Ethology. Claims and Limits of a Lost Discipline

When the Werner Reimers Foundation organized a colloquium on Human Ethology in 1977, it was about Claims and Limits of a New Discipline as a bridge between biology and the social sciences and humanities. As a lost discipline, however, the interdisciplinary approach to ethology only takes shape in a dispersed dispositif. This is the framing argument, which derives from the nucleus of ethology, namely that the starting point of all knowledge is the body in its possibilities of movement in time and space to affect and be affected. In their essays (English or German), the contributors to this collection have worked through the heterogeneity of ethological thought – from Spinoza to Jakob von Uexküll, Gregory Bateson, Gilles Deleuze and Félix Guattari, Philippe Descola, or Isabelle Stengers – and practice – as, for example in the works of Virginia Woolf or Marcel Beyer – and have taken it as an opportunity to relocate ethology, 1) as an “Immanent Ecology”, with essays by Kerstin Andermann, Hanjo Berressem, and Verena Andermatt Conley; 2) in the discussion of “Anthropological Contrasts”, with essays by Marc Rölli, Mirjam Schaub, and Stefan Rieger, and 3) in “Ethological Interferences and Practices,” with essays by Stephan Zandt, Anthony Uhlmann, and Adrian Robanus. A commentary by Sophia Gräfe concludes the volume

Groundfish overfishing, diatom decline, and the marine silica cycle : lessons from Saanich Inlet, Canada, and the Baltic Sea cod crash

Author Posting. © American Geophysical Union, 2009. This article is posted here by permission of American Geophysical Union for personal use, not for redistribution. The definitive version was published in Global Biogeochemical Cycles 23 (2009): GB4032, doi:10.1029/2008GB003416.In this study, we link groundfish activity to the marine silica cycle and suggest that the drastic mid-1980s crash of the Baltic Sea cod (Gadus morhua) population triggered a cascade of events leading to decrease in dissolved silica (DSi) and diatom abundance in the water. We suggest that this seemingly unrelated sequence of events was caused by a marked decline in sediment resuspension associated with reduced groundfish activity resulting from the cod crash. In a study in Saanich Inlet, British Columbia, Canada, we discovered that, by resuspending bottom sediments, groundfish triple DSi fluxes from the sediments and reduce silica accumulation therein. Using these findings and the available oceanographic and environmental data from the Baltic Sea, we estimate that overfishing and recruitment failure of Baltic cod reduced by 20% the DSi supply from bottom sediments to the surface water leading to a decline in the diatom population in the Baltic Sea. The major importance of the marginal ocean in the marine silica cycle and the associated high population density of groundfish suggest that groundfish play a major role in the silica cycle. We postulate that dwindling groundfish populations caused by anthropogenic perturbations, e.g., overfishing and bottom water anoxia, may cause shifts in marine phytoplankton communities.We acknowledge the VENUS Project, University of Victoria, for supporting the ship and submersible time for field experiments and USGS, CMGP, for support to J.C. Additional funding from NSERC Canada and from the Canada Research Chairs Foundation to V.T.; a Rothschild fellowship to G.Y.; and a Yohay Ben-Nun fellowship and Moshe Shilo Center for Marine Biogeochemistry fund to T.K. are also acknowledged

Women get worse sex: a confound in the explanation of gender differences in sexuality

Gender differences in sexuality have gained considerable attention both within and outside of the scientific community. We argue that one of the main unacknowledged reasons for these differences is simply that women experience substantially worse sex than men do. Thus, in examinations of the etiology of gender differences in sexuality, a confound has largely been unacknowledged: Women and men are treated to different experiences of what is called “sexuality” and “having sex.” We discuss four arenas in which women’s experience of sexuality may often be worse than men’s: (a) anatomical differences, (b) sexual violence, (c) stigma, and (d) masculine cultures of sexuality. Then we consider how each disparity might explain well-known gender differences in sexuality.</p