Last fall, Science Today’s Barbara Tannenbaum caught up with Dave Ebert and his grad student, Paul Clerkin, as they brought deep-sea shark specimens from the Indian Ocean to their new home in the Ichthyology collection here at the Academy.

Tannebaum’s article, “Fantastic Voyage,” captured their work expanding the Academy’s collections, and Ebert, an Academy research associate and director of the Pacific Shark Research Center in Moss Landing, has been tirelessly working ever since. We caught up with him by phone this week to hear the latest.

Earlier this year, Ebert traveled to Mauritius, east of Madagascar, searching for new and unknown shark species in the Indian Ocean. Ebert also attended a workshop put on by the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, or FAO.

“We’re working on an identification catalog for sharks in that area to understand what’s being caught there,” Ebert explains.

In May, Ebert was part of a research cruise off of New Zealand, seeking more undiscovered sharks. His work was captured on film by the BBC for a segment that will air in early 2015. They hope to film him more on other expeditions in the coming year, too. “They’re doing something a little different,” Ebert says. “Kind of a day in the life of a researcher. They send us to a couple of different places to do some field surveys that will likely result in finding new or lesser known species.”

Ebert is pleased with the upcoming documentary because he’s hoping it will bring public awareness to little known shark species. “Everyone knows the white sharks and hammerheads, the charismatic species. These high profile sharks get a lot of attention and protection. But there are a lot of other species out there that for whatever reason are not known. Some of these have much higher conservation needs.”

He mentions the honeycomb cat shark (Holohalaelurus favus) off east Africa. The species was very abundant in the 1950s and 1960s, but hasn’t been seen for 40 years. “The shark didn’t even have a formal scientific name until 2006,” Ebert says. “We should know more about sharks like these and look out for them in fishery by-catch.”

When Ebert isn’t traveling, he works tirelessly on naming and describing these unknown and recently discovered shark species. The sharks he and Clerkin discovered were shipped here to the Academy for further examination. They will also find a permanent residence in our collections. “Several specimens just arrived from Taiwan and several more are due from South Africa this week,” he says.

Speaking of South Africa, Ebert will be a keynote speaker at next year’s Sharks International Conference in Durban, South Africa. The event occurs once every four years, and Ebert will be presenting on the biodiversity and conservation of sharks and rays, mostly African species.

And for true shark fans out there, Ebert is lead author on a new guidebook, Sharks of the World, due out next week.

Ebert is a busy scientist with much work ahead in discovering, describing and protecting sharks. Stay tuned for more updates on his important work.

Earlier this year, we produced a video documenting Academy researcher Luiz Rocha’s work in Belize studying invasive lionfish. These predators, originally from the Indo-Pacific, found their way to the northwest Atlantic in the 1990s—likely through an aquarium release—and have steadily moved south over the past fifteen years.

The lionfish are wreaking havoc in the area because they voraciously gobble up smaller, native fish—threatening everything from coral reef ecosystems to local economies based on fishing and tourism. In addition, eradication appears impossible and whatever is keeping them in check in their native Indo-Pacific habitats—researchers around the world are trying to find out what—appears to missing in the Atlantic.

“Prey in the Indo-Pacific could simply be more aware of the danger lionfish pose,” Rocha says. “There could also be parasites keeping the lionfish in check in their native habitats.”

Bad
A recent study in PLoS One determines that humans may be the only threat to lionfish in their new home. An international research team looked at whether native reef predators such as sharks and groupers could help control the population growth of lionfish in the Caribbean, either by eating them or out-competing them for prey.

The team surveyed 71 reefs over three years, in three different regions of the Caribbean. Their results indicate there is no relationship between the density of lionfish and that of native predators, suggesting that, “interactions with native predators do not influence” the number of lionfish in those areas.

The researchers did find that lionfish populations were smaller in protected reefs, but researchers attributed the lower numbers to targeted removal by reef managers, rather than consumption by large fishes in the protected areas. As Rocha mentioned in the video last spring, encouraging the hunting and human consumption of these spiny fish may be reefs’ only hope.

Ugly
Recent submersible dives deep off the coast of Fort Lauderdale, Florida reveal that these invasive lionfish populations aren’t just spreading southward—they’re also heading to great depths, out of the reach of their only predators, human hunters.

“We expected some populations of lionfish at that depth [300 feet], but their numbers and size were a surprise,” says Stephanie Green, of Oregon State University, who participated in the dives.

The lionfish are growing to an unusually large size—as much as 16 inches. “A lionfish will eat almost any fish smaller than it is,” Green says. “Regarding the large fish we observed in the submersible dives, a real concern is that they could migrate to shallower depths as well and eat many of the fish there. And the control measures we’re using at shallower depths—catch them and let people eat them—are not as practical at great depth.”

Rocha confirms this. “Even if control efforts are successful in shallow water, we can’t reach these deep fish.” And the lionfish at great depths can easily move to shallower areas. In addition, “these larger fish produce more eggs,” Rocha says, creating even larger populations.

(Rocha is hoping to join on subsequent dives. He was invited on this recent submersible dive, but was attending a conference on Indo-Pacific fish in Japan at the time. A video of the dives is available here.)

Good
We want to end on an upbeat note, and Rocha has a recent study in Marine Ecology Progress Series about the spread of lionfish down the coast of South America and into Brazil. The fish haven’t reached that far yet, but given their rapid spread, it seems to be only a matter of time.

Working with other Brazilian researchers, Rocha investigated movements of various fish species across the Amazon-Orinoco plume (AOP), where the Amazon and Orinoco rivers meet the Atlantic Ocean. The study describes the AOP as “a large freshwater and sediment runoff between the Caribbean and the Brazilian Provinces that represents a ‘porous’ barrier to dispersal for reef organisms.”

The scientists found that while a few “vagrant” species recently crossed the barrier heading north, “species headed south don’t spread as quickly,” according to Rocha. “The currents make it tricky to cross.”

This could be the first bit of good news in stopping the spread of lionfish. “This means we can keep an eye on it and control the lionfish as they cross, keeping their numbers down,” Rocha says.

Next
Rocha and colleagues here at the Academy and in Europe are beginning a population genomic study of the invasive lionfish. This study will look at fine-scale genetic diversity of lionfish among the different Caribbean islands. Rocha will start collecting samples in two weeks in Curaçao. The samples will then be analyzed by Academy researchers—including Rocha’s wife, Claudia—here at the Center for Comparative Genomics.

“We want to see if there is gene exchange between different island populations,” Rocha explains. “This will help us determine how successful local efforts to control lionfish can be if larvae are coming from other locations. This study can help inform how resources are used to control different populations.”

The fight against invasive lionfish continues…

Image: Alexander Vasenin/Wikipedia

How will climate change affect different species? Will organisms be able to adapt quickly enough to survive in a rapidly changing environment?

Researchers at the University of Oxford are attempting to predict this with small, short-lived birds like the great tit (Parus major). In a study published this week in PLoS Biology, the scientists discovered that great tits living in a forest near Oxford have been able to survive and adapt to a 1°C temperature increase over the past 50 years.

After analyzing those 50-plus years of data collected on the birds in their habitats, the authors studied when the birds lay their eggs relative to spring temperatures, as well as how the birds have tracked the shifts in peak caterpillar numbers caused by the changes in temperature. They found that the birds are now laying their eggs an average of two weeks earlier than they did 50 years ago, primarily as a result of phenotypic plasticity.

Phenotypic plasticity enables organisms to adjust their behavior rapidly in response to short-term changes in the environment. Jack Dumbacher, curator and department chair of Ornithology & Mammalogy here at the Academy, explains, “It’s heritable but it’s not an evolutionary, or genotypic change. There’s no change in the genes.”

The authors’ predictions show that phenotypic plasticity could allow the great tits—and similar birds—to survive warming of 0.5°C per year, easily outpacing the current worst-case scenario of 0.03°C from climate models.

Dumbacher says that while this study is interesting and a good reminder how adaptable one species may be, he emphasizes that temperature increase is just one effect of climate change. Temperature variance and extreme weather are other effects with unknown results to various ecosystems, he says. In addition, Dumbacher reminds us that the great tits and caterpillars play roles in a much larger ecosystem, where the web of relationships is so interdependent that one small change to one small organism in that web could easily affect other species.

One effect of climate change that Dumbacher stresses (and the study does not mention) is invasive species. As temperatures change, habitat ranges change for different species, which can result in one species invading the habitat of another. One example Dumbacher gives is the Northern Spotted Owl (Strix occidentalis caurina). These birds have been able to adapt to a 1°C temperature increase over the past 100 years but are now facing a fierce competitor in the Barred Owl (Strix varia), an eastern species that now finds itself in the same territory as the Northern Spotted Owl.

“Climate change is more than a one degree temperature increase,” Jack says. “And while a species may demonstrate plasticity within different temperature regimes, it’s likely that ecosystems are not as adaptable. This why climatologists have such a difficult time predicting the effect of climate change on organisms.”

Image: Luc Viatour/Wikipedia

Here’s one: Dimensions of Biodiversity, a program for graduate students funded by the National Science Foundation. It currently boasts 112 grad students from 14 institutions in five countries, with 23 faculty members advising these students.

Their mission? According to their website, “To prepare the next generation of biodiversity researchers for higher levels of academic and scientific interaction, while simultaneously advancing, synthesizing, and baselining knowledge of biodiversity science on a global scale.”

At the AAAS meeting last month, three members of the program talked about a few of the various projects of Dimensions of Biodiversity.

Selina Heppell, a professor at Oregon State University, discussed a project to measure biodiversity in the oceans utilizing commercial fishing data. Samantha Davis, a graduate student at UC Santa Barbara, described three separate projects looking at the variability in biodiversity in tropical forests. And Ailene Ettinger, a student at the University of Washington, looked at data about the efficacy of citizen science and the data collected by non-scientists. (Her PowerPoint opened with a picture of citizen scientists on the Academy’s roof!)

The young researchers are using existing data in each study, looking at old observations in entirely new ways. All of the projects span many institutions and approach biodiversity beyond species numbers. They look at the diversity of individual species, of course, but they also look at the diversity of groups of species and functions of each species. For example, you can look at functional biodiversity as how many herbivores, carnivores, top predators, and bottom dwellers exist within an ecosystem. Their diagram, above right, demonstrates this and the effects and influences to an ecosystem.

Students drive each endeavor, but they don’t need to select something within their particular program of study. And like the iGem teams, each project includes a diverse group of students—biologists, statisticians, writers, you name it.

And the results? A recent paper about remote sensing in rainforests and two more publications forthcoming (see here and here). Also an online blog that was introduced earlier this year at the popular Science Online conference.

The Academy supports a similar NSF-funded program, this one for undergraduates. The Summer Systematics Institute has been running for an astounding 17 years and “addresses critical issues such as, world-wide threats to biodiversity, the origins and diversification of life, phylogenetic systematics and evolutionary biology, which have become critical components of undergraduate education.” Stay tuned for a video about the SSI program, available on Science Today later this year.

Diagram courtesy of biodiverseperspectives.com

About a year ago, I heard Academy researchers talk about the same goal, identifying all life as quickly (and thoroughly) as possible, starting in pockets around the world where our research is and has been strong—Madagascar, the Coral Triangle, Gaoligongshan, and of course, California.

Why the need? Why the desire to accomplish this? I emailed Quentin Wheeler, the meeting organizer, who told me “With the biodiversity crisis, the need to advance taxonomy and species discovery has never been more urgent.” The Academy’s Stan Blum, who was part of the meeting, told me:

Human actions are profoundly changing our planet.  Knowing what exists and where will help us understand the resources we have at our disposal, and what we are at risk of losing. Right now we are like rich kids that haven’t learned to manage the family fortune. From medicine, to agriculture, to renewable energy, our reliance on the living portion of our natural heritage—biodiversity— is profound.

This project will include scientists from institutions around the world. Working together, in an open research format, is essential, says Blum:

This science is a global enterprise.  Every country has an interest in knowing how its own ecosystems work, and collectively we all have an interest in knowing life on Earth.

According to Wheeler, it won’t just be scientists. We can all get involved:

We spent a fair amount of time talking about citizen science and there are lots of exciting ideas for expanding involvement.  What I find especially exciting about cyber-enabled taxonomy or cybertaxonomy—the fusion of traditional taxonomic goals with cyber tools—is the coming democratization of taxonomy.  While only a privileged few in the past could access the rare literature and type- and rare-specimens in order to conduct taxonomy at high levels of excellence, all those resources are being digitized and soon citizen scientists will be able to take their work as far as their passion and talents permit.

(For more information on cybertaxonomy and to find out about the organization behind this proposal, check out the International Institution for Species Exploration website.)

I asked Blum if the goal was realistic, “to identify and describe all the world’s 10 million species in the next 50 years.”

Yes, with a few caveats.  This initiative doesn’t have a finite goal like landing on the moon; it doesn’t have the simple demonstration of achievement symbolized by planting a flag. Nevertheless, the value in going to the moon was not planting the flag.  The value was in what came out of getting there. We may never know ALL the species there are, but before we lose traction worrying about how we’ll know when we’re done, we really need to understand that we’re at the other end of the process with some very important and large groups of organisms.  Our ignorance is still profound.  It is very possible to achieve the discovery rate we need to meet the 50-year goal.

How much will it cost? How will it get funded? Wheeler told us that there will be a final report in March 2011, but a first report is expected earlier next year. This is a subject our institution is very passionate about. In fact, it’s in our mission statement: to explore, explain and protect the natural world. All of it. So stay tuned.

Creative Commons image by treegrow/flickr

How do new species develop? Well, in many cases, it takes the geographic separation of a population to get that process started. However, researchers out of UC Santa Cruz studying colorful and charismatic lizards have been working to confirm an alternative hypothesis that’s existed since Darwin that a population containing different morphs– different types of the same species can, over time, yield new species.

Scientists in Barry Sinervo’s Lab have been studying the side-blotched lizard for over 20 years. Within this species there are three distinct color morphs– orange-throated, blue-throated and yellow-throated lizards.

A few years ago, Dr. Sinervo and his team discovered that competition among male side-blotched lizards for territory and mates takes the form of a rock-paper-scissors game, where the aggressive orange-throated lizard can take the territory from a blue-throated; the blue-throated can work in teams to defend against the yellow-throated; and the non-territory holding yellow-throated can mimic females in order to sneak onto the territory of an orange-throated and mate with females there.

Side-blotched lizards live in the western and southwestern United States and into Mexico. In some areas, all three morphs live side-by-side, but in others, one or two of the morphs are missing. As published recently in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, it’s in these areas that two things are happening which may be leading to the evolution of new species.

One: There are populations where one or two of the morphs have been lost, leaving just a single-colored morph. As that morph takes over, adaptations that were beneficial before become unnecessary, leading to evolutionary change and new adaptations emerging.

Two: Evidence of this evolutionary change is supported by the fact that a new subspecies of side-blotched lizards have been identified in populations where one or two of the three morphs have been lost. This is significant since subspecies are the precursors to new species.

DNA testing supports the idea that cycling between color morphs has been happening within some populations of side-blotched lizards for many millions of years. The research here suggests that, in some cases, this cycling may eventually result in the loss of one or two morphs which, in turn, could lead to the evolution of new species. But that probably won’t happen until further down the road. Remember, evolution can be a very slow process.

Image from LizardLand!