SABBATICAL

SABBATICAL

Thursday, October 15, 2009

KILL THE INSECTS?

Sometimes the most important truth can be hidden in plain sight. There are over 250,000 flowering plants that have been described. That is probably a modest estimate, but I am not a Botanist and don’t want to over-sell. There are over 750,000 insects described. That number is actually much bigger and is expected to go over a million. Together this means that two thirds of all life forms are monopolized by these two groups. This is not an accident. These two groups of living things live together in an intimate way. Flowering plants could not exist without the service of insects to aid them in sexual reproduction, which we call pollination. And most insects could not exist without the shelter, surface, and food (nectar, pollen and plant parts) provided by the plants.

This concept of living together is a delicate and changing arrangement. Sometimes this balance between organisms is upset and we call the result predation, or parasitism, or disease, or extinction, or some other term. The problem is that it is very difficult to know what will upset the balance between any two or three organisms. How do we know what to avoid or how to avoid it. It is akin to a complex structure built out of toothpicks. It is hard to predict which tooth pick can be removed and which cannot without causing the collapse of the whole system. Generally humans don’t have a clue what we are doing in this regard

Mankind has put a lot of energy into killing insects. Ironically mankind relies heavily on the flowering plants for food and fiber. High mountain peaches, cherries, apples, pears, and apricots are just a few of the hundreds of plants we find desirable that rely on insects. So if plants need insects, and insects need plants, and man needs plants, then doesn’t man need insects?

Friday, October 9, 2009

TO BEE, OR NOT TO BEE

The Natives are restless and, like their human counterparts, their land is being taken from them. I’m not speaking of the Algonquin, Sioux or Navajo. I am speaking about tribes with names like Megachilidae, Colletidae, Osmia, and Bombus. These are tribes of the Native bees of North America. They have lived here for centuries prior to the invasion of the European interlopers, the Honey bee. There are somewhere between 3500 and 4000 species of Native bees in North America. That means that all pollination done in North and South America prior to the 1600’s was accomplished by these little known creatures.

They are cataloged and typed by several different names. Sometimes they are collectively called “pollen bees” because they carry far more pollen than honey bees. They are also known as “solitary bees” because they do not form large colonies. Each female develops her own nest without honey stores or workers. They are largely invisible to the average person, but of huge significance to the world. There are so many different types of these Native bees that it is hard to talk about them all at once. But there are a few simple facts that are relative to most.

Perhaps most importantly, Native bees are highly efficient pollinators. They often do the lion's share of pollinating crops, although this is not always recognized or appreciated. They have a number of advantages over honeybees as pollinators.
• Many are active early in the spring, before honey bee colonies reach large
size.
• Native bees are active earlier in the day and later in the afternoon than
honeybees, thus providing more pollination time.
• Native bees tend to stay in a crop rather than fly between crops, providing
more efficient pollination.
• Native bees seldom forage more than a couple of hundred yards from their
nest, whereas Honey bees may travel many miles.
• Because they fly faster than honeybees, they can pollinate more plants.
• Unlike honeybees, the males also pollinate the crop.
• Native bees are usually gentle, and do not sting since they have no honey
stores to defend. When they do sting, it is mild.
• Many native bees do not get disoriented in greenhouses.

Because of these differences, many Native bees are far more efficient pollinators than honey bees. Some experts suggest they accomplish more than 100 times what the Honey bee does. For example 250 Mason bees can pollinate one acre of apples. The same job would generally require a honeybee hive of about 20,000 bees.
Native bees have been shown to increase crop yields when they are present. Over 50 species of native bees specialize in plants such as watermelon or sunflower and over 80 species have been shown to be involved in berry crop pollination in Maine and Massachusetts. Native bees tripled the production of cherry tomatoes in one study in California. Many of these crops simply would not exist without native bees.
Often, growers don't realize how much pollination is performed by native bees. Signs of inadequate pollination are often misinterpreted as weather problems or disease. In one study it was found that of the 1700 bees trapped, only 34 were honeybees. This means that Native bees were performing almost all of the pollination in that area. Experts suggest that the economic value of pollination by Native bees greatly outweighs the traditional value of honey and wax produced by honeybees.
The drastic decline in feral and domestic honey bees has made it even more important to conserve and study wild bee populations.

The number of Native bees has also declined, but the reasons for these declines appear to be different from honey bees and are not well understood. Though some Native bees can be managed and used in commercial agriculture, most of them are regional. We do not know enough yet about their biology to know why they are declining, or how to manage them effectively.

So the fading drum beat of declining natives is once again affecting the North American continent. Likewise there may be serious consequences to the conqueror. However, if we can understand and preserve these native tribes, we may, at the same time, better feed the world. Towards this end biologists at Mesa State College will be collecting, identifying and attempting to culture local species of native bees in the future.

Monday, October 5, 2009

ART AND SCIENCE

Science is uniquely concerned with physical things. Historically science is born of questions such as: How many are there? Why do apples fall down? How does a falling thing fall? What shape is it? How big is it. How much does it weigh? Why does that object act that way? This requires scientists to restrict their attention to a limited single object and study that one object carefully.

This study may require tremendous physical skill and special techniques. The scientist may have to invent new methods and perfect new skills to conduct his studies. Often numerous studies are done which simply attempt to establish a pattern or direction. But from this careful, and sometimes lengthy, study the scientist attempts to distil some kind of general understanding about the object or event that they have studied.

This general understanding is sometimes called a theory. As it becomes more reliable and useful, it is sometimes is called a Law. These general ideas can then be used to compare other similar objects, evaluate the theory further, and make predictions about events under certain conditions.

But the overall conclusion is that scientists tend to begin with some real-world physical object or phenomenon and conclude with a general idea. They turn the world of reality into the world of imagination and thought.

In contrast, art appears to be concerned with ideas. Much of art, including visual art, music, language arts and performance, appears to be born from such matters as: religious concepts, political movements, cultural characteristics, imaginary events or social ideals. This requires the artist to restrict their attention and focus on a specific idea they wish to explore.

This exploration may require an extended period of time to consider all the ramifications of the idea they wish to explore. This is followed by an extended period of time when the artist may have to invent new methods and exert considerable skill in his chosen medium to produce a model. Often the artist may make several models or attempts to capture the ideas he is contemplating.

In the end the artist creates a physical object which represents his view of the purely ethereal idea he has been contemplating. The important thing is that the end product is a function of the physical world. It may be visual, audible, or palpable; but it is real. This object can then be used to test the accuracy of the artists (and societies) understanding of the idea, explore the ramifications of the idea, explain the idea more fully to others, or even test the truthfulness of the idea.

But the overall conclusion is that artists tend to begin with some non-physical idea and conclude with a real object or physical manifestation that can be detected by the senses. They turn the imaginary world of ideas into reality.

It seems that both groups of people are concerned with understanding our world, arriving at some form of truth and increasing understanding. Even the skills and talents involved are very similar in a general sense. What appears significantly different is that they initiate their mental journeys from separate starting points.

Unfortunately, because of their opposite trajectories, scientists and artists often see themselves as in conflict. Understanding similarities enriches each field significantly. This can be especially powerful in educational endeavors where numerous studies and pilot projects have shown that using one approaches to study the other is especially effective.

For example, having students write about math or science has increased understanding for many students. Writing computer programs that artistically animates scientific phenomenon has proven animate to be an excellent learning tool. The discipline of assigning an artist to explore a specific scientific concept in an art class leads to greater understanding of both art and science.

The world appears to need fewer engineers and poets, and far more people who understand the relationship between ideas and objects. The creation of ideas has an effect on the physical world. The creation of objects has an effect on the creation of ideas.