linkfest – 04/19/15

a linkfest! =D

Experimental evolution reveals hidden diversity in evolutionary pathways“Our findings show that parallel genetic evolution is strongly biased by constraints and we reveal the genetic bases. From such knowledge, and in instances where new phenotypes arise via gene activation, we suggest a set of principles: evolution proceeds firstly via pathways subject to negative regulation, then via promoter mutations and gene fusions, and finally via activation by intragenic gain-of-function mutations. These principles inform evolutionary forecasting and have relevance to interpreting the diverse array of mutations associated with clinically identical instances of disease in humans.”

Selectionism Strikes Back! – from razib.

Genomes carry a heavy burden“Most people’s DNA contains genetic mutations that are potentially lethal to offspring…. Most people carry one or two genetic mutations that can cause early death or infertility in their offspring….”

World’s oldest stone tools discovered in Kenya“Researchers…say they have found the oldest tools made by human ancestors — stone flakes dated to 3.3 million years ago. That’s 700,000 years older than the oldest-known tools to date, suggesting that our ancestors were crafting tools several hundred thousand years before our genus Homo arrived on the scene. If correct, the new evidence could confirm disputed claims for very early tool use, and it suggests that ancient australopithecines like the famed ‘Lucy’ may have fashioned stone tools, too.”

Neanderthals manipulated the bodies of adults and children shortly after death

Neandertal flutes debunked – @dienekes’.

IQ prediction from structural MRI – from steve hsu. see also: MRI-Based Intelligence Quotient (IQ) Estimation with Sparse Learning.

New brain science shows poor kids have smaller brains than affluent kids – see also: Credit, where credit is due, to Lyndsey Layton and Income, brain, race: Prof Kimberly Noble replies and Howitzer or Katyusha: Reply to Prof Noble at dr. james thompson’s blog. – and see also: In today’s social science, wishing makes it so – from charles murray.

Gene study may explain why some remain quick thinkers“Genetic differences could explain why some people are quicker thinkers in middle age and later life, a study of data from 30,000 people suggests.” – see also: GWAS for executive function and processing speed suggests involvement of the CADM2 gene.

Prediction of brain age suggests accelerated atrophy after traumatic brain injury – h/t stuart ritchie! who tweeted: “Super-cool new paper on how to predict someone’s age just from a brain image (r = .92!)”

National Wealth and IQ at the Edge: American Exceptionalism, East Asian Mediocrity – anatoly karlin’s “big-ass blog on national wealth, IQ, HBD, East Asians, smart fractions, etc.” (~_^)

In the beginning was the Word – dr. james thompson blogs on the recent woodley et al. paper “By their words ye shall know them: Evidence of genetic selection against general intelligence and concurrent environmental enrichment in vocabulary usage since the mid 19th century.”

Born That Way – from greg cochran.

Female Same-Sex Attraction Revisited – from jayman.

Examining the S factor in Mexican states – from emil kirkegaard.

Sex differences and vulnerability: how the male-female divide affects health“[S]ome studies have shown that premature baby girls will grow up to suffer greater language deficits than premature boys, whereas boys exposed to certain prenatal toxins will suffer greater deficits to spatial skills than girls similarly exposed, but because sex differences were never the original focus of the research no one, until Geary, has united these sex specific developmental problems and placed them in evolution’s bigger picture. Geary explains, ‘Sexually selected traits are the first to go; for example, low level exposure to prenatal toxins will affect play in boys but not their IQ: if you don’t measure the right thing you will fail to detect underlying problems.'” – h/t steve stewart williams!

Men up to five times more likely to commit sex crimes than the average male if they have brother or father convicted of a sex offence – h/t claire lehmann! who tweeted: “Survey of 21,566 men convicted of sex crimes from 1973- 2009 has revealed a strong genetic component to sex offending.” – see also: Sexual offending runs in families: A 37-year nationwide study.

Aggressive-Antisocial Boys Develop Into Physically Strong Young Men“We found that males’ antisocial tendencies temporally precede their physical formidability. Boys, but not girls, with greater antisocial tendencies in childhood attained larger increases in physical strength between the ages of 11 and 17. These results support sexual selection theory, indicating an adaptive congruence between male-typical behavioral dispositions and subsequent physical masculinization during puberty.”

Childhood Self-Control and Unemployment Throughout the Life Span: Evidence From Two British Cohort Studies“Analyzing unemployment data from two nationally representative British cohorts (N = 16,780), we found that low self-control in childhood was associated with the emergence and persistence of unemployment across four decades. On average, a 1-SD increase in self-control was associated with a reduction in the probability of unemployment of 1.4 percentage points after adjustment for intelligence, social class, and gender.”

Enlisting in the Military: The Influential Role of Genetic Factors“Given that enlistment in the U.S. military is completely voluntary, there has been a great deal of interest in identifying the various factors that might explain why some people join the military, whereas others do not. The current study expanded on this line of literature by estimating the extent to which genetic and environmental factors explained variance in the liability for lifetime participation in the military. Analysis of twin pairs drawn from the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent to Adult Health (Add Health) revealed that 82% of the variance was the result of genetic factors, 18% of the variance was the result of nonshared environmental factors, and none of the variance was accounted for by shared environmental factors.” – from brian boutwell et al.

Risk of Suicide Among US Military Service Members Following Operation Enduring Freedom or Operation Iraqi Freedom Deployment and Separation From the US Military“Findings do not support an association between deployment and suicide mortality in this cohort. Early military separation (<4 years) and discharge that is not honorable were suicide risk factors.” – h/t michael story!

Verbal ability as a predictor of political preferences in the United States, 1974–2012“[H]igher vocabulary scores are associated with a greater likelihood that people place themselves on the ideological and political spectrum and that they vote in presidential elections, but have only small relationships with liberal-versus-conservative self-identification.”

Do our genes tell us how to vote? Study of twins says they might

On the Malleability and Plasticity of the History of the Blank Slate and 21st Century Moral Philosophy Advances Boldly into the 19th Century – from helian.

More on the younger Franz Boas – from peter frost.

Surnames and Y-Chromosomal Markers Reveal Low Relationships in Southern Spain – ruh roh.

New study finds genetic predisposition for noise-induced hearing loss

New function of obesity gene revealed

The placebome: Where genetics and the placebo effect meet

Chimps That Hunt Offer a New View on Evolution“[A] 10-year study of chimpanzees in Senegal shows females playing an unexpectedly big role in hunting and males, surprisingly, letting smaller and weaker hunters keep their prey. The results do not overturn the idea of dominant male hunters, said Jill D. Pruetz of Iowa State University, who led the study. But they may offer a new frame of reference on hunting, tools and human evolution. ‘We need to broaden our perspective,’ she said.”

Upper Palaeolithic ritualistic cannibalism at Gough’s Cave (Somerset, UK): The human remains from head to toe“Our present analysis of the postcrania has identified a far greater degree of human modification than recorded in earlier studies. We identify extensive evidence for defleshing, disarticulation, chewing, crushing of spongy bone, and the cracking of bones to extract marrow. The presence of human tooth marks on many of the postcranial bones provides incontrovertible evidence for cannibalism.”

Yes, You Can Catch Insanity“A controversial disease revives the debate about the immune system and mental illness.” – pediatric autoimmune neuropsychiatric disorders or “PANDAS”.

Hatfield and McCoy Feud — The Real Thing

Colors help set body’s internal clock“[Mice] use light’s changing color to set their own clocks, a finding that researchers expect will hold for humans, too.”

The Myth of the Angry Atheist“[T]hese results support the idea that people believe atheists are angry individuals, but they do not appear to be angrier than other individuals in reality.”

Flowers Are “Darker” at Lower Latitudes“UV radiation may explain why plants and animals closer to the equator come in darker varieties.”

The Disease That Turned Us Into Genetic-Information Junkies – brief history on tay–sachs disease research.

Antibiotic Resistant Bacteria Could Predate Antibiotics“A South American tribe, called the Yanomami, which was isolated for about 11,000 years prior to 2009, have gut bacteria that carry antibiotic resistance genes, according to new research. The Yanomami’s microbiome is far more diverse than that of Europeans or North Americans, but it also contains antibiotic resistant genes, despite never having had antibiotics. The findings suggest antibiotic resistance predates antibiotics, although it is possible the Yanomami ingested naturally occurring antibiotics in soil at some point.” – see also: The microbiome of uncontacted Amerindians.

Rotherham Worker ‘Told To Give Girls To Abusers’“The ex-protection worker says she repeatedly raised concerns about men taking girls away but her boss told her to ‘let them go’.” – also: State wards being groomed for prostitution by paedophile gangs“Organised gangs of paedophiles are grooming state wards as young as 12 for prostitution. Veteran child protection workers have told the Herald Sun they are powerless to protect the children in their care and that the sexual exploitation of state wards is ‘endemic’…. Victoria Police has set up a taskforce to investigate a gang of Afghani men in Dandenong suspected of preying on teens in care.” – australia now. =/

bonus: Jurassic Park in real life: The race to modify the DNA of endangered animals and resurrect extinct ones“Professor Church has applied a sophisticated and revolutionary ‘gene editing’ technique known as Crispr and has managed to get it working in elephant cells to carry out 14 precise changes to its genome. ‘We are now working on in vitro organogenesis [organ formation] and embryogenesis [embryo formation],’ he told The Independent in an email.”

bonus bonus: Genome Digest – findings from genomes of mountain gorilla, pseudomonas aeruginosa, canary, bird flu strain, and leprosy bacterium.

bonus bonus bonus: Through This Chemical Loop, Dogs Win Our Hearts

(note: comments do not require an email. woof?)

Advertisements

linkfest – 07/15/12

How Much Hard Evidence Do You Need?“[T]hree dopamine genes … examined, the dopamine transporter gene (DAT1), the dopamine D2 receptor gene (DRD2), and the dopamine D4 receptor gene (DRD4), had small but reliable effects on educational attainment, such that those with a higher ‘dopamine index’ tended to attain less education…. But what’s much more interesting is that they found significant differences in the prevalence of the alleles of theses genes between the White and the Black subjects, with Blacks having tending to have higher dopamine indices.” – from jayman (at his new location!).

Earliest Americans Arrived in Waves, DNA Study Finds – via steve sailer.

Spearheads and DNA Point to a Second Founding Society in North America“Clovis people, long known for their graceful, fluted projectile points, were not alone in the New World.” – original research article. see also: Paisley Caves yield 13,000-year old Western Stemmed points, more human DNA.

New Au. sediba fossils discovered in rock“Bones to be unearthed ‘live’ online, in a laboratory studio in real time.”

Fascinatin’ rhythm“[A] Neanderthal-derived segment that overlaps CLOCK, a key gene in regulating circadian rhythms. That segment has a frequency of 85% in Europeans.” – from greg cochran.

Pathological Altruism – jared taylor reviews Pathological Altruism.

Bad News for Big Brains“Humans and other creatures with large brains relative to their body size tend to have smaller guts and possibly fewer offspring. Scientists have debated for decades whether the two phenomena are related. Now a team of researchers says that they are—and that big brains do indeed make us smart.”

IQ and fertility cross-nationally – bad news from the inductivist.

The IQ’s Of Russian Politicians – anatoly guesstimates.

Intro to kinship and inbreeding coefficients“Fair warning: this is the most mathematical post I have ever done. If you hate math or are not good at it, don’t bother reading this post.” – from secular blood. also: On inbreeding coefficients and On kinship coefficients.

Women’s body movements are a potential cue to ovulation – something in the way she moves….

Natural Alzheimer’s Protection“Researchers identify a gene variant that reduces risk of Alzheimer’s disease.”

Q: Why Do We Wear Pants? A: Horses

bonus: Fruitflies evolve number sense

bonus bonus: Falling Dominoes – in china.

bonus bonus bonus: Feeling Snappy? Measuring Personality in Hermit Crabs

bonus bonus bonus bonus: Papua New Guinea charges 29 alleged cannibals

(note: comments do not require an email. lazy sunday.)

two things

1) inclusive fitness — hamilton’s idea that your genetic success should be calculated by considering both your direct descendants AND other individuals who happen to share copies of your genes and whom you have aided in some way — means that individuals who are more altruistic towards those other individuals with whom they share a good deal of genes, close-ish family members being the most likely candidates, increase their total fitness. inbreeding, because it amplifies the relatedness between family members, can amplify the altruistic behaviors between them.

2) altruistic behaviors are behavioral traits that are selected for under certain conditions (selective pressures) because such behaviors pay off (i.e. increasing an individual’s fitness or inclusive fitness). there are many, many, many types of altruistic behaviors, including those that are on the “dark side” of altruism (bigotry, waaaaycism, genocide), so there cannot possibly be just one “gene for altruism.” inbreeding, because it amplifies the relatedness between family members, can make the evolution of “genes for familial altruism” easier/happen more quickly (see here and here).

(ok. so technically that’s more than just two things. so sue me! (^_^) )
_____

regarding the first point — inbreeding, because it amplifies the relatedness between family members, can amplify the altruistic behaviors between them — let’s take two examples: a population that breeds entirely randomly (doesn’t really exist in humans) and a population that inbreeds (cousins marry cousins regularly, for instance).

in the randomly breeding (diploid) population, the relatedness between the various family members looks like this. in such a population, first-cousins will probably share 1/8th (12.5%) of their dna in common; that’s an inbreeding coefficient of 6.25%.

first-cousins in the regularly inbreeding population will share a greater amount of dna in common because they share so many ancestors in common, so their inbreeding coefficients will be higher. for instance, some first-cousins from pakistan and saudi arabia, two societies with very long histories of cousin marriage, have inbreeding coefficients of 11%, almost double those in a randomly mating population.

so, all else being equal (which is obviously never the case), if we take a totally made-up example of an altruistic behavior — the sharing of bananas — one would expect to find that the first-cousins in the inbreeding population, since they are more closely related to one another, share more bananas with each other on average than the first-cousins in the randomly mating population. the first-cousins in the randomly mating population should share more bananas with each other than they do with their second-cousins, because they share more genes with each other than they do with their second-cousins — but overall their altruistic behaviors won’t hold a candle to the inbred first-cousins.

got that? (^_^)

macaque monkeys provide a good example of how more closely related family members are more altruistic towards one another than more distantly related family members. the closer the genetic relationship, the more grooming between two macaque relatives; the more distant the relationship, the less grooming

confused beetles provide a good example of how more inbred family members are more altruistic towards their close relatives than randomly mated family members are. in this case, we’re talking about an example of the “dark side” of altruism: randomly mated confused beetles cannibalize other related confused beetle larvae more than inbred ones.

steve sailer applied these ideas to humans way back in 2003. from Cousin Marriage Conundrum:

“Are Muslims, especially Arabs, so much more loyal to their families than to their nations because, due to countless generations of cousin marriages, they are so much more genealogically related to their families than Westerners are related to theirs? Frank Salter, a political scientist at the Max Planck Institute in Germany whose new book ‘Risky Transactions: Trust, Kinship, and Ethnicity’ takes a sociobiological look at the reason why Mafia families are indeed families, told me, ‘That’s my hunch; at least it’s bound to be a factor.’

“One of the basic laws of modern evolutionary science, quantified by the great Oxford biologist William D. Hamilton in 1964 under the name ‘kin selection,’ is that the more close the genetic relationship between two people, the more likely they are to feel loyalty and altruism toward each other. Natural selection has molded us not just to try to propagate our own genes, but to help our relatives, who possess copies of some of our specific genes, to propagate their own.

“Nepotism is thus biologically inspired. Hamilton explained that the level of nepotistic feeling generally depends upon degree of genetic similarity. You share half your personally variable genes with your children and siblings, but one quarter with your nephews/nieces and grandchildren, so your nepotistic urges will tend to be somewhat less toward them. You share one eighth of your genes with your first cousins, and one thirty-second with your second cousin, so your feelings of family loyalty tend to fall off quickly.

“But not as quickly if you and your relatives are inbred. Then, you’ll be genealogically and related to your kin via multiple pathways. You will all be genetically more similar, so your normal family feelings will be multiplied. For example, your son-in-law might be also be the nephew you’ve cherished since his childhood, so you can lavish all the nepotistic altruism on him that in an outbred family would be split between your son-in-law and your nephew.

“Unfortunately, nepotism is usually a zero sum game, so the flip side of being materially nicer toward your relatives would be that you’d have less resources left with which to be civil, or even just fair, toward non-kin. So, nepotistic corruption is rampant in countries such as Iraq, where Saddam has appointed members of his extended family from his hometown of Tikrit to many key positions in the national government….”
_____

what i got interested in was the flip-side of what steve talked about. in other words, if inbreeding leads to the sort of nepotistic behaviors we see in the middle east, maybe not-so-much inbreeding — or even outbreeding — leads to the opposite. lots of inbreeding in humans seems to lead to all sorts of family-oriented, clannish behaviors, not just nepotism. it even seems to, as randall parker pointed out, impede the development of democracy because everyone’s so focused on their extended families/clans/tribes. again, maybe outbreeding does just the opposite. i think there’s a lot of pretty good evidence pointing in these directions (see the Mating Patterns series down below ↓ in the left-hand column), but so far it’s all circumstantial.

furthermore, point number two from the top: inbreeding, because it amplifies the relatedness between family members, can make the evolution of “genes for familial altruism” easier/happen more quickly. not only are inbred populations of humans more likely to be more altruistic to their near kin than not-so-inbred populations because they are more closely related to one another (like the confused beetles), various “altruistic alleles” related to familial altruism ought to develop more quickly and be more frequent in the inbred populations (again, see here and here).

greg cochran’s not convinced. he said: “Your general notion that the degree of inbreeding does something, by itself, in the short run, is incorrect.”

i think he’s misunderstood my argument (well, how much can one communicate in a couple of comments to a blog post?). i am not arguing that “inbreeding does something by itself — except for potentially amplifying already existing altruistic behaviors (see the beetle example again). nor am i arguing that “inbreeding does something, by itself, in the short run.” no. of course, any “genes for altruism” would have to be selected for (or not) over some amount of generations.

wade and breden found that inbreeding accelerates the spread of altruism genes in a population, and that “genes for altruism” would already be on the increase after just fifty generations if the selection was strong and the genes dominant. populations like arabs in the middle east have certainly been inbreeding closely for well over fifty generations (i’ve over-estimated the length of generations at 25 years/generation to come up with a conservative guess of how long they’ve been inbreeding). and northwest europeans have been doing just the opposite for something like fifty generations or so. the one group is almost freakishly oriented towards the extended-family/clan/tribe; the other, as m.g. miles put it, to the commonweal.

i think there’s been an almost exactly opposite evolutionary history in terms of altruism in these two populations over the last one thousand years (how cool is that?!) — an evolution that’s ongoing, of course, since middle easterners are still inbreeding and northwest europeans are outbreeding more and more.
_____

greg also said:

“Imagine that in much of history, people lived in small groups that often fought with their neighbors. In that sort of situation, selection for group altruism is at least possible, since the group is full of close relatives, while the opponents are less closely related. Both sides are probably members of the same broad ethnic group or race, but that doesn’t matter: only the kinship coefficients matter.

“Suppose that many people emerge on to the stage of history with this impulse to fight for their side: in the past, this always meant closely related people. Now, with the emergence of states, they find themselves fighting in armies, which feel like their side, but are no longer closely related – not a bunch of cousins and such. It could well be that many individuals are actually willing to risk themselves for that state. They’re willing to die for truth, justice and the Assyrian Way. It’s not genetically smart, but their adaptations are wired for past circumstances….

Over time, this misfiring of altruism should decrease. Patriotism burns itself out. Dying for Assyria doesn’t do your close relatives any good at all. Some people will be more prone to this, some less, and that tendency will be heritable. Those with a tendency to volunteer (in the service of anything other than close relatives) should dwindle away over time.

yes. familial altruism (all sorts of behaviors!) can be misapplied in new circumstances. but i think that what greg describes would only occur IF you started off with a population with lots of smaller, somewhat related but inbred sub-groups which had lots of “genes for familial altruism” and then brought them together into a state. maybe like the roman empire. or any of the chinese empires.

BUT there are other sorts of altruism beyond familial altruism — like reciprocal altruism — tit-for-tat sorts of behaviors, for example.

if you started off, not with a population that consisted of sub-groups with lots of “genes for familial altruism,” but rather a population with more “genes for reciprocal altruism,” the patriotism may not be quite so artificial. i suspect — but have no real proof, of course — that northwest europeans are such a population.

to quote myself from over @west hunter [links added]:

“i wondered before, though, if an opposite of these sorts of kin-oriented altruism alleles might be certain types of reciprocal altruism alleles. you know: the ones behind tit-for-tat sort-of behaviors, etc.

“if you have a population that oubreeds A LOT (nw europeans from the middle ages onward) in which family and kin connections are downplayed (prolly because of the outbreeding) — AND you have the ‘right’ sort of selection pressures (something that selects for cooperation and corporate behavior, like medieval manorialism and farming in a cold climate) — then maybe the frequencies for whatever alleles code for reciprocal altruism increase because lots of reciprocal altruism increases your success at reproducing.”

if you kept warring, you would still burn through the most patriotic members of the group (think wwi and wwii), but you wouldn’t be left with clans at the end of the day (see the rest of greg’s comment below). perhaps bunches of self-oriented nuclear families/individuals, but not clans.

speaking of misapplied altruism, i think our reciprocal altruism is now being misapplied in the face of migrating mexicans and muslims and all sorts of third world populations who, on the whole, are not big into reciprocation.
_____

finally, greg said:

“But states are older in some places than others, and some have made greater demands than others. Imagine a region where states have been around longer, a place in which the locals have lived through empire after empire after empire. They should have had the patriotism bred clean out of them. They should feel altruistic about their families, maybe their clan – and nothing else.

yes, they do — middle easterners (the strongest of the inbreeders) and to a lesser extent the chinese (who also have a very long history of inbreeding) feel more altruistic about their families and their clans, but that’s not because they had the altruism/patriotism bred out of them. they’re sooo inbred (the muslims way more than the chinese) that they never had any patriotism in the first place! they have such strong drives for familial altruism that anything like patriotism doesn’t even enter into the picture. feelings of patriotism — nationalism — have historically been strongest amongst northwest europeans — the most outbred, civic, and “corporate” peoples in the world.

i think there are some really cool evolutionary histories that led to these differences in altruistic behaviors — differences which are some of the most profound, innate differences between human populations that are out there — the instinctive feelings guiding us in how to treat the others around us.
_____

see also: Giving Bigotry a Chance and Your country’s not your blood from henry harpending and greg cochran @west hunter (who seem to have caught the inbreeding/outbreeding & altruism bug! (~_^) ).

previously: inbreeding and the evolution of altruistic behavior and four things and which altruism genes? and inclusive inclusive fitness

(note: comments do not require an email. altruism. what’s in it for me?)

even confused beetles do it!

back in the 70s, michael wade ran an altruism experiment with some confused flour beetles.

confused flour beetle larvae have a tendency to cannibalize nearby eggs (’cause they’re confused? (~_^) ). wade wanted to find out if there were any differences in the cannibalization rates between more closely related versus not so closely related hatches. so, he outbred some groups of beetles and inbred other groups to see what would happen.

i don’t have access to the paper related to this research, but here’s a summary of what he found from another one of his papers [pgs. 844-45]:

“In experimental studies of kin selection, using laboratory populations of the flour beetle, Tribolium confusum, Wade (1980a) investigated the effects of discontinuities in population breeding structure on the predictions of kin selection theory. The experiment consisted of synthesizing a strain of T. confusum with genetic variability for the tendency of larvae to cannibalize eggs. Beetles randomly chosen from this strain were then placed in six different treatments, each representing a different population structure, and the evolution of the cannibalism behavior was followed for several generations….

“The population structure was varied by varying both the degree of genetic relatedness between the larval cannibals and their egg victims and the degree of random mating. Depending on the treatment, the genetic relationship between the larvae and eggs was .50 (full-sibs), .25 (half-sibs), or .00 (no relationship). These ‘interaction treatments’ were factorially combined with two different breeding structures, representing the extremes of (1) random mating and (2) within-group mating. Wade (1980a) observed that the egg cannibalism rates, which were initially equal, diverged significantly from one another only in the within-group mating treatments. Specifically, in that treatment where the larvae and eggs were full-sibs, cannibalism rates declined relative to the treatment where the larvae and eggs were unrelated. Cannibalism rates in the half-sib treatment were intermediate. In those treatments with random mating, however, no differences in cannibalism rates were observed regardless of the larval-egg relationship….

“On the basis of this comparison of two extreme mating systems, Wade (1980a) concluded that inbreeding should accelerate the rate of evolution of social behaviors.”

so, inbreeding makes the evolution of altruism (and other social behaviors) easier.
_____

digression. this research with bugs reminded of an amusing story from bill hamilton about doing research at the univ. of michigan and some other bugs [pg. 51]:

“I mathematized them [some models] as far as I could and then used simulation on the Michigan main computer, accessing it either from a huge cave-like room called NUBS in the basement of the herbarium (our nearest-neighbour building) or, later, from a smaller terminal room in my own floor of the Museum of Zoology. NUBS had firebrats plus a spectrum of dazed, earnest, and sometimes frighteningly expert freshmen. Freshmen are first-year university students; firebrats, not arsonists but primitive insects. Smartly striped like football players, the latter dashed swiftly about on the floor under the piles of unwanted output paper, especially favouring that mounded against walls. I think their name’s origin lies in their being commonly found near bakery ovens. The nature of their food there is obvious; but what it was under the paper in NUBS is hard to imagine unless perhaps there were mummified students, dead of their sorrow at their unco-operating programs.”

(^_^)

previously: technical stuff and even plants do it! and more plants playing favorites and even ROBOTS do it! and even monkeys do it and even slime molds do it!

(note: comments do not require an email. the beetles!)

linkfest – 10/09/11

A Moral Gene? — one of ’em.

Copping a Latitude: Genetics Supports Idea Cultural Interaction Was More East to West Than North to South — not to mention genetic interaction.

Study finds crows can distinguish symbols representing quantities

Racial differences in narcissistic tendencies — higher levels of narcissism in black than in whites.

Cannibalism Confirmed Among Ancient Mexican Group“Eating humans ‘crucial’ to spiritual life of the Xiximes people.” – ancient? we’re talking about 1425 a.d. here.

Chinese Kids Feel More Obliged Toward Parents? — from parapundit.

5 Things That Internet Porn Reveals About Our Brains – no big surprises here. except maybe for the number of guys searching for granny pr0n!

Climbing up the social ladder — Mouse study may tell how. — that’s some geeky looking chinese people there! not that there’s anything wrong with that. (~_^)

‘Dumb’ Neanderthals Likely Had a Smart Diet

Birth Order and the Big Five“A new study reports that there is no connection between birth order and Big 5 personality traits.” – @the inductivist.

bonus: Charles Darwin, Economist

bonus bonus: Afghanistan Holds Enormous Bounty of Rare Earths, Minerals“Geologists actually mapping the country’s mineral bounty suspect its prime cache of coveted rare earth elements is considerably larger than the latest estimate lets on”

bonus bonus bonus: Is the Present Better Than the Past? — from everyone’s favorite über-pessimist, john derbyshire.

(note: comments do not require an email. counting crows!)

linkfest – 02/20/11

Gonorrhea Acquires a Piece of Human DNA: First Evidence of Gene Transfer from Human Host to Bacterial Pathogen

Early Britons were cannibals who drank out of cups made from human skulls, horde of remains reveal

How can we enhance girls’ interest in scientific topics?“Results. Both studies indicated that the mean level of girls’ scientific interest was higher when scientific concepts were presented in the context of feminine topics and boys’ level of scientific interests was higher when scientific concepts were presented in the context of masculine topics.” see also: Lessons in cosmetic surgery and ordering clothes online ‘will help turn girls to science’

Study: Native Hawaiians at higher risk of hemorrhagic stroke at younger age

Forecasting Aggression“[C]ertain variables are good predictors that a child will develop aggressive behavior by adolescence. These predictors include poverty, changes in caregivers (as in foster care situations), childhood exposure to abuse and violence, parental substance abuse, maternal smoking during pregnancy, being male, having a lower IQ, and gravitating to conduct-disordered peers…. But all of them together account for only about 40 percent of the probability that a child will develop a conduct disorder in adolescence. What is missing?”

Why Autism Is More Common in Males: Testosterone Affects Gene – RORA.

Exclusive Interview with Prof. Frans De Waal

Too Sexy? Too Bad

Liberal bias: science writing’s elephant in the room?“Does the lack of political diversity among science writers and bloggers risk alienating large portions of the public?” (all the lefties are suddenly discovering that they’re biased! what IS the world coming to?)