Tempo de vôo entre uma fonte e um detetor observado de um satélite

segunda-feira, outubro 31, 2011

Time-of-flight between a Source and a Detector observed from 
a Satellite

Ronald A.J. van Elburg

(Submitted on 12 Oct 2011 (v1), last revised 17 Oct 2011 (this version, v3))

Source/Fonte: Technology Review

Michelson and Morley showed that an interference pattern is reference-frame independent. However, the distance between a particle's production and detection site is reference-frame dependent due to Lorentz contraction and detector movement. For the OPERA experiment detector movement in the satellite reference frame leads to corrections which can account for most of the $\pm 60$ ns discrepancy between expected and observed time of flight.

Comments: 4 pages; Version 3: Rephrased large parts of the paper. I try to respond to latest developments on my website

Subjects: General Physics (physics.gen-ph)

MSC classes: 83B05

Cite as: arXiv:1110.2685v3 [physics.gen-ph]

Submission historyFrom: R. A. J. van Elburg [view email
[v1] Wed, 12 Oct 2011 15:47:03 GMT (4kb)
[v2] Thu, 13 Oct 2011 21:49:31 GMT (4kb)
[v3] Mon, 17 Oct 2011 12:34:00 GMT (4kb)

Por que os pica-paus não sofrem fraturas em suas cabeças?

sábado, outubro 29, 2011

Why Do Woodpeckers Resist Head Impact Injury: A Biomechanical Investigation

Lizhen Wang1,2, Jason Tak-Man Cheung3, Fang Pu1, Deyu Li1, Ming Zhang2*, Yubo Fan1*

1 Key Laboratory for Biomechanics and Mechanobiology of Ministry of Education, School of Biological Science and Medical Engineering, Beihang University, Beijing, People's Republic of China, 2 Department of Health Technology and Informatics, the Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hong Kong, 3 Li Ning Sports Science Research Center, Beijing, People's Republic of China


Head injury is a leading cause of morbidity and death in both industrialized and developing countries. It is estimated that brain injuries account for 15% of the burden of fatalities and disabilities, and represent the leading cause of death in young adults. Brain injury may be caused by an impact or a sudden change in the linear and/or angular velocity of the head. However, the woodpecker does not experience any head injury at the high speed of 6–7 m/s with a deceleration of 1000 g when it drums a tree trunk. It is still not known how woodpeckers protect their brain from impact injury. In order to investigate this, two synchronous high-speed video systems were used to observe the pecking process, and the force sensor was used to measure the peck force. The mechanical properties and macro/micro morphological structure in woodpecker's head were investigated using a mechanical testing system and micro-CT scanning. Finite element (FE) models of the woodpecker's head were established to study the dynamic intracranial responses. The result showed that macro/micro morphology of cranial bone and beak can be recognized as a major contributor to non-impact-injuries. This biomechanical analysis makes it possible to visualize events during woodpecker pecking and may inspire new approaches to prevention and treatment of human head injury.

Citation: Wang L, Cheung JT-M, Pu F, Li D, Zhang M, et al. (2011) Why Do Woodpeckers Resist Head Impact Injury: A Biomechanical Investigation. PLoS ONE 6(10): e26490. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0026490

Editor: Mark Briffa, University of Plymouth, United Kingdom

Received: April 11, 2011; Accepted: September 28, 2011; Published: October 26, 2011

Copyright: © 2011 Wang et al. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

Funding: This project was funded by National Natural Science Foundation of China under the Grant 10925208, 11120101001 (http://www.nsfc.gov.cn/Portal0/default12​4.htm) and by the Hong Kong Polytechnic University under the grant G-U624 (http://www.polyu.edu.hk/cpa/polyu/index.​php). The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

Competing interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

* E-mail: ming.zhang@polyu.edu.hk (MZ);

O que a Grande Mídia, que odeia aos judeus, não noticiou

sexta-feira, outubro 28, 2011



Um prisioneiro judeu trocado por mil terroristas palestinos assassinos. Em Israel nós celebramos a vida, porque sagrada, já os palestinos...

Hazak, hazak, hazak Israel!!!


Para, por e com Israel, sempre!!! Apesar de [preencher as lacunas]

Risco de tumores ovarianos duvidosos e invasivos, após a estimulação ovariana para fertilização in vitro em uma grande número de pacientes holandesas

Risk of borderline and invasive ovarian tumours after ovarian stimulation for in vitro fertilization in a large Dutch cohort

F.E. van Leeuwen1,*, et al

Author Affiliations

1Department of Epidemiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute,Plesmanlaan 121, 1066 CX Amsterdam, The Netherlands
*Correspondence address. E-mail: f.v.leeuwen@nki.nl

Received March 10, 2011.
Revision received July 13, 2011.
Accepted September 2, 2011.



Long-term effects of ovarian stimulation for IVF on the risk of ovarian malignancies are unknown.


We identified a nationwide historic cohort of 19 146 women who received IVF treatment in the Netherlands between 1983 and 1995, and a comparison group of 6006 subfertile women not treated with IVF. In 1997–1999, data on reproductive risk factors were obtained from 65% of women and data on subfertility (treatment) were obtained from the medical records. The incidence of ovarian malignancies (including borderline ovarian tumours) through 2007 was assessed through linkage with disease registries. The risk of ovarian malignancies in the IVF group was compared with risks in the general population and the subfertile comparison group.


After a median follow-up of 14.7 years, the risk of borderline ovarian tumours was increased in the IVF group compared with the general population [standardized incidence ratio (SIR) = 1.76; 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.16–2.56]. The overall SIR for invasive ovarian cancer was not significantly elevated, but increased with longer follow-up after first IVF (P= 0.02); the SIR was 3.54 (95% CI = 1.62–6.72) after 15 years. The risks of borderline ovarian tumours and of all ovarian malignancies combined in the IVF group were significantly increased compared with risks in the subfertile comparison group (hazard ratios = 4.23; 95% CI = 1.25–14.33 and 2.14; 95% CI = 1.07–4.25, respectively, adjusted for age, parity and subfertility cause).


Ovarian stimulation for IVF may increase the risk of ovarian malignancies, especially borderline ovarian tumours. More large cohort studies are needed to confirm these findings and to examine the effect of IVF treatment characteristics.

Key words ovarian stimulation, ovarian malignancies, fertility drugs, infertility, in vitro fertilization

© The Author 2011. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology.

This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/2.5), which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.


Darwin, mano! 450 mil visitantes a este blog! Obrigado, cara!!!

quinta-feira, outubro 27, 2011

Source/Fonte: ClustrMaps

450 mil visitantes nos cinco continentes! Isso não é marca obtida por qualquer blog não! E aí, alguma linha na Folha de São Paulo sobre este feito? Nenhuma!!! Não faz mal, eu nem quero aparecer naquele jornal mesmo (mentira, cruzei os dedinhos pedindo para ser entrevistado pela editoria de ciência da FSP, hehehe).

Darwin, mano! 450 mil visitantes. Obrigado, cara! Valeu!!!

Declínio da violência: dominando o diabo dentro de nós

Decline of violence: Taming the devil within us

Steven Pinker

Nature, 478, 309-311 (20 October 2011) 

First paragraph: "The twentieth century was the bloodiest in history." This frequently asserted claim is popular among the romantic, the religious, the nostalgic and the cynical. They use it to impugn a range of ideas that flourished in that century, including science, reason, secularism, Darwinism and the ideal of progress. But this historical factoid is rarely backed up by numbers, and it is almost certainly an illusion. We are prone to think that modern life is more violent because historical records from recent eras are more complete, and because the human mind overestimates the frequency of vivid, memorable events. We also care more about violence today. Ancient histories are filled with glorious conquests that today would be classified as genocide, and the leaders known to history as So-and-So the Great would today be prosecuted as war criminals.

FREE PDF GRATIS [Courtesy/Cortesia: Steve Pinker]

Arquivo de publicações científicas da Royal Society com livre acesso permanentemente

quarta-feira, outubro 26, 2011

Royal Society journal archive made permanently free to access

26 October 2011

The Royal Society has today announced that its world-famous historicaljournal archive – which includes the first ever peer-reviewed scientific journal – has been made permanently free to access online.

Around 60,000 historical scientific papers are accessible via a fully searchable online archive, with papers published more than 70 years ago now becoming freely available. 

The Royal Society is the world’s oldest scientific publisher, with the first edition of Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society appearing in 1665. Henry Oldenburg – Secretary of the Royal Society and first Editor of the publication – ensured that it was “licensed by the council of the society, being first reviewed by some of the members of the same”, thus making it the first ever peer-reviewed journal.

Philosophical Transactions had to overcome early setbacks including plague, the Great Fire of London and even the imprisonment of Oldenburg, but against the odds the publication survived to the present day. Its foundation would eventually be recognised as one of the most pivotal moments of the scientific revolution.

Professor Uta Frith FRS, Chair of the Royal Society library committee, said: “I’m delighted that the Royal Society is continuing to increase access to its wonderful resources by opening up its publishing archives. The release of these papers opens a fascinating window on the history of scientific progress over the last few centuries and will be of interest to anybody who wants to understand how science has evolved since the days of the Royal Society’s foundation.”

Treasures in the archive include Isaac Newton’s first published scientific paper, geological work by a young Charles Darwin, and Benjamin Franklin’s celebrated account of his electrical kite experiment. And nestling amongst these illustrious papers, readers willing to delve a little deeper into the archive may find some undiscovered gems from the dawn of the scientific revolution – including accounts of monstrous calves, grisly tales of students being struck by lightning, and early experiments on tohow to cool drinks “without the Help of Snow, Ice, Haile, Wind or Niter, and That at Any Time of the Year.”

Henry Oldenburg writes in his introduction to the first edition: “...it is therefore thought fit to employ the Press, as the most proper way to gratify those, whose...delight in the advancement of Learning and profitable Discoveries, doth entitle them to the knowledge of what this Kingdom, or other parts of the World, do, from time to time, afford...”, going on to state that potential contributors are: “...invited and encouraged to search, try, and find out new things, impart their knowledge to one another, and contribute what they can to the Grand design of improving natural knowledge, and perfecting all Philosophical Arts, and Sciences.”

Thomas Huxley FRS wrote in 1870: “If all the books in the world, except the Philosophical Transactions, were to be destroyed, it is safe to say that the foundations of physical science would remain unshaken, and that the vast intellectual progress of the last two centuries would be largely, though incompletely, recorded.”

The move is being made as part of the Royal Society’s ongoing commitment to open access in scientific publishing. Opening of the archive is being timed to coincide with Open Access Week, and also comes soon after the Royal Society announced its first ever fully open access journal, Open Biology.

Search the journal archive here.

Opinião do especialista em Oriente Médio

Authorized use/Uso autorizado
Yaakov Kirschen - The Dry Bones Blog
1. Esperar a poeira se assentar no Oriente Médio de hoje...

2. é realmente frustrante porque...

3. cada dia parece que há...

4. mais e mais poeira!!!


Para, por e com Israel, sempre! Apesar de [preencher as lacunas]

População de celacanto geneticamente distante ao largo da costa da Tanzânia

terça-feira, outubro 25, 2011

Genetically distinct coelacanth population off the northern Tanzanian coast

Author Affiliations

aGraduate School of Bioscience and Biotechnology, Tokyo Institute of Technology, Midori-ku, Yokohama 226-8501, Japan;
bDepartment of Integrative Biology, University of California, Berkeley, CA 94720-3140;
cTanzania Fisheries Research Institute, P.O. Box 9750, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania;
dAquamarine Fukushima, Onahama, Iwaki, Fukushima 971-8101, Japan;
eDepartment of Ecology and Evolution, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL 60637; and
fBiodiversity Research Center, Academia Sinica, Taipei 115, Taiwan

Contributed by Wen-Hsiung Li, September 26, 2011 (sent for review May 29, 2011)


Since the sensational discovery of a living coelacanth off the east coast of South Africa, the geographic distribution of viable coelacanth populations has been a subject of debate. In the past, the coelacanths off the African mainland were thought to be strays from the Comoros because most coelacanths captured were caught in the waters surrounding the Comoros archipelagos. However, in recent years, a large number of coelacanths were captured off the coast of Tanzania, including nine living specimens observed in a remotely operated vehicles survey. Thus, it is possible that there is a reproducing population inhabiting waters off the Tanzania coast. We have sequenced the complete mitochondrial genomes of 21 Tanzanian and 2 Comoran coelacanths and analyzed these sequences together with two additional full mitochondrial genomes and 47 d-loop sequences from the literature. We found that the coelacanth population off the northern Tanzanian coast is genetically differentiated from those of the southern Tanzania coast and the Comoros, whereas no significant genetic differentiation occurs between the latter two localities. The differentiation between the northern and southern Tanzanian coast populations is consistent with the hypothesis that the existence of northward-flowing ocean current along the Tanzanian coast may reduce or prevent gene flow from the northern to the southern population. Finally, we estimated that the population localized to the southern Tanzanian coast and the Comoros diverged from other coelacanths at least 200,000 y ago. These results indicate that the coelacanths off the northern Tanzania coast are not strays but a genetically distinct group. Our study provides important information for the conservation of this threatened “living fossil.”


1M.N. and T.S. contributed to this work.

2Present address: Laboratory of Wild Animals, Department of Human and Animal-Plant Relationships, Faculty of Agriculture, Tokyo University of Agriculture, 1737 Funako, Atsugi-shi, Kanagawa 243-0034, Japan.
3To whom correspondence may be addressed. E-mail:nokada@bio.titech.ac.jp or whli@uchicago.edu.

Author contributions: W.-H.L. and N.O. designed research; M.N., T.S., M.A., S.I.M., Y.L.B., B.P.N., M.I., and Y.A. performed research; M.N., T.S., J.J.E., and W.-H.L. analyzed data; and M.N., J.J.E., W.-H.L., and N.O. wrote the paper.

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Data deposition: The sequences reported in this paper have been deposited in the GenBank database (accession nos.AP012177AP012199).

This article contains supporting information online atwww.pnas.org/lookup/suppl/doi:10.1073/pnas.1115675108/-/DCSupplemental.

Freely available online through the PNAS open access option.

Já estamos prontos para descartar a teoria do Big Bang?

Já estamos prontos para descartar a teoria do Big Bang?

Com informaçoes da PhysicsWorld - 22/10/2011Mais importante do que a teoria em si é a demonstração de que o Sol pode ser usado como laboratório para teorias cosmológicas.[Imagem: NASA]

Teoria de Eddington

Um grupo de físicos portugueses está propondo que o Sol seja usado para testar algumas teorias alternativas à Teoria da Relatividade Geral de Einstein.

Jordi Casanellas e seus colegas da Universidade Técnica de Lisboa afirmam que uma teoria proposta há mais de um século por Arthur Eddington não foi totalmente descartada pelas observações recentes dos neutrinos solares e das ondas acústicas solares.

E, segundo eles, uma variante da teoria de Eddington pode ajudar a resolver algumas das deficiências das teorias atuais.

Problemas da Teoria da Relatividade

A Teoria da Relatividade Geral, que descreve a gravidade como a curvatura do espaço-tempo por corpos celestes de grande massa, tem passado por todos os testes aos quais tem sido submetida ao longo dos anos.

Mas isto não significa que ela não tenha problemas.

Além da bem conhecida dificuldade de unificação com a mecânica quântica e das ainda pendentes explicações para a matéria e a energia escuras, há o problema bem mais sério das singularidades, onde as leis da física simplesmente se esfacelam.

Buracos negros e Big Bang

Em 2010, Máximo Bañados (Universidade Católica do Chile) e Pedro Ferreira (Universidade de Oxford) propuseram uma variante da teoria de Eddington que adiciona um termo gravitacional repulsivo para a teoria da relatividade.

Mas o que parece ser a simples adição de mais um membro a uma equação tem um efeito devastador sobre o entendimento mais geral do cosmo.

Esse termo gravitacional repulsivo não apenas elimina a necessidade das singularidades - ele descarta a formação dos buracos negros e a ideia de que o Universo teria surgido de um Big Bang.

Sol como laboratório

Quando tenta interpretar um campo gravitacional em um vácuo, essa teoria inspirada em Eddington é equivalente à teoria da relatividade. Mas ela prevê efeitos diferentes para a gravidade agindo no interior da matéria.

O lugar ideal para testar essas diferenças seria o interior de estrelas de nêutrons.

Embora se acredite que estrelas de nêutrons possam acordar o vácuo quântico, não se sabe o suficiente a respeito delas para comparar as duas teorias. Por exemplo, recentemente foi encontrada uma estrela de nêutrons cuja existência os astrônomos acreditavam ser impossível.

Entra em cena então a proposta de Casanellas e seus colegas portugueses: usar o Sol.

Mesmo sendo uma fonte de gravidade muito menos extrema do que uma estrela de nêutrons, o funcionamento do interior do Sol já é razoavelmente bem descrito pelos modelos solares.

O grupo de Casanellas calculou que, mesmo em sua forma newtoniana, não-relativística, a teoria derivada de Eddington prevê diferenças quantificáveis nas emissões solares em comparação com a teoria gravitacional padrão, desenvolvida por Einstein.

Constante gravitacional na matéria

O termo gravitacional repulsivo na teoria de Bañados e Ferreira, afirmam eles, seria equivalente a dar um valor diferente para a constante gravitacional no interior da matéria.

E intensidades diferentes da gravidade no interior do Sol devem resultar em diferenças em sua temperatura interna, uma vez que se assume que o Sol está em equilíbrio hidrostático - a pressão para dentro de sua massa é equilibrada pela pressão para fora gerada pelas reações de fusão nuclear em seu interior.

Uma temperatura mais elevada implica uma maior taxa de fusão nuclear, o que, por sua vez, implica em uma maior taxa de emissão de neutrinos solares, algo diretamente mensurável.

E não apenas isso: uma força da gravidade maior no interior do Sol implica em uma variação na sua distribuição de densidade, o que deve modificar a propagação das ondas acústicas em seu interior, o que pode ser medido com as técnicas da heliossismologia.

Todos esses dados já estão disponíveis. Contudo, eles colocam sérias restrições à nova teoria, impondo limites muito estreitos para seus valores.

Mas não a descartam, afirmam os pesquisadores, salientando que os dados apenas colocam limites para a nova teoria.

Um teste mais rigoroso exigiria melhorias nos modelos solares, incluindo a abundância de hélio na superfície do Sol, ou medições mais precisas dos fluxos de neutrinos.

Para apenas fazer o teste já é por si um enorme avanço, demonstrando que nossa estrela - tão pequena em termos cósmicos - pode ser usada para fazer experimentos de teorias com potencial de explicação em termos universais.

Esfera no buraco

Paolo Pani, um dos membros da equipe, sugere um teste alternativo, aqui na Terra mesmo.

Para ele, tanto a teoria derivada de Eddington, quanto outras teorias alternativas da gravidade, poderiam ser testadas medindo a atração gravitacional entre uma esfera de metal inserida em um buraco no solo e a massa da Terra ao seu redor.

A ideia é fazer um buraco onde coubesse apenas a esfera, e nada mais, com uma precisão gigantesca, de forma que a medição mostrasse apenas a intensidade da gravidade no interior da matéria, e não no vazio ao seu redor - no caso, no ar.

Entretanto, o próprio Pani concorda que projetar esse experimento apresenta desafios consideráveis.

Não poderia ser diferente para alguém que tenha a pretensão de desbancar uma das teorias de maior sucesso até hoje.


Testing alternative theories of gravity using the Sun
Jordi Casanellas, Paolo Pani, Ilídio Lopes, Vitor Cardoso


A teoria geral da evolução de Darwin através da seleção natural  e de n mecanismos evolucionários [de A a Z] é apregoada como sendo a teoria científica mais corroborada assim como a lei da gravidade. NADA MAIS FALSO!!!

Diferentemente das teorias e modelos científicos de longo alcance histórico das ciências duras como o Big Bang, que se cogita seu abandono por razões dos problemas científicos que não resolve, a teoria da evolução de Darwin também é uma teoria científica de longo alcance histórico tem muitos problemas, especialmente no contexto de justificação teórica, mas é uma teoria que a Nomenklatura científica se recusa debater a mera possibilidade do seu descarte.

O Big Bang é mais corroborado em muitas de suas predições enquanto que as especulações transformistas de Darwin não são. Vamos lá, Nomenklatura científica ser mais honesta cientificamente falando, pois o status epistêmico de Darwin hoje é de total FALÊNCIA EPISTÊMICA na sua explicação da origem das espécies!!!

Filogenia de mamíferos revela mudança de diversificação recente

segunda-feira, outubro 24, 2011

Mammalian phylogeny reveals recent diversification rate shifts

Tanja Stadler1

Author Affiliations

Institut für Integrative Biologie, Eidgenössiche Technische Hochschule Zurich, 8092 Zurich, Switzerland

Edited by David M. Hillis, University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX, and approved March 2, 2011 (received for review November 9, 2010)


Phylogenetic trees of present-day species allow investigation of the rate of evolution that led to the present-day diversity. A recent analysis of the mammalian phylogeny challenged the view of explosive mammalian evolution after the Cretaceous–Tertiary (K/T) boundary (65 Mya). However, due to lack of appropriate methods, the diversification (speciation minus extinction) rates in the more recent past of mammalian evolution could not be determined. In this paper, I provide a method that reveals that the tempo of mammalian evolution did not change until ∼33 Mya. This constant period was followed by a peak of diversification rates between 33 and 30 Mya. Thereafter, diversification rates remained high and constant until 8.55 Mya. Diversification rates declined significantly at 8.55 and 3.35 Mya. Investigation of mammalian subgroups (marsupials, placentals, and the six largest placental subgroups) reveals that the diversification rate peak at 33–30 Mya is mainly driven by rodents, cetartiodactyla, and marsupials. The recent diversification rate decrease is significant for all analyzed subgroups but eulipotyphla, cetartiodactyla, and primates. My likelihood approach is not limited to mammalian evolution. It provides a robust framework to infer diversification rate changes and mass extinction events in phylogenies, reconstructed from, e.g., present-day species or virus data. In particular, the method is very robust toward noise and uncertainty in the phylogeny and can account for incomplete taxon sampling.

macroevolution, maximum-likelihood inference, speciation rates


Author contributions: T.S. designed research, performed research, contributed new reagents/analytic tools, analyzed data, and wrote the paper.

The author declares no conflict of interest.

This article is a PNAS Direct Submission.

This article contains supporting information online at

Inferindo processos de especiação e extinção de dados de espécies existentes

Inferring speciation and extinction processes from extant species data

Tanja Stadler1

Author Affiliations

Institut für Integrative Biologie, Eidgenössiche Technische Hochschule Zürich, 8092 Zürich, Switzerland

Querying the past is hard. Speciation and extinction processes are on a scale of thousands to millions of years. Thus, they are most often studied by reconstructing the evolutionary past. This past is reconstructed using phylogenetic methods either on the basis of data from living species or by directly examining the fossil record. Robust methods for inferring the evolutionary past purely on the basis of living species would allow us to understand speciation and extinction processes for the large number of groups without a good fossil record.

Generally, studies using living species infer lower extinction rates than the rates suggested by the fossil record ( 1, 2). A new study in PNAS ( 3) suggests that this mismatch is due to our use of oversimplified models of speciation and extinction.

Fifteen years ago, Nee et al. ( 4) presented the first method to infer speciation and extinction rates on the basis of “reconstructed” phylogenies, i.e., phylogenies inferred on only extant species ( Fig. 1 A and B ). This first likelihood method relied on the idea that lineages in a reconstructed phylogeny accumulate through time with rate λ − μ (where λ is the speciation rate and μ is the extinction rate) and accumulate in the very recent past with rate λ. The change in rate of lineage accumulation from λ − μ to λ, called the “pull-of-the-present” (5), allows us to estimate both λ and μ given only data from living species.

Fig. 1. 

( A and B) Complete phylogeny ( A) with associated reconstructed phylogeny ( B), which is obtained by suppressing all extinct lineages. ( C– G)Models for speciation and extinction. Red denotes a fast rate, purple an intermediate rate, and blue a slow rate of speciation. C–E indicate the three models accounting for rate heterogeneity through time and across subclades: ( C) Morlon …

Reconciliando as filogenias moleculares com o registro fóssil

Reconciling molecular phylogenies with the fossil record

Hélène Morlon a,b,1, Todd L. Parsons b, and Joshua B. Plotkin b

Author Affiliations

aCenter for Applied Mathematics, Ecole Polytechnique, 91128 Palaiseau, France; and
bBiology Department, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104

Edited* by Robert E. Ricklefs, University of Missouri, St. Louis, MO, and approved August 1, 2011 (received for review February 14, 2011)


Historical patterns of species diversity inferred from phylogenies typically contradict the direct evidence found in the fossil record. According to the fossil record, species frequently go extinct, and many clades experience periods of dramatic diversity loss. However, most analyses of molecular phylogenies fail to identify any periods of declining diversity, and they typically infer low levels of extinction. This striking inconsistency between phylogenies and fossils limits our understanding of macroevolution, and it undermines our confidence in phylogenetic inference. Here, we show that realistic extinction rates and diversity trajectories can be inferred from molecular phylogenies. To make this inference, we derive an analytic expression for the likelihood of a phylogeny that accommodates scenarios of declining diversity, time-variable rates, and incomplete sampling; we show that this likelihood expression reliably detects periods of diversity loss using simulation. We then study the cetaceans (whales, dolphins, and porpoises), a group for which standard phylogenetic inferences are strikingly inconsistent with fossil data. When the cetacean phylogeny is considered as a whole, recently radiating clades, such as the Balaneopteridae, Delphinidae, Phocoenidae, and Ziphiidae, mask the signal of extinctions. However, when isolating these groups, we infer diversity dynamics that are consistent with the fossil record. These results reconcile molecular phylogenies with fossil data, and they suggest that most extant cetaceans arose from four recent radiations, with a few additional species arising from clades that have been in decline over the last ∼10 Myr.


1To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail:helene.morlon@polytechnique.edu.

Author contributions: H.M. and J.B.P. designed research; H.M., T.L.P., and J.B.P. performed research; H.M. and T.L.P. contributed new reagents/analytic tools; H.M. analyzed data; and H.M., T.L.P., and J.B.P. wrote the paper.

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

See Commentary on page 16145.

*This Direct Submission article had a prearranged editor.

This article contains supporting information online at

As bactérias se comunicam entre si: Bonnie Bassler diz como

Fermilab Lecture Series presents:

How Bacteria Talk to Each Other

Dr. Bonnie Bassler, Princeton University

Friday, November 11, 2011 @ 8 p.m.

Tickets - $7

Bacteria communicate with one another using small chemical molecules that they release into the environment. These molecules travel from cell to cell and the bacteria have receptors on their surfaces that allow them to detect and respond to the build up of the molecules. This process of cell-to-cell communication in bacteria is called “Quorum Sensing” and it allows bacteria to synchronize behavior on a population-wide scale. Bacterial behaviors controlled by quorum sensing are usually ones that are unproductive when undertaken by an individual bacterium acting alone but become effective when undertaken in unison by the group. For example, quorum sensing controls virulence, sporulation, and the exchange of DNA. Thus, quorum sensing is a mechanism that allows bacteria to function as multi-cellular organisms. Current biomedical research is focused on the development of novel anti-bacterial therapies aimed at interfering with quorum sensing. Such therapies could be used to control bacterial pathogenicity.

Bonnie Bassler is a member of the National Academy of Sciences and the American Academy of Arts and Sciences. She is a Howard Hughes Medical Institute Investigator and the Squibb Professor of Molecular Biology at Princeton University. Bassler received a B.S. in Biochemistry from the University of California at Davis, and a Ph.D. in Biochemistry from the Johns Hopkins University. She performed postdoctoral work in Genetics at the Agouron Institute, and she joined the Princeton faculty in 1994. The research in her laboratory focuses on the molecular mechanisms that bacteria use for intercellular communication. This process is called quorum sensing. Bassler’s research is paving the way to the development of novel therapies for combating bacteria by disrupting quorum-sensing-mediated communication. At Princeton, Dr. Bassler teaches both undergraduate and graduate courses. Dr. Bassler directed the Molecular Biology Graduate Program from 2002-2008 and she currently chairs Princeton University’s Council on Science and Technology which has revamped the science curriculum for humanists. Bassler is a passionate advocate for diversity in the sciences and she is actively involved in and committed to educating lay people in science. Dr. Bassler was awarded a MacArthur Foundation Fellowship in 2002. She was elected to the American Academy of Microbiology in 2002 and made a fellow of the American Association for the Advancement of Science in 2004. She was given the 2003 Theobald Smith Society Waksman Award and she is the 2006 recipient of the American Society for Microbiology’s Eli Lilly Investigator Award for fundamental contributions to microbiological research. In 2008, Bassler was given Princeton University’s President’s Award for Distinguished Teaching. She is the 2009 recipient of the Wiley Prize in Biomedical Science for her paradigm-changing scientific research. She is the 2011 recipient of the National Academies’ Richard Lounsbery Award. Bassler is the President of the American Society for Microbiology, an editor for Molecular Microbiology, mBio, and Chief Editor of Annual Reviews of Genetics. She is an associate editor for Cell, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Journal of Bacteriology, and other journals. Among other duties, she serves on the National Academies Board on Life Sciences, the Howard Hughes Medical Institute Science Education Committee, and Discovery Communications’ Science Channel Scientific Advisory Board. She sits on the Scientific Advisory Boards of Cubist Pharmaceuticals and Pfizer Global Research. She serves on oversight, grant, fellowship, and award panels for the National Academies of Sciences, National Institutes of Health, National Science Foundation, American Society for Microbiology, American Academy of Microbiology, Keck Foundation, Burroughs Wellcome Trust, Jane Coffin Childs Fund, MIT Whitehead Institute, and the Max Planck Society.



Pode o mero acaso, a fortuita necessidade explicar a informação complexa especificada desta comunicação bateriana? Repare na linguagem teleológica empregada na comunicação do Fermilab. Ué, mas Darwin não tinha acabado de uma vez por todas com a teleologia em biologia? Nada mais falso! É preciso ser mais céticos com as especulações transformistas de Darwin!!!

III Seminário Materialismo e Evolucionismo: Evolução e Acaso na Hominização

domingo, outubro 23, 2011


UNICAMP, 24 a 26 de outubro de 2011.

Centro de Lógica, Epistemologia e História da Ciência (CLE)

Instituto de Filosofia e Ciências Humanas (IFCH

O "III Seminário Materialismo e evolucionismo" centrará suas reflexões na importância da categoria acaso para que se entenda a linha de evolução que conduziu à hominização. Afinal, que o homem tenha surgido "por acaso" interpela radicalmente não apenas os defensores do chamado "desígnio inteligente" [NOTA DESTE BLOGGER 1: design inteligente é a grafia acolhida pela Academia], mas em geral todas as vertentes, teológicas ou não, do humanismo metafísico. [NOTA DESTE BLOGGER 2: Não fomos convidados para oferecer a posição do Design Inteligente] No mesmo espírito dos dois eventos anteriores (2006 e 2009), o debate em torno das comunicações apresentadas pelos participantes compõe a atividade. (Veja abaixo os tópicos propostos para as comunicações).

A existência de um tema central colocado para o debate nada tem de limitativa. Discussões mais gerais em torno da noção de acaso e do complexo de suas conexões com a teoria geral da evolução permitirão analisar em perspectiva nova a lógica objetiva da transformação das espécies e reexaminar criticamente os temas clássicos da filosofia da vida, bem como as categorias em que se apoia, notadamente as de necessidade, causalidade, teleologia [NOTA DESTE BLOGGER 3: Quem melhor poderia apresentar este tópico? Os darwinistas ou os teóricos e proponentes do Design Inteligente?] e progresso.

No mesmo espírito, consagraremos o terceiro e último dia à discussão ampla e aberta das categorias filosóficas com as quais pensamos a vida, notadamente as de necessidade, causalidade, teleologia e progresso. Em função do número de participantes, o formato dessa seção de síntese poderá ser ou bem de mesa redonda ou de intervenção livre, com um mediador.

Contatos desenvolvidos no Simpósio "Filosofía, Evolución y Ciencias Cognitivas", em especial nas mesas plenárias: Filosofía de las Ciencias Sociales e Filosofía de las Ciencias de la Vida, no âmbito do XVI Congreso da Sociedad Interamericana de Filosofía (Mazatlán, México, 28 de novembro a 3 de dezembro de 2010), permitiram assegurar a participação, neste III Seminário, de respeitados pesquisadores mexicanos. 

[NOTA DESTE BLOGGER 4: Os respeitados pesquisadores e teóricos americanos do Design Inteligente como William Dembski, Michael Behe, Stephen Meyer, Paul Nelson e Jonathan Wells, e brasileiros como o Prof. Dr. Marcos Eberlin Nogueira, pasme, professor da Unicamp e membro da Academia Brasileira de Ciências e do NBDI - Núcleo Brasileiro de Design Inteligente, 
não foram convidados para este Seminário internacional.] 




9:30 - CARLOS ALBERTO DÓRIA (Departamento de Ciências Sociais/ IFHC/UNICAMP): O acaso no ninho da andorinha: lições de um inédito de Charles Darwin.

10:30-MAURO BARBOSA DE ALMEIDA (Departamento de Antropologia /IFHC/ UNICAMP): O acaso na evolução: paralelismos entre Boltzmann e Darwin.

11:30- SANDRA CAPONI (Professora Associada do Departamento de Saúde Pública da Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina): O homem médio de Quételet: um princípio ordenador do acaso.


14:30- JERZY A. BRZOZOWSKI (Universidade Federal da Fronteira Sul/ Campus Erechim, RS): Duas dimensões da possibilidade: entendendo o debate entre Gould e Conway Morris sobre a contingência na evolução.

15:30- PAULO DALGALARRONDO (Medicina da UNICAMP): Acaso e finalismo em teorias da evolução na Antropologia.



9:30- JORGE MARTINEZ CONTRERAS (Departamento de Filosofía; Centro Darwin de Pensamiento Evolucionista, UAM-Iztapalapa; Lerma, Mexico): Las sociedades de antropoides. La sociabilidad y su evolución.

10:30- CHARBEL EL-HANI (Professor Associado do Instituto de Biologia, UFBA, Coordenador do Laboratório de Ensino, História e Filosofia da Biologia (LEHFIBio)): A evolução biológica da sociabilidade.

11:30- SILVIO SENO CHIBENI (Departamento de Filosofia do

IFHC/UNICAMP): Hume e a razão dos animais.

14:30- ANDRÉ LUIS DE LIMA CARVALHO (Laboratório de Avaliação em Ensino e Filosofia das Biociências - Instituto Oswaldo Cruz (IOC) - FIOCRUZ, Rio de Janeiro, RJ): Simpatia para além dos confins do homem": as origens animais da inteligência e da sensibilidade e suas implicações éticas nas relações entre humanos e não-humanos.


16:30 - Mesa Redonda com os palestrantes do dia



9:30- GUSTAVO CAPONI (Departamento de Filosofia da Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina): Tipologia e filogenia do humano.

10:30- AURA PONCE DE LEON (Centro de Estudios Filosóficos, Políticos y Sociales

Vicente Lombardo Toledano - SEP, Mexico): Evolución humana y modificación de ambientes.

11:30- JOÃO QUARTIM DE MORAES (Departamento de Filosofia do IFHC/ UNICAMP): A violência na hominização. Sobre a caça e as guerras primordiais.


A evolução biológica da sociabilidade

Acaso, necessidade e progresso [???] na hominização.

Técnica, ética e sociabilidade na hominização.

Humanidade e animalidade

Obs. Haverá emissão de certificados para aqueles que tiverem 75% de presença.



Neste seminário será considerada a pobreza de evidências encontradas no registro fóssil sobre a evolução humana? Duvido!!!

Este blogger poderia relacionar uma montanha de evidências negativas sobre o status da teoria geral da evolução humana no contexto de justificação teórica, mas cita aqui apenas alguns artigos importantes:

"When we consider the remote past, before the origin of the actual species Homo sapiens, we are faced with a fragmentary and disconnected fossil record. Despite the excited and optimistic claims that have been made by some paleontologists, no fossil hominid species can be established as our direct ancestor". 

Richard Lewontin – Harvard Zoologist

Evolution of the Genus Homo – Annual Review of Earth and Planetary Sciences – Tattersall, Schwartz, May 2009

Excerpt: “Definition of the genus Homo is almost as fraught as the definition of Homo sapiens. We look at the evidence for “early Homo,” finding little morphological basis for extending our genus to any of the 2.5–1.6-myr-old fossil forms assigned to “early Homo” or Homo habilis/rudolfensis.”

"Man is indeed as unique, as different from all other animals, as had been traditionally claimed by theologians and philosophers."

Evolutionist Ernst Mayr

“Something extraordinary, if totally fortuitous, happened with the birth of our species….Homo sapiens is as distinctive an entity as exists on the face of the Earth, and should be dignified as such instead of being adulterated with every reasonably large-brained hominid fossil that happened to come along.”

Anthropologist Ian Tattersall – curator at the American Museum of Natural History

“these australopith specimens (Lucy) can be accommodated with the range of intraspecific variation of African apes” – Nature 443 (9/2006), p.296

“The australopithecines (Lucy) known over the last several decades from Olduvai and Sterkfontein, Kromdraai and Makapansgat, are now irrevocably removed from a place in a group any closer to humans than to African apes and certainly from any place in a direct human lineage.”

Charles Oxnard, former professor of anatomy at the University of Southern California Medical School, who subjected australopithecine fossils to extensive computer analysis;

Israeli Researchers: ‘Lucy’ is not direct ancestor of humans”; Apr 16, 2007

The Mandibular ramus morphology (lower jaw bone) on a recently discovered specimen of Australopithecus afarensis closely matches that of gorillas. This finding was unexpected given that chimpanzees are the closest living relatives of humans.,,,its absence in modern humans cast doubt on the role of Au. afarensis as a modern human ancestor.

“The australopithecine (Lucy) skull is in fact so overwhelmingly simian (ape-like) as opposed to human that the contrary proposition could be equated to an assertion that black is white.”

Lord Solly Zuckerman – Chief scientific advisor to British government and leading zoologist

Lucy – The Powersaw Incident – (a humorous video showing how biased evolutionists can be with the evidence to ‘make the evidence’ fit their preconceived conclusion)

“If pressed about man’s ancestry, I would have to unequivocally say that all we have is a huge question mark. To date, there has been nothing found to truthfully purport as a transitional species to man, including Lucy, since 1470 was as old and probably older. If further pressed, I would have to state that there is more evidence to suggest an abrupt arrival of man rather than a gradual process of evolving”.

Richard Leakey, world’s foremost paleo-anthropologist, in a PBS documentary, 1990.

The changing face of genus Homo – Wood; Collard

Excerpt: the current criteria for identifying species of Homo are difficult, if not impossible, to operate using paleoanthropological evidence. We discuss alternative, verifiable, criteria, and show that when these new criteria are applied to Homo, two species, Homo habilis and Homo rudolfensis, fail to meet them.

Human evolution?

Excerpt: Some scientists have proposed moving this species (habilis) out of Homo and into Australopithecus (ape) due to the morphology of its skeleton being more adapted to living on trees rather than to moving on two legs like H. sapiens.

Who Was Homo habilis—And Was It Really Homo? – Ann Gibbons – June 2011

Abstract: In the past decade, Homo habilis’s status as the first member of our genus has been undermined. Newer analytical methods suggested that H. habilis matured and moved less like a human and more like an australopithecine, such as the famous partial skeleton of Lucy. Now, a report in press in the Journal of Human Evolution finds that H. habilis’s dietary range was also more like Lucy’s than that of H. erectus, which many consider the first fully human species to walk the earth. That suggests the handyman had yet to make the key adaptations associated with our genus, such as the ability to exploit a variety of foods in many environments, the authors say.

New findings raise questions about who evolved from whom

Excerpt: The old theory was that the first and oldest species in our family tree, Homo habilis, evolved into Homo erectus, which then became us, Homo sapiens. But those two earlier species lived side-by-side about 1.5 million years ago in parts of Kenya for at least half a million years,,, The two species lived near each other, but probably didn’t interact with each other, each having their own “ecological niche,” Spoor said. Homo habilis was likely more vegetarian and Homo erectus ate some meat, he said. Like chimps and apes, “they’d just avoid each other, they don’t feel comfortable in each other’s company,” he said.

The Truth About Human Origins

Excerpt: “It is practically impossible to determine which “family tree” (for human evolution) one should accept. Richard Leakey (of the famed fossil hunting family from Africa) has proposed one. His late mother, Mary Leakey, proposed another. Donald Johanson, former president of the Institute of Human Origins in Berkeley, California, has proposed yet another. And as late as 2001, Meave Leakey (Richard’s wife) has proposed still another...”
http://books.google.com/books?.....8;lpg=PT28A 2004 book by leading evolutionary biologist Ernst Mayr stated that

“The earliest fossils of Homo, Homo rudolfensis and Homo erectus, are separated from Australopithecus (Lucy) by a large, unbridged gap. How can we explain this seeming saltation? Not having any fossils that can serve as missing links, we have to fall back on the time-honored method of historical science, the construction of a historical narrative.”

Misrepresentations of the Evidence for Human Evolutionary Origins


Darwin’s mistake: Explaining the discontinuity between human and nonhuman minds

Excerpt: There is a profound functional discontinuity between human and nonhuman minds. We argue that this discontinuity pervades nearly every domain of cognition and runs much deeper than even the spectacular scaffolding provided by language or culture can explain. We hypothesize that the cognitive discontinuity between human and nonhuman animals is largely due to the degree to which human and nonhuman minds are able to approximate the higher-order, systematic, relational capabilities of a physical symbol system.
Origin of the Mind

Marc Hauser – Scientific American – April 2009

Excerpt: “Researchers have found some of the building blocks of human cognition in other species. But these building blocks make up only the cement footprint of the skyscraper that is the human mind”,,,

Earliest humans not so different from us, research suggests – February 2011

Excerpt: Shea argues that comparing the behavior of our most ancient ancestors to Upper Paleolithic Europeans holistically and ranking them in terms of their “behavioral modernity” is a waste of time. There are no such things as modern humans, Shea argues, just Homo sapiens populations with a wide range of behavioral variability.

Chimps are not like humans – May 2004

Excerpt: the International Chimpanzee Chromosome 22 Consortium reports that 83% of chimpanzee chromosome 22 proteins are different from their human counterparts,,, The results reported this week showed that “83% of the genes have changed between the human and the chimpanzee—only 17% are identical—so that means that the impression that comes from the 1.2% [sequence] difference is [misleading]. In the case of protein structures, it has a big effect,” Sakaki said.

Chimp chromosome creates puzzles – 2004

Excerpt: However, the researchers were in for a surprise. Because chimps and humans appear broadly similar, some have assumed that most of the differences would occur in the large regions of DNA that do not appear to have any obvious function. But that was not the case. The researchers report in ‘Nature’ that many of the differences were within genes, the regions of DNA that code for proteins. 83% of the 231 genes compared had differences that affected the amino acid sequence of the protein they encoded. And 20% showed “significant structural changes”. In addition, there were nearly 68,000 regions that were either extra or missing between the two sequences, accounting for around 5% of the chromosome.,,, “we have seen a much higher percentage of change than people speculated.” The researchers also carried out some experiments to look at when and how strongly the genes are switched on. 20% of the genes showed significant differences in their pattern of activity.

Study Reports a Whopping “23% of Our Genome” Contradicts Standard Human-Ape Evolutionary Phylogeny – Casey Luskin – June 2011

Excerpt: For about 23% of our genome, we share no immediate genetic ancestry with our closest living relative, the chimpanzee. This encompasses genes and exons to the same extent as intergenic regions. We conclude that about 1/3 of our genes started to evolve as human-specific lineages before the differentiation of human, chimps, and gorillas took place. (of note; 1/3 of our genes is equal to about 7000 genes that we do not share with chimpanzees)


Será que os respeitados pesquisadores participantes brasileiros e estrangeiros irão apresentar neste seminário como o ACASO, qua mecanismo evolucionário, pode ser empiricamente detectado na natureza e realizar toda a complexidade e diversidade da história evolucionária, ou o que será apresentado e discutido na Unicamp será somente 'just-so stories' [estórias da carochinha] evolucionárias???