cnidarians or an adult. From this common ancestor, they would then develop the other two-sided, some of which (such as two-sided, not fitted to the body cavities, or us, not We segmented) would have then lost or changed some of the points 1,2 and 3.
paleontology is obviously one of the best ways to study the evolution of organisms of the past. Again, a good fossil record is essential in order to provide data to support or detriment of either claim. Unfortunately, the fossil organisms on which we are investigating (we are roughly in the Cambrian, and we are trying to soft-bodied animals such as cnidarians and the first two-sided vermiform, such as flatworms) have to cover my soft and very difficult to find, as they rarely they fossilize.
Therefore, a great help to resolve the issue comes not from paleontology However, the study of this animal, using sophisticated methods of molecular analysis.
The molecular phylogeny is based mainly on the study and comparison of the genetic material of the taxa considered. A major study on the origin of bilateral and was played in excellent Maneiro by Jaume Baguňa Riutort and Martha (2004). Here, in particular, the analysis were conducted by comparing a particular sequence of RNA (18S rDNA). And on the sequencing and comparison of Hox genes, which are considered very important because they are actually (indeed, some of them) that "giving instructions" to the body cells that are arranged in a certain way and promoting the development of an anterior-posterior axis and dorsoventrale.
This analysis showed that within Bilateria, the position is occupied by the most basal clade Acoelomorpha, a group of small invertebrates acelomati, once regarded as flatworms, bearing the characteristics of the group 1 but not the others. This detail, as we shall see, is very useful to hypothesize the origin of the two-sided.
Furthermore, these tests have shown that within Bilateria there is another group, called Eubilateria, which includes three major groups of two-sided, Ecdysozoa, Lophotrochozoa (both joined in the group of protostome) and deuterostome. The matter, as often happens, is wonderfully complicated.
Acoelomorpha represent the most basal clade within Bilateria, to weigh more plausible as the hypothesis of an ancestor of the two-sided rather simple, small, acelomato and not segmented. Acoelomorpha's also a set of Hox genes in between that of cnidarians and that of Eubilateri, to emphasize their key importance in the tree of evolution. Important to note that some cnidarians possess Hox genes similar to those in two-sided deal to organize the body so that an axis has a board anterodorsale dorsoventrale. It may therefore be that, from a planula (which, as we have seen, is already sides) it then developed a mutation in Hox genes, such as to maintain the planula a bilateral structure (for neoteny?) that give rise to a completely two-sided animal in all stages of life.
do not know, but we feel the same imagine what happened: about 615 to 570 million years ago (it seems to indicate the fossil and molecular studies), a body similar to the cnidarian planula for mutations Hox genes or genetic interesting consequence for the formation of new genes, evolved a race of animals from the body with lateral symmetry, not fitted with cavities, they segmentation, but rather simple.
During the Cambrian, perhaps developed several lines of animals of this type, including one that includes the current Acoleomorpha, one group survived.
Then, gradually, other important features were acquired, as a body cavity or a real device stomach, providing new and important means to the animals to grow and radiarsi. Thus, approximately 570 million years ago, the first eubilateri evolved, and, in the wake of this wonderful burst of evolution, to 550 million years ago began to separate the lines of the protostome and deuterostome.
Again, life was never the same.
------------------------------------------------ -------------------------------------------------- ----------
Bibliography: J. Baguna and Riutort M., 2004, The dawn of bilaterian animals: the case of acoelomorph flatworms, BioEssays 26: 1046 to 1057.
PaleoStoria We speculated on the importance of embodiment and what may have been the evolutionary steps that led to the development of this fundamental property of animal life.
Today, I will speak of another great achievement of development, another innovation that significantly changed the lives of animals: the development of bilateral symmetry. As we
seen in the post Basics Part 1 PaleoStories , most of the bodies with the body can be divided into two main categories, those whose body can be divided into two parts mirror for more than two or more axes, and those on the other hand whose body can be divided into two symmetrical parts (right and left) by a single axis of symmetry. (The situation is a bit 'more complicated, but I'll explain later). The former are such animals radial symmetry (or radial) and are, for example, current cnidarians (including jellyfish) and ctenophores, a bizarre group of marine animals tentacles.
to say so, it seems that the problem is only in the geometric concept symmetry, which in itself may seem irrelevant from the anatomical point of view.
However, if you look at the internal anatomy of animals radial symmetry and symmetry side, you'll immediately notice that the two different forms, there is a gap very meaning of anatomical complexity, two-sided with the animals that possess various anatomical features that the deletions do not have and which are of extreme importance from a functional standpoint. Data in hand, we note that over 99 percent of living species of metazoans are bilateral and that they have a much more complex structure and distribution and a much more diverse ecology than deletions.
then be a two-sided, it's not just!
But if the bilateral symmetry allowed the animals to develop an anatomically far more complex than that radiated, as we have moved from one floor to another body? You can trace the origins of bilateral symmetry, groped to understand when and how did this pass?
The answer is yes, but the question is rather complicated.
The starting point for all phylogenetic analysis (and then groped for something to understand the evolution of different groups) is to recognize what characteristics distinguish one group from another. In this case, therefore, we must consider whether apomorfici that allow us to separate the two-sided by the other animals.
Not all scholars agree in recognizing a set number of synapomorphies for the two-sided, but, in order of importance, we can divide the distinctive features (or rather deemed distinctive) of two-sided in three large groups, in order of consent:
2. Other features that are sometimes considered to be distinctive for the two-sided are the presence of an excretory system, a real channel stomach (ie, mouth and anus), a primitive eyes and a set of genes including Hox genes at least 7-8 (I Hox genes are particular types of genes that play an important function to grow the cells and organs in their right place. Which are genes that regulate the development of the anteroposterior body, those that regulate the development of ventral spine, those who "say" in the arts where it grows, or where "should be placed" the eyes, etc.. Hox genes on a specific post will be discussed later)
3. Finally, some would be considered synapomorphies of Bilateria also possess a coelomic cavity, a heart, and a segmented body with appendages. On this third point, however, many scholars agree, and consider these features are not diagnostic for derivatives and Bilateria.
Why have I done here? Why on diagnosis of the distinguishing features of Bilateria run all the theories concerning the origin of bilateral symmetry. Numerous phylogenetic analysis indicate the presence of a common ancestor shared between the bilateral and the cnidarians, then, to understand the origin of the two-sided we groped to reconstruct the features of this common ancestor.
In particular, based on what features we take into account two different scenarios:
- A. The common ancestor of the animal was a simple two-sided, non-segmented and without cavities, similar to the planula cnidarians, and the distinctive features of two-sided would gradually appeared. In this case, therefore, the characteristics of the first two-sided were those of group 1, while those of group 2 and 3 would be appeared later. Note that the planula of cnidarians, which is one of them juveniles, has bilateral symmetry. In the figure we can see a body acelomato fitted with bilateral symmetry, mesoderm, but still simple. -B. The common ancestor was an animal rather complex two-sided, with the characteristics of two-sided complex, derived from a large larva of a cnidarian cnidarians or an adult. From this common ancestor, they would then develop the other two-sided, some of which (such as two-sided, not fitted to the body cavities, or us, not We segmented) would have then lost or changed some of the points 1,2 and 3.
paleontology is obviously one of the best ways to study the evolution of organisms of the past. Again, a good fossil record is essential in order to provide data to support or detriment of either claim. Unfortunately, the fossil organisms on which we are investigating (we are roughly in the Cambrian, and we are trying to soft-bodied animals such as cnidarians and the first two-sided vermiform, such as flatworms) have to cover my soft and very difficult to find, as they rarely they fossilize.
Therefore, a great help to resolve the issue comes not from paleontology However, the study of this animal, using sophisticated methods of molecular analysis.
The molecular phylogeny is based mainly on the study and comparison of the genetic material of the taxa considered. A major study on the origin of bilateral and was played in excellent Maneiro by Jaume Baguňa Riutort and Martha (2004). Here, in particular, the analysis were conducted by comparing a particular sequence of RNA (18S rDNA). And on the sequencing and comparison of Hox genes, which are considered very important because they are actually (indeed, some of them) that "giving instructions" to the body cells that are arranged in a certain way and promoting the development of an anterior-posterior axis and dorsoventrale.
This analysis showed that within Bilateria, the position is occupied by the most basal clade Acoelomorpha, a group of small invertebrates acelomati, once regarded as flatworms, bearing the characteristics of the group 1 but not the others. This detail, as we shall see, is very useful to hypothesize the origin of the two-sided.
Furthermore, these tests have shown that within Bilateria there is another group, called Eubilateria, which includes three major groups of two-sided, Ecdysozoa, Lophotrochozoa (both joined in the group of protostome) and deuterostome. The matter, as often happens, is wonderfully complicated.
Acoelomorpha represent the most basal clade within Bilateria, to weigh more plausible as the hypothesis of an ancestor of the two-sided rather simple, small, acelomato and not segmented. Acoelomorpha's also a set of Hox genes in between that of cnidarians and that of Eubilateri, to emphasize their key importance in the tree of evolution. Important to note that some cnidarians possess Hox genes similar to those in two-sided deal to organize the body so that an axis has a board anterodorsale dorsoventrale. It may therefore be that, from a planula (which, as we have seen, is already sides) it then developed a mutation in Hox genes, such as to maintain the planula a bilateral structure (for neoteny?) that give rise to a completely two-sided animal in all stages of life.
do not know, but we feel the same imagine what happened: about 615 to 570 million years ago (it seems to indicate the fossil and molecular studies), a body similar to the cnidarian planula for mutations Hox genes or genetic interesting consequence for the formation of new genes, evolved a race of animals from the body with lateral symmetry, not fitted with cavities, they segmentation, but rather simple. During the Cambrian, perhaps developed several lines of animals of this type, including one that includes the current Acoleomorpha, one group survived.
Then, gradually, other important features were acquired, as a body cavity or a real device stomach, providing new and important means to the animals to grow and radiarsi. Thus, approximately 570 million years ago, the first eubilateri evolved, and, in the wake of this wonderful burst of evolution, to 550 million years ago began to separate the lines of the protostome and deuterostome.
Again, life was never the same.
------------------------------------------------ -------------------------------------------------- ----------
Bibliography: J. Baguna and Riutort M., 2004, The dawn of bilaterian animals: the case of acoelomorph flatworms, BioEssays 26: 1046 to 1057.
Wednesday, December 15, 2010
Cervical Position Right Before Period?
HSI image is a bit 'better than what you see in the simulator.
This tool is the union of a directional indicator and VOR.
- The line of faith (lubber line) and the rose of damage directional reading the magnetic heading.
- Selector course (course select knob) turns the course pointer (select course pointer) that indicates the selected VOR radial.
- The Command of the selector forward (heading select knob) with the selector Bow (heading select bug) help to indicate the route to follow.
- The VOR deviation bar (course deviation bar) is at the center when the Course is on the VOR radial or shifted to the right or the left indicating the direction of the turn to run to reach the route.
- The indicator TO / FROM (TO / FROM indicator) indicates the VOR as if the station is in front of or behind the plane.
I FNAR plays an impor-
Midnight Meat Train, Barnacles
Lesson 8 - The HSI
tool that allows an immediate view of the situation Horizontal is the HSI (Horizontal Situation Indicator).
As you can see in the video, to intercept a QDM do not have to perform calculations but simply follow the instructions of the instrument.
I FNAR plays an impor-
tool that allows an immediate view of the situation Horizontal is the HSI (Horizontal Situation Indicator).
As you can see in the video, to intercept a QDM do not have to perform calculations but simply follow the instructions of the instrument.
I FNAR plays an impor-
Wednesday, December 8, 2010
Citalapram Overdose Tablets
Lesson 7 - The QDM QDR and the VOR
In one video the steps to the interception of the QDM and the QDR with the use of the VOR.
rule to execute the turn correctly is simple. Once the value of the QDM (or QDR) to intercept the VOR you look at the hand: if it is right you should add to the value of the angle of interception that QDM has been adopted, if it is to the left subtract. The result is the value that should have the bow at the end of the turn.
I FNAR plays an impor-
In one video the steps to the interception of the QDM and the QDR with the use of the VOR.
rule to execute the turn correctly is simple. Once the value of the QDM (or QDR) to intercept the VOR you look at the hand: if it is right you should add to the value of the angle of interception that QDM has been adopted, if it is to the left subtract. The result is the value that should have the bow at the end of the turn.
I FNAR plays an impor-
Sunday, December 5, 2010
After Prom Hamptons 2010
Lesson 6 - The RMI
The RMI (radio magnetic indicator) is the tool that is created by the executive and the ADF with two indices for orientation is NDB stations around the VOR.
In the video below the RMI has one index for the NDB and the Rose graduated wheel indicating the magnetic heading (the lubber line on top).
As always shows the pink bow, the index provides us directly with the QDM QDR with the tip and tail.
thank his friend Joseph reminded me quote Tim Carlson (mim@visi.com) as the creator of the simulator that I use in the video.
E 'can be found with this link: http://www.visi.com/ ~ mim / nav /
I FNAR plays an impor-
The RMI (radio magnetic indicator) is the tool that is created by the executive and the ADF with two indices for orientation is NDB stations around the VOR.
In the video below the RMI has one index for the NDB and the Rose graduated wheel indicating the magnetic heading (the lubber line on top).
As always shows the pink bow, the index provides us directly with the QDM QDR with the tip and tail.
thank his friend Joseph reminded me quote Tim Carlson (mim@visi.com) as the creator of the simulator that I use in the video.
E 'can be found with this link: http://www.visi.com/ ~ mim / nav /
I FNAR plays an impor-
Saturday, December 4, 2010
Toothbrush Receding Gums
Mens sana in corpore sano: the origin of the body
Finally, after more than two months after the founding of this blog, I can post my first PaleoStoria. I must say I'm a bit 'excited, we hope to ear with clarity and without boring, because, being quite complex issues, unfortunately the post will be of considerable length. If you find them boring or too long, please let me know in the comments. For the first
PaleoStoria I chose a topic of great importance, both from an evolutionary point of view, and, above all, from a cognitive point of view. I think it's enough counterproductive to talk about complicated issues if you do not have certain basics. I could talk about bones, locomotives special adaptations, behavior, origin of certain anatomical structures, etc. .. But without first having explained things, the risk that certain notions for granted is very high. And, because what interests me is the look especially popular, I prefer starting from the base. For this reason, my PaleoStorie follow a fairly well-defined line of reasoning, using arguments that gradually becoming more complex. The fact that the increase in complexity also follows the chronological history of life on Earth and its evolution, will prove very helpful in understanding and narrative, and often the reader's task easier. In this first
PaleoStoria referred to as one of the fundamental concepts of the history of life on Earth: the origin of the body .
But what is a body? I will you ever wondered?
In general terms, we can say that a body is an aggregate of cells that work together to build and keep alive a larger whole, often turning different functions and specifications, and coordination so that each "give a hand" to the survival of 'whole.
One of the fundamental properties of the body is then co-ordination between different cells, their specificity and the fact that not all work for themselves but for the whole body that make up their own.
This distinction is crucial: a cluster of cells is not a body if they do not cooperate for the survival of the whole.
If, for example, take a colony of bacteria and extract from it some of these bacteria, we certainly find ourselves with a smaller colony, but if we extract the cells from a body of a human being or any other body with body, be the risk of being left with a dead body is by no means negligible (obviously depends on which cells are extracted).
A body is so much more than an aggregate of cells. One could say that it represents a kind of society, in which people with different abilities will pool their talents to make the most of the entire corporate structure. And most important, despite continuous cellular changes (the lifetime of a cell varies widely, from a few days to several years) your body continues to live. Despite several generational changes, "society body" goes on without trouble, thanks to precise rules and the innate spirit of cooperation that characterizes its inhabitants, the cells.
The body, in essence, is a very serious and wonderfully perfect and damn more complicated than simple clusters of cells.
For our distant relatives would evolve from unicellular forms to a corporeal creatures, their cells had to learn to collaborate, communicate with each other to join. All through new mechanisms, to equipment and methods ever used.
So if the level of complexity of the body is immensely higher than that of simple cell clusters, as has been possible to reach such complexity? When he grew the body? How? And most importantly, why?
The answer to the question about when the body is formed from a concept often overlooked, especially the superb species Homo sapiens: a large part of the history of life on Earth is the story of unicellular organisms. Not only do they have developed, but much of the first multicellular organisms, but still represent a big slice (much more than their "relatives" multicellular) of the biotic component of our planet. Virtually everything in the next post I will talk about (that of multicellular organisms) inhabiting the Earth from a small fraction of time.
How do we know this? Easy, fossils.
From fossils we know that life on Earth probably appeared around 3.5 billion years ago, and up to 600 million years ago, more or less, the only organisms on our planet were unicellular. Layers are older than 600 million years, in fact no trace fossils of complex life.
Soon after though, and apparently suddenly appear a multitude of fossils of animals with real bodies, some very specialized, others simple. But in any case, bodies, bodies with a capital.
As a sort of explosion, in a short time you spent a lifetime in a single cell was "body", more or less complex.
the question "when?" Respond well fossils 600 million years ago (Precambiano). Understanding how and why this happened, it's definitely a different story.
Now, to understand how we had originally multicellularity soa makes me ask you just so special and efficient body.
What holds together a group of cells, either a jellyfish or a complex human organ? What makes them able to communicate?
The answer is quite long and complex, and requires fairly detailed knowledge of anatomy and cell biology. But we try to simplify a little 'things.
feature common to all multicellular organisms, both vertebrates and invertebrates, plants or simple clumps of cells, is that they possess molecules that occupy the empty space between one cell and another. These molecules are varied, and often most of the specific properties of a certain set of cells is derived from molecules which they are held together, and how these cells are placed.
In animals, one of these special substances is collagen, a protein that alone is more than 90 percent of all proteins in the body. Thanks to collagen, our cells are connected to each other, that they can interact and communicate.
In addition to joining the cells, these molecules (I repeat, there are many and varied) made possible the interactions between different cells. Some are so specialized (select the link, just by binding to molecules of the same type) that give the cells the wonderful property of being able to bind only to their own kind. So, ensure that cells are able to be positioned at the sun between them, so that the skin cells to bind to cells in the skin, which bind to the eye than those in the eye and so on.
These molecules, cells also provide an efficient system of communication so that each knows when to replicate, creating molecules bind, die, etc. ..
Ultimately, it is all of these molecules and their interactions with the cells that allow the existence of the body.
Well, now that we have an idea of \u200b\u200bwhat a body and what allows it to be, we can try to understand how it originated.
But first, I want to bring to your attention a great scientific experiment that will prove useful to our inquiry and absolutely enlightening.
Henry Van Peters Wilson was one of the greatest biologists of the twentieth century. During his years at the University of North Carolina, he taught biology to some American students, who will later become some of the brightest minds of genetics and cell biology.
From a young age, Wilson decided to dedicate his life to the study of sponges, considered by him (in hindsight) some of the most interesting animals from a biological standpoint.
Sponges are very primitive organisms: their body is essentially composed of a matrix is \u200b\u200bnot alive, usually composed of silica or calcium carbonate, and a set of more or less specialized cells, held together by collagen. Although not particularly complex, the sponges have all the requirements to be considered in all respects bodily organisms.
He was at the beginning of the twentieth century the good Wilsons made a fantastic experiment with sponges, in an attempt to study them in detail: the specimens taken and passed them through a sieve, reducing them to a pile of broken cells. Later, he took these single cells and placed on a slide for study. With great satisfaction, that he soon began to move individual cells on the slide and, with great speed, came together in one body! At first, they formed a chaotic mass of cells and then in a short time, they organized and gave life back to a sponge! Wilsons had observed in the direct formation of a body!
This experiment showed how the sponges were absolutely amazing animals, and especially how the structural properties of the body are given their own collagen and interactive capacity between the various cells.
The origin of the body then has to be found in the source material and cell properties essential for the establishment of the "body"?
Until recently it was thought that the answer was "yes", because the study of genes of organisms "without body" was certified the absence of those materials that make the cells able to participate, communicate, etc.. So, it seemed clear that the origin of the body were connected with the appearance of such property.
Scholars, however, had not yet come to terms with the strange single-celled organisms: the coanoflagellati.
A study published by Nicole King, a researcher at the University of Berkeley, California, showed how coanoflagellati are present in different molecules homologous to those of cellular organisms, such as collagen or there different types of molecules that enable cell communication. In short, the coanoflagellati have all the means possible to aggregate and form bodies. Still, they are single-celled organisms.
And subsequent studies, reported that some of these molecules were also present in some bacteria (including streptococci), but which were used to other functions, metabolic often.
The fossil record tells us that up to 600 million years ago all were single-celled organisms on Earth. Then all of a sudden, in a time fast enough (40 million years), bodies appear everywhere: plants, animals and fungi. Yet, as demonstrated by Nicole King, life had long since to form the basis for bodies.
Why it all happened so quickly and suddenly? Because, while being able to "merge" for some time, preferring to remain single-celled organisms?
To answer this last question, I will quote once again an experiment.
Martin Boraas and his colleagues, in a admirable experiment in cell biology, trying to understand what factors may have facilitated the development of the body: they took a unicellular alga (which meet the requirements for the body, but using them in a different way) and let it develop in the laboratory for several generations.
Then, at some point, they introduced an agent of disorder, a predator, able to incorporate the individual and algae to feed on them. In less than two hundred generations, the algae responded by evolving into a cluster of one hundred cells, that number dropped gradually and reached steady at eight per clump (the number eight turned out to be more balanced, because it allows the individual clusters to be large enough not be counted from the predatory and small enough to live on their own, without too much energy). By removing the predator, Boraas and his colleagues went on to say that the algae reproduce to form individuals of eight cells each.
In essence, through the introduction of a predator, a unicellular organism gave rise to a multicellular organism in a very short time.
The experiment did advance the theory that the development of the body evolved when the single-celled organisms found new ways to predict or to avoid being prey. Having a body would be an advantage because it allowed not to be eaten, given the large size, is able to feed on smaller creatures. It also allows you to cover distances more.
all makes sense, but does not answer our question: why has not developed before?
Perhaps the problem was to find the energy needed to keep alive a body, since over a large body is most in need of food and energy (especially if formed from collagen, which needs a lot of oxygen to synthesize).
Early in the history of the Earth, at a time when life began, Earth's atmosphere contained little oxygen, infinitely insignificant compared with the amount contained today. And, probably, too little even to allow the development of the body.
However, about a billion years ago, the oxygen level began to rise, as demonstrated by chemical analysis of rocks from that period.
And perhaps because of this, took the spark for the formation of bodies: for billions of years, single-celled organisms had evolved continuously developing new techniques for feeding and interacting with the environment around them. In doing so, they had developed, albeit for different purposes, all the requirements to form the bodies. And, moreover, were evolving new forms of predation, learning to eat each other. There was already
all means to form a body, there were already reasons to do it, but there was still one small detail: the oxygen to supply the energy needed to sustain the body.
And when the level of oxygen in the atmosphere reached the right place, like a pressure cooker office for some time, corporeality exploded into a myriad of amazing shapes. All of a sudden, the earth was filled with bodies everywhere. And from there, it was a different story ..
------------------------------------------------ -------------------------
Bibliography:
N. King, 2004, "The Single Cell Ancestry of Animal Development", Developmental Cell, 7 , pp. 313-325
MEBoraas, and J. DBSeale Boxhorn, 1998, "by Phagotrophy to flog Selects Colonisl for Prey: A Possible Origin of Multicellularity", Evolutionary Ecology, 12, pp. 153-164
Clipboard course Phylogeny Animals of Professor Robert Penn, Unimi.
Finally, after more than two months after the founding of this blog, I can post my first PaleoStoria. I must say I'm a bit 'excited, we hope to ear with clarity and without boring, because, being quite complex issues, unfortunately the post will be of considerable length. If you find them boring or too long, please let me know in the comments. For the first
PaleoStoria I chose a topic of great importance, both from an evolutionary point of view, and, above all, from a cognitive point of view. I think it's enough counterproductive to talk about complicated issues if you do not have certain basics. I could talk about bones, locomotives special adaptations, behavior, origin of certain anatomical structures, etc. .. But without first having explained things, the risk that certain notions for granted is very high. And, because what interests me is the look especially popular, I prefer starting from the base. For this reason, my PaleoStorie follow a fairly well-defined line of reasoning, using arguments that gradually becoming more complex. The fact that the increase in complexity also follows the chronological history of life on Earth and its evolution, will prove very helpful in understanding and narrative, and often the reader's task easier. In this first
PaleoStoria referred to as one of the fundamental concepts of the history of life on Earth: the origin of the body .
But what is a body? I will you ever wondered?
In general terms, we can say that a body is an aggregate of cells that work together to build and keep alive a larger whole, often turning different functions and specifications, and coordination so that each "give a hand" to the survival of 'whole.
One of the fundamental properties of the body is then co-ordination between different cells, their specificity and the fact that not all work for themselves but for the whole body that make up their own.
This distinction is crucial: a cluster of cells is not a body if they do not cooperate for the survival of the whole.
If, for example, take a colony of bacteria and extract from it some of these bacteria, we certainly find ourselves with a smaller colony, but if we extract the cells from a body of a human being or any other body with body, be the risk of being left with a dead body is by no means negligible (obviously depends on which cells are extracted).
A body is so much more than an aggregate of cells. One could say that it represents a kind of society, in which people with different abilities will pool their talents to make the most of the entire corporate structure. And most important, despite continuous cellular changes (the lifetime of a cell varies widely, from a few days to several years) your body continues to live. Despite several generational changes, "society body" goes on without trouble, thanks to precise rules and the innate spirit of cooperation that characterizes its inhabitants, the cells.
The body, in essence, is a very serious and wonderfully perfect and damn more complicated than simple clusters of cells.
For our distant relatives would evolve from unicellular forms to a corporeal creatures, their cells had to learn to collaborate, communicate with each other to join. All through new mechanisms, to equipment and methods ever used.
So if the level of complexity of the body is immensely higher than that of simple cell clusters, as has been possible to reach such complexity? When he grew the body? How? And most importantly, why?
The answer to the question about when the body is formed from a concept often overlooked, especially the superb species Homo sapiens: a large part of the history of life on Earth is the story of unicellular organisms. Not only do they have developed, but much of the first multicellular organisms, but still represent a big slice (much more than their "relatives" multicellular) of the biotic component of our planet. Virtually everything in the next post I will talk about (that of multicellular organisms) inhabiting the Earth from a small fraction of time.
How do we know this? Easy, fossils.
From fossils we know that life on Earth probably appeared around 3.5 billion years ago, and up to 600 million years ago, more or less, the only organisms on our planet were unicellular. Layers are older than 600 million years, in fact no trace fossils of complex life.
Soon after though, and apparently suddenly appear a multitude of fossils of animals with real bodies, some very specialized, others simple. But in any case, bodies, bodies with a capital.
As a sort of explosion, in a short time you spent a lifetime in a single cell was "body", more or less complex.
the question "when?" Respond well fossils 600 million years ago (Precambiano). Understanding how and why this happened, it's definitely a different story.
Now, to understand how we had originally multicellularity soa makes me ask you just so special and efficient body.
What holds together a group of cells, either a jellyfish or a complex human organ? What makes them able to communicate?
The answer is quite long and complex, and requires fairly detailed knowledge of anatomy and cell biology. But we try to simplify a little 'things.
feature common to all multicellular organisms, both vertebrates and invertebrates, plants or simple clumps of cells, is that they possess molecules that occupy the empty space between one cell and another. These molecules are varied, and often most of the specific properties of a certain set of cells is derived from molecules which they are held together, and how these cells are placed.
In animals, one of these special substances is collagen, a protein that alone is more than 90 percent of all proteins in the body. Thanks to collagen, our cells are connected to each other, that they can interact and communicate.
In addition to joining the cells, these molecules (I repeat, there are many and varied) made possible the interactions between different cells. Some are so specialized (select the link, just by binding to molecules of the same type) that give the cells the wonderful property of being able to bind only to their own kind. So, ensure that cells are able to be positioned at the sun between them, so that the skin cells to bind to cells in the skin, which bind to the eye than those in the eye and so on.
These molecules, cells also provide an efficient system of communication so that each knows when to replicate, creating molecules bind, die, etc. ..
Ultimately, it is all of these molecules and their interactions with the cells that allow the existence of the body.
Well, now that we have an idea of \u200b\u200bwhat a body and what allows it to be, we can try to understand how it originated.
But first, I want to bring to your attention a great scientific experiment that will prove useful to our inquiry and absolutely enlightening.
Henry Van Peters Wilson was one of the greatest biologists of the twentieth century. During his years at the University of North Carolina, he taught biology to some American students, who will later become some of the brightest minds of genetics and cell biology.
From a young age, Wilson decided to dedicate his life to the study of sponges, considered by him (in hindsight) some of the most interesting animals from a biological standpoint.
Sponges are very primitive organisms: their body is essentially composed of a matrix is \u200b\u200bnot alive, usually composed of silica or calcium carbonate, and a set of more or less specialized cells, held together by collagen. Although not particularly complex, the sponges have all the requirements to be considered in all respects bodily organisms.
He was at the beginning of the twentieth century the good Wilsons made a fantastic experiment with sponges, in an attempt to study them in detail: the specimens taken and passed them through a sieve, reducing them to a pile of broken cells. Later, he took these single cells and placed on a slide for study. With great satisfaction, that he soon began to move individual cells on the slide and, with great speed, came together in one body! At first, they formed a chaotic mass of cells and then in a short time, they organized and gave life back to a sponge! Wilsons had observed in the direct formation of a body!
This experiment showed how the sponges were absolutely amazing animals, and especially how the structural properties of the body are given their own collagen and interactive capacity between the various cells.
The origin of the body then has to be found in the source material and cell properties essential for the establishment of the "body"?
Until recently it was thought that the answer was "yes", because the study of genes of organisms "without body" was certified the absence of those materials that make the cells able to participate, communicate, etc.. So, it seemed clear that the origin of the body were connected with the appearance of such property.
Scholars, however, had not yet come to terms with the strange single-celled organisms: the coanoflagellati.
A study published by Nicole King, a researcher at the University of Berkeley, California, showed how coanoflagellati are present in different molecules homologous to those of cellular organisms, such as collagen or there different types of molecules that enable cell communication. In short, the coanoflagellati have all the means possible to aggregate and form bodies. Still, they are single-celled organisms.
And subsequent studies, reported that some of these molecules were also present in some bacteria (including streptococci), but which were used to other functions, metabolic often.
The fossil record tells us that up to 600 million years ago all were single-celled organisms on Earth. Then all of a sudden, in a time fast enough (40 million years), bodies appear everywhere: plants, animals and fungi. Yet, as demonstrated by Nicole King, life had long since to form the basis for bodies.
Why it all happened so quickly and suddenly? Because, while being able to "merge" for some time, preferring to remain single-celled organisms?
To answer this last question, I will quote once again an experiment.
Martin Boraas and his colleagues, in a admirable experiment in cell biology, trying to understand what factors may have facilitated the development of the body: they took a unicellular alga (which meet the requirements for the body, but using them in a different way) and let it develop in the laboratory for several generations.
Then, at some point, they introduced an agent of disorder, a predator, able to incorporate the individual and algae to feed on them. In less than two hundred generations, the algae responded by evolving into a cluster of one hundred cells, that number dropped gradually and reached steady at eight per clump (the number eight turned out to be more balanced, because it allows the individual clusters to be large enough not be counted from the predatory and small enough to live on their own, without too much energy). By removing the predator, Boraas and his colleagues went on to say that the algae reproduce to form individuals of eight cells each.
In essence, through the introduction of a predator, a unicellular organism gave rise to a multicellular organism in a very short time.
The experiment did advance the theory that the development of the body evolved when the single-celled organisms found new ways to predict or to avoid being prey. Having a body would be an advantage because it allowed not to be eaten, given the large size, is able to feed on smaller creatures. It also allows you to cover distances more.
all makes sense, but does not answer our question: why has not developed before?
Perhaps the problem was to find the energy needed to keep alive a body, since over a large body is most in need of food and energy (especially if formed from collagen, which needs a lot of oxygen to synthesize).
Early in the history of the Earth, at a time when life began, Earth's atmosphere contained little oxygen, infinitely insignificant compared with the amount contained today. And, probably, too little even to allow the development of the body.
However, about a billion years ago, the oxygen level began to rise, as demonstrated by chemical analysis of rocks from that period.
And perhaps because of this, took the spark for the formation of bodies: for billions of years, single-celled organisms had evolved continuously developing new techniques for feeding and interacting with the environment around them. In doing so, they had developed, albeit for different purposes, all the requirements to form the bodies. And, moreover, were evolving new forms of predation, learning to eat each other. There was already
all means to form a body, there were already reasons to do it, but there was still one small detail: the oxygen to supply the energy needed to sustain the body.
And when the level of oxygen in the atmosphere reached the right place, like a pressure cooker office for some time, corporeality exploded into a myriad of amazing shapes. All of a sudden, the earth was filled with bodies everywhere. And from there, it was a different story ..
------------------------------------------------ -------------------------
Bibliography:
N. King, 2004, "The Single Cell Ancestry of Animal Development", Developmental Cell, 7 , pp. 313-325
MEBoraas, and J. DBSeale Boxhorn, 1998, "by Phagotrophy to flog Selects Colonisl for Prey: A Possible Origin of Multicellularity", Evolutionary Ecology, 12, pp. 153-164
Clipboard course Phylogeny Animals of Professor Robert Penn, Unimi.
Thursday, December 2, 2010
Dryer Duct Cleaning Contract
Sunday, Sunday, APPI Days!
By now it is useless to write the whys and wherefores of my delay in updating the blog, is not born for this. Unfortunately, life is made even (and especially) in commitments and situations that take away time away to what you really want to do.
But 'nuff said ...
today's post comes from a new impetus to work in this blog and update it (and this time I will!) Given to me by my friend Alex Chiarenza (I hope to do first and last name), I can say one of the largest paleoappassionati Italic both technical expertise for both willpower (and both have my admiration).
But what's it all about?
a factor, a factor, because Alexander is involved, along with many others (I take this opportunity to say goodbye to its president, Alexander Carpana), which probably will mention later, in a fantastic project called APPI , Paleontological Association Parma Italian
The APPI is a wonderful proof of how the passion and willpower can also lead to those who may be passionate and not just a professional, to create an important group in terms of scientific, educational, but above all social. The APA is not only to make a serious and conscientious in paleontology, with the participation of famous paleontologists and promising students, is also a place where anyone (and I stress anyone) can attend and speak quietly of her love for paleontology, updating and comparing with people who meet in a friendly and polite. In fact, as far as I know (having attended a couple of times), smooths the atmosphere is first of all paleoamichevole (pass me the term).
So, I can not help but invite you to subscribe to the JPA, if you have not already done so, and to participate in the meetings, usually held every two - three months. To subscribe just visit their blog and find all information about it, or send an email to associazionepaleontologica@yahoo.it
Because I told you about the APA? First of all because
answers to important questions that I hope every Italian paleoappasionato ask: "Paleontology and lows in Italy?" "The Italian paleontology is just stuff for barons, professoroni and people with hands-on?" "In Italy paleontology is a science funded so little that the poor lovers are forced to change plans for a better look to the future? "
Here, the APPI in some way responds" no! " to all these questions .. and it is significantly important.
And to prove that I'm not kidding, we update news on three (two fresh, one already antiquated but not least) paleoitaliane, two of which will be the subject of APPI next meeting to be held this Sunday, 17.00 to trees, the province of Parma.
1) In Italy it was discussed recently, very little (and it's truly outrageous), and I am very sorry for Fabio Marco Dalla Vecchia, because I know that he wanted. I'm talking about the description of Tethyshadros insularis , the second dinosaur Italian (best known as Antonio).
From a scientific perspective, the description of this new adrosauroide has provided several indications of nature especially palaeoenvironmental and morphology, especially as regards the phenomenon of island dwarfism, the morphology Tethys in the Early Cretaceous, and its very peculiar anatomy, with a weird skull and forelimbs curiously specialized.
It is also one of the best adrosauroidi fossils ever found in Europe, really a scandal that no mass media in Italy has deepened it.
Sunday, however, the JPA, will be the same from the old to make us enjoy all the details about this wonderful taxon.
2) Another presentation which you can review the JPA meeting on Sunday is on Neptunidraco ammoniticus , described recently by two highly trained scholars Italian, Andrea Cau (author of wonderful blog Theropoda.blogspot.com ) and Federico Fanti.
Neptunidraco was featured on a beautiful plate, kept for more than 50 years in the Museum of Bologna Cappellini, containing the remains of an individual kept in good condition.
The importance of the discovery is especially in the dating of fossil Neptunidraco metriorinco is in fact the oldest in the world, and the first to be described in Italy!
addition to this, however, the new taxon contains a series of exquisite anatomical detail, as well as important phylogenetic data, read in detail and nice Blog Andrea Cau.
3) We go out for a moment by Italy to meet two new taxa of ornithopodi, Hippodraco scutodens and Iguanacolossus fortis (McDonald, Kirkland, DeBlieux, Madsen, Cavin, & Milner Panzarin 2010)
As you see, between the authors there is also the mythical Lukas Panzarin this time, not only was responsible for the iconographic part of the study, with two valuable reconstructions of the animals in vivo, but has also actively participated in the study of these two taxa. Well, another great source of pride for Italian paleontology.
Finally .. so if you believe that the Paleontology in Italy still has the possibility (Believe me, has just come to an obligation), if you want to learn something fun, if you love paleontology, especially of vertebrates, and want to stay up to date on his news (and if, like me, loved the city of Parma) , you can not join the JPA.
PS The next post, probably published on Saturday morning, will last the first PaleoStoria ... a little 'patience .. it is almost ready.
By now it is useless to write the whys and wherefores of my delay in updating the blog, is not born for this. Unfortunately, life is made even (and especially) in commitments and situations that take away time away to what you really want to do.
But 'nuff said ...
today's post comes from a new impetus to work in this blog and update it (and this time I will!) Given to me by my friend Alex Chiarenza (I hope to do first and last name), I can say one of the largest paleoappassionati Italic both technical expertise for both willpower (and both have my admiration).
But what's it all about?
a factor, a factor, because Alexander is involved, along with many others (I take this opportunity to say goodbye to its president, Alexander Carpana), which probably will mention later, in a fantastic project called APPI , Paleontological Association Parma Italian
The APPI is a wonderful proof of how the passion and willpower can also lead to those who may be passionate and not just a professional, to create an important group in terms of scientific, educational, but above all social. The APA is not only to make a serious and conscientious in paleontology, with the participation of famous paleontologists and promising students, is also a place where anyone (and I stress anyone) can attend and speak quietly of her love for paleontology, updating and comparing with people who meet in a friendly and polite. In fact, as far as I know (having attended a couple of times), smooths the atmosphere is first of all paleoamichevole (pass me the term).
So, I can not help but invite you to subscribe to the JPA, if you have not already done so, and to participate in the meetings, usually held every two - three months. To subscribe just visit their blog and find all information about it, or send an email to associazionepaleontologica@yahoo.it
Because I told you about the APA? First of all because
answers to important questions that I hope every Italian paleoappasionato ask: "Paleontology and lows in Italy?" "The Italian paleontology is just stuff for barons, professoroni and people with hands-on?" "In Italy paleontology is a science funded so little that the poor lovers are forced to change plans for a better look to the future? "
Here, the APPI in some way responds" no! " to all these questions .. and it is significantly important.
And to prove that I'm not kidding, we update news on three (two fresh, one already antiquated but not least) paleoitaliane, two of which will be the subject of APPI next meeting to be held this Sunday, 17.00 to trees, the province of Parma.
1) In Italy it was discussed recently, very little (and it's truly outrageous), and I am very sorry for Fabio Marco Dalla Vecchia, because I know that he wanted. I'm talking about the description of Tethyshadros insularis , the second dinosaur Italian (best known as Antonio).
From a scientific perspective, the description of this new adrosauroide has provided several indications of nature especially palaeoenvironmental and morphology, especially as regards the phenomenon of island dwarfism, the morphology Tethys in the Early Cretaceous, and its very peculiar anatomy, with a weird skull and forelimbs curiously specialized.
It is also one of the best adrosauroidi fossils ever found in Europe, really a scandal that no mass media in Italy has deepened it.
Sunday, however, the JPA, will be the same from the old to make us enjoy all the details about this wonderful taxon.
2) Another presentation which you can review the JPA meeting on Sunday is on Neptunidraco ammoniticus , described recently by two highly trained scholars Italian, Andrea Cau (author of wonderful blog Theropoda.blogspot.com ) and Federico Fanti.
Neptunidraco was featured on a beautiful plate, kept for more than 50 years in the Museum of Bologna Cappellini, containing the remains of an individual kept in good condition.
The importance of the discovery is especially in the dating of fossil Neptunidraco metriorinco is in fact the oldest in the world, and the first to be described in Italy!
addition to this, however, the new taxon contains a series of exquisite anatomical detail, as well as important phylogenetic data, read in detail and nice Blog Andrea Cau.
3) We go out for a moment by Italy to meet two new taxa of ornithopodi, Hippodraco scutodens and Iguanacolossus fortis (McDonald, Kirkland, DeBlieux, Madsen, Cavin, & Milner Panzarin 2010)
As you see, between the authors there is also the mythical Lukas Panzarin this time, not only was responsible for the iconographic part of the study, with two valuable reconstructions of the animals in vivo, but has also actively participated in the study of these two taxa. Well, another great source of pride for Italian paleontology.
Finally .. so if you believe that the Paleontology in Italy still has the possibility (Believe me, has just come to an obligation), if you want to learn something fun, if you love paleontology, especially of vertebrates, and want to stay up to date on his news (and if, like me, loved the city of Parma) , you can not join the JPA.
PS The next post, probably published on Saturday morning, will last the first PaleoStoria ... a little 'patience .. it is almost ready.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
The fact that