A perfusion protocol for lizards, including a method for brain removal

The goal of fixation is to rapidly and uniformly preserve tissue in a life-like state. Perfusion achieves optimal fixation by pumping fixative directly through an animal's circulatory system. Standard perfusion techniques were developed primarily for application in mammals, which are traditional neuroscience research models. Increasingly, other vertebrate groups are also being used in neuroscience. Following mammalian perfusion protocols for non-mammalian vertebrates often results in failed perfusions. Here, I present a modified perfusion protocol suitable for lizards. Though geared towards standard brain perfusion, this protocol is easily modified for the perfusion of other tissues and for various specialized histological techniques. The two aortas of the lizard heart, emerging from a single ventricle, mean that care must be taken to place the perfusion needle in the correct aorta, unlike in mammals.Only the head and neck perfuse - the visceral organs will not decolour, and the body may not twitch.I also include a method for removing a lizard brain, which differs from mammals due to the incomplete and thicker skull of the lizard.Funding was provided by grants from the Australian National University (APA-31/2011) and the Canadian National Science and Engineering Research Council (PGSD3-415253-2012)

Knowledge, Certainty, and Factivity: A Possible Rapprochement

In recent discussions in this journal, Moti Mizrahi defends the claim that knowledge equals epistemic certainty. Howard Sankey finds Mizrahi’s argument to be problematic, since, as he reads it, this would entail that justification must guarantee truth. In this article, I suggest that an account of the normativity of justification is able to bridge the gap between Mizrahi’s proposal and Sankey’s objections

What If the Black Forest Owned Itself? A Constitutional Property Law Perspective on Rights of Nature

Ownership has been a key tool in the exploitation of nature for centuries. However, ownership could also shield natural entities from extraction and pollution if it were vested in them, rather than in humans or corporations. Through a case study of German constitutional property law, this article examines the normative content of this constitutional right. It argues that in owning themselves, natural entities would have numerous tools to fend off human interference with their self-determination. Constitutional property law would require any harmful activity affecting the natural entity to be based upon legislation and necessary to achieve a public purpose. The natural entity would enjoy broader access to justice. Courts would also often award appropriate remedies; where the natural entity would be awarded only compensation, this would be unsatisfactory because money cannot replace nature. The article finds that constitutional property law offers the potential for further protection from human interference, which has not been realized because of anthropocentric value judgments prevalent in German legal doctrine. Ecocentric approaches to ownership and invalidity as a standard remedy would play an important role in unlocking the full potential of ownership for environmental protection

Property Meeting the Challenge of the Commons in The Netherlands

In different branches of the Dutch legal system, there are categories and rights that serve to protect specific commons through different methods. Sunlight and air (including wind for windmills) can be freely used by everyone. Waters in the sea and rivers are things under private law, but do not have any owner until water is extracted. The seabed of the territorial sea and the Wadden Sea are State-owned and cannot be alienated. State-owned markets, schools, and swimming pools are public things. The public may claim access to private roads. Certain privately owned forests are maintained, in return for tax benefits, in the public interest. Health care, food, education, housing, and environmental protection are protected commons. Nationalisation requires an expropriation unless the owner is willing to sell: property may be expropriated only if in the public interest and the owner is compensated. In private law, there are specific grounds on which a non-owner can claim access to somebody else’s land

An Examination of Morality in a Naturalistic Universe

Naturalism is the view that our death marks a final and irreversible extinction. We are born into this world, we live our lives, and we ultimately perish from existence. This being the case, many naturalists urge people to live as fulfilling lives as possible. If this life is the only life people have, whatever constitutes the fullest or best way to live should be the way a person lives. However, what exactly constitutes a fulfilling life by the naturalist is not entirely agreed upon. Some naturalists claim that having individual happiness is what constitutes a fulfilling life, while others claim that being moral and serving others constitutes a fulfilling life. In a third view, our individual happiness is actually found in being moral and serving others, thus being moral ultimately constitutes a fulfilling life. If this life is the only one we have before eternal extinction, which one of these three views of a fulfilling life is correct? This project examines two naturalists who assert that being moral constitutes the most fulfilling life, and one who asserts that objective morality does exist