Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Indy

Izumiranje vrsta nije nužno lose

Recommended Posts

DarkAttraktor

Cenim da ste naisli na ovo na Yahoo newsu pre mesec dana kad i ja:Let the pandas die

Share this post


Link to post
iDemo

Ovo je najjace - kad se tzv borci za zaštitu životne sredine obrate za pomoc vojsci da zajednickim snagama istrebe jednu od, ocigledno, ne tako retkih zivotinjskih vrsta:

Objaviti rat žabama krastacama Borci za zaštitu životne sredine u Australiji pozvali su vojsku da objavi rat jednoj vrsti žaba krastaca koja je bukvalno preplavila severni deo ovog kontinenta. Ovi vodozemci do sada su svoje stanište raširili od Kvinslenda, na severoistoku, do Darvina, na severu zemlje. Danas ih ima više od 200 miliona i njihovo razmnožavanje predstavlja pravu katastrofu za životnu sredinu slicnu onoj koja nastaje nekontrolisanim razmnožavanjem zeceva, navode agencije. Koža ove vrste žaba krastaca je otrovna i one su odgovorne za drasticno opadanje populacije zmija, guštera i torbara u Australiji. (Srna, 2006/12/30-31)
Ove zabe je inace neka pametna glava smislila da uveze jer je neka gamad jela secernu trsku koja se gaji na severu Australije. Pitam se kako je to uopste bilo moguce kad nam rodjake svlace do gole koze samo da posumnjaju da imaju neko seme koje ne postoji u Australiji. Mene su shajzovali zbog blatnjavih cipela (i oprase mi cipele, pa me tek onda pustili u zemlju). A ovaj moron je uspeo da uveze zabe. Jedini zez je bio sto zabe nemaju prirodnog neprijatelja ovde cega se pametnjakovici nisu setili, tako da se zabe sada slobodno mnoze i umiru prirodnom smrcu. Imaju otrovnu kozu tako da ni jedna vrsta nije zainteresovana da ih jede.

Share this post


Link to post
čekmeže

Da, i šta je tu čudno? Ispravan bold je Borci za zaštitu životne sredine u Australiji.Znaš i sam da je Aus specifičan i veoma osetljiv ekosistem i da uvoz drugih vrsta ume žestoko da poremeti ravnotežu. Kao što sam već rekao čovek zasro čovek popravlja. Da se priroda pita ta žaba nikad ne bi mogla da stigne do Aus. S obzirom da se veštački pojavila, priroda ne može sama da se izbori sa njom i zbog toga čovek mora da uleti.

Share this post


Link to post
iDemo
Da, i šta je tu čudno? Ispravan bold je Borci za zaštitu životne sredine u Australiji.Znaš i sam da je Aus specifičan i veoma osetljiv ekosistem i da uvoz drugih vrsta ume žestoko da poremeti ravnotežu. Kao što sam već rekao čovek zasro čovek popravlja. Da se priroda pita ta žaba nikad ne bi mogla da stigne do Aus. S obzirom da se veštački pojavila, priroda ne može sama da se izbori sa njom i zbog toga čovek mora da uleti.
Moguce da si u pravu mada ima zabelezenih slucajeva da su ljudi 'uspeshno' intervenisali - pocev od nacionalnih parkova po Americi (hocemo vukome pa necemo vukove pa aj da vidimo sta cemo sa vukovima posle) pa dalje redom. Sto bi rekli nasi stari - veshtacka inteligencija je (jos uvek) limitirana al' zato ljuCka glupost nema granica. Mada ovi ovde lepo kazu (i vide razliku) - ima i stupidity a ima i ignorance - pa kako god ga mi preveli...

Share this post


Link to post
Indy

Nije ovde tema, ali da ne pokrećem još jedan nedonošče-naučni topik. Dokle će više ovi naučnici da nas razočaravaju, bre... niti imamo lek za rak & sidu, niti letimo na odmor na Veneru, a evo sad ispada da neće biti ni Jurassic Parka... Pa, dobro, bre. Zašta su tolike milijarde potrošili, sunce im njino.Mammoth blood brought back to life

Those hoping this might lead to a living woolly mammoth will be disappointed."This is not going to bring the species back to life - we've [only] done this to one protein," Cooper says.He says the experience of cloning shows reproduction needs a mother of the same species to carry the embryo.And those yearning for Jurassic Park to come to life will also have to wait.Cooper says the technique relies on DNA, which is not preserved in fossils, making it unlikely it can be used on species such as dinosaurs that died out millions of years ago.
:( Edited by Indy

Share this post


Link to post
Jolly Roger

Evo stava koji je žestoko zatalasao:

Let the panda die out 'with dignity', says BBC expert Chris PackhamThe BBC wildlife expert Chris Packham has questioned the millions spent trying to save the giant panda from extinction and suggested that the bamboo-eating bear should be allowed to die out "with a degree of dignity".
EDIT: Tek sam sada video, DarkAttraktor je bio brži...Izvinjavam se na ponavljanju. Edited by Jolly Roger

Share this post


Link to post
Jolly Roger

Nekada je (krivo)lov doveo slonove gotovo na ivicu istrebljenja. Nažalost, izgleda da se ponovo vraća:

Vijetnam: 2 tone slonovskih kljova6. maj 2010. | 14:30 | Izvor: Tanjug Hanoj -- Vlasti u vijetnamskom lučkom gradu Hajfongu danas su otkrile skoro dve tone slonovskih kljova, ilegalno unetih iz Kenije.Krajnje odredište kljova sakrivenih u kontejneru sa suvim algama koji je u luku dopremljen 28. aprila, bila je susedna Kina, prenela je agencija AP. U martu ove godine vlasti u Hajfongu zaplenile su skoro sedam tona slonovskih kljova iz Tanzanije, što je bila najveća zaplenjena količina slonovskih kljova u Vijetnamu.Slonovske kljove koriste se za proizvodnju slonovače koja služi za pravljenje nakita, klavirskih dirki i drugih predmeta.
Užas. :(

Share this post


Link to post
hazard
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-13438610
Extinction rates 'overestimated', says studyBy Mark Kinver Science and environment reporter, BBC NewsThe authors acknowledge that the study does not mean concerns for biodiversity can be put on iceCurrent extinction rate projections may be overestimating the role of habitat loss on species, a study suggest.Current methods are too simplistic and fail to take into account the full complexity of what influences species numbers, researchers observed.Writing in the journal Nature, they said present figures overestimated rates by up to 160%, and called for updated, more accurate calculations.But they did add that habitat loss was still the main threat to biodiversity.Co-authors Professor Stephen Hubbell, from the University of California Los Angeles, and Professor Fangliang He, from Sun Yat-sen University, China, said existing mathematical models were flawed."The most widely used indirect method is to estimate extinction rates by reversing the species-area accumulation curve, extrapolating backwards to smaller areas to calculate expected species loss," they wrote."Estimates based on this method are almost always much higher than actually observed."“What is the actual concern is the rate of decline in populations”Jean-Christophe Vie IUCNIn ecology, a species-area curve is used to highlight a relationship between and area of habitat and the number of species found in the area.They added that they defined extinction rate as the fraction of species lost as a result of habitat loss over a period of time."The area that must be added to find individual of a species is, in general, much smaller than the area that must be removed to eliminate the last individual of a species," the professors observed."Therefore, on average, it takes a much greater loss of area to cause the extinction of a species."'Severe reservations'Probably the most authoriative global assessment of the status of species is the Red List of Threatened Species, co-ordinated and published by the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN).Jean Christophe Vie, IUCN's species programme deputy director - who was not involved in the research - said it was good that it was a clear effort to "get the science right", but had very severe reservations about how it could be interpreted."I am quite worried about how this report could be used by people who are reluctant to take environmental issues seriously,"he told BBC News."We (IUCN assessors) do not use this system between area and species because we know there are flaws."We have explicit details in our guidelines that to estimate extinction is not something we should do; for example, we know that species are not evenly distributed in ecosystems; habitat loss is not the only threat."Dr Vie explained that, very often, conservation agencies and NGOs tended to mobilise support when species crept towards extinction thresholds."What is the actual concern is the rate of decline in populations," he went on to say."You do not see that many extinctions, but you do see many more species that are ending up with very small populations."So, focusing purely on extinctions is - to me - a problem."In their paper, Professors He and Hubbell warned that their study must not "lead to complacency about extinction (as a result of) habitat loss", which was a "real and growing concern"."We have bought a little more with this discovery, but not a lot," Professor Hubbell observed.

Share this post


Link to post
Simon

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...