Mate Selection Expressed on a Molecular Scale

The level of detail through which behaviors are expressed that are aligned with ensuring adaptive advantage extends to the microscopic. In this case a strategy for sexual selection involves the production of some kind of protein or chemical in the ovarian fluid of ocellated wrasses which helps define the acceptance or rejection of sperm based on whether the male that emitted it will be more inclined to tend the nest or not. The idea being that those males more fit to carry on the species will be more likely to breed, enabling the species a better chance to continue forward.

From the article: “Female ocellated wrasses prefer males that build nests and take care of the fertilized eggs as they develop. But there are other types of males that do not provide parental care and compete to fertilize the eggs a female lays in the nest prepared by a nesting male. Small “sneaker” males hang out around the nest and dart in to release large amounts of sperm when a female is spawning. The females, however, seem to have found a way to thwart the sneaker males by giving an advantage to the nesting male’s sperm.”

Among the questions that might ride in the undercurrents of such a fantastically coordinated biological process if we anthropomorphize the situation a bit is; How does the female know that the chemical signature of “sneaker” males is different than the nesters? How was she able to translate this information into a coordinated process to produce a chemical in response that is able to  differentiate between sneakers and nesters and select based on criteria that is advantageous to the female? Regardless of whether or not these are legitimate lines of questioning, the behavioral dynamics expressed through the relational field we call biology certainly is intricate, and whether or not these are the right questions is not as important as recognizing that there is room for questions – plenty of food to feed a passionate curiosity.

To read the full article in Science Daily Click Here

Cancer Is a Biological Outlaw

0152-Monopoly Win

Cancer is a biological outlaw. It begins its career as a cell triggered by a set of circumstances that cause it to diverge from participating in a contributory role in the community it draws nourishment from. Instead of a vested stake in the biological community that sustains it, cancer turns to a life characterized by parasitic behaviors that turn predatory over time.

Cancer turns against the cooperative unity on which biological systems depend and becomes an expression of destructive greed and consumption without a community aligned purpose. Its implied purpose narrows to its own interests, to the immediate gratification, to right now, to more and more, to domination over cultivation – to itself at the expense of the community. Through its behaviors, cancer becomes a biological outlaw.

If cancer was assigned the attributes of a self aware being, it would be defined as either failing to recognize its detrimental behavior toward its own future, or identified as someone that doesn’t care. Either way, it’s devoid of participating in the implied social contract that all sustainable living systems depend on; that of working in the limited context of the environment and contributing nourishing value back to the biological community it depends on for life, so that community is stronger than it ever could be as isolated parts.

There are many kinds of cancer with many different causes, but the common thread is a lack of regard to translate the taking from the community with corresponding activities to give back something of value to it. In the case of Pancreatic cancer, once the cancer takes root and steals the resources it needs to establish a foothold, it begins to use that theft to hijack the production machinery of nearby cells to feed itself even more. It uses this fuel to grow stronger and demand more. With increased strength, it now causes the enslaved cells working at a frenzied pace to serve its demands to sacrifice their lives in order to make more room for it, and for it to selectively feed on the dying remains to strengthen the cancerous process still more…

Cancer can enjoy a burst of extravagant artificial wealth by predatorily consuming great quantities of the genuine wealth produced by the nourishing relational acts of the biological community from which it feeds. As it increasingly consumes without regard for renewal, it crosses a terminal threshold where its demands exceed the capacity of the system to compensate for the collective theft, murder and interference of nourishing biological commerce. It is at this point where the biological system cancer depends on to fuel its excesses collapses in on itself.

Why does cancer behave this way? Why does this myopic collection of predatory behaviors consume without an eye for the sustainability of the system on which it depends? Cancer dominates, but if its strategy is successful, it becomes a victim of its own success. It ends up dominating itself out of existence. It is destroyed itself in a bonfire of its own greed and ignorance.

Upon seeing this cancerous behavioral agenda clearly exposed we might recognize that cancer comes in many forms. We might be inclined to see the parallels between cellular cancer and social behavioral cancer on other scales. Upon seeing this parallel and coupling it with some of the behavioral dynamics coursing through our human behavioral veins, we might be compelled to wonder if there is such a thing as “Mancreatic Cancer”. We might also ask whether we ourselves are engaged in aligning our individual and collective activities toward cultivating that which sustains us – that which we need.

When it comes to the micro decisions that lead to the macro effects of our life, not only reflected back on itself, but echoing outward to the community at large, we may want to be careful to define success before we engage in it, because in our frenzy to accomplish a false success, we could find out too late that as soon as somebody wins at monopoly, the game is over for everyone.

For more information about the way Pancreatic Cancer works: Click Here

The Evolution of Behaviors

Behaviorism Will Peck For Food

In 1948, B. F. Skinner published a landmark paper illustrating how animals develop superstition. Basically, if an animal is fed at irregular intervals it associates whatever behaviors it happened to be doing right before receiving food with receiving food. After that, it thinks those behaviors are what brings the food. It develops a “superstitious connection” between the unrelated behavior and the food.

This understanding of how connections are developed has been the foundation of behavioral conditioning and behavioral psychology since its discovery. This capacity for false (or true) association based on whatever happens to coincide at a particualr time is stitched onto our perception faculties and consequently, our psychology. People given mild stimulants unbeknownst to them have been recorded associating the effects of the stimulant with the things happening in their local happenings for instance. It is also important to emphasize that while the perception faculties sometimes falsely associate correlations, sometimes these factors are actually causal, and understanding this causal connection can lead to a survival advantage. This is probably why the capacity is seated in our biological makeup to begin with.

Our biological perception tendency to weave coincidental happenings into causal connections (which may be true or untrue) has an enormous implication in terms of understanding ourselves, our culture, our history, and the level of trust we can place on our individual certainties if we apply the information appropriately. It easily explains the reason medicine was stagnated for centuries by such notions as humors. It explains the cultural prevalence and behaviors that flow from beliefs in omens, and may be the foundation for all the world’s superstitions and religions. It may also be a strong if not causal factor in some disorders such as O.C.D. and other destructive compulsive behaviors. It has strong implications on our sociality because of the underlying message of acceptance or rejection we get for adopting certain ideas or behaviors as well. This may also be the foundation of bird song and language itself. The list goes on…

Behaviorism Will Press Lever For Food

While this symbolic association built into our perception faculties has definite survival value in that it is rooted in searching for a cause in order to more intentionally choose specific behaviors that lead toward survival, it is also true that these faculties are not entirely accurate, and come with a downside. This aspect of evolutionary biology, where a benefit comes with a potential downside is not unusual in the least. Evolution in peppered with these cost/benefit aspects, and much of who and what we are is a product of those competing priorities

 

A Small Glimpse at the Memory Pathway in Our Immune System

Our immune system has to detect and effectively deal with a wide variety of destructive agents, known as pathogens. Many of these come in the form of invasive viruses and parasitic organisms. It must be able to tell the difference between pathogens and healthy tissue and this is sometimes be difficult. It must learn to effectively differentiate friend from foe.

Immune systems learn. Like human beings, immune systems have critical periods where they are particularly sensitive to learning. If they are not exposed to the typical environmental pathogens at these critical periods the immune system may not respond properly.

Asthma is less prominent among farm children because they are exposed to native pathogens during this critical period. Children brought up without exposure to these things can develop an overreaction. In addition to this supercharged learning capacity that lasts a short time, the immune system also has a less powerful, ongoing learning capacity to combat novel pathogens. This learning process involves what are called B Cells. These are a type of blood cell, part of the immune system, and secrete antibodies in response to perceived pathogens. These antibodies are in effect tattletales. They mark the invader as an enemy so that T-cells (Another type of immune cell) can deal with them. Thanks to way b cells can learn and remember, our body then gets a head start fighting repeat offender pathogens. This memory process is what makes vaccinations work.

This article in this link explains how “naive” immune cells transition into memory cells. Click Here

Here is a brief overview of both the innate and adaptive immune system:

Is Farming Evolution’s First Step toward Complex Organisms?

0001-Is Farming Evolutions Forst Step

There are certain ants that farm aphids for the food they produce, protecting and defending them for the nourishing survival value they provide. Leafcutter ants farm leaves in order to grow a fungus. This relationship has endured so long that they now depend on each other for existence.

We see a gradient of relationships in biology that go from optional beneficial value such as a food source or protection etc. these relationships can develop into a mutual dependency and perhaps grow all the way to an obligate relationship where one cannot live without the other. In effect, the once separate organisms that farmed each other may merge into an inseparable dance, becoming in effect, one body – each depending on the other for survival.

The various organs in our body follow this mutually dependent relational scheme, but so do some relationships in nature that transcend species lines like that of leafcutter ants and the fungus they farm. We may be witnessing a gradient of relationships that move along a spectrum from useful to necessary and in some cases result in once separate organisms becoming a singular organism over time.

This process of merging may begin with what could be termed “farming” or relationships built on mutual benefit, that over time merge into a single body of mutually nourishing entities. Eukaryotic cells are thought to have emerged over 2 billion years ago may have been one such merger that began as “farming”.

Creatures and or biological bits of information such as proteins and RNA etc. that provide adaptive value may have become so dependent on each other that they merged into a singular body. This in fact may be the backbone of evolution.

Of course this is speculation, but it may be that farming is the start of the process for more complex life forms, but where did farming begin? Perhaps it began long before eukaryotic creatures arose on earth and may have been a precursor to that merger known as endosymbiosis that led to eukaryotic cells.

The article linked below illustrates a farming relationship between a bacteria and amoeba where the bacteria turn the amoeba into farmers. This is one piece of evidence that may indicate that farming may have begun before the emergence of eukaryotes and may indeed be the first step toward the sort of biological convergence we know of as complex organisms.

For the article on the relationship between the bacteria and amoeba that appeared in National Geographic in 2015: Click Here

 

To see more on Ants Farming Aphids:

For more on leafcutter ants:

 

 

 

Self Replicating Proteins May be a Clue to Life Origins

The proteins in our body must not only be the right configuration, but the right shape. Prions are misfolded proteins that are also self replicating which can cause biological systems to malfunction such as forming holes in the brain called spongiform encephalitis (Mad Cow disease or Crutchfield Jacobs disease in humans).

Prions can spread from one organism to another by mouth, blood or contaminated surfaces. Like infectious viruses, prions can also have variants, or strains, that produce different effects, not all of which are harmful. Unlike the rest of biologically active structures, prions don’t have information-storage molecules like DNA or RNA, yet they are able to copy and transmit biological information. This has strained the idea that all replication of proteins must come from an information coding system like DNA or RNA. While it does put some strain on the validity of our conventional interpretations of how things happen in evolution and biology (that proteins are “only” manufactured from DNA to RNA and then to final form as protein), it may also be a clue to our origins. (Note* retroviruses are also known to violate this rule, called the central dogma of molecular biology)

Some researchers have proposed that it may be possible, due to the ease with which amino acids and peptides can be produced by abiotic means; that the first protocells may have been proteins only encapsulated in lipid membranes. (For more information look up Fox’s protein microspheres). These microspheres may have only acquired nucleic acids as an adaptation later on as a means information storage related to reproduction.

In other words; it is thought that proteins may have reproduced themselves by some autocatalytic process at first, like that which we see in prions today. Evidence for this can be seen in the fact that there are still noncoded peptides in certain bacteria to this day (See Day, 1979, p. 369). Is it possible that proteins began working in mutually beneficial symbiotic relation to each other and some of which eventually specialized in information storage and protein synthesis” This type of relationship dynamic is known to have happened in the case of mitochondria and chloroplasts, Eukaryotes are thought to originated as symbiotic prokaryote organisms that fused into obligate (necessary-inseparable) form.

Is it possible that RNA and DNA were adaptive strategies in service of prions? Is the behavior of prions a clue to our origins? Time may tell.

Here’s more on Prions:

Developing Sustainable Cycles in Farming

Developing sustainable cycles in farming is important. Although we have come a long way in terms of production capacity, this is not the same as developing a sustainable model. Capturing the principles of sustainability is of great value because it leans us toward a future that is not peppered with boom and bust cycles because we did not tend to our long game. Here is one such person, who may happen to have a crappy job, but is leading the charge for the future.

Biology Is Social All the Way to the Core

 

Social psychology studies social interactions, including their origins and their effects on the individual. It focuses on the relationship between the mental structures within the individual and the social structures which that individual encounters and interacts with, and how that shapes the individual and the wider social landscape. One of the keys to understanding this relationship dynamic is in looking at the multiple flows on influence back and forth that define the overall nature of the entire relationship system. This complex relational dance brings up the intersection of multiple influences from which our experience and behaviors emerge. This same principle is now beginning to be understood on a biological level as we see the influence of various organisms on each other over time can shape our experience, our individual developmental paths and our evolution. A long history of just such a relationship dynamic can be witnessed by examining certain gut microbes that are thought to have been around humans since before humans were humans. They currently play powerful roles in steering the early development of our intestines, in training our immune systems to negotiate the “shark” infested waters they will have to contend with over a lifetime, and possibly affecting our moods and behaviors, including social behaviors, in many other ways.

So tightly tied together is this biological social dance that there is now genetic evidence that certain bacteria split into distinct strains at about the same times as their hosts split into distinct species, demonstrating the influence of organisms on each other in the evolutionary development story.

From a certain perspective, what we think of as human is composed of a parliament of biological bodies that together form a relationship system that defines who and what we are as “individuals” through a vast and intertwined collection of interdependent influences, and what could be more social than that?

For a more refined glimpse at a segment of the social relationship between gut microbes and humans, click here. From the article:

“Some of the bacteria in our guts were passed down over millions of years, since before we were human, suggesting that evolution plays a larger role than previously known in people’s intestinal-microbe makeup… our gut microbes, which we could get from many sources in the environment, have actually been co-evolving inside us for such a long time…  scientists found genetic evidence that the bacteria split into distinct strains at about the same times as their hosts were splitting into distinct species… One… happened about 15.6 million years ago as the gorilla lineage diverged from the other hominids. The other… about 5.3 million years ago as the human lineage separated from the lineage leading to chimps and bonobos.

Again Read more on this at: http://phys.org/news/2016-07-bacteria-human-gut.html

Is our social behavior an Echo of Physics?

Tajfel's_Theory_of_Social_Identity

Every atom the functions as part of our biological system craves specific relationships with other atoms. There are systems that are geared to satisfy those hungers and other systems, like our immune system, that are geared to reject and expel any elements the “do not belong to the in-group” so to speak. It is this complex social dynamic between physical elements that forms and maintains our biological structure.

Like the relationship dynamic that happens on a micro scale, as a whole, our biological system has specific hungers that must be met as well. From a certain perspective, our own behavioral and social actions are, in essence, a reflection of that from which we are physically composed. This can be found clearly echoed in scientific disciplines such as sociology. The following is one example:

According to Social Identity Theory, comparison with an outgroup is the main engine by which positive ingroup distinctiveness is formed.

Experiments conducted by Henri Tajfel and others into the so-called Minimal Group Paradigm illustrate this point well.

In the experiments to see what the minimum was to establish an in-group, a number of assumptions, concepts, values or practices were accepted in order to better allow a view of the onset of human group formation and of the appearance of discriminatory behaviours toward out-group.

From the article:

“Intergroup behaviour was analyzed in a situation of “mere categorization” such as where people involved as subjects in this research were told that they were individually “overestimators” or “underestimators” of the number of dots in a display. It was found that even under very flimsy and apparently baseless assigned social categorisation into two distinct, and previously “unheard of” social categories, in-group favoritism and out-group derogation occurred in the distribution, by the research subjects, of “rewards for participation” in the study.”

This is more evidence that shows how hard wired we are to cling to a group and reject anything perceived as out-group.  For a more detailed look Click Here

Ant Colonies have Group-Level Personalities

Antz1

This glimpse at ant life may help give us some insight into human group dynamics. As it turns out, ants have group-level personalities as well. The same way human cultures are shaped by environmental circumstances that powerfully influence their characteristics, ants and other social creatures may be influenced by these same factors.

From the article: “Colonies of funnel ants show group personality, which affects their success at collecting food and competing with other colonies… Some colonies are full of adventurous risk-takers, whereas others are less aggressive about foraging for food and exploring the great outdoors… these group “personality types” are linked to food-collecting strategies, and they could alter our understanding of how social insects behave.

For the full article Click here: