Happy Atheist Forum

General => Science => Topic started by: Tank on August 02, 2010, 09:49:21 AM

Title: Chernobyl zone shows decline in biodiversity
Post by: Tank on August 02, 2010, 09:49:21 AM
Chernobyl zone shows decline in biodiversity (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-10819027)

QuoteThe largest wildlife census of its kind conducted in Chernobyl has revealed that mammals are declining in the exclusion zone surrounding the nuclear power plant.

The study aimed to establish the most reliable way to measure the impact on wildlife of contamination in the zone.

It was based on almost four years of counting and studying animals there...

This makes interesting reading as there have been conflicting reports about the effects on wildlife of the radioactive fallout around the Chernobyl area. At one time it was reported that wildlife was flourishing as humans had left the area, thus implying that humans are more dangerous to wildlife than nuclear fallout. While initially this may have been true it would now appear that the long term (multi generational) effects of exposure to the fallout are coming to light. One potential implication is that some species are better able to withstand radioactivity than others and that a strong selection pressure is at work combined with a high mutations rate caused by the fall out. I recall a report on the adaptability of mice in the area. Many genes are switched on the the Chernobyl mice that are present, but latent, in mice outside the fall out zone. This implies that without a high background radiation switching on these genes is detrimental to survival but in a high background area, on balance, it's better to take the risk and switch them on.
Title: Re: Chernobyl zone shows decline in biodiversity
Post by: Thumpalumpacus on August 03, 2010, 12:32:53 AM
Is their any information on the lower echelons of the food chain?
Title: Re: Chernobyl zone shows decline in biodiversity
Post by: Tank on August 03, 2010, 07:06:00 AM
Quote from: "Thumpalumpacus"Is their any information on the lower echelons of the food chain?
Good question. Don't know. What stimulated the question?
Title: Re: Chernobyl zone shows decline in biodiversity
Post by: Thumpalumpacus on August 03, 2010, 05:09:54 PM
I was wondering if this is a bump in the chart, or if a larger ecological collapse is augured.
Title: Re: Chernobyl zone shows decline in biodiversity
Post by: Tank on August 03, 2010, 05:18:05 PM
Quote from: "Thumpalumpacus"I was wondering if this is a bump in the chart, or if a larger ecological collapse is augured.
Your comment got me thinking, I think along the same lines that if the creatures higher on the food chain are showing demographic changes is this because the creatures lower on the food chain are being effected. An example of this would be Puffins that eats Sand eels which were never considered catching. However now they are being caught by the megaton and ground up as fertiliser! Another possibility would be accumulation of isotopes in the food chain in a similar way to the insecticide DDT. I'm not aware of any food chain research.

It is an interesting point though. The 'big five' (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extinction_event) extinctions in the history of the Earth, all seem to have been global ecosystem collapses. The way humanity is going there could well be another catastrophe on its way  :verysad:
Title: Re: Chernobyl zone shows decline in biodiversity
Post by: Tank on August 03, 2010, 05:39:04 PM
Found this while looking for food chain research http://www.independent.co.uk/news/scien ... 20059.html (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/scottish-sheep-farms-finally-free-of-chernobyl-fallout-2020059.html)
Title: Re: Chernobyl zone shows decline in biodiversity
Post by: Thumpalumpacus on August 04, 2010, 06:49:27 PM
Yeah, that's kinda what my noggin was working on, except I was analogizing to mercury in fish.

From what I understand, we are in the middle of one of the larger extinction events that we know of, and it seems hopelessly naive to think that human environmental modification isn't a large part of the reason it's happening, though I admittedly have no data to support that hunch.

eta -- and thanks for the links.