rhamphotheca:

New Research Finds That Humans Are Responsible for Extinction of Giant Birds on New Zealand
by Jeremy Hance
Moas were a diverse group of flightless birds that ruled over New Zealand up to the arrival of humans, the biggest of these mega-birds stood around 3.5 meters (12 feet) with outstretched neck. While the whole moa family—comprised of nine species—vanished shortly after the arrival of people on New Zealand in the 13th Century, scientists have long debated why the big birds went extinct. Some theories contend that the birds were already in decline due to environmental changes or volcanic activity before humans first stepped on New Zealand’s beaches. But a study released today in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS) finds no evidence of said decline, instead pointing the finger squarely at us.  To find the moa’s smoking gun, scientists analyzed two different sets of DNA from 281 specimens made up of four species: the South Island giant moa (Dinornis robustus), the biggest of the family; the heavy-footed moa (Pachyornis elephantopus); the eastern moa (Emeus crassus); and the coastal moa (Euryapteryx curtus). Instead of showing a slow, genetic decline, the DNA told a different story: moas were thriving even as humans arrived…
(read more: MongaBay)
illustration by MIchael B.H./Wikimedia Commons

rhamphotheca:

New Research Finds That Humans Are Responsible for Extinction of Giant Birds on New Zealand

by Jeremy Hance

Moas were a diverse group of flightless birds that ruled over New Zealand up to the arrival of humans, the biggest of these mega-birds stood around 3.5 meters (12 feet) with outstretched neck. While the whole moa family—comprised of nine species—vanished shortly after the arrival of people on New Zealand in the 13th Century, scientists have long debated why the big birds went extinct. Some theories contend that the birds were already in decline due to environmental changes or volcanic activity before humans first stepped on New Zealand’s beaches. But a study released today in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS) finds no evidence of said decline, instead pointing the finger squarely at us.

To find the moa’s smoking gun, scientists analyzed two different sets of DNA from 281 specimens made up of four species: the South Island giant moa (Dinornis robustus), the biggest of the family; the heavy-footed moa (Pachyornis elephantopus); the eastern moa (Emeus crassus); and the coastal moa (Euryapteryx curtus). Instead of showing a slow, genetic decline, the DNA told a different story: moas were thriving even as humans arrived…

(read more: MongaBay)

illustration by MIchael B.H./Wikimedia Commons

(via scientificillustration)

christineneo:

I’ve always found something incredibly fascinating about the cross section and cellular structure of plants and flowers, how familiar and unfamiliar they are at the same time.

christineneo:

I’ve always found something incredibly fascinating about the cross section and cellular structure of plants and flowers, how familiar and unfamiliar they are at the same time.

(via scientificillustration)

roachasaurus:

Working on some anteaters

(via scientificillustration)

omgthatdress:

Evening Dress
1925
The Metropolitan Museum of Art

omgthatdress:

Evening Dress

1925

The Metropolitan Museum of Art

feathersandbeaks:

"The Common Poorwill (Phalaenoptilus nuttallii) is a nocturnal bird of the family Caprimulgidae, the nightjars. It is found from British Columbia and southeastern Alberta, through the western United States to northern Mexico. The bird’s habitat is dry, open areas with grasses or shrubs, and even stony desert slopes with very little vegetation.
Many northern birds migrate to winter within the breeding range in central and western Mexico, though some remain further north. Remarkably, the Common Poorwill is the only bird known to go into torpor for extended periods (weeks to months).[2] This happens on the southern edge of its range in the United States, where it spends much of the winter inactive, concealed in piles of rocks. This behavior has been reported in California and New Mexico. Such an extended period of torpor is close to a state of hibernation, not known among other birds. It was described definitively by Dr. Edmund Jaeger in 1948 based on a Poorwill he discovered hibernating in the Chuckwalla Mountains of California in 1946.”
(Source: Common Poorwill)
The extended period of torpor is highly unusual — really interesting life history trait!

feathersandbeaks:

"The Common Poorwill (Phalaenoptilus nuttallii) is a nocturnal bird of the family Caprimulgidae, the nightjars. It is found from British Columbia and southeastern Alberta, through the western United States to northern Mexico. The bird’s habitat is dry, open areas with grasses or shrubs, and even stony desert slopes with very little vegetation.

Many northern birds migrate to winter within the breeding range in central and western Mexico, though some remain further north. Remarkably, the Common Poorwill is the only bird known to go into torpor for extended periods (weeks to months).[2] This happens on the southern edge of its range in the United States, where it spends much of the winter inactive, concealed in piles of rocks. This behavior has been reported in California and New Mexico. Such an extended period of torpor is close to a state of hibernation, not known among other birds. It was described definitively by Dr. Edmund Jaeger in 1948 based on a Poorwill he discovered hibernating in the Chuckwalla Mountains of California in 1946.”

(Source: Common Poorwill)

The extended period of torpor is highly unusual — really interesting life history trait!

(via scientificillustration)

medicalillustration:

Week 30: surgical illustration of thenar trauma | original sketch in pencil and then I cleaned up everything in photoshop

Very thankful for all the anatomy textbooks and skeletal models that are lying around in the studio. I still need to shade everything in but it’s getting there. Slooooow and steady…

(via scientificillustration)

ooksaidthelibrarian:

n68_w1150 by BioDivLibrary on Flickr.
Via Flickr: Fabre’s book of insects,. New York :Dodd, Mead and company,1921..biodiversitylibrary.org/page/8611623

ooksaidthelibrarian:

n68_w1150 by BioDivLibrary on Flickr.

Via Flickr:
Fabre’s book of insects,.
New York :Dodd, Mead and company,1921..
biodiversitylibrary.org/page/8611623

(via scientificillustration)

justanothermasterpiece:

Hans Hoffman.

justanothermasterpiece:

Hans Hoffman.

blakegopnik:

THE DAILY PIC: I spotted this strange little 1952 piece at the Germaine Richier show that opened yesterday at Dominique Lévy and Galerie Perrotin in New York.  Although unknown in the States – her last American show was at the Martha Jackson Gallery in 1957! – at home in Europe Richier counts as a superstar of postwar French sculpture, up there (almost) with Louise Bourgeois. The many bronzes at Levy and Perotin show Richier in pitch-perfect command of the era’s angstful existentialism.  That’s why I prefer the couple of lead works that have also been included: They are absolutely peculiar and somehow wrong – in all the right ways. There’s something brilliantly wrongheaded, for instance, about including a girlish yellow stone in what is otherwise a mess of Dubbufetian slag.
No matter how coarse a bronze may look, you always know it’s the product of extreme, self-conscious refinement. No one dares claim that for Richier’s leads.  
For a full inventory of past Daily Pics visit blakegopnik.com/archive

blakegopnik:

THE DAILY PIC: I spotted this strange little 1952 piece at the Germaine Richier show that opened yesterday at Dominique Lévy and Galerie Perrotin in New York.  Although unknown in the States – her last American show was at the Martha Jackson Gallery in 1957! – at home in Europe Richier counts as a superstar of postwar French sculpture, up there (almost) with Louise Bourgeois. The many bronzes at Levy and Perotin show Richier in pitch-perfect command of the era’s angstful existentialism.  That’s why I prefer the couple of lead works that have also been included: They are absolutely peculiar and somehow wrong – in all the right ways. There’s something brilliantly wrongheaded, for instance, about including a girlish yellow stone in what is otherwise a mess of Dubbufetian slag.

No matter how coarse a bronze may look, you always know it’s the product of extreme, self-conscious refinement. No one dares claim that for Richier’s leads.  

For a full inventory of past Daily Pics visit blakegopnik.com/archive