Feeding Mechanism of the Atlantic Guitarfish \u3cem\u3eRhinobatos Lentiginosus\u3c/em\u3e: Modulation of Kinematic and Motor Activity

The kinematics and muscle activity pattern of the head and jaws during feeding in the Atlantic guitarfish Rhinobatos lentiginosus are described and quantified using high-speed video and electromyography to test hypotheses regarding the conservation and modulation of the feeding mechanism. Prey is captured by the guitarfish using suction. Suction capture, bite manipulation and suction transport behaviors in the guitarfish are similar to one another in the relative sequence of kinematic and motor activity, but can be distinguished from one another by variation in absolute muscle activation time, in the presence or absence of muscle activity and in the duration of muscle activity. A novel compression transport behavior was observed that is strikingly different from the other feeding behaviors and has not been described previously in elasmobranchs. The mechanism of upper jaw protrusion in the guitarfish differs from that described in other elasmobranchs. Muscle function and motor pattern during feeding are similar in the plesiomorphic cranial muscles in the guitarfish and the spiny dogfish probably because of their shared ancestral morphology. Modulation in recruitment of jaw and hyoid depressor muscles among feeding behaviors in the guitarfish may be a consequence of duplication of muscles and decoupling of the jaws and hyoid apparatus in batoids

Durophagy in Sharks: Feeding Mechanics of the Hammerhead \u3cem\u3eSphyrna tiburo\u3c/em\u3e

This study investigates the motor pattern and head movements during feeding of a durophagus shark, the bonnethead Sphyrna tiburo, using electromyography and simultaneous high-speed video. Sphyrna tiburo feeds almost exclusively on hard-shelled crabs, with shrimp and fish taken occasionally. It captures crabs by ram feeding, then processes or reduces the prey by crushing it between molariform teeth, finally transporting the prey by suction for swallowing. The prey-crushing mechanism is distinct from that of ram or bite capture and suction transport. This crushing mechanism is accomplished by altering the duration of jaw adductor muscle activity and modifying jaw kinematics by the addition of a second jaw-closing phase. In crushing events, motor activity of the jaw adductor muscles continues (biting of the prey occurs as the jaws close and continues after the jaws have closed) throughout a second jaw-closing phase, unlike capture and transport events during which motor activity (biting) ceases at jaw closure. Sphyrna tiburo is able to take advantage of a resource (hard prey) that is not readily available to most sharks by utilizing a suite of durophagous characteristics: molariform teeth, a modified jaw protrusor muscle, altered jaw adductor activity and modified jaw kinematics. Sphyrna tiburo is a specialist feeder on crab prey as demonstrated by the lack of differences in kinematic or motor patterns when offered prey of differing hardness and its apparent lack of ability to modulate its behavior when feeding on other prey. Functional patterns are altered and coupled with modifications in dental and jaw morphology to produce diverse crushing behaviors in elasmobranchs

Conservation and Variation in the Feeding Mechanism of the Spiny Dogfish \u3cem\u3eSqualus Acanthias\u3c/em\u3e

Changes in the feeding mechanism with feeding behavior were investigated using high-speed video and electromyography to examine the kinematics and motor pattern of prey capture, manipulation and transport in the spiny dogfish Squalus acanthias (Squalidae: Squaliformes). In this study, Squalus acanthias used both suction and ram behaviors to capture and manipulate prey, while only suction was used to transport prey. The basic kinematic feeding sequence observed in other aquatic-feeding lower vertebrates is conserved in the spiny dogfish. Prey capture, bite manipulation and suction transport events are characterized by a common pattern of head movements and motor activity, but are distinguishable by differences in duration and relative timing. In general, capture events are longer in duration than manipulation and transport events, as found in other aquatic-feeding lower vertebrates. Numerous individual effects were found, indicating that individual sharks are capable of varying head movements and motor activity among successful feeding events. Upper jaw protrusion in the spiny dogfish is not restricted by its orbitostylic jaw suspension; rather, the upper jaw is protruded by 30 % of its head length, considerably more than in the lemon shark Negaprion brevirostris (Carcharhinidae: Carcharhiniformes) (18 %) with its hyostylic jaw suspension. One function of upper jaw protrusion is to assist in jaw closure by protruding the upper jaw as well as elevating the lower jaw to close the gape, thus decreasing the time to jaw closure. The mechanism of upper jaw protrusion was found to differ between squaliform and carcharhiniform sharks. Whereas the levator palatoquadrati muscle assists in retracting the upper jaw in the spiny dogfish, it assists in protruding the upper jaw in the lemon shark. This study represents the first comprehensive electromyographic and kinematic analysis of the feeding mechanism in a squaliform shark

Evolution of Upper Jaw Protrusion Mechanisms in Elasmobranchs

Upper jaw protrusion is a prominent component of the feeding mechanism in most elasmobranchs and has received considerable attention over the years. In this paper, we review what is known of muscle activity during prey capture in elasmobranchs, particularly that of upper jaw protrusion, and evaluate the extent to which functional modifications have evolved through changes in anatomy or patterns of muscle activity. To date, motor activity during feeding has been documented in only four species of elasmobranchs, although they represent the three major elasmobranch groups: Galea (typical sharks); Squalea (dogfish sharks); and Batoidea (skates and rays). Our efforts show that while muscles involved in cranial elevation and lower jaw depression and elevation show a conserved pattern of motor activity and function across species, other muscles show a more variable history. Our observations of elasmobranch upper jaw protrusion mechanisms suggest a mosaic of character changes over the course of evolution that involve anatomical changes in all cases and modifications of muscle activation patterns in some cases. During the evolution of feeding mechanisms of elasmobranchs, there have been two structural changes incorporating a pre-existing motor pattern to yield an unmodified kinematic profile, the original preorbitalis and the descendent preorbitalis. One additional instance of structural modification is accompanied by an alteration in the motor pattern leading to a change in movement pattern, the levator palatoquadrati

DE-STARLITE: A Directed Energy Planetary Defense Mission

This paper presents the motivation behind and design of a directed energy planetary defense system that utilizes laser ablation of an asteroid to impart a deflecting force on the target. The proposed system is called DE-STARLITE for Directed Energy System for Targeting of Asteroids and ExploRation – LITE as it is a small, stand-on unit of a larger standoff DE-STAR system. Pursuant to the stand-on design, ion engines will propel the spacecraft from low-Earth orbit (LEO) to the near-Earth asteroid (NEA). During laser ablation, the asteroid itself becomes the propellant ; thus a very modest spacecraft can deflect an asteroid much larger than would be possible with a system of similar mission mass using ion beam deflection (IBD) or a gravity tractor. DE-STARLITE is capable of deflecting an Apophis-class (325 m diameter) asteroid with a 15-year targeting time. The mission fits within the rough mission parameters of the Asteroid Redirect Mission (ARM) program in terms of mass and size and has much greater capability for planetary defense than current proposals and is readily scalable to the threat. It can deflect all known threats with sufficient warning

BIOFRAG: A new database for analysing BIOdiversity responses to forest FRAGmentation

Habitat fragmentation studies are producing inconsistent and complex results across which it is nearly impossible to synthesise. Consistent analytical techniques can be applied to primary datasets, if stored in a flexible database that allows simple data retrieval for subsequent analyses. Method: We developed a relational database linking data collected in the field to taxonomic nomenclature, spatial and temporal plot attributes and further environmental variables (e.g. information on biogeographic region. Typical field assessments include measures of biological variables (e.g. presence, abundance, ground cover) of one species or a set of species linked to a set of plots in fragments of a forested landscape. Conclusion: The database currently holds records of 5792 unique species sampled in 52 landscapes in six of eight biogeographic regions: mammals 173, birds 1101, herpetofauna 284, insects 2317, other arthropods: 48, plants 1804, snails 65. Most species are found in one or two landscapes, but some are found in four. Using the huge amount of primary data on biodiversity response to fragmentation becomes increasingly important as anthropogenic pressures from high population growth and land demands are increasing. This database can be queried to extract data for subsequent analyses of the biological response to forest fragmentation with new metrics that can integrate across the components of fragmented landscapes. Meta-analyses of findings based on consistent methods and metrics will be able to generalise over studies allowing inter-comparisons for unified answers. The database can thus help researchers in providing findings for analyses of trade-offs between land use benefits and impacts on biodiversity and to track performance of management for biodiversity conservation in human-modified landscapes.Fil: Pfeifer, Marion. Imperial College London; Reino UnidoFil: Lefebvre, Veronique. Imperial College London; Reino UnidoFil: Gardner, Toby A.. Stockholm Environment Institute; SueciaFil: Arroyo Rodríguez, Víctor. Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México; MéxicoFil: Baeten, Lander. University of Ghent; BélgicaFil: Banks Leite, Cristina. Imperial College London; Reino UnidoFil: Barlow, Jos. Lancaster University; Reino UnidoFil: Betts, Matthew G.. State University of Oregon; Estados UnidosFil: Brunet, Joerg. Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences; SueciaFil: Cerezo Blandón, Alexis Mauricio. Universidad de Buenos Aires. Facultad de Agronomía. Departamento de Métodos Cuantitativos y Sistemas de Información; ArgentinaFil: Cisneros, Laura M.. University of Connecticut; Estados UnidosFil: Collard, Stuart. Nature Conservation Society of South Australia; AustraliaFil: D´Cruze, Neil. The World Society for the Protection of Animals; Reino UnidoFil: Da Silva Motta, Catarina. Ministério da Ciência, Tecnologia, Inovações. Instituto Nacional de Pesquisas da Amazônia; BrasilFil: Duguay, Stephanie. Carleton University; CanadáFil: Eggermont, Hilde. University of Ghent; BélgicaFil: Eigenbrod, Félix. University of Southampton; Reino UnidoFil: Hadley, Adam S.. State University of Oregon; Estados UnidosFil: Hanson, Thor R.. No especifíca;Fil: Hawes, Joseph E.. University of East Anglia; Reino UnidoFil: Heartsill Scalley, Tamara. United State Department of Agriculture. Forestry Service; Puerto RicoFil: Klingbeil, Brian T.. University of Connecticut; Estados UnidosFil: Kolb, Annette. Universitat Bremen; AlemaniaFil: Kormann, Urs. Universität Göttingen; AlemaniaFil: Kumar, Sunil. State University of Colorado - Fort Collins; Estados UnidosFil: Lachat, Thibault. Swiss Federal Institute for Forest; SuizaFil: Lakeman Fraser, Poppy. Imperial College London; Reino UnidoFil: Lantschner, María Victoria. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Bahía Blanca; Argentina. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria. Centro Regional Patagonia Norte. Estación Experimental Agropecuaria San Carlos de Bariloche; ArgentinaFil: Laurance, William F.. James Cook University; AustraliaFil: Leal, Inara R.. Universidade Federal de Pernambuco; BrasilFil: Lens, Luc. University of Ghent; BélgicaFil: Marsh, Charles J.. University of Leeds; Reino UnidoFil: Medina Rangel, Guido F.. Universidad Nacional de Colombia; ColombiaFil: Melles, Stephanie. University of Toronto; CanadáFil: Mezger, Dirk. Field Museum of Natural History; Estados UnidosFil: Oldekop, Johan A.. University of Sheffield; Reino UnidoFil: Overal , Williams L.. Museu Paraense Emílio Goeldi. Departamento de Entomologia; BrasilFil: Owen, Charlotte. Imperial College London; Reino UnidoFil: Peres, Carlos A.. University of East Anglia; Reino UnidoFil: Phalan, Ben. University of Southampton; Reino UnidoFil: Pidgeon, Anna Michle. University of Wisconsin; Estados UnidosFil: Pilia, Oriana. Imperial College London; Reino UnidoFil: Possingham, Hugh P.. Imperial College London; Reino Unido. The University Of Queensland; AustraliaFil: Possingham, Max L.. No especifíca;Fil: Raheem, Dinarzarde C.. Royal Belgian Institute of Natural Sciences; Bélgica. Natural History Museum; Reino UnidoFil: Ribeiro, Danilo B.. Universidade Federal do Mato Grosso do Sul; BrasilFil: Ribeiro Neto, Jose D.. Universidade Federal de Pernambuco; BrasilFil: Robinson, Douglas W.. State University of Oregon; Estados UnidosFil: Robinson, Richard. Manjimup Research Centre; AustraliaFil: Rytwinski, Trina. Carleton University; CanadáFil: Scherber, Christoph. Universität Göttingen; AlemaniaFil: Slade, Eleanor M.. University of Oxford; Reino UnidoFil: Somarriba, Eduardo. Centro Agronómico Tropical de Investigación y Enseñanza; Costa RicaFil: Stouffer, Philip C.. State University of Louisiana; Estados UnidosFil: Struebig, Matthew J.. University of Kent; Reino UnidoFil: Tylianakis, Jason M.. University College London; Estados Unidos. Imperial College London; Reino UnidoFil: Teja, Tscharntke. Universität Göttingen; AlemaniaFil: Tyre, Andrew J.. Universidad de Nebraska - Lincoln; Estados UnidosFil: Urbina Cardona, Jose N.. Pontificia Universidad Javeriana; ColombiaFil: Vasconcelos, Heraldo L.. Universidade Federal de Uberlandia; BrasilFil: Wearn, Oliver. Imperial College London; Reino Unido. The Zoological Society of London; Reino UnidoFil: Wells, Konstans. University of Adelaide; AustraliaFil: Willig, Michael R.. University of Connecticut; Estados UnidosFil: Wood, Eric. University of Wisconsin; Estados UnidosFil: Young, Richard P.. Durrell Wildlife Conservation Trust; Reino UnidoFil: Bradley, Andrew V.. Imperial College London; Reino UnidoFil: Ewers, Robert M.. Imperial College London; Reino Unid

First detection of X-ray polarization from the accreting neutron star 4U 1820-303

This paper reports the first detection of polarization in the X-rays for atoll-source 4U 1820-303, obtained with the Imaging X-ray Polarimetry Explorer (IXPE) at 99.999% confidence level (CL). Simultaneous polarimetric measurements were also performed in the radio with the Australia Telescope Compact Array (ATCA). The IXPE observations of 4U 1820-303 were coordinated with Swift-XRT, NICER, and NuSTAR aiming to obtain an accurate X-ray spectral model covering a broad energy interval. The source shows a significant polarization above 4 keV, with a polarization degree of 2.0(0.5)% and a polarization angle of -55(7) deg in the 4-7 keV energy range, and a polarization degree of 10(2)% and a polarization angle of -67(7) deg in the 7-8 keV energy bin. This polarization also shows a clear energy trend with polarization degree increasing with energy and a hint for a position-angle change of about 90 deg at 96% CL around 4 keV. The spectro-polarimetric fit indicates that the accretion disk is polarized orthogonally to the hard spectral component, which is presumably produced in the boundary/spreading layer. We do not detect linear polarization from the radio counterpart, with a 99.97% upper limit of 50% at 7.25 GHz