<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML xmlns:o = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:st1 =
"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags"><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2900.2722" name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY id=role_body style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; COLOR: #000000; FONT-FAMILY: Arial"
bottomMargin=7 bgColor=#ffffff leftMargin=7 topMargin=7 rightMargin=7>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt"><SPAN
style="COLOR: black; FONT-FAMILY: Arial">Dear Howard,<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt"><SPAN
style="COLOR: black; FONT-FAMILY: Arial"><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt"><SPAN
style="COLOR: black; FONT-FAMILY: Arial">You asked two questions: <EM>What in
the world could the answer be to the following question:</EM> "</SPAN><FONT
face="Times New Roman"><SPAN style="COLOR: black">Our brains expanded at he same
rate in (exponent about 1.5) evolution as did the antlers of giant deer and
horns of giant sheep! ... Why?"</SPAN><SPAN
style="COLOR: black; FONT-FAMILY: Arial"><o:p></o:p></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt"><SPAN
style="COLOR: black; FONT-FAMILY: Arial"> <o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt"><SPAN style="COLOR: black"><FONT
face="Times New Roman"><EM>And why are periglacial environments, environments
poor to the naked eye, richer than tropical environments, which seem very, very
rich?<o:p></o:p></EM></FONT></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt"><SPAN
style="COLOR: black"><o:p><FONT
face="Times New Roman"> </FONT></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt"><SPAN style="COLOR: black"><FONT
face="Times New Roman">They are good questions, which I think I can answer. In
the first, the similarity extends much beyond the fact that both, horns and
brains, grow within or from skull bones! Large antlers/horns as well as brains
stand, in an odd way, for supreme, highly adaptive all-round ability, for
supreme competence and confidence. However, let me start at the real
beginning.<o:p></o:p></FONT></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt"><SPAN
style="COLOR: black"><o:p><FONT
face="Times New Roman"> </FONT></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt"><SPAN style="COLOR: black"><FONT
face="Times New Roman">Antlers as well as the cerebral cortex (the largest part
of the brain) are both tissues of low growth priority. That is, they only grow
when the blood stream has supplied all other tissues with their required energy
and nutrients. Antlers and brains thus both depend for maximum growth on
superabundant food of the highest quality. The brain in addititon to that
superlative nutrition requires hard, but diverse exercise in order to grow. It’s
like a muscle: no exercise, no growth! The broader the range of abilities
mastered the larger the brain! Brain size is not related to excellence in a
task, but in <U>many</U> tasks. Therefore, very large brains can only occur
together with an athletic body and large body size. And that is the very picture
of our wild, ice age ancestors from the upper Paleolithic in the cold, but
productive periglacial zones. (It also applies to Neanderthal). The average
Cro-magnid, athetic, six-foot plus, and with a brain 20% larger than moderns was
a superior human specimen to Val Geist on every
count!<o:p></o:p></FONT></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt"><SPAN
style="COLOR: black"><o:p><FONT
face="Times New Roman"> </FONT></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt"><SPAN style="COLOR: black"><FONT
face="Times New Roman">As to antlers, they also grow only if there is lots and
lots of excellent food. However, here is the rub! In deer societies the females
occupy the most secure ground and graze the daylights out of it. For females and
young the primary goal is security from predators, and they will gladly accept
second rate food to achieve that. Consequently, males cannot thrive on the land
occupied by the females. If they want to eat well, as they are driven to do as
only <U>large</U> males are successful breeders so <U>chosen</U> by females,
they must seek superior feeding grounds. However superior feeding areas are
insecure. That is, to eat well is associated with much greater danger from
predators and, consequently, more<SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes">
</SPAN>males get killed than females. Therefore, the larger the antlers of the
male, the better he has succeeded feeding in very dangerous areas while
outwitting and outrunning predators. Since antlers are tissues of low growth
priority their size is directly related to superior competence of the male –
precisely the male the female will choose for mating.
<o:p></o:p></FONT></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt"><SPAN
style="COLOR: black"><o:p><FONT
face="Times New Roman"> </FONT></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt"><SPAN style="COLOR: black"><FONT
face="Times New Roman">There is no escape from this: to grow into a superior
specimen the young male deer must leave the poor feeding grounds of mother where
he was born and raised and seek – boldly, cleverly, persistently - the best food
in the most insecure, dangerous localities. His antler size proves his success
as a hero! The bigger the more heroic and smart his conduct.
<o:p></o:p></FONT></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt"><SPAN style="COLOR: black"><FONT
face="Times New Roman">That’s within a species.</FONT></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt"><SPAN style="COLOR: black"><FONT
face="Times New Roman"></FONT></SPAN> </P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt"><SPAN style="COLOR: black"><FONT
face="Times New Roman">Big antlers turn on deer fames and big intelligence in
human males turns on females. So big antlers and big brains are probably organs
of sexual seelction, formed by ladies choice!</FONT></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt"><SPAN
style="COLOR: black"><o:p><FONT
face="Times New Roman"> </FONT></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt"><FONT
face="Times New Roman"><SPAN style="COLOR: black">Now antler size in deer and
brain size in humans progress in size, stepwise from the equator outward towards
the poles. Each step away from the Equatorial Forests towards the poles
increases the climates seasonality and severity as shown by
</SPAN><st1:City><st1:place><SPAN
style="COLOR: black">Savannah</SPAN></st1:place></st1:City><SPAN
style="COLOR: black">, Steppe, Deserts, Temerate zones, Periglacial,
Arctic/Alpine. Ungulates and omnivores many times, but Primates only once, bud
off discrete “species” or “forms” from the tropic to the </SPAN><st1:place><SPAN
style="COLOR: black">Arctic</SPAN></st1:place><SPAN style="COLOR: black">. Note:
in this progression of new “forms” each has to
</SPAN><st1:State><st1:place><SPAN
style="COLOR: black">del</SPAN></st1:place></st1:State><SPAN
style="COLOR: black"> with the consequences of increased seasonality, with
increasing extremes in climate, with ever wider fluctuations temporally and
geographically – of resource abundance. Food availability and security demands
are totally different in spring, than in summer, than in fall, than in winter.
The further from the equator, the greater the demand on the diversity of skills
and information to be mastered – and brain size keeps pace with that. Another
important point: as poulations are limited by the scarce food supplies of
winter, they are increasingly overwhelmed by the abundance of foods during the
productivity pulse of summer. So, no productivity pulse in tropical moist
forests, some pulse in </SPAN><st1:City><st1:place><SPAN
style="COLOR: black">Savannah</SPAN></st1:place></st1:City><SPAN
style="COLOR: black">, good pulse in steppe, better pulse in temperate zones
good, large pulse in cold temperate, sharp but tall<SPAN
style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>productivity spike in the Arctic/Alpine.
During the productivity spike individuals enjoy freedome from want or luxury.
The further north the greter the luxury – except for time! Towards the
</SPAN><st1:place><SPAN style="COLOR: black">Arctic</SPAN></st1:place><SPAN
style="COLOR: black"> the spike becomes shorter and shorter – not enough Time to
grow! Summer in the </SPAN><st1:place><SPAN
style="COLOR: black">Arctic</SPAN></st1:place><SPAN style="COLOR: black"> is
very productive, but too short to allow luxurious body growth.
<o:p></o:p></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt"><SPAN
style="COLOR: black"><o:p><FONT
face="Times New Roman"> </FONT></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt"><SPAN style="COLOR: black"><FONT
face="Times New Roman"><SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>And another
factor: in the tropics leaching drains fertility form the land making it
nutrient poor except where nutrients are washed into soils deposited by rivers –
alluvial soils. In the north glaciatons have liberated fertility from ground up
rock. Ergo, our glaciated north is filthy rich in fertility. Filthy rich!
Therefore the progression of species adapts each species to incasing seasonal
luxury – totally missing in the moist tropics. In the tropics ferocious
competition for nutrients drives species into narrow specialization increasing
biodiversity. Each species, though is of minimum design and struggling to make
ends meet. In the north, one species does what several species do in the
tropics, lowering biodiversity. Also, logically, each northern species grows
during the productivity pulse and stores fat for the bad times ahead in winter –
lacking in tropical forms. Ergo, we are filthy fat and chimps and gorillas are
not!<o:p></o:p></FONT></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt"><SPAN
style="COLOR: black"><o:p><FONT
face="Times New Roman"> </FONT></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt"><FONT
face="Times New Roman"><SPAN style="COLOR: black">Now lets quickly go through
the species progression south top north in the only primate lineage –
anthropoids - which was able to achieve this, what has been achieved many, many
times by ungulates. Note the rogression inro climatic severity and its
ecological repercussions.</SPAN><SPAN
style="COLOR: black; FONT-FAMILY: Arial"><o:p></o:p></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt"><o:p><FONT
face="Times New Roman"> </FONT></o:p></P>
<OL style="MARGIN-TOP: 0in" type=1>
<LI class=MsoNormal
style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; tab-stops: list .5in"><FONT
face="Times New Roman">primitive tropical moist forest ancestor – with
chimp/bonobo adaptations holding the genetic foundations for human
evolution.</FONT></LI>
<LI class=MsoNormal
style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; tab-stops: list .5in"><FONT
face="Times New Roman">the Savannah-adapted gracile <I
style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal">Australopithecu</I>s form, breaking free
from territoriality by adapting to the “selfish herd”. <U>Surface forager</U>
in the most productive tropical ecosystems. Climbs trees and builds nests for
security at night.</FONT></LI>
<LI class=MsoNormal
style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; tab-stops: list .5in"><FONT
face="Times New Roman">The first advance into the dry, seasonal step braking
radically with the anthropoid adaptation by (a) being able to survive
predators on the ground at night, (b) discovers <U>underground feeding</U> for
stored plant foods (tubers, corms, bulbs, roots) which are only accessible
through digging sticks which in turn need to be sculptured with stone tools
from tough branches covered densely with sharp spines (tools to make tools)
(c) begin to tap into the huge protein stores as represented by the ungulate
biomass of the steppe. (d) almost certainly: begin to explore the fat and
protein rich foods <U>hidden!</U> in the inter-tidal zones along ocean shores
– as are steppe plant foods. All this generates additional profound changes
away from the chimp ancestor. This is the <I
style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal">Homo habilis/erectus</I> form, the first
true humans.</FONT></LI>
<LI class=MsoNormal
style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; tab-stops: list .5in"><FONT
face="Times New Roman">With the first major glacitation about 1.9 m y ago, the
beginning of the Pleistocene, this new form hardens its steppe adaptations and
– bypassing the desert – begins to invade progressively the temperate zones.
About a dozen or more major glaciations follow, desiccating
<st1:place>Africa</st1:place> merciless and exterminating all human advances
north of the Eurasian mountain chains – again and again. Still spread to
<st1:place>Europe</st1:place> and <st1:place>Asia</st1:place> persist. This is
the 1.5 my progression of our parent species <I
style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal">Homo erectus.</I></FONT></LI>
<LI class=MsoNormal
style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; tab-stops: list .5in"><FONT
face="Times New Roman">Huge penultimate glaciation 225 000 y ago desiccates
<st1:place>Africa</st1:place> crisp and our parent species cannot make it and
dies out. Two branches of it however transform to supreme desert conditions, a
gracile form (us) and a robust form (Neanderthal). Jump in brain
size!</FONT></LI>
<LI class=MsoNormal
style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; tab-stops: list .5in"><FONT
face="Times New Roman">Neanderthal first and the gracile form later, invade
the herbivore-rich periglacial zones in <st1:place>Eurasia</st1:place>,
develop advanced technology and soon culture as we know it. Both are
biologically grotesque and fat Ice Age giants within a fauna of grotesque and
fat Ice Age giants (its all dreadfully “biologica!”). Superlative luxury body
and brain development in both forms till Neanderthal fades away, and the
superlatively developed European specimen fade away with the end of the last
glaciation, being replaced by a small-brained starvation culture (Mesolithic)
followed by agriculture (followed by genetic decay, and loss of brain size
etc). </FONT></LI>
<LI class=MsoNormal
style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; tab-stops: list .5in"><FONT
face="Times New Roman">Meanwhile, one late-glacial branch of the graciles
branches out into inner <st1:place>Asia</st1:place> and develops even more
brain in a process of neotinization. The supremely cold adapted mongoloid
people evolve that colonize the Arctic/Alpine and north
<st1:country-region><st1:place>America</st1:place></st1:country-region>, but
only with and after mega-faunal extinctions (earlier attempts by ur-caucasoids
and Ainu failed!).</FONT></LI></OL>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt"><o:p><FONT
face="Times New Roman"> </FONT></o:p></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt"><FONT face="Times New Roman">So
much for the thumb-nail sketch! Note: no other primate went past the horrific
barriers of the African dry steppe! In crashing through we became humans.
</FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt"><o:p><FONT
face="Times New Roman"> </FONT></o:p></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt"><FONT face="Times New Roman">So,
antlers and brains both depend on ecological riches, and such are found
increasingly the closer one gets to the fertile soils formed by glacial actions
and warm, moist summers. However, the price to pay is acquisition of competence
to deal with increasingly more complex ecological demands.</FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt"><o:p><FONT
face="Times New Roman"> </FONT></o:p></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt"><FONT
face="Times New Roman">Cheers, Val Geist</FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt"><o:p><FONT
face="Times New Roman"> </FONT></o:p></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt"><o:p><FONT
face="Times New Roman"> </FONT></o:p></P></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
<DIV
style="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: black"><B>From:</B>
<A title=HowlBloom@aol.com
href="mailto:HowlBloom@aol.com">HowlBloom@aol.com</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A title=paleopsych@paleopsych.org
href="mailto:paleopsych@paleopsych.org">paleopsych@paleopsych.org</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Monday, October 10, 2005 10:52
PM</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: [Paleopsych] Fwd: Universal
Footprint: Power Laws</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV><FONT id=role_document face=Arial color=#000000 size=3>
<DIV>
<DIV>Fascinating. But you have me hooked. What in the world could
the answer be to the following question: "<FONT face="Times New Roman">Our
brains expanded at he same rate in (exponent about 1.5) evolution as did the
antlers of giant deer and horns of giant sheep! ... Why?"</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Times New Roman"></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Times New Roman">And why are periglacial environments,
environments poor to the naked eye, richer than tropical environments, which
seem very, very rich?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Times New Roman"></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Times New Roman">How does the PERCEPTION of what's trash and
what's treasure, of what's a resource and what's not, feed into the
equation? Seemingly the bigger the brain, the more likely its owner is
to see resources where smaller brained creatures obstacles and
emptiness. But is this true?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Times New Roman"></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Times New Roman">Deer presumably inherit the strategies that
tell them what is trash and what is treasure--what is food and what is
not. They don't make discoveries that turn yesterday's waste into
tomorrow's resource, the way human inventors do. And deer don't have the
repository of solutions inventors draw from, then add their discoveries
to--culture.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Times New Roman"></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Times New Roman">So why do the same formulae apply in the
case of deer and of humans? Why do deer find the north, with its eight
months of scarcity, richer than the south, with its twelve months of
lushness?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Times New Roman"></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Times New Roman">Where does the technology that produces
clothing, shelter, and tools for hunting and harvesting
fit? What analog of this technology is available to the
deer?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Times New Roman"></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Times New Roman">Are deer antlers useful for anything--for
scraping lichen and moss off of rocks, for example? Or are they simply
what most of us have always thought--gaudy displays of excess evolved to
appeal to the females of the species?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Times New Roman"></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Times New Roman">And why does the gaudy display of excess
show up so often in a cosmos that we think obeys strict laws of
frugality?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Times New Roman"></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Times New Roman">How does this extravagance fit into the
notions of economy that underlie Paul Werbos' Laplaceian math? And how
does this excess production of new form fit into a universe that many think is
ruled by the form-destroying processes of entropy?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Times New Roman"></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Times New Roman">A lot of questions, Val, but you've provided
food for a lot of thought. Howard</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>In a message dated 10/10/2005 7:31:47 PM Eastern Standard Time,
kendulf@shaw.ca writes:</DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: blue 2px solid"><FONT
style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" face=Arial color=#000000 size=2><FONT
size=2>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt"><FONT face="Times New Roman"
size=3>Dear Howard,</FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt"><o:p><FONT
face="Times New Roman" size=3> </FONT></o:p></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt"><FONT face="Times New Roman"
size=3>The essay on power functions struck a cord within for a number of
reasons. (a) Biologists are – finally – waking up to utility of power
functions, which, since the 1920’s have been one of the major tools of the
agricultural discipline of Animal Science. These scientists – totally
innocent of biology – developed great mastery in the study of body growth
and production in agricultural animals. Their goals were strictly
utilitarian (how to produce bigger haunches in cattle and sheep, or longer
bodies in pigs so as to get longer slabs of beacon etc. because that’s where
the money led), however, when I took Animal Science in the late 1950’s I
became quickly aware of the applicability of both, their insights and
methods, in the study of evolution and ecology of large mammals. That
included anthropology, us, as I shall illustrate for the fun of it, below.
And then there is the Bible of Animal Science, the genial summary work of
Samuel Brody (1945) <I style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal">Bioenergetics and
Growth</I>, (mine is a Hafner reprint). An utterly timeless, brilliant work
if there ever was one!<SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>So,
that’s my first source of happiness! (b) Might I raise the hope that,
finally, after decades of working with power functions - in splendid
isolation - I just might be able to discuss insights about human biology and
evolution using power functions? The closest I ever got was explaining to
colleagues how to use their hand calculator to pull logs and anti-logs! So,
the essay raised my hopes - and there is nothing like hope! And that’s my
second source of happiness. (c)<SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes">
</SPAN>In over 40 years of reading and reviewing papers I have caught only
one out and out fraud! And this gentleman had the gift of creatively
misusing power functions. The paper I got was based on the second half of a
PhD Thesis for which Harvard had awarded him a doctorate. He had bamboozled
four eminent scientists into signing off that piece of fraud. By one of
those co incidents I was just working on something very similar to him and
became suspicious because his theoretical predictions fitted his data too
well, and the raw data in that are never looked that good. I managed to
recreate all his calculations and discovered that he had misused his own
data, had falsely attributed data to existing authors (whom I called on the
phone), that he had invented not only data – his own and under the names of
reputable scholars, but that he had created fictitious references as well.
Then a buddy in mathematics looked at some of his mathematical discussions
and declared them as invalid on multiple counts. I returned with my friend a
stinging review promising we would expose him next time. The fellow had a
most undistinguished career in several degree mills subsequently and the
only other paper of his I subsequently refereed was OK, but mediocre. I
refused to read the published first half of his thesis, but some buddies who
did shook their head and wondered out loud that there is something eerie
about that paper! Yes indeed! However, I kept my mouth shut and a fraud was
able to acquire a university position. So much for happiness!</FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt"><o:p><FONT
face="Times New Roman" size=3> </FONT></o:p></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt"><FONT face="Times New Roman"
size=3>Power functions are absolutely basic to understanding life processes,
and they do a sterling job of relieving the theory of evolution of
unnecessary ad hoc explanations. If you have it handy,<SPAN
style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>please see “<I
style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal">Primary rules of reproductive
fitness</I>” pp.2-13 of my 1978 “<I style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal">Life
Strategies</I>…” book. Some of the insights in the essay presented as new
are actually discussed in D’Arcy Thompsons (1917) <I
style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal">On Growth and Form</I>. To my
embarrassment I discovered that his book by a zoologist is known better in
Architecture and the Design disciplines than among current zoologists.
</FONT></FONT></FONT><FONT style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" face=Arial
color=#000000 size=2><FONT size=2><FONT face="Times New Roman"
size=3>Thompson uses real mathematics, where as current life scientists
focus on statistics. It is he who discusses that globular cells merely take
advantage of the fee shape-forming energy of surface tension and that it
costs real energy for a cell to deviate from this shape. In principle life
scavenges free energy from physics and chemistry to function as cheaply as
possible, for power functions drive home mercilessly just how costly it is
to live and how supremely important to life is the law of least effort, or
Zipf’s (1949) Law. </FONT></P></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: blue 2px solid">
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt"><o:p><FONT
face="Times New Roman" size=3> </FONT></o:p></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt"><FONT face="Times New Roman"
size=3>Thje beauty of power functions is that they state rules with
precision and that such are essential to comparisons. Let’s look at an
amusing example that suddenly becomes relevant to understanding humans. As I
detailed in my 1998 <I style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal">Deer of the
World</I> (next most important magnum opus) the deer family is marvelously
rich in examples essential to the understanding of evolutionary processes in
large mammals, humans included. They show several times a pattern of
speciation from the Tropics to the <st1:place>Arctic</st1:place>, that among
primates only the human lineage followed. In several deer lineages there is
a progressive increase in antler – those spectacular organs beloved by
trophy hunters. There is a steady, but step-wise, increase in size and
complexity from equator to pole!<SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes">
</SPAN>The further north, the larger the antlers!</FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt"><o:p><FONT
face="Times New Roman" size=3> </FONT></o:p></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt"><FONT face="Times New Roman"
size=3>However, antlers do not increase in proportion to body mass (weight
in Kg raised to the power of 1), nor to metabolic mass (weight in Kg raised
to the power of<SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>0.75), rather,
antler growth follows a positive power function, which, between species is
1.35. So, to compare the relative antler mass of small and large deer one
generates for each species y<SUB>(antler mass in grams)</SUB> = f (weight in
kg)<SUP>1.35 </SUP>. First of I can readily compare the amount of antler
mass produced by species despite differences in body size. The largest
antler mass is found in cursors (high speed runners) the smallest in forest
hiders. However, in high speed runners, antler mass grows with body mass -
within a lineage - even faster than suggested above. The huge antlers of the
Irish elk, 14 feet of spread turn out to be of exactly the same relative
mass as those of his last living relative the fallow deer. A small fallow
deer, scaled up to the size of an irish elk would have 14 foot of antler
spread! Are antlers incresing in size passively with body size? Yes, but
only under <B style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal"><U>luxury
</U></B>conditions. Note <B
style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal"><U>luxury</U></B>! I a moment you will
see why! Antler mass is determined in above deer from small to large by
y<SUB>(antler mass in grams)</SUB> = 2.6 (wtKg) <SUP>1.50</SUP>. Horn mass
in wild sheep happens to be y=2.32 (wtKg)<SUP>1.49</SUP>. And increase in
relative brain volume from <I
style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal">Australopithecus gracilis</I> to <I
style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal">Homo sapiens</I> is y(cm<SUP>3</SUP> of
brain) = 1.56 (wtkg)<SUP>1.575</SUP>. Cute, isn’t it? The human brain is (a)
disassociated from body growth following positive allometry. (b) Provided
the environment allows individuals a significant vacation from shortages and
want, that is, body growth under luxury conditions, human brains expand with
(lean!) body mass – period! If humans fall below the expected value, then
you have some explaining to do! Smaller than expected brain size will
therefore be a function of poor nutritional environments. (c) Natural luxury
environments are periglacial and North Temperate ones – up to about 60oN,
above and below that conditions deteriorate. That is, up to about 60oN the
annual productivity pulse has a length and height to facilitates maximum
growth. Therefore, periglacial Ice Age giants are brainy, tropical ones are
not! That certainly applies to the huge brains of Neanderthal and
Cro-magnids. As we invaded the cold, but rich periglacial environments,
getting a large brain to deal with the increased diversity of demands
(initially due to ever sharper seasonality) was filling out an already
available growth function! Our brains expanded at he same rate in (exponent
about 1.5) evolution as did the antlers of giant deer and horns of giant
sheep! Awesome organs all! Why? There is no ready explanation. One would
need to compare the growth exponents of other organs. </FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt"><o:p><FONT
face="Times New Roman" size=3> </FONT></o:p></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt"><FONT size=3><FONT
face="Times New Roman">I have written enough! Cheers, Val
Geist<o:p></o:p></FONT></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt"><o:p><FONT
face="Times New Roman" size=3> </FONT></o:p></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt"><o:p><FONT
face="Times New Roman" size=3> </FONT></o:p></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt"><o:p><FONT
face="Times New Roman" size=3> </FONT></o:p></P></FONT>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
<DIV
style="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: black"><B>From:</B>
<A title=mailto:HowlBloom@aol.com
href="mailto:HowlBloom@aol.com">HowlBloom@aol.com</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A
title=mailto:paleopsych@paleopsych.org
href="mailto:paleopsych@paleopsych.org">paleopsych@paleopsych.org</A>
</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Friday, October 07, 2005 12:26
PM</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> [Paleopsych] Fwd: Universal
Footprint: Power Laws</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV><FONT face=Arial color=#000000 size=3>
<DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV>In a message dated 10/7/2005 3:13:06 PM Eastern Standard Time, Howl
Bloom writes:</DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: blue 2px solid"><FONT
style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" face=Arial color=#000000
size=2><FONT face=Arial color=#000000 size=3>
<DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV>All thanks, Jim. I just gave a presentation related to this
subject to an international quantum physics conference in
Moscow--Quantum Informatics 2005. I wish I'd seen the article
before giving the talk. It would have come in handy.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Meanwhile I tracked down a copy of the full article. It's
downloadable for free at <A
title=http://www.pasteur.fr/recherche/unites/neubiomol/ARTICLES/Gisiger2001.pdf
href="http://www.pasteur.fr/recherche/unites/neubiomol/ARTICLES/Gisiger2001.pdf">http://www.pasteur.fr/recherche/unites/neubiomol/ARTICLES/Gisiger2001.pdf</A></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Better yet, enclosed is a file with the full article and with
another article that relates. I may not have the time to read
these, so if you digest anything interesting from them and get the time,
please jot me an email and give me your summary of what these articles
are getting at.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Since Eshel Ben-Jacob has been trying to point out for years why
such concepts as scale-free power laws and fractals fail to get at the
creative twists evolution comes up with as it moves from one level of
emergence to another, anything in these pieces that indicates how
newness enters the repetition of the old would be of particular
interest.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Again, all thanks. Onward--Howard</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>In a message dated 10/5/2005 5:12:27 PM Eastern Standard Time,
JBJbrody@cs.com writes:</DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: blue 2px solid"><FONT
style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" face=Arial color=#000000
size=2><FONT lang=0 face=Arial size=2 PTSIZE="10"
FAMILY="SANSSERIF"><A
title=http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayAbstract?fromPage=online&aid=74595#
href="http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayAbstract?fromPage=online&aid=74595#">Biological
Reviews</A> (2001), 76: 161-209 Cambridge University Press
doi:10.1017/S1464793101005607 Published Online 17May2001 *This article
is available in a PDF that may contain more than one articles.
Therefore the PDF file's first page may not match this article's first
page. <BR><A
title=http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayAbstract?fromPage=online&aid=74595#
href="http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayAbstract?fromPage=online&aid=74595#">Login</A>
<BR><A
title=http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayAbstract?fromPage=online&aid=74595#
href="http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayAbstract?fromPage=online&aid=74595#">Subscribe
to journal</A> <BR><A
title=http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayAbstract?fromPage=online&aid=74595#
href="http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayAbstract?fromPage=online&aid=74595#">Email
abstract</A> <BR><A
title=http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayAbstract?fromPage=online&aid=74595#
href="http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayAbstract?fromPage=online&aid=74595#">Save
citation</A> <BR><A
title=http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayAbstract?fromPage=online&aid=74595#
href="http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayAbstract?fromPage=online&aid=74595#">Content
alerts</A> <BR><BR>Review Article<BR><BR></FONT><FONT lang=0
style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffffff" face=Arial color=#336699 size=2
PTSIZE="10" FAMILY="SANSSERIF" BACK="#ffffff">Scale invariance in
biology: coincidence or footprint of a universal
mechanism?</FONT><FONT lang=0 style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffffff"
face=Arial color=#000000 size=2 PTSIZE="10" FAMILY="SANSSERIF"
BACK="#ffffff"><BR><BR><B>T.</B> <B>GISIGER</B> a1 <A
title=http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayAbstract?fromPage=online&aid=74595#p1
href="http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayAbstract?fromPage=online&aid=74595#p1">p1</A>
<BR>a1 Groupe de Physique des Particules, Université de Montréal, C.P.
6128, succ. centre-ville, Montréal, Québec, Canada, H3C 3J7 (e-mail:
<A title=mailto:gisiger@pasteur.fr
href="mailto:gisiger@pasteur.fr">gisiger@pasteur.fr</A>)<BR><BR><B>Abstract</B><BR><BR>In
this article, we present a self-contained review of recent work on
complex biological systems which exhibit no characteristic scale. This
property can manifest itself with fractals (spatial scale invariance),
flicker noise or 1/f-noise where f denotes the frequency of a signal
(temporal scale invariance) and power laws (scale invariance in the
size and duration of events in the dynamics of the system). A
hypothesis recently put forward to explain these scale-free
phenomomena is criticality, a notion introduced by physicists while
studying phase transitions in materials, where systems spontaneously
arrange themselves in an unstable manner similar, for instance, to a
row of dominoes. Here, we review in a critical manner work which
investigates to what extent this idea can be generalized to biology.
More precisely, we start with a brief introduction to the concepts of
absence of characteristic scale (power-law distributions, fractals and
1/f- noise) and of critical phenomena. We then review typical
mathematical models exhibiting such properties: edge of chaos,
cellular automata and self-organized critical models. These notions
are then brought together to see to what extent they can account for
the scale invariance observed in ecology, evolution of species, type
III epidemics and some aspects of the central nervous system. This
article also discusses how the notion of scale invariance can give
important insights into the workings of biological
systems.<BR><BR>(Received October 4 1999)<BR>(Revised July 14
2000)<BR>(Accepted July 24 2000)<BR><BR><B>Key Words:</B> Scale
invariance; complex systems; models; criticality; fractals; chaos;
ecology; evolution; epidemics; neurobiology.
<BR><BR><B>Correspondence:</B><BR><BR>p1 Present address: Unité de
Neurobiologie Moléculaire, Institut Pasteur, 25 rue du Dr Roux, 75724
Paris, Cedex 15, France. <BR><BR></FONT></FONT></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV>
<DIV></DIV></DIV></FONT></FONT></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt"><FONT
face="Times New Roman" size=2>Retrieved <SPAN
style="mso-no-proof: yes">February 16, 2005</SPAN>, from the World Wide
Web<SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes">
</SPAN>http://www.sciencenews.org/articles/20050212/bob9.asp<SPAN
style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>Week of Feb. 12, 2005; Vol. 167,
No. 7 , p. 106 Life on the Scales Simple mathematical relationships
underpin much of biology and ecology<SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes">
</SPAN>Erica Klarreich<SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>A
mouse lives just a few years, while an elephant can make it to age 70. In
a sense, however, both animals fit in the same amount of life experience.
In its brief life, a mouse squeezes in, on average, as many heartbeats and
breaths as an elephant does. Compared with those of an elephant, many
aspects of a mouse's life—such as the rate at which its cells burn energy,
the speed at which its muscles twitch, its gestation time, and the age at
which it reaches maturity—are sped up by the same factor as its life span
is. It's as if in designing a mouse, someone had simply pressed the
fast-forward button on an elephant's life. This pattern relating life's
speed to its length also holds for a sparrow, a gazelle, and a
person—virtually any of the birds and mammals, in fact. Small animals live
fast and die young, while big animals plod through much longer lives.<SPAN
style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>"It appears as if we've been
gifted with just so much life," says Brian Enquist, an ecologist at the
<st1:place><st1:PlaceType>University</st1:PlaceType> of
<st1:PlaceName>Arizona</st1:PlaceName></st1:place> in
<st1:City><st1:place>Tucson</st1:place></st1:City>. "You can spend it all
at once or slowly dribble it out over a long time."<SPAN
style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>a5850_1358.jpg Dean MacAdam<SPAN
style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>Scientists have long known that
most biological rates appear to bear a simple mathematical relationship to
an animal's size: They are<B> proportional to the animal's mass raised to
a power that is a multiple of 1/4. These relationships are known as
quarter-power scaling laws.</B> <B>For instance, an animal's metabolic
rate appears to be proportional to mass to the 3/4 power, and its heart
rate is proportional to mass to the –1/4 power.</B><SPAN
style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>The reasons behind these laws were
a mystery until 8 years ago, when Enquist, together with ecologist James
Brown of the <st1:place><st1:PlaceType>University</st1:PlaceType> of
<st1:PlaceName>New Mexico</st1:PlaceName></st1:place> in Albuquerque and
physicist Geoffrey West of <st1:place>Los Alamos</st1:place> (N.M.)
National Laboratory proposed a model to explain quarter-power scaling in
mammals (SN: 10/16/99, p. 249). They and their collaborators have since
extended the model to encompass plants, birds, fish and other creatures.
In 2001, Brown, West, and several of their colleagues distilled their
model to a single formula, which they call the master equation, that
predicts a species' metabolic rate in terms of its body size and
temperature.<SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>"They have
identified the basic rate at which life proceeds," says Michael Kaspari,
an ecologist at the <st1:place><st1:PlaceType>University</st1:PlaceType>
of <st1:PlaceName>Oklahoma</st1:PlaceName></st1:place> in
<st1:City><st1:place>Norman</st1:place></st1:City>.<SPAN
style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>In the July 2004 Ecology, Brown,
West, and their colleagues proposed that their equation can shed light not
just on individual animals' life processes but on every biological scale,
from subcellular molecules to global ecosystems. In recent months, the
investigators have applied their equation to a host of phenomena, from the
mutation rate in cellular DNA to Earth's carbon cycle.<SPAN
style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>Carlos Martinez del
<st1:place>Rio</st1:place>, an ecologist at the
<st1:place><st1:PlaceType>University</st1:PlaceType> of
<st1:PlaceName>Wyoming</st1:PlaceName></st1:place> in
<st1:City><st1:place>Laramie</st1:place></st1:City>, hails the team's work
as a major step forward. "I think they have provided us with a unified
theory for ecology," he says.<SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes">
</SPAN>The biological clock<SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes">
</SPAN>In 1883, German physiologist Max Rubner proposed that an animal's
metabolic rate is proportional to its mass raised to the 2/3 power. This
idea was rooted in simple geometry. If one animal is, say, twice as big as
another animal in each linear dimension, then its total volume, or mass,
is 23 times as large, but its skin surface is only 22 times as large.
Since an animal must dissipate metabolic heat through its skin, Rubner
reasoned that its metabolic rate should be proportional to its skin
surface, which works out to mass to the 2/3 power.<SPAN
style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>a5850_2473.jpg Dean MacAdam<SPAN
style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>In 1932, however, animal scientist
Max Kleiber of the University of California, Davis looked at a broad range
of data and concluded that the correct exponent is 3/4, not 2/3. In
subsequent decades, biologists have found that the 3/4-power law appears
to hold sway from microbes to whales, creatures of sizes ranging over a
mind-boggling 21 orders of magnitude.<SPAN
style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>For most of the past 70 years,
ecologists had no explanation for the 3/4 exponent. "One colleague told me
in the early '90s that he took 3/4-scaling as 'given by God,'" Brown
recalls.<SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>The beginnings of an
explanation came in 1997, when Brown, West, and Enquist described
metabolic scaling in mammals and birds in terms of the geometry of their
circulatory systems. It turns out, West says, that Rubner was on the right
track in comparing surface area with volume, but that an animal's
metabolic rate is determined not by how efficiently it dissipates heat
through its skin but by how efficiently it delivers fuel to its
cells.<SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>Rubner should have
considered an animal's "effective surface area," which consists of all the
inner surfaces across which energy and nutrients pass from blood vessels
to cells, says West. These surfaces fill the animal's entire body, like
linens stuffed into a laundry machine.<SPAN
style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>The idea, West says, is that a
space-filling surface scales as if it were a volume, not an area. If you
double each of the dimensions of your laundry machine, he observes, then
the amount of linens you can fit into it scales up by 23, not 22. Thus, an
animal's effective surface area scales as if it were a three-dimensional,
not a two-dimensional, structure.<SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes">
</SPAN>This creates a challenge for the network of blood vessels that must
supply all these surfaces. In general, a network has one more dimension
than the surfaces it supplies, since the network's tubes add one linear
dimension. But an animal's circulatory system isn't four dimensional, so
its supply can't keep up with the effective surfaces' demands.
Consequently, the animal has to compensate by scaling back its metabolism
according to a 3/4 exponent.<SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes">
</SPAN>Though the original 1997 model applied only to mammals and birds,
researchers have refined it to encompass plants, crustaceans, fish, and
other organisms. The key to analyzing many of these organisms was to add a
new parameter: temperature.<SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes">
</SPAN>Mammals and birds maintain body temperatures between about 36°C and
40°C, regardless of their environment. By contrast, creatures such as
fish, which align their body temperatures with those of their
environments, are often considerably colder. Temperature has a direct
effect on metabolism—the hotter a cell, the faster its chemical reactions
run.<SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>In 2001, after James
Gillooly, a specialist in body temperature, joined Brown at the
<st1:place><st1:PlaceType>University</st1:PlaceType> of <st1:PlaceName>New
Mexico</st1:PlaceName></st1:place>, the researchers and their
collaborators presented their master equation, which incorporates the
effects of size and temperature. An organism's metabolism, they proposed,
is proportional to its mass to the 3/4 power times a function in which
body temperature appears in the exponent. The team found that its equation
accurately predicted the metabolic rates of more than 250 species of
microbes, plants, and animals. These species inhabit many different
habitats, including marine, freshwater, temperate, and tropical
ecosystems.<SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>The equation gave
the researchers a way to compare organisms with different body
temperatures—a person and a crab, or a lizard and a sycamore tree— and
thereby enabled the team not just to confirm previously known scaling laws
but also to discover new ones. For instance, in 2002, Gillooly and his
colleagues found that hatching times for eggs in birds, fish, amphibians,
and plankton follow a scaling law with a 1/4 exponent.<SPAN
style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>When the researchers filter out
the effects of body temperature, most species adhere closely to
quarter-power laws for a wide range of properties, including not only life
span but also population growth rates. The team is now applying its master
equation to more life processes—such as cancer growth rates and the amount
of time animals sleep.<SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>"We've
found that despite the incredible diversity of life, from a tomato plant
to an amoeba to a salmon, once you correct for size and temperature, many
of these rates and times are remarkably similar," says Gillooly.<SPAN
style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>A single equation predicts so
much, the researchers contend, because metabolism sets the pace for myriad
biological processes. An animal with a high metabolic rate processes
energy quickly, so it can pump its heart quickly, grow quickly, and reach
maturity quickly.<SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes">
</SPAN>Unfortunately, that animal also ages and dies quickly, since the
biochemical reactions involved in metabolism produce harmful by-products
called free radicals, which gradually degrade cells.<SPAN
style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>"Metabolic rate is, in our view,
the fundamental biological rate," Gillooly says. There is a universal
biological clock, he says, "but it ticks in units of energy, not units of
time."<SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>Scaling up<SPAN
style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>The researchers propose that their
framework can illuminate not just properties of individual species, such
as hours of sleep and hatching times, but also the structure of entire
communities and ecosystems. Enquist, West, and Karl Niklas of
<st1:place><st1:PlaceName>Cornell</st1:PlaceName>
<st1:PlaceType>University</st1:PlaceType></st1:place> have been looking
for scaling relationships in plant communities, where they have uncovered
previously unnoticed patterns.<SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes">
</SPAN>a5850_3175.jpg<SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>REGULAR
ON AVERAGE. Newly discovered scaling laws have revealed an unexpected
relationship between the spacing of trees and their trunk diameters in a
mature forest. PhotoDisc<SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>The
researchers have found, for instance, that in a mature forest, the average
distance between trees of the same mass follows a quarter-power scaling
law, as does trunk diameter. These two scaling laws are proportional to
each other, so that on average, the distance between trees of the same
mass is simply proportional to the diameter of their trunks.<SPAN
style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>"When you walk in a forest, it
looks random, but it's actually quite regular on average," West says.
"People have been measuring size and density of trees for 100 years, but
no one had noticed these simple relationships."<SPAN
style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>The researchers have also
discovered that the number of trees of a given mass in a forest follows
the same scaling law governing the number of branches of a given size on
an individual tree. "The forest as a whole behaves as if it is a very
large tree," West says.<SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes">
</SPAN>Gillooly, Brown, and their <st1:State><st1:place>New
Mexico</st1:place></st1:State> colleague Andrew Allen have now used these
scaling laws to estimate the amount of carbon that is stored and released
by different plant ecosystems.<SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes">
</SPAN>Quantifying the role of plants in the carbon cycle is critical to
understanding global warming, which is caused in large part by carbon
dioxide released to the atmosphere when animals metabolize food or
machines burn fossil fuels.<SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes">
</SPAN>Plants, by contrast, pull carbon dioxide out of the air for use in
photosynthesis. Because of this trait, some ecologists have proposed
planting more forests as one strategy for counteracting global
warming.<SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>In a paper in an
upcoming Functional Ecology, the researchers estimate carbon turnover and
storage in ecosystems such as oceanic phytoplankton, grasslands, and
old-growth forests. To do this, they apply their scaling laws to the mass
distribution of plants and the metabolic rate of individual plants. The
model predicts, for example, how much stored carbon is lost when a forest
is cut down to make way for farmlands or development.<SPAN
style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>Martinez del
<st1:place>Rio</st1:place> cautions that ecologists making practical
conservation decisions need more-detailed information than the scaling
laws generally give. "The scaling laws are useful, but they're a blunt
tool, not a scalpel," he says.<SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes">
</SPAN>Scaling down<SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>The
team's master equation may resolve a longstanding controversy in
evolutionary biology: Why do the fossil record and genetic data often give
different estimates of when certain species diverged?<SPAN
style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>Geneticists calculate when two
species branched apart in the phylogenetic tree by looking at how much
their DNA differs and then estimating how long it would have taken for
that many mutations to occur. For instance, genetic data put the
divergence of rats and mice at 41 million years ago. Fossils, however, put
it at just 12.5 million years ago.<SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes">
</SPAN>The problem is that there is no universal clock that determines the
rate of genetic mutations in all organisms, Gillooly and his colleagues
say. They propose in the Jan. 4 Proceedings of the National Academy of
Sciences that, instead, the mutation clock—like so many other life
processes—ticks in proportion to metabolic rate rather than to time.<SPAN
style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>The DNA of small, hot organisms
should mutate faster than that of large, cold organisms, the researchers
argue. An organism with a revved-up metabolism generates more
mutation-causing free radicals, they observe, and it also produces
offspring faster, so a mutation becomes lodged in the population more
quickly.<SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>When the researchers
use their master equation to correct for the effects of size and
temperature, the genetic estimates of divergence times—including those of
rats and mice—line up well with the fossil record, says Allen, one of the
paper's coauthors.<SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>The team
plans to use its metabolic framework to investigate why the tropics are so
much more diverse than temperate zones are and why there are so many more
small species than large ones.<SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes">
</SPAN>Most evolutionary biologists have tended to approach biodiversity
questions in terms of historical events, such as landmasses separating,
Kaspari says. The idea that size and temperature are the driving forces
behind biodiversity is radical, he says.<SPAN
style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>"I think if it holds up, it's
going to rewrite our evolutionary-biology books," he says.<SPAN
style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>Enthusiasm and skepticism<SPAN
style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>While the metabolic-scaling theory
has roused much enthusiasm, it has its limitations. Researchers agree, for
instance, that while the theory produces good predictions when viewed on a
scale from microbes to whales, the theory is rife with exceptions when
it's applied to animals that are relatively close in temperature and size.
For example, large animals generally have longer life spans than small
animals, but small dogs live longer than large ones.<SPAN
style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>a5850_4238.jpg Dean MacAdam<SPAN
style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>Brown points out that the
metabolic-scaling law may be useful by calling attention to such
exceptions. "If you didn't have a general theory, you wouldn't know that
big dogs are something interesting to look at," he observes.<SPAN
style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>Many questions of particular
interest to ecologists concern organisms that are close in size. Metabolic
theory may not explain, for example, why certain species coexist or why
particular species invade a given ecosystem, says John Harte, an ecologist
at the <st1:place><st1:PlaceType>University</st1:PlaceType> of
<st1:PlaceName>California</st1:PlaceName></st1:place>,
<st1:City><st1:place>Berkeley</st1:place></st1:City>.<SPAN
style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>Some scientists question the very
underpinnings of the team's model. Raul Suarez, a comparative physiologist
at the <st1:place><st1:PlaceType>University</st1:PlaceType> of
<st1:PlaceName>California</st1:PlaceName></st1:place>,
<st1:City><st1:place>Santa Barbara</st1:place></st1:City> disputes the
model's starting assumption that an animal's metabolic rate is determined
by how efficiently it can transport resources from blood vessels to cells.
Suarez argues that other factors are equally important, or even more so.
For instance, whether the animal is resting or active determines which
organs are using the most energy at a given time.</FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt"><FONT size=2><FONT
face="Times New Roman"><SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes">
</SPAN>"Metabolic scaling is a many-splendored thing," he says.<SPAN
style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>Suarez' concern is valid, agrees
Kaspari. However, he says, the master equation's accurate predictions
about a huge range of phenomena are strong evidence in its favor.<SPAN
style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>Ecologists, physiologists, and
other biologists appear to be unanimous on one point: The team's model has
sparked a renaissance for biological-scaling theory.<SPAN
style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>"West and Brown deserve a great
deal of credit for rekindling the interest of the scientific community in
this phenomenon of metabolic scaling," Suarez says. "Their ideas have
stimulated a great deal of discussion and debate, and that's a good
thing."<SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>If you have a comment
on this article that you would like considered for publication in Science
News, send it to editors@sciencenews.org. Please include your name and
location.<SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>To subscribe to
Science News (print), go to https://www.kable.com/pub/scnw/
subServices.asp.<SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>To sign up
for the free weekly e-LETTER from Science News, go to
http://www.sciencenews.org/pages/subscribe_form.asp.<SPAN
style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>References:<SPAN
style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>Brown, J.H., J.F. Gillooly, A.P.
Allen, V.M. Savage, and G.B. West. 2004. Toward a metabolic theory of
ecology. Ecology 85(July):1771-1789. Abstract.<SPAN
style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>Gillooly, J.F., A.P. Allen, G.B.
West, and J.H. Brown. 2005. The rate of DNA evolution: Effects of body
size and temperature on the molecular clock. Proceedings of the
<st1:place><st1:PlaceName>National</st1:PlaceName>
<st1:PlaceType>Academy</st1:PlaceType></st1:place> of Sciences 102(Jan.
4):140-145. Abstract available at
http://www.pnas.org/cgi/content/abstract/102/1/140.<SPAN
style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>Gillooly, J.F. . . . G.B. West . .
. and J.H. Brown. 2002. Effects of size and temperature on developmental
time. Nature 417(May 2):70-73. Abstract available at
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/417070a.<SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes">
</SPAN>Gillooly, J.F., J.H. Brown, G.B. West, et al. 2001. Effects of size
and temperature on metabolic rate. Science 293(Sept. 21):2248-2251.
Available at
http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/293/5538/2248.<SPAN
style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>Savage, V.M., J.F. Gillooly, J.H.
Brown, G.B. West, and E.L. Charnov. 2004. Effects of body size and
temperature on population growth. American Naturalist 163(March):429-441.
Available at http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/AN/
journal/issues/v163n3/20308/20308.html.<SPAN
style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>Suarez, R.K., C.A. Darveau, and
J.J. Childress. 2004. Metabolic scaling: A many-splendoured thing.
Comparative Biochemistry and Physiology, Part B 139(November):531-541.
Abstract available at http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cbpc.2004.05.001.<SPAN
style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>West, G.B., J.H. Brown, and B.J.
Enquist. 1997. A general model for the origin of allometric scaling models
in biology. Science 276(April 4):122-126. Available at
http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/276/5309/122.<SPAN
style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>Further Readings:<SPAN
style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>Savage, V.M., J.F. Gillooly, . . .
A.P. Allen . . . and J.H. Brown. 2004. The predominance of quarter-power
scaling in biology. Functional Ecology 18(April):257-282. Abstract
available at http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.0269-8463.2004.00856.x.<SPAN
style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>Weiss, P. 1999. Built to scale.
Science News 156(Oct. 16):249-251. References and sources available at
http://www.sciencenews.org/pages/sn_arc99/10_16_99/bob1ref.htm.<SPAN
style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>Sources:<SPAN
style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>Anurag Agrawal Ecology and
Evolutionary Biology Cornell University Ithaca, NY 14853<SPAN
style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>Andrew Allen Biology Department
University of New Mexico Albuquerque, NM 87131<SPAN
style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>James H. Brown Biology Department
University of New Mexico Albuquerque, NM 87131<SPAN
style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>Steven Buskirk Department of
Zoology and Physiology University of Wyoming 1000 E. University Avenue
Laramie, WY 82071<SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>Brian
Enquist Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology University of
Arizona Tucson, AZ 85721<SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes">
</SPAN>James Gillooly Biology Department University of New Mexico
Albuquerque, NM 87131<SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>John
Harte Energy and Resources Group 310 Barrows Hall University of
California, Berkeley Berkeley, CA 94720<SPAN
style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>Michael Kaspari Department of
Zoology University of Oklahoma Norman, OK 73019<SPAN
style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>Carlos Martínez del Rio Department
of Zoology and Physiology University of Wyoming Laramie, WY 82071<SPAN
style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>Karl Niklas Department of Plant
Biology Cornell University Ithaca, NY 14853<SPAN
style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>Raul Suarez Department of Ecology,
Evolution and Marine Biology University of California, Santa Barbara Santa
Barbara, CA 93016<SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>Geoffrey B.
West Theoretical Physics Division Los Alamos National Laboratory MS B285
Los Alamos, NM 87545<SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>From
Science News, Vol. 167, No. 7, Feb. 12, 2005, p. 106. <SPAN
style="mso-tab-count: 1"> </SPAN><SPAN
style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>Home | Table of Contents |
Feedback | Subscribe | Help/About | Archives | Search<SPAN
style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>Copyright ©2005 Science Service.
All rights reserved. 1719 N St., NW, Washington, DC 20036 | 202-785-2255 |
scinews@sciserv.org <SPAN
style="mso-tab-count: 2">
</SPAN><SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>Subscribe
Subscribe to Science News. Click OR call 1-800-552-4412.<SPAN
style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>Google Search WWW Search Science
News<SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>Free E-mail Alert
Science News e-LETTER.<SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>Click
here to find resources for enjoying our planet and the universe. Science
Mall sells science posters, gifts, teaching tools, and collector items.
Finally a store for science enthusiasts, professionals, and kids alike!
Shop at the Science Mall.<SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes">
</SPAN>Science News Logo Wear Science News Logo Wear Copyright Clearance
Center<SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>Photo Archive Browse a
Science News photo collection. </FONT></FONT></P></DIV></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT lang=0 face=Arial size=2 PTSIZE="10"
FAMILY="SANSSERIF">----------<BR>Howard Bloom<BR>Author of The Lucifer
Principle: A Scientific Expedition Into the Forces of History and Global
Brain: The Evolution of Mass Mind From The Big Bang to the 21st
Century<BR>Recent Visiting Scholar-Graduate Psychology Department, New
York University; Core Faculty Member, The Graduate
Institute<BR>www.howardbloom.net<BR>www.bigbangtango.net<BR>Founder:
International Paleopsychology Project; founding board member: Epic of
Evolution Society; founding board member, The Darwin Project; founder: The
Big Bang Tango Media Lab; member: New York Academy of Sciences, American
Association for the Advancement of Science, American Psychological
Society, Academy of Political Science, Human Behavior and Evolution
Society, International Society for Human Ethology; advisory board member:
Institute for Accelerating Change ; executive editor -- New Paradigm book
series.<BR>For information on The International Paleopsychology Project,
see: www.paleopsych.org<BR>for two chapters from <BR>The Lucifer
Principle: A Scientific Expedition Into the Forces of History, see
www.howardbloom.net/lucifer<BR>For information on Global Brain: The
Evolution of Mass Mind from the Big Bang to the 21st Century, see
www.howardbloom.net<BR></FONT></DIV></FONT>
<P>
<HR>
<P></P>_______________________________________________<BR>paleopsych
mailing
list<BR>paleopsych@paleopsych.org<BR>http://lists.paleopsych.org/mailman/listinfo/paleopsych<BR>
<P>
<HR>
<P></P>No virus found in this incoming message.<BR>Checked by AVG
Anti-Virus.<BR>Version: 7.0.344 / Virus Database: 267.11.13/124 - Release
Date:
10/7/2005<BR></BLOCKQUOTE><BR><BR>_______________________________________________<BR>paleopsych
mailing
list<BR>paleopsych@paleopsych.org<BR>http://lists.paleopsych.org/mailman/listinfo/paleopsych<BR></FONT></BLOCKQUOTE>
<DIV></DIV></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT lang=0 face=Arial size=2 PTSIZE="10"
FAMILY="SANSSERIF">----------<BR>Howard Bloom<BR>Author of The Lucifer
Principle: A Scientific Expedition Into the Forces of History and Global
Brain: The Evolution of Mass Mind From The Big Bang to the 21st
Century<BR>Recent Visiting Scholar-Graduate Psychology Department, New York
University; Core Faculty Member, The Graduate
Institute<BR>www.howardbloom.net<BR>www.bigbangtango.net<BR>Founder:
International Paleopsychology Project; founding board member: Epic of
Evolution Society; founding board member, The Darwin Project; founder: The Big
Bang Tango Media Lab; member: New York Academy of Sciences, American
Association for the Advancement of Science, American Psychological Society,
Academy of Political Science, Human Behavior and Evolution Society,
International Society for Human Ethology; advisory board member: Institute for
Accelerating Change ; executive editor -- New Paradigm book series.<BR>For
information on The International Paleopsychology Project, see:
www.paleopsych.org<BR>for two chapters from <BR>The Lucifer Principle: A
Scientific Expedition Into the Forces of History, see
www.howardbloom.net/lucifer<BR>For information on Global Brain: The Evolution
of Mass Mind from the Big Bang to the 21st Century, see
www.howardbloom.net<BR></FONT></DIV></FONT>
<P>
<HR>
<P></P>_______________________________________________<BR>paleopsych mailing
list<BR>paleopsych@paleopsych.org<BR>http://lists.paleopsych.org/mailman/listinfo/paleopsych<BR>
<P>
<HR>
<P></P>No virus found in this incoming message.<BR>Checked by AVG
Anti-Virus.<BR>Version: 7.0.344 / Virus Database: 267.11.14/128 - Release
Date: 10/10/2005<BR></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>