Does the evidence from a new study suggest that Burmese pythons are responsible for native species deaths in Florida's Everglades

Building upon the topic of my last post, it has now been suggested via a year long study that Burmese pythons (Python molurus bivittatus) are responsible for the death of native species within the Florida Everglades.

What they did
A team led by Robert Francis of the University of Florida captured native marsh rabbits (Sylvilagus palustris), fitting a total of 95 trackers to adults that included a mortality sensor which notified them of the animals death. The rabbits were then released onto three separate sites, two sites had pythons present whilst the third had no observed pythons present. The team stated that they chose marsh rabbits for the study due to their prolific breeding habits suggesting, that it would be harder to wipe such a species out.
The rabbits were radio tracked at least once every two days and any carcasses found were examined for cause of death; predation by either the python or alligators was easy to detect as it was often still located within the body of the animal. Two carcasses which were found were also tested for traces of python DNA.

What they found
Once the year long study had been completed, the findings showed that only two rabbits had survived, with the team documenting a total of 68 rabbit deaths (If like me you are wondering what happened to the other 25 rabbits which were tracked to make up the total of 95, it does not mention them so unfortunately I can not provide an accurate answer other then to guess that they were not retrieved). In the areas of the park where pythons were present it showed that they were responsible for 75% of the deaths compared to 71% in areas where they were not present which, were were caused by mammalian predators, leading them to suggest that the pythons were the main threat for the species decline.

 

My Views

Firstly I am drawn to the conclusion made by this study, how can it suggest that the python is any more of a threat to the species when the two percentages are so similar? Surely all this data would suggest is that where pythons are present they are the new apex predator and therefore are out competing other native mammals for the same food source meaning, that the python is more of a threat to the native predators which it out-competes, then to the marsh rabbit which it preys upon as, the rabbit is still preyed heavily upon by mammalian species where the python is not present.

Secondly this study is again being used as a reason to back Americas reasoning that exotic species such as the Burmese python should be banned from ownership but again alike a lot of the studies that supposedly support this theory there is often plenty of misinterpretations that are too questionable to allow these studies to be used as evidence. I agree that the pythons are a invasive species and should be removed from the area but I do not agree that it should result in a ban of a species as a result; over the years thousands of domestic species such as livestock i.e. pigs and goats and dogs and cats have escaped and become feral across America and the rest of the world and not once have I heard of any of these countries banning the ownership, or importation of any of these species; it seems that because there is so much stipulation and poor education about exotic species such as reptiles and snakes that they become an easy target for eradication but they are many reptile owners out there who love and care for there bearded dragon, corn snake or Burmese python as much as any cat or dog, rabbit or guinea pig owner loves their pet, they are part of their family just as much and I only hope that with a bit of education and understanding it will be that way for many more years to come.

 

As always thanks for taking the time to visit and read my blog and if you would like to share your opinions then feel free to add them in the comments box below :)

To view the original paper click here 

A dark day for the reptile community. Four new snake species added to the Lacey Act

Reticulated Python, one of the new species added to the Lacey Act.

On the 6th of March the United States Fish and Wildlife service announced that four species of large snake are to be added to the Lacey Act; these are the reticulated python (Python reticulatus) and three species of anaconda, the DeSchauensee’s anaconda (Eunectes deschauenseei), green anaconda (E. murinus) and beni anaconda (Eunectes beniensis) which join the Burmese python (Python bivittatus) which is already on the act.

So what is the Lacey Act?
The Lacey Act was passed in 1900 to aid in protecting wildlife by inflicting strict penalties on anyone trading animals and plants illegally and regulates the import of any species protected by international or domestic law and thus prevents the spread of non-native/invasive species. For more information about the act please click here for the US fish and wildlife service official explanation of the act.

So why are these snake species being added?
The Burmese python was originally added to the Lacey Act as a result of the spread of a invasive population that had been released by suspected pet owners, who could no longer manage them, in the Florida everglades. These snakes have had a supposed detrimental effect on the local wildlife populations, by preying on species such as birds and some endangered species. It is interesting to note however that local residents from the everglades state that most have never seen a Burmese in the everglades and that other invasive species such as stray cats and pigs are more prevalent and have more of a negative effect.
The four latest additions are not actually found as an invasive species anywhere within the United States and have been put on the act as a precautionary measure suggesting, that they might become an invasive species in the future; a interesting view on this was provided by Brian Barczyk from BHB reptiles and who runs the popular online show animal bytes, he stated 'it is like putting someone in jail because they might commit a crime.'. None of these snakes could survive in the wild in northern states due to the cold climate and therefore could never become an invasive species, this poses the question of why should the entire population of reptile owners be punished for a incident that has only occurred in southern Florida? and why are other more invasive species such as stray cats and pigs not included on the list for the same reasons?

The green anaconda another addition to the act.

So how does this effect me?
If you live in the United States and own one of these five species, you can still keep them and if you wish breed them but you can not cross state lines with them or you would be breaking the law which, carries a sentence of up to five years in prison if they press charges. This means that if you had to move between states then your snake can not come with you, leaving you with the option of staying put, trying to re-home the snake or the one that no pet owner should ever have to face, euthanizing a healthy animal because of a misjudged law.

I do not live in America, how does this affect me?
Unfortunately it is only too common that once one country adopts a policy like this, that others start to follow and already within the UK, the announcement that the Scottish government wants to review its exotic pet trade act, could result in not just the prevention of keeping snakes but also other reptiles, fish, small mammals and birds.

So what can I do to help prevent/fight against this?
In the US the USArk has filed a federal lawsuit against the US fish and wildlife service for their use of poor reasoning for why this law has been passed. To find out more about USArk and to find out how you can help in the fight against the Lacey Act please click here  to view their site.
For UK residents a petition has been started by the Federation of British Herpetologists against the Scottish government, to sign the petition please click here and to find out more about it please click here to visit their website.

Finally I shall leave you with a video by Brian Barczyk owner of BHB reptiles, the animal bytes online video show and who is passionate about educating people about reptiles, having helped myself and friends with our own snake questions as well as providing breeding advice. This video discusses the Lacey Act and the effects it will have on the reptile community which brought tears to my eyes.

   

Reciprocating rats! Rats more willing to help those that help them.

Humans are familiar with the concept of returning a favor if someone has helped them, this is known as reciprocity and is a favorite explanation for how co-operative behaviors evolved. In nature this behavior is difficult to study, this could be due to it being rarer then thought in nature or because it is a behavior that is difficult to measure in the field.
A study by Dolivo and Taborksy looking at Norwegian lab rats (Rattus norvegicus) found that the rats give as good as they get. Following the principle that this behavior is hard to study in the wild and therefore using a controlled laboratory environment instead; they trained the rats to pull a stick that issued food items to a rat in a adjourning cage which could see the the rat dispensing the treat through the cage. They then expanded on this by placing a rat in between two cages containing rats on either side. The cage on the left had a stick that upon being pulled dispensed a carrot treat to the central rat whilst, the cage on the right had a stick that dispensed a banana treat to the central rat. The central rats generally favored the banana treat therefore, this would suggest that the central rat would favor the right side rat that dispensed the banana treat and would be more willing to help banana providing rats than carrot providing ones; this turned out to be true with rats that provided better help (banana) receiving greater rewards as a result, indicating reciprocal behavior.

 
These results therefore clearly show that rats have the ability to recall not only which rat helped them but the quality of help received as well, adjusting their behavior accordingly as a response. Adding this onto previously studies undertaken by Taborksy's team that rats are more likely to help a partner that has aided them before compared to one that had not; it provides a interesting insight into how a species manages the challenges of co-operation.
However it is not just rats that have displayed the ability to reciprocate, a study by Melis et al (2006) demonstrated how chimps theorized which partners to choose, based on previous experiences, when embarking on tasks. It has also been seen with fish that use cleaner fish, these client fish as they are often referred as, will often favor cleaner fish that behave in a more co-operative manner. Lastly even pied flycatchers have been observed favoring other flycatchers that actively aid them in mobbing owls in their territories.

All these examples clearly show that reciprocation is used within the natural world as, it provides a benefit to both animals involved and that those who help more will receive more in return; this behavior possibly aids in forming stronger bonds amongst social groups allowing those who aid the group to be favored over those that do not.
To view the original article Click here. 
Thanks for reading and as always feel free to leave any additional views or comments in the box below :)

Toucan beaten by youths to receive prosthetic beak

A chestnut mandibled toucan (Ramphastos ambiguus swainsonii) from Costa Rica was brutally attacked by a group of youths, causing it to loose a substantial amount from its beak. The toucan despite being wild is known by the locals who put out food for it, causing him to become the town's mascot and adopting the towns name Grecia. Grecia's attack occurred in January when youths beat him with a plank of wood, the bird was taken to a local animal rescue center where, vets have been caring for him since and has been recovering and eating small bits of food with some assistance. 
When news spread of the vicious attack on the bird it caused outrage among people, causing them to turn to their pockets in a attempt to help fund the birds treatment; a social media campaign started by Luciano Lacayo with the hashtag #savethetoucan managed to raise more than $7000 to help the injured toucan, smashing its $5000 goal in less than 48 hours.

This led to four different companies within Costa Rica to offer to help the bird by designing and printing a new 3d beak for the bird which, will be the first of its kind to be used on a toucan but has been used and successful with other bird species such as eagles and penguins. The bill will have both a fixed and mobile part to allow it to be cleaned and replaced as needed however, time is needed to let his wounds heal before what is left of his beak can be scanned to plan for models.
Despite all this mass effort the poor toucan's future is still uncertain, he may not readily accept his new prosthetic beak and in the wild the beak aids in thermoregulation (temperature control) and attracting mates.
Unfortunately for Latin America this is not the first case of animal cruelty that has gained media attention, as little as a month ago a dog was brutally murdered by being blown apart by fireworks which, was filmed and placed online; this is due to the lack of laws or punishment for such abuse and perpetrators often face no penalty or if they do it is as little as a $2 fine; hopefully this will change as activists strive for tougher punishments for these acts of animal cruelty.  

This story shows both the worst in humans and the best and is a wonderful example of just how well we can group together to overcome a tragic incident by showing how truly compassionate we can be. My fingers are crossed that this little survivor will be able to eventually get his new beak and that all goes well and I am sure a lot of other people are too.
To view original story click here   
Finally as always thank you for taking the time to read my blog and feel free to leave your thoughts in the comment box below :)

Why do cats love boxes?

Something every cat owner experiences is when they spend £100's on that huge new fancy cat tree only for the cat to totally ignore it and spend endless hours playing in the box it came in, much to the slight annoyance of the owner (we still love them loads regardless!), however new research by a team of veterinary scientists from the university of Utrecht titled 'Will a hiding box provide stress reduction for shelter cats?' has showed that boxes do aid in providing a comforting, stress relieving area for cats.
The research was aimed at aiding with shelter cats (Felis sylvestris catus) whom dependent on personality type, can experience high levels of stress within a shelter environment which, can lead to not only mental issues but health issues as well. The scientists divided a group of shelter cats into a group that had access to a box and those that did not, observing their behavior over a period of two weeks; behavior was measured using the Kessler and Turner cat stress score as shown below.

By the third day of observation the cats which had been provided with boxes had lower stress scores than those without though, it was observed that some probably those with a more stronger personality, were not affected by not having access to a box but those that were, showed higher levels of stress which gradually reduced over time to the same as the box access cats by day fourteen.
The sample size of nineteen cats used is classed as small by most scientific standards but the paper still concluded that access to boxes provides a higher level of enrichment for the cats during the first weeks of shelter life, aiding with coping strategies thus reducing levels of stress and that further research will hopefully build upon this conclusion.

Why cats appear to love boxes so much is still a mater up for scientific debate, some suggestions include: that they like the warmth and allows a solitary species an area to hide away from social interactions however, I like to think as a cat owner myself, that it holds a attraction similar to that with young children; a box can be so many amazing things to a cat, a fort to conquer and defend vigorously from fellow cats and humans with a few well placed swipes at unsuspecting feet and hands, a place to hide from all of life's many annoyances, or maybe a object to pounce on and destroy till only scattered fragments remain and finally a lovely cosy place to snuggle up and catch some shut eye after a hard day of doing cat things.

Courtesy of Maru the cat :)

As always thank you for taking the time to visit my blog and feel free to leave any thoughts or comments in the box below thanks :)
To view the original article click here

Scorpions can lose their tail to prevent predation

When a animal voluntarily sheds part of its body, often as a result of predation it is called autotomy; this occurs at a defined cleavage plane, as shown by the black lines on the above picture. When cleavage occurs at these sites it minimizes damage to the animal and aids with the rapid sealing of fluids called hemolymph. In scorpions this means that often the stinger and the anus is lost as they never grow back, this means that the scorpion can no-longer defend itself/inject venom (hunt) or pass feces.
A team of scientists led by Camilo Mattoni from Unversidad nacional de Cordoba went out into the field and turned over rocks, using UV at night, marking where detachments occurred on the scorpions. In the lab they observed museum specimens that displayed autotomy and conducted a experiment with the species (Ananteris solimariae) holding onto the metasoma (Posterior end of scorpion) with forceps and gently pulling backwards to see where cleavage occured.

In 22 out of 25 males studied cleavage occured at joints between the metasomal segments I, II, II and III and III and IV (see pic below for reference) allowing the scorpion to escape. Females and juveniles either showed one instance (female) or not at all (juvenile). After detachment the parts kept on wiggling for over a minute which, may aid in distracting the predator away from the escaping scorpion and in 47% of cases the detached tail attempted to sting.
The area around the detachment heals quickly and scar tissue forms within five days but the lost parts do not regenerate preventing the scorpion from being able to defecate and reducing it to only being able to catch small prey using their mouth parts only. The bodies eventually start to swell as a result of the inability to pass feces and some even experienced a second autotomy as a result of this however, most of the males survived and even mated with females up to 8 months after autotomy.

To view the original paper click here
Thanks for taking the time to view my blog and as always feel free to leave any comments in the box below. :)

New study shows that the orchid mantis does not mimic orchid flower

The orchid mantis (Hymenopus coronatus) was first described in 1879 by James Hingston during a trip to west Java where, he was witness to a red orchid that caught flies which, at the time he believed to be not a insect but a type of carnivorous plant.
The orchid mantis is a bit of a looker amongst the mantis species, sporting pink and white coloration instead of the brown/green coloration associated with most mantis species; it has legs which have broader upper parts resembling petals and is difficult to see when positioned on a flower. It was originally thought that the mantis had evolved to look like a flower (also known as crypsis) to attract and eat its insect prey; this type of cryptic mimicry is well known within the animal world, such as with the (Xerociris wilsonii ) or Wilson's Wood-Nymph moth which uses cryptic coloration to disguise itself as tree bark to deter predation, as shown below.

Can you see it?

  

However there was never any clear evidence or study provided to definitely state that the orchid mantis was using this type of mimicry and studies by James O'Hanlon and his colleagues show that this is not the case. They achieved this by testing the assumed method of hunting for the orchid mantis; firstly testing whether the mantis actually camouflaged  itself against flowers or if they attracted insects on their own. To insects the mantis' colour was indistinguishable from other flowers but when placed against the most common flower in their natural habitat, the insects approached the mantises more regularly than flowers demonstrating, that the mantises attracted the insects without the need for camouflage. This is known as aggressive mimicry and allows the predator to avoid detection by assuming the appearance of a harmless item for example, the alligator snapping turtle (Macrochelys temminckii) uses its worm-like tongue as a lure to catch fish.

Next the study looked at where the mantises chose to place themselves on the plant; this showed that the mantises chose not to hide on the flowers but chose leaves often near flowers due to the the likelihood of insects being attracted to that area. 

When the shape and colour of the mantis was examined from that of a insect's perspective, it was discovered it was not the shape but the coloration of the mantis that attracted the insects, with the mantis adopting a more generalized flower shape then that of a exact species possibly exploiting a loophole within the insect brain. Humans are capable of abstract thought and make decisions based upon all information present to us therefore upon viewing a orchid mantis for a few seconds, we start to notice the bug eyes and distinct insect outline and realize that we are looking at a mantis. Insects are constantly on the move and have more compact brains preventing this level of thought processing, generally anything matching a colour familiar to it is a nectar containing flower, with generally higher levels of colour meaning higher levels of nectar. The mantis takes advantage of this thought process, using a process known as sensory stimulation, using just the right amount of optimal colour to attract the insects to it. 

There is still one question left unanswered at this point which is, why then do the mantises have petal like appendages? Martin Stevens from Exeter university suggests that this may be aid in continuing to fool the insect as it gets closer to the mantis, though further study will be required to ascertain this.

  

Personally I believe this article demonstrates just how much we still have to learn about species that have been discovered and how upon further study, especially with species that are often overlooked such as the invertebrates, we will discover some amazing behaviors/traits which will give us not only a better understanding of the animal but a greater appreciation as well. 

As always feel free to post your thoughts in the box below and thanks for reading :)

To view the original article click here