Even before the study was started, it was known that some species are not male dominated. Above is a family of Bonobos, and these great apes live in a female dominated society.
Given our assumption that on male dominance, it is perhaps surprising, that only 58% of primate species have dominant males. Perhaps not surprising, as a result, every major primate group had at least one species which was female (or co-dominant) structures.
Indeed, with the gibbons (or lesser apes on this website, to check them out, click here to visit the home page, and then expand the species database, and click on lesser apes) all 5 species examined (there are a total of 20) have been classed as non-male dominant.
Amongst primates, this likelihood is (according to Lewis, the head of the study) relatively easily predicted, as tends to occur in the species, where there is little difference between the size of male and female members.
An example here, is clear: while a male gorilla can weigh twice that of a female, siamang gibbons only have males a couple of kg heavier than females – not surprisingly, while male gorillas are dominant, this is not the case with siamang gibbons.
It should be noted, therefore, that while 4 out the 5 species of great apes are male dominated (we assume this in humans as well, though, in the modern day, it would be hard to argue that we are not more of a co dominant species. Given that likely all the lesser apes (the gibbons) are more or less co-dominant, it follows, that even just looking at the apes, more are female dominant or co-dominant.
Killer whale or Orca: highly intelligent, inquisitive, caring of family, no wonder they fascinate us
The Southern resident killer whale population is on the brink of extinction, but it seems, not for the reason that people thought.
Found along the coast of Washington, Oregon, California, and British Columbia, this population is thought to number just 75, but births are rare, and often end in sadness. 2 calves have been born in the last 2 years, but both have died young. This year, the mother was seen carrying her dead infant for some time (draped across her snout).
It is thought that this population is in danger as a result of a collapse in the Chinook salmon which is an essential part of their diet. However, this theory is defeated, when we look at the Northern resident killer whale population, and notice that they appear to have less access to the salmon. There is lots of shipping noise in their home, which may mean that they are incapable of communicating, which would impact their ability to hunt,
It is true that the origins of their decline lie around 120 years ago, when blackfish (orca as they were then called) were both slaughtered and captured for marine parks. The population on stopped falling fast when Canada banned capture. So is this just the straw that broke the camels back?
Why do captive orca have drooping fins?
Drooping dorsal fins are occasionally seen in the wild, so the split is not totally solid, but it is true, that while most captive orca eventually have a drooping dorsal fin, this is a far rarer site in the wild (while not being unheard of).
The fin is supported by a tough protein called callagen, and it has been suggested that with captive orca spending more time at the surface, the higher temperature from the sun may degrade the protein.
Tahlequah has given birth again (famous for carrying her first calf after it died)
Tahlequah carried a former calf for 17 days after it died, and for more than 1000 miles. This means it is rather lovely to see that she has had another calf. However, the calf has already been observed being pushed by the mother and does not look healthy. The mother is very experienced, so it is hoped that she can succeed, but time will tell. This mother is part of the Southern resident population which i mentioned above, which is small and with few births in recent years. It is therefore very concerning to find that 2 related calves died so close together.
A new video shows a mother orca teaching her calves how to hunt
I should say, that the article I read suggested this was the first time that it had been seen, but the below clip is from several years ago. Even so, it is fascinating to see a mother actively teaching her offspring how to hunt/
Orca have been seen, for the first time off Chile, hunting dolphins
As can be seen from the video above, orca are known to hunt and eat dolphins in various places around the world. However, this behaviour has never been seen in this population, so they had to work out how to do it for themselves. While in the past they have been filmed eating sea lions (and using local boats to hide their approach), they have now been filmed hunting dusky dolphins.
The study was looking at the eating habits of orcas in the southern hemisphere, so as to be able to conserve them more effectively. It suggests that Chile Orca are turning to these food-sources. While Orca have been filmed harrasing or even killing porpoises and dolphins, this is the first time that they have been filmed eating them.
Orca facing uncertain future as the marine zoo shuts
Marineland Antibese near Cannes France, is shutting, after the French government brought in more strict rules of their care. The law was passed in 2021, but comes into force in 2026. It is thought that 90% of the visitors come to see the killer whales and other dolphins, so without them they are not viable.
It is unclear as to what will happen with the Orca. They are from Icelandic waters, but having spent so much time in captivity, would not be able to look after themselves in the wild. A deal had been made to send them to a Japanese park, but there was outcry as their treatment would be worse, so the French government blocked it. There is another zoo in the Canary islands. A facility in Eastern Canada has suggested netting off around 40 hectares of a sea bay for them, where they could live out their lives, in relative comfort, and yet still be looked after by a team of vets and other carers.
Something similar has happened before. Keiko was the orca from the film Free Willy, and was rescued from captivity in 1996 and released into a similar bay in Iceland in 1998. Having spent more time in the wild, though he was able to relearn some skills and in 2002 he left with some wild orca. He swam to Norway, but unfortunately died from an infection in 2003.
While these fuels power much of the creation of electricity around the world, as well as most transport and heating, they all need to either be left in the ground or 100% of their emissions. Below is a roundup of a group of articles of importance on these subjects.
Uk’s £22 billion carbon capture pledge follows surge in lobbying by fossil fuel industry, records show
Sky islands like this one Mount Lico in Mozambique
Sky islands are found across much of Africa. Our experience of sky islands, occurred within the Udzungwa national park in Tanzania. This national park protects a large portion of the Eastern arc mountains. – a chain of mountains which run across Eastern Tanzania.
Africa started drying out around 5500 years ago, and much changed at this point, including a great expansion of the Sahara. However, what is relevant here, is that in many parts of the continent, this caused the rainforests to retreat. More rain falls on higher ground, so you were left with a situation where the tops of hills and mountains remain forested, but the valleys become savannahs. Perhaps one of the most notable effects of this, was to split the worlds mountain gorillas into two populations, one in the Bwindi impenetrable forest in Uganda and the other in the Virunga ecosystem. At their closest point, these two protected areas are only 20km apart (though driving between the two are likely to take longer, as visitor facilities are not at these points). Unfortunately, this space between the two areas has a large human population. This means that the two mountain gorilla populations were stuck on their respective mountain homes, relatively close together, but with no way to cross the gap between.
Not researched until recently, there is a strip of mountains that runs from northern Mozambique to Malawi’s Mount Mulanje. As with the eastern arc mountains, rainforest was preserved on these peaks. These were finally given scientific attention by an internatiional team in the South East Africa Montane Archipelago study. While archipelagos are usually used to refer to a group of islands, it seems apt here. Among these mountains, there are around 30 fragmented pockets of grasslands and evergreen forests that have been largely cut off from each other.
This is perfect for housing unique collections of species, that have found themselves cut off from other habitat that they once roamed. This study, identified 90 species from amphibians(11), reptiles(22), birds(3), mammals(4), butterflies(39) and freshwater crabs(6), alongside 127 species of plant, not found anywhere else on earth. These sky islands are even being considered for their own ecoregion.
Big or small, it is important to protect these little ecological islands, and it should be possible to have tourists visit to give an extra income to locals.
Cattle in a newly deforested area on the edge of more Amazon rainforest – threatened in the future? photo credit Alice Mitchel
The problem with stopping deforestation, is that for the majority of the world we are far removed from rainforests (from where I sit in the UK, I would have to travel 3250km (over 2000 miles) to the nearest rainforest, which is an area on mainland India). Indeed, rainforest is generally something that only survives in developing countries.
This means that, for most people, they either live far removed from the rainforest, and so cant see it impacting them, or they live near a rainforest, but are struggling to provide for their family and those around them. It is quite true that many people in both the first and third world would like the rainforest to survive – indeed, should you talk to people in the west, many are very worried about the survival of the great apes, who are rapidly loosing land.
The problem is simple. Those living in the third world are living hand to mouth, so unless they work in tourism, the rainforest is often an inconvenience that makes life harder.
In 2023 a total of 6.4 hectares of forest were destroyed – more than 25,000 square miles. However, more concerning is the fact that 62.6 million hectares of forest (almost quarter of a million square miles) was degraded – for road building, logging, and forest fires. Degraded land is often less good for carbon storage, as well as conservation of the worlds wild species. It is often, then not long, before someone comes along a removes the rest of the plants so that the land can be used for something else.
And what was this deforestation for (other than logs)? Beef, soy, palm oil paper and nickel.
The Brazilian Amazon is one of the bright spots, where since the election of Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva, deforestation has fallen 62%. Unfortunately, in the same time period, Indonesia’s deforestation is up 57%
It seems hard to see how the world will meet its goal of cutting deforestation to zero by 2030 as most countries have pledged. Also, despite reductions in deforestation, the Amazon has had one of the hardest years in terms of forest fires – something that only gets more likely as rainforests are lost, and climate change increases the temperature in many parts of the world. It is a sad fact, that there is often not a great deal of temperature difference between a rainforest which is functioning, and one that dries out and becomes a fire hazard.
Having said all this… a study in Indonesia has found that controlled low-intensity logging doesn’t have to negatively impact a forest in terms of carbon storage or food availability – this in turn means that much wildlife can survive.
The problem often is that if the land is in private hands, then low- intensity logging is not going to happen. If the landowner has decided to deforest, they will raze the land. In national parks, in theory low intensive logging would be possible, but this would require people to control the logging, and this is the issue that we have in the first place. Unfortunately, despite the pledge by 140 countries, deforestation is coming back.
In a related subject, the Indonesian president Prabowo Subianto has stated that palm oil expansion won’t deforest because palm oil has leaves. There are many issues with this, but perhaps primarily amongst them, when forests are cut down, they are usually replaced with grass lands for grazing cattle – these are also covered in leaves. This is obviously stupid – it may well be a better thing, that the rainforest is going to be replaced with plantations, but it has been shown that palm oil plantations take up a tiny proportion of the carbon that rainforests take up.
In another article, there was a finding that macaques living in palm oil plantations have an alarming infant mortality. Unfortunately, these macaques are not unique in being threatened by palm oil, but others include orangutans, elephants, tigers, pangolins, bonobos, and Irrawaddy dolphins.
While palm oil may be a better vegetable oil than other crops, it still looks like it will lead to us loosing most of our rainforests, unless a grip on this is found.
Large parts of Australia look like the above photo, beautiful in a rugged way, but quite useless for the survival of many of Australia species. Australia has a wide range of habitats, which means that there are many areas which need to be protected.
The problem is, according to this study, declaring an area protected appears to be having little change on what is happened.
1/3 of all land that is set aside for restoration and conservation, has got worse rather than better. Given the fact that so many species are just hanging on to existence, this could be very bad news.
In one area that was studied, the majority of the area was cleared paddock – a serious problem for the koala and grey-headed flying fox which called the area home.
In particular, the idea of this scheme is so called biodiversity offsetting – if you are to clear wildlife habitat, you protect a similar sized area elsewhere.
A study, using detailed 3d surveys, found that road building, and other degradation is causing 5 times as much carbon to be released into the air, than deforestation of the Amazon.
From road building, to selective logging, fires and natural disasters, all these activities are combining to having a greater impact on carbon stocks in the Brazillian Amazon than deforestation. This huge discrepancy is not taken into account by the numbers.
This is also a problem to the world, as this carbon is being radically underestimated, which means that large quantities of our remaining carbon budget are being used up. This new survey used lidar, which gives a more accurate idea of what is left in terms of forest cover.
With the addition of lidar sensors on the ISS, it is possible to scan the worlds forests more often – and given the ISS regular passing over 90% of the earths surface (in each 24 period – as while it orbits on a set path, the earth turns below it) this can be a good tool to keep an eye on the forests of the earth.
Another confirmation (as if it was needed) has been supplied by this study, showing that Indigenous territories and conservation units are both more efficient ways to protect the forest. These cover only 47.5% of the land, but contain just 9.1% of the forest clearing 2.6% of the logging and 9.6% of the fires.
Talking of fires
Fires continue to burn in the Amazon, with over 13,400 having been recorded in 2024. President Lula has called for general mobilization and Brazil has pledged to end deforestation by 2030. This is higher than during Bolsonaro’s time in office, though current cause is a drought, not human mismanagement.
Climate change is causing an increasing change in weather patterns, and reduced rainfall is changing the forests behaviour ( it should be noted, that the forest produces a not -insignificant portion of its rainfallm
The Ross ice shelf is vast, covering 182,000 square miles, it is only slightly smaller than France, and yet a study has shown, that the whole ice shelf can move 40 cm in just 10 minutes. These were generally caused by slips in the Whillans Ice Sheet, which is one of just a few ice flows into and through the area.
The whole shelf was found to move 6-8cm once or twice a day, triggered by these flows moving. This could be the cause of both icequakes, and fractures running through the ice (fractures are important, as they make it more likely that a section of the ice will break off the edge of Antarctica and head into the ocean. While this ice can, on occasion survive a long time – A23a broke of Antarctica in 1986 and has been floating free for much of the time since (except for a decade or so when it grounded); it was estimated to be 400m thick and weigh in at nearly 1 trillion tonnes.
This is a problem for a simple reason. Unlike the north pole, there is land under the ice in Antarctica. This means that while in the north pole, the ice sheet is already in the sea, so its melting cannot increase sea level, Antarctic ice all does increase sea levels.
The Ross ice shelf is known to have collapsed 120,000 years ago during the last interglacial period, and contains enough ice to raise sea levels by 11.5m (this would also cause another 2m of sea level rise because of the glaciers which would no longer be held back).
A Dutch startup, is trialling mitigating this in the Arctic, by pumping sea water onto the ice. This then freezes, thickening the ice. It is possible that this might work in the short term, however, what is clear, is that the only long-term solution, is to stop burning fossil fuels, so as to halt the heating of the earths climate.
These 3 groups do not intermix, and only very seldom, interbreed. These populations are found in the Southern Pacific, Northern Pacific and the North Atlantic and Mediterranean.
This naturally means that the great white sharp is far more at risk of extinction, than if all the great white sharks in the worlds oceans could interbreed.
These areas appear to be bounded by great ocean currents, which are rarely crossed. This is a problem, as if an individual population is lost, it makes it far more likely that distinct genetic information could be lost with it – take the Mediterranean great while shark population, which has seen a dramatic population decline from historic numbers, estimated at between 52% and 96% (areas like the Maramara sea, are known to have lost 96% of their population) depending on which study you read.
This makes local conservation far more essential, and we need to be careful to not loose any individual populations. There has been a great deal of worry for the great white shark population around South Africa, as they pretty much vanished in 2017, but appear to have returned in 2024. The disappearance of the great white was attributed to 2 orca which had become expert in hunting and killing these sharks – it should be remembered, that while great whites are often at the top of the food chain, they are hunted for food by orca. Whether these orca have gone back to eating something else, hence the great white shark return, is a question that does not appear to have been answered as yet.
Whether tropical or not, old growth forests absorb far more carbon than new trees, and can increase this
Old growth trees, have the capacity to greatly increase their growing rate, when there is a lot of carbon dioxide in the air. This has been found, in a study by the University of Birmingham. This is important, as in many places around the world, an area of destroyed natural forest, is considered to be replaceable by a similar area of planted trees, but what is clear, is that in order to merely keep up with the absorption of the original trees, several multiples more of trees need planting. What is worse, is that this is not worrying about the huge amount of carbon that is stored in the trees that are cut down, or within its roots system and the surrounding soil.
To put this in perspective, at the current time, it is estimated that a football pitch of primary forest is lost every 6 seconds.
This experiment was done, by piping extra carbon dioxide into a forest area and monitoring its growth. Unfortunately, this does reinforce the conservationist point of view, that simply planting a similar area of woodland for each bit lost, is not good enough.
English
Afrikaans
Albanian
Amharic
Arabic
Armenian
Azerbaijani
Basque
Belarusian
Bengali
Bosnian
Bulgarian
Catalan
Cebuano
Chichewa
Chinese (Simplified)
Chinese (Traditional)
Corsican
Croatian
Czech
Danish
Dutch
Esperanto
Estonian
Filipino
Finnish
French
Frisian
Galician
Georgian
German
Greek
Gujarati
Haitian Creole
Hausa
Hawaiian
Hebrew
Hindi
Hmong
Hungarian
Icelandic
Igbo
Indonesian
Irish
Italian
Japanese
Javanese
Kannada
Kazakh
Khmer
Korean
Kurdish (Kurmanji)
Kyrgyz
Lao
Latin
Latvian
Lithuanian
Luxembourgish
Macedonian
Malagasy
Malay
Malayalam
Maltese
Maori
Marathi
Mongolian
Myanmar (Burmese)
Nepali
Norwegian
Pashto
Persian
Polish
Portuguese
Punjabi
Romanian
Russian
Samoan
Scottish Gaelic
Serbian
Sesotho
Shona
Sindhi
Sinhala
Slovak
Slovenian
Somali
Spanish
Sundanese
Swahili
Swedish
Tajik
Tamil
Telugu
Thai
Turkish
Ukrainian
Urdu
Uzbek
Vietnamese
Welsh
Xhosa
Yiddish
Yoruba
Zulu
