Daily Archives: February 18, 2017

Op/Ed: Sanville wrong for U-CF – Chadds Ford Live

Posted: February 18, 2017 at 4:22 am

At the Unionville-Chadds Ford School Board public meeting on Jan. 23, the directors took the remarkable action of accepting Superintendent John Sanville's resignation with two years remaining on his current contract. This is probably the best thing this current board has ever done.

However, right after this action the board took what is probably the worst decision ever made in our district. The members of the board voted unanimously to give Sanville a new five-year contract with an increase in salary to $255000, or a 15.4 percent annual increase. After six years, the superintendent's salary has nearly doubled.

If he completely serves out this new contract, he will have served roughly 10 years with an average yearly salary of $240,000. Additionally he will have earned benefits for vacations, a sabbatical, health insurance, and funds for retirement.

The board's action is highly questionable, definitely unethical, and possibly illegal. When an open position occurs in the district, it should be advertised, those interested in filling the opening should be interviewed, and the best applicant should be offered the position. Board ignored all these steps.

Since Sanville became superintendent in 2011 at an annual salary of $180000, the student body has experienced extensive bullying, drunken students have entered the high school building during class time, and three students have entered the building armed with knives.

I do not recall such actions having ever occurred in the sixty years that i have been a resident of the district.

The superintendent allows some out of district students to attend our schools without paying any tuition or taxes. Sanville lied by claiming this was not occurring. I am aware and have also been told this illegal action is still continuing.

The superintendent and board approved a $70 million renovation and expansion of the high school. In taking this action, the public results of two district referenda were completely ignored.

Annual budgets have grown every year at an average rate 1 percent greater that the educational cost of living increases. The district's taxpayers have not experienced a year without a tax increase since 1998.

Sanville has lost two excellent members from his staff. These were Sharon Allen Spann, director of Pupil and Staff Services, and Kenneth E. Batchelor, assistant to the superintendent.

And finally the annual ranking of schools done by U.S. News and World Report last reported our district ranked number 8 in our State and number 510 nationally last year. In 2012 the magazine reported that UCF was fourth in the State and number 394. Both rankings are significantly lower since Sanville was hired.

All these dreadful results occurred during Sanvilles time in office. The board gave no reasons why he deserves a raise or even continued employment in our district. Our district deserves a much better performance by our superintendent.

** (Editors note: The high school renovation project was approved in 2009, two years before Sanville became superintendent. The questionable admission of non-district students into U-CF schools also happened under a previous administration.)

See Contributors Page http://chaddsfordlive.com/writers/

comments

Read more:

Op/Ed: Sanville wrong for U-CF - Chadds Ford Live

Posted in Cf | Comments Off on Op/Ed: Sanville wrong for U-CF – Chadds Ford Live

PewDiePie: Alt-Right Nazi, Victim of Political Correctness, or Just an Idiot? – Reason (blog)

Posted: at 4:21 am

Aftonbladet/ZUMA Press/NewscomPewDiePie, the biggest Youtube star you've probably never heard of (especially if you're older than 30), just lost his Disney contracta source of millions of dollars in revenueover allegations of anti-Semitism.

It's an easy, even obvious, storyline for this season of Life as We Know It Right Now, given increasing awareness of the alt-right movement and its penchant for overt pro-Nazi displays. The kids are not alrightthey're flocking to their computers to share Pepe the frog memes and tell jokes about sending Jewish writers to the gas chambers. And on and on.

For many, PewDiePie's downfall will probably feel gratifying: yes, there are limits to how far this sort of behavior can progress. For others, his belated comeuppance is insufficient, and does nothing to address the toxicity of teenage (particularly white) male online culture. In a lengthy essay for BuzzFeed, writer Jacob Clifton laments "that 'edgelords,' the boys and men who group together online for the explicit proliferation of hate speech and misogyny, will almost inevitably keep pushing the line until they end up in a truly dark place."

"This is about understanding what lies beneath this dark side of the internet, and how to stop it," writes Clifton.

But Clifton's essay makes little effort to understand the phenomenon he's describing. And he offers absolutely no advice for how to stop it. Here's how his article ends:

PewDiePie is a symptom of a majority illness, but because he accidentally got rich, we seem content to let the buck stop with him. His downfall feels anti-capitalist, it feels nonconformist, it makes us feel all the things we love to feel when trying to prove we're better than. But the truth is that the soil this stuff grows in is the reality of our country and world, and we will go on encouraging this behavior, and these thoughts, until they bear their fruit.

The reason for that is terrible, and quite simple: because the whiny self-importance and self-indulgence of white male rage from Gamergate to Anonymous, WikiLeaks to the Fappening, all the proliferating forms of alt-right confusion and rage you couldn't possibly discern from that of even the least radical right is so repugnant that it's nearly impossible to see through. But we won't heal, and they won't heal, if we don't try. Their pain is pathetic, but watch how it spreads.

The reason Clifton doesn't actually offer a solution to this problem is probably because there isn't one: it's just so much broader, and more permanent, than Clifton notes here. Young men have always acted out in unpredictable and frustrating ways: the alt-right is just the current manifestation of "white male rage."

That's not an excuseI'm not saying boys will be boys as if it isn't a problem, because sometimes it is. Rather, I'm saying that boys doing stupid, irksome things has always been a problem. We don't really have any evidence that the problem is getting more substantialand I'd have a hard time believing that the average white male between the ages of 15 and 25 is worse behaved now than he was 50 years ago, given the decline in violence and crime in generalbut we're paying more attention to it now because it's chosen the form of an easy political narrative: ahhh, look at all the Nazi kids who love Trump!

When I was in high school, other boys loved to draw penises on everything. It's a weird fact, but there it is. If you left your notebook unsupervised, even for a moment, you would soon find it covered in dicks. Why a bunch of teenage boysall of whom insisted, loudly and frequently, that they weren't gaywould enjoy drawing pictures of the male reproductive organ mystified me at the time, as it still does today.

Teenage boys are probably still drawing dicks, but they're also writing #MAGA and Build the Wall and creating Pepe memes. Teachers call it the Trump effect, as if young men were perfectly well-behaved until Trump came along. Again, we don't know that bullying has gotten worse, and to the extent we can measure it, schoolyard bullying seems to be falling over time, according to the National Center for Education Statistics.

It's true that a certain kind of bullyingthe anti-Semitic, pro-Trump, alt-right kindis more noticeable than it was before. We probably shouldn't discount the possible political implications of this. It would be wrong, of course, to pretend that white nationalism isn't making any sort of comeback. But we also shouldn't pretend that the kids are doomed because they currently prefer a different kind of sick humor than they used to. Again, teenagers were always laughing at incredibly inappropriate thingsthat thing just happens to be PewDiePie's awful jokes, at the moment.

This was, essentially, the defense offered by PewDiePiereal name Felix Kjellberg, who made $15 million last year saying dumb things on the internet. Kjellberg is a blond-haired blue-eyed Swede, but as far as I can tell, he's not actually an anti-Semite, Trump supporter, alt-right, member, or Breitbart contributor. He landed himself in hot water because, as The Wall Street Journal recently reported, he made as many as nine anti-Semitic jokes in his videos.

The following example is illustrative. There are online services that allow you to pay random people halfway around the world to do or say whatever you want. PewDiePie decided to test one of these services outlong story short, two tribal-looking fellows unfurled a banner that read "Death to All Jews" as PewDiePie exclaims "I didn't think they would actually do it." He recorded both thingsthe incident, and his own reactionand posted in on Youtube.

Funny? Not really. Offensive? Sure. Evidence of deep-seated anti-Semitic animus? Well, that might be a stretch. Here's how PewDiePie defended himself:

Mr. Kjellberg defended himself from criticism in a Jan. 17 video, saying "I think there's a difference between a joke and actual like... death to all Jews. If I made a video saying"Mr. Kjellberg then quickly cuts to a close-up of his face illuminated brightly"Hey guys, PewDiePie here. Death to all Jews, I want you to say after me: Death to all Jews. And, you know, Hitler was right. I really opened my eyes to white power. And I think it is time we did something about this." The video then zooms back out and he adds: "That is how they're essentially reporting this, as if that's what I was saying."

One gathers, if you believe PewDiePie's explanation, that he could have used any edgy statement, like "Bush did 9/11." Why can't anyone take a joke anymore? is the underlying theme.

I'm reminded of the most recent season of South Park (spoilers to follow). One of its main plots involved Gerald Broflovski being unmasked as an internet troll. He enjoys shrieking at people online, telling them to kill themselves, and photoshopping penises over their faces. Why? Because it's funny, he claims. Later, when other trolls try to recruit him into their group, he insists he isn't one of them. What they do to people is horrible and stupidhe's not like them at all. What Gerald does is funny, he claims. Still later, when the villain of the season attempts to troll the entire U.S., Gerald challenges him. Join me, the villain offers Gerald, and together we will troll the world. But Gerald is horrified by the villain's plans and kills him. "Fuck you," Gerald says. "What I do is fucking funny, bitch."

This gagGerald insisting that his actions are fundamentally different because his horrible trolling is funnyperfectly encapsulates the teenage male attitude, and PewDiePie's humor. Stupid, random, shitty things are selectively funny to kids, and always have been. There's no ideology here beyond typical teen nastiness.

Disney, of course, is well within its rights to can PewDiePie for any reasonand not wanting to be associated with Nazi humor is a reason I support. It is not censorship when one private actor refuses to endorse or fund the speech of another private actor. It's just business. We shouldn't treat Kjellberg like a victimof political correctness, or of anything else. Even without Disney and Youtube, he's still a 28-year-old millionaire with a sizeable audience. He can clean up his act and try again.

Nor should we forget the fact that the White House is currently occupied by someone whose foremost advisor was the boss of an online media hub that deliberately and successfully catered to an alt-right audience. I share some of Clifton's concern that "the whiny self-importance and self-indulgence of white male rage" has taken a particularly pernicious form at the moment. But I wouldn't be surprised if it fizzles out on its own and the kids go back to drawing dicks.

More:

PewDiePie: Alt-Right Nazi, Victim of Political Correctness, or Just an Idiot? - Reason (blog)

Posted in Political Correctness | Comments Off on PewDiePie: Alt-Right Nazi, Victim of Political Correctness, or Just an Idiot? – Reason (blog)

‘Political correctness’ mostly used as epithet – Walton Tribune

Posted: at 4:21 am

Don Ashworth, in his column of Jan. 28-29 (Our nation must get the controls under control), is his customary hyperventilating self, e.g. a complex astray when array would work better there and compliance verses law when versus would be more appropriate.

I assume these are mistakes of writer and editor.

kAmqFE D=:AA6CJ D=@A6D H:E9 2? 6?5=6DD 3@EE@> 😀 2 AFC6 23DFC5:EJ 2D 😀 :?G:D:3=6 DA64:2=:DED W:7 J@F =@@< 7@C E96> x 6IA64E J@F 4@F=5 D66 E96>X F?=6DD E96J 2C6 F?:56?E:7:65 89@DED]k^Am

kAmp== C68F=2E:@?D 2C6 25@AE65 AFCDF2?E E@ =2HD 6?24E65 3J 2 =68:D=2E:G6 3@5J 4@?D:DE:?8 @7 E96 A6@A=6VD 6=64E65 C6AC6D6?E2E:G6D[ @E96CH:D6 D @FC 7@F?56CD 56D:8?65 7@C FD x 6IA64E 3=24< 4:E:K6?D H@F=5 36 DFCAC:D65 E@ 962C E96 7C665@>D H6C6 56D:8?65 7@C E96>] xE E@@< 2 3=@@5J H2C E@ 86E E92E AC@;64E DE2CE65]k^Am

kAm(@>6? >:89E 92G6 2 BF6DE:@? 23@FE :E 2=D@ D:?46 E96J @?=J 8@E E96 G@E6 `b_ J62CD 27E6C v6@C86 (2D9:?8E@? E@@< @77:46]k^Am

kAm!@=:E:42= 4@CC64E?6DD 😀 FD65 2D :7 :E 925 2 567:?:E6 >62?:?8] xE 😀 FD65 AC:?4:A2==J 2D 2? 6A:E96E E9C@H? 2E @E96C A6@A=6 3J s@?2=5 %CF>A 2?5 pD9H@CE9[ 6E 2=]k^Am

kAm%96C6 2C6 >2?J >@C6 AC@3=6>D H:E9 9:D 4@=F>?] qFE pD9H@CE9 ?665D E@ AFE 9:D 3C2:? 😕 862C 367@C6 96 AFED 9:D 7:?86CD 😕 >@E:@?]k^Am

kAm$E2?=6J w] z6==6J[{@82?G:==6k^Am

Originally posted here:

'Political correctness' mostly used as epithet - Walton Tribune

Posted in Political Correctness | Comments Off on ‘Political correctness’ mostly used as epithet – Walton Tribune

Scientists say we can clone a woolly mammoth. But should we? – Christian Science Monitor

Posted: at 4:20 am

February 16, 2017 This is not your parents' "Jurassic Park."

Harnessing the power of the CRISPR-Cas9 gene editing tool, a team of Harvard researchers is slowly coaxing woolly mammoth-like traits out of normal elephant cells. But recent claims that theyre close to creating a hybrid embryo have raised questions regarding the ethics of the procedure.

The issues range from questions of practicality Should we risk impregnating an endangered elephant with an experimental embryo? to an ethical Pandora's box: Would the ability to bring species back from the dead derail conservation efforts?

But geneticist George Church says he believes letting the research continue would produce the benefits that go beyond the chance to see an extinct creature, suggesting the reintroduction of the woolly mammoth might mitigate climate change.

Except it wouldn't be a mammoth, exactly.

"Our aim is to produce a hybrid elephant-mammoth embryo, Dr. Church told the Guardian. Actually, it would be more like an elephant with a number of mammoth traits. Were not there yet, but it could happen in a couple of years.

The phrase mammoth cloning may conjure up images of scientists extracting amber-bound DNA and incubating it in frogs as in the 1993 film "Jurassic Park," but it means something quite different to Church.

Instead of re-creating an extinct organism, his team is trying to create a hybrid mammophant. Starting with the woolly mammoths closest living relative, the Asian elephant, Church uses theCRISPRprecision gene editing tool to snip and splice in mammoth genes, granting mammoth-like characteristics such as a shaggy coat, extra fat, and cold-resistant blood.

The list of edits affects things that contribute to the success of elephants in cold environments. We already know about ones to do with small ears, subcutaneous fat, hair, and blood, Church explained to New Scientist.

So far, with samples from a remarkably well-preserved 2013 find as a DNA guide, the team has accomplished 45 of these edits. If their goal were to perfectly re-create the mammoth genome, theyd still have thousands to go.

And they arent the only team taking this alternative cloning approach. Researchers in Chile are also trying to engineer a dinosaur out of a chicken by rolling back certain genes.

Church's team says theyre only a couple years away from the next step, making the edits in an elephant embryo and studying its viability. The researchers believe they could turn skin cells of the highly endangered Asian elephant into embryos using cloning techniques.

And thats the easy part.

Once they have a mammophant egg ready to go, theyd need a way to carry it to term. Ethics prevent using real Asian elephants as surrogate mothers because of their endangered status and high degree of intelligence, but Church has other plans.

"We hope to do the entire procedure ex-vivo," oroutside a living body, he told The Guardian. "It would be unreasonable to put female reproduction at risk in an endangered species."

Some say the technology to grow a hybrid animal inside an artificial womb wont be possible this decade, but The Guardian reports that Churchs lab is hard at work on the problem, already able to incubate a mouse embryo for ten days, about half of its gestation period.

Even if Church succeeds in overcoming all the technical hurdles, some wonder if the mammoth should be resurrected at all.

As Matthew Cobb, professor of zoology at the University of Manchester, told The Guardian: The proposed de-extinction of mammoths raises a massive ethical issue the mammoth was not simply a set of genes, it was a social animal, as is the modern Asian elephant. What will happen when the elephant-mammoth hybrid is born? How will it be greeted by elephants?

Church argues that the mammophant would join the fight against global warming, thus bringing concrete benefits to humans all over the planet.

They keep the tundra from thawing by punching through snow and allowing cold air to come in, said Church. In the summer they knock down trees and help the grass grow.

While such behavior could help keep greenhouses gasses locked in the permafrost, wed need to get pretty good at mammophant cloning to bring back enough of the beasts to populate Canada and Siberia. Plus, as is often the case with geoengineering schemes, the effects would be uncertain. Scientists arent even sure whether the original loss of mammoths caused some climate change, or if the climate change killed the mammoths. In addition, there's no guarantee that the helpful stomping behaviors are genetic, instead of taught by long-vanished mammoth parents.

And climate may not be the only unintended consequence. Other researchers worry developing such Lazarus-technology would endanger current conservation efforts. "De-extinction just provides the ultimate 'out'," said wildlife biologist Stanley Temple in a BBC interview. "If you can always bring the species back later, it undermines the urgency about preventing extinctions."

Rather, we should focus on keeping the Asian elephant alive, paleobiologist and mammoth expert Tori Herridge wrote in a 2014 opinion piece for The Guardian.

Sometimes the ice age world is so real to me that my throat aches and my eyes sting a little when I think about what weve lost, the animals we will never see," she wrote. "But heres the irony if we feel like that about the mammoth, just think how our kids might feel about the elephant if we let it become extinct. We really ought to be focusing on that, and doing everything we can to stop it from happening.

Continued here:

Scientists say we can clone a woolly mammoth. But should we? - Christian Science Monitor

Posted in Cloning | Comments Off on Scientists say we can clone a woolly mammoth. But should we? – Christian Science Monitor

20 years after Dolly: Everything you always wanted to know about the cloned sheep and what came next – The Conversation US

Posted: at 4:20 am

Well hello, Dolly.

Its been 20 years since scientists in Scotland told the world about Dolly the sheep, the first mammal successfully cloned from an adult body cell. What was special about Dolly is that her parents were actually a single cell originating from mammary tissue of an adult ewe. Dolly was an exact genetic copy of that sheep a clone.

Dolly captured peoples imaginations, but those of us in the field had seen her coming through previous research. Ive been working with mammalian embryos for over 40 years, with some work in my lab specifically focusing on various methods of cloning cattle and other livestock species. In fact, one of the coauthors of the paper announcing Dolly worked in our laboratory for three years prior to going to Scotland to help create the famous clone.

Dolly was an important milestone, inspiring scientists to continue improving cloning technology as well as to pursue new concepts in stem cell research. The endgame was never meant to be armies of genetically identical livestock: Rather, researchers continue to refine the techniques and combine them with other methods to turbocharge traditional animal breeding methods as well as gain insights into aging and disease.

Dolly was a perfectly normal sheep who became the mother of numerous normal lambs. She lived to six and a half years, when she was eventually put down after a contagious disease spread through her flock, infecting cloned and normally reproduced sheep alike. Her life wasnt unusual; its her origin that made her unique.

Before the decades of experiments that led to Dolly, it was thought that normal animals could be produced only by fertilization of an egg by a sperm. Thats how things naturally work. These germ cells are the only ones in the body that have their genetic material all jumbled up and in half the quantity of every other kind of cell. That way when these so-called haploid cells come together at fertilization, they produce one cell with the full complement of DNA. Joined together, the cell is termed diploid, for twice, or double. Two halves make a whole.

From that moment forward, nearly all cells in that body have the same genetic makeup. When the one-cell embryo duplicates its genetic material, both cells of the now two-cell embryo are genetically identical. When they in turn duplicate their genetic material, each cell at the four-cell stage is genetically identical. This pattern goes on so that each of the trillions of cells in an adult is genetically exactly the same whether its in a lung or a bone or the blood.

In contrast, Dolly was produced by whats called somatic cell nuclear transfer. In this process, researchers remove the genetic material from an egg and replace it with the nucleus of some other body cell. The resulting egg becomes a factory to produce an embryo that develops into an offspring. No sperm is in the picture; instead of half the genetic material coming from a sperm and half from an egg, it all comes from a single cell. Its diploid from the start.

Dolly was the culmination of hundreds of cloning experiments that, for example, showed diploid embryonic and fetal cells could be parents of offspring. But there was no way to easily know all the characteristics of the animal that would result from a cloned embryo or fetus. Researchers could freeze a few of the cells of a 16-cell embryo, while going on to produce clones from the other cells; if a desirable animal was produced, they could thaw the frozen cells and make more copies. But this was impractical because of low success rates.

Dolly demonstrated that adult somatic cells also could be used as parents. Thus, one could know the characteristics of the animal being cloned.

By my calculations, Dolly was the single success from 277 tries at somatic cell nuclear transfer. Sometimes the process of cloning by somatic cell nuclear transfer still produces abnormal embryos, most of which die. But the process has greatly improved so success rates now are more like 10 percent; its highly variable, though, depending on the cell type used and the species.

More than 10 different cell types have been used successfully as parents for cloning. These days most cloning is done using cells obtained by biopsying skin.

Genetics is only part of the story. Even while clones are genetically identical, their phenotypes the characteristics they express will be different. Its like naturally occurring identical twins: They share all their genes but theyre not really exactly alike, especially if reared in different settings.

Environment plays a huge role for some characteristics. Food availability can influence weight. Diseases can stunt growth. These kinds of lifestyle, nutrition or disease effects can influence which genes are turned on or off in an individual; these are called epigenetic effects. Even though all the genetic material may be the same in two identical clones, they might not be expressing all the same genes.

Consider the practice of cloning winning racehorses. Clones of winners sometimes also will be winners but most of the time theyre not. This is because winners are outliers; they need to have the right genetics, but also the right epigenetics and the right environment to reach that winning potential. For example, one can never exactly duplicate the uterine conditions a winning racehorse experienced when it was a developing fetus. Thus, cloning champions usually leads to disappointment. On the other hand, cloning a stallion that sires a high proportion of race-winning horses will result very reliably in a clone that similarly sires winners. This is a genetic rather than a phenotypic situation.

Even though the genetics are reliable, there are aspects of the cloning procedure that mean the epigenetics and environment are suboptimal. For example, sperm have elegant ways of activating the eggs they fertilize, which will die unless activated properly; with cloning, activation usually is accomplished by a strong electric shock. Many of the steps of cloning and subsequent embryonic development are done in test tubes in incubators. These conditions are not perfect substitutes for the female reproductive tract where fertilization and early embryonic development normally occur.

Sometimes abnormal fetuses develop to term, resulting in abnormalities at birth. The most striking abnormal phenotype of some clones is termed large offspring syndrome, in which calves or lambs are 30 or 40 percent larger than normal, resulting in difficult birth. The problems stem from an abnormal placenta. At birth, these clones are genetically normal, but are overly large, and tend to be hyperinsulinemic and hypoglycemic. (The conditions normalize over time once the offspring is no longer influenced by the abnormal placenta.)

Recent improvements in cloning procedures have greatly reduced these abnormalities, which also occur with natural reproduction, but at a much lower incidence.

Many thousands of cloned mammals have been produced in nearly two dozen species. Very few of these concern practical applications, such as cloning a famous Angus bull named Final Answer (who recently died at an old age) in order to produce more high-quality cattle via his clones sperm.

But the cloning research landscape is changing fast. The driving force for producing Dolly was not to produce genetically identical animals. Rather researchers want to combine cloning techniques with other methods in order to efficiently change animals genetically much quicker than traditional animal breeding methods that take decades to make changes in populations of species such as cattle.

One recent example is introducing the polled (no horns) gene into dairy cattle, thus eliminating the need for the painful process of dehorning. An even more striking application has been to produce a strain of pigs that is incapable of being infected by the very contagious and debilitating PRRS virus. Researchers have even made cattle that cannot develop Mad Cow Disease. For each of these procedures, somatic cell nuclear transplantation is an essential part of the process.

To date, the most valuable contribution of these somatic cell nuclear transplantation experiments has been the scientific information and insights gained. Theyve enhanced our understanding of normal and abnormal embryonic development, including aspects of aging, and more. This information is already helping reduce birth defects, improve methods of circumventing infertility, develop tools to fight certain cancers and even decrease some of the negative consequences of aging in livestock and even in people. Two decades since Dolly, important applications are still evolving.

Read the original:

20 years after Dolly: Everything you always wanted to know about the cloned sheep and what came next - The Conversation US

Posted in Cloning | Comments Off on 20 years after Dolly: Everything you always wanted to know about the cloned sheep and what came next – The Conversation US

How The New Evolution Items Work In ‘Pokmon GO’ – Forbes

Posted: at 4:20 am


Forbes
How The New Evolution Items Work In 'Pokmon GO'
Forbes
Evolution got a bit more complicated in Pokmon GO last night. Originally it was a pretty straightforward affair: you got candy for catching, walking and transferring Pokmon, which you then used to turn your Squirtles into Waroturtles, your ...

Read the original here:

How The New Evolution Items Work In 'Pokmon GO' - Forbes

Posted in Evolution | Comments Off on How The New Evolution Items Work In ‘Pokmon GO’ – Forbes

Evolution Items – IGN

Posted: at 4:20 am

New with the release of the Johto Pokemon Update, many new and old Pokemon can evolve into advanced form Pokemon - but only through the use of specific Evolution Items. These items have a rare chance of being found at any Pokestop, and can be used along with specific Pokemon Candy to evolve a Pokemon.

This even works with Pokemon who have different evolution paths, as an additional evolution button will let you choose which path you'd like to take if you meet the requirements. Dragon Scale

There are currently 5 new Evolution Items introduced with the latest update:

The Dragon Scale is one of the new Evolution Items that can be used in conjunction with Pokemon Candy to evolve some of the Gen 1 Pokemon to new Gen 2 evolutions.

Currently, the applicable Pokemon for this item is Seadra, who can be evolved into Kingdra using a Dragon Scale and 100 Horsea Pokemon Candy.

The Kings Rock is another of the new Evolution Items that can be used in conjunction with Pokemon Candy to evolve some of the Gen 1 Pokemon to new Gen 2 evolutions.

Currently, there are 2 applicable Pokemon who can use this item: Slowpoke can use the Kings Rock and 50 Slowpoke Candy to evolve into Slowking - or just the candy to evolve into Slowbro. Poliwhirl can also use the Kings Rock and 100 Politwag Candy to evolve into Politoed - or just the candy to evolve into Poliwrath.

The Sun Stone is another of the new Evolution Items that can be used in conjunction with Pokemon Candy to evolve some of the Gen 1 Pokemon to new Gen 2 evolutions.

Currently, the applicable Pokemon for this item is Gloom, who can evolve into Bellossom using the Sun Stone as well as 100 Oddish Candy, or into Vileplume using just candy.

The Metal Coat is another of the new Evolution Items that can be used in conjunction with Pokemon Candy to evolve some of the Gen 1 Pokemon to new Gen 2 evolutions.

Currently, there are twp applicable Pokemon for this item: Onix, who can now be evolved into Steelix using 1 Metal Coat and 50 Onix Candy. Scyther can also use 1 Metal Coat and 50 Scyther Candy to evolve into Scizor.

The Upgrade is another of the new Evolution Items that can be used in conjunction with Pokemon Candy to evolve some of the Gen 1 Pokemon to new Gen 2 evolutions.

Currently, the applicable Pokemon for this item is Porygon, who can use an Upgrade along with 50 Porygon Candy to evolve inyo Porygon2.

Read more from the original source:

Evolution Items - IGN

Posted in Evolution | Comments Off on Evolution Items – IGN

Congo River fish evolution shaped by intense rapids: Genomic study … – Science Daily

Posted: at 4:20 am

Congo River fish evolution shaped by intense rapids: Genomic study ...
Science Daily
New research provides compelling evidence that a group of strange-looking fish living near the mouth of the Congo River are evolving due to the intense ...

and more »

Read more:

Congo River fish evolution shaped by intense rapids: Genomic study ... - Science Daily

Posted in Evolution | Comments Off on Congo River fish evolution shaped by intense rapids: Genomic study … – Science Daily

How To Choose Your Eevee Evolution In ‘Pokmon GO:’ Umbreon And Espeon Edition – Forbes

Posted: at 4:20 am


Forbes
How To Choose Your Eevee Evolution In 'Pokmon GO:' Umbreon And Espeon Edition
Forbes
Of all the Pokmon in the Pokworld, Eevee remains something of a rarity. The evolutionary wildcard has always featured random evolutions, and now that Gen 2 has hit Pokmon GO, the potential forms have increased from three to five. People have long ...
Pokemon Go trick: How to make Eevee evolve into Espeon and UmbreonBGR
Guide: Pokemon Go has a new Eevee evolution trick for Umbreon and EspeonDestructoid
Pokmon Go Eevee evolution: How to evolve Eevee into Umbreon, Espeon, Vaporeon, Jolteon and Flareon with new ...Eurogamer.net
Mic -The Daily Dot -TechnoBuffalo
all 65 news articles »

Continued here:

How To Choose Your Eevee Evolution In 'Pokmon GO:' Umbreon And Espeon Edition - Forbes

Posted in Evolution | Comments Off on How To Choose Your Eevee Evolution In ‘Pokmon GO:’ Umbreon And Espeon Edition – Forbes

Migration to America took long enough for evolution to happen on the way – Ars Technica

Posted: at 4:20 am

The Bering land bridge plays a central role in our picture of how humans reached the Americas. When much more of the worlds water was locked up in ice, and the land between Asia and North America was exposed, people followedthe bridge to migrate out of Asia, into Alaska, and from there into the rest of the Americas.

This picture tends to portray thebridge as purely a route to the new continents. In fact, the word bridge definitely conjures up the wrong image. It was a geographic region, often called Beringia, and people lived there for so long that it probably would have been ludicrous to them that we could think of their homeas transient. Current estimates suggest that people lived there for between 5,000 and 8,000years, starting about23,000 years ago.

That is a long enough time for natural selection to have had an effect on the genome of people who lived there, according to a paper in PNAS this week. The Beringians would have faced distinctdiseases, food constraints, and climate conditions, and natural selection would have helped those with the right genetic adaptationsto thrive in that environment. According to the new paper, we can see evidence of that natural selection in modern Native American populations.

Recently, a genetic survey of 191 Greenlandic Inuit people found some genetic patterns that are so common that the best explanation for them is natural selection. Specifically, theres evidence to suggest that three genes involved in metabolizing fatty acids (called the fatty acid desaturases, or FADS, genes) show changes that might be the result of adaptation to a diet high in protein and fats.That sort of diettends to be one of the side-effects of living in the Arctic.

But these conditions arent really particular toGreenland; they were probably similar in Beringia. It's possiblethat the adaptations tookplace on Beringia itselfin which case they would predate the peopling of all the Americas.

To test this hypothesis, a group of researchers compared the genomes of Native Americans to people from Africa, Europe, and East Asia. In line with earlier evidence, they found variants in the FADS genes that were much more common in the Native American genomes. This is true even though diets among Native American populations became quite diverse over their history.

Theres a growing pile of evidence that the FADS genes are pretty important, says Rasmus Nielsen, who wasnt involved with this paper, but was one of the authors on the paper about the Greenlandic Inuit genome. The same genes seem to show signs of natural selection in lots of different human populations, and it all seems to have something to do with the histories of what those populations have eaten. These are genes that seem to be really, really important when the diet changes, he says.

One tricky thing is that natural selection isnt the only thing that brings about differences between genomes. When you have a large population of people, they have quite a bit of variation in their genomesfor instance, apopulation might have some people with brown eyes, some with green, and some with blue.

If a small part of this group breaks away and moves off, they take only part of that total variation with them. Because of random chance, 80 percent of that group of migrants might have brown eyes. If their descendants tend to have brown eyes, that doesnt mean that natural selection made it that way.

So, if Native American genomes tend to show a lot of differences on the FADS genes, its important to check that the result isnt because of this founder effect. Testing this means looking at the rest of the genome, estimating how strong the founder effect is, and seeing whether the variants in question are more common than you would expect based on afounder effect. When the researchers did this, they found a number of variants that were common enough that natural selection seemed like the best explanation.

Beringia was inhabited by a population, not individuals. So, as you might imagine, not all of the Native American genomes were uniform in terms of which FADS variants they had. Some regions showed more of the variants, and some showed less. The high frequencies occur despite marked differences in lifestyles and diets of the different indigenous populations, the authors write. However, there hasnt been a huge amount of time for natural selection to operate. Future studies could test whether there are any differences amongNative American groups that could be connected totheir historical diets.

If the evidence keeps piling up that the FADS genes affect how we process our food, they could ultimately be important in medical research, says Nielsen. Theres so muchdebate about what dietis the most healthy, he says, but we could be looking at the reason why that question doesnt have a simple answer: the best diet might be different for different people, depending on their genetics.

PNAS, 2016. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1620541114 (About DOIs).

See the rest here:

Migration to America took long enough for evolution to happen on the way - Ars Technica

Posted in Evolution | Comments Off on Migration to America took long enough for evolution to happen on the way – Ars Technica