Why do zebras have stripes?

A mother zebra with a foal in Tanzania’s Tarangire National Park. Credit: Brenda Larison/UCLA

One of nature’s fascinating questions is how zebras got their stripes.

A team of life scientists led by UCLA’s Brenda Larison has found at least part of the answer: The amount and intensity of striping can be best predicted by the temperature of the environment in which zebras live.

In the January cover story of the Royal Society’s online journal, Open Science, the researchers make the case that the association between striping and temperature likely points to multiple benefits — including controlling zebras’ body temperature and protecting them from diseases carried by biting flies.

“While past studies have typically focused their search for single mechanisms, we illustrate in this study how the cause of this extraordinary phenomenon is actually likely much more complex than previously appreciated, with temperature playing an important role,” said Thomas B. Smith, professor of ecology and evolutionary biology in the UCLA College and senior author of the research.

Larison, a researcher in UCLA’s department of ecology and evolutionary biology and the study’s lead author, and her colleagues examined the plains zebra, which is the most common of three zebra species and has a wide variety of stripe patterns. On zebras in warmer climes, the stripes are bold and cover the entire body. On others — particularly those in regions with colder winters such as South Africa and Namibia — the stripes are fewer in number and are lighter and narrower. In some cases, the legs or other body parts have virtually no striping.

Zebras evolved from horses more than 2 million years ago, biologists have found. Scientists have previously hypothesized that zebras’ stripes evolved for one, or a combination of, four main reasons: confusing predators, protecting against disease-carrying insects, controlling body temperature and social cohesion. And while numerous previous studies of the phenomenon focused on a single hypothesis, the Larison-led study was the first to fully test a large set of hypotheses against one another.

Analyzing zebras at 16 locations in Africa and considering more two dozen environmental factors, the researchers found that temperature was the strongest predictor of zebras’ striping. The finding provides the first evidence that controlling body temperature, or thermoregulation, is the main reason for the stripes and the patterns they form.
WATCH VIDEO
Separate research by Daniel Rubenstein, a Princeton University professor of ecology and evolutionary biology and a co-author of the Open Science paper, and Princeton undergraduate Damaris Iriondo strongly suggests that boldly striped zebras have external body temperatures about five degrees Fahrenheit cooler than other animals of the same size — like antelopes — that do not have stripes but live in the same areas. The Rubenstein study is not yet published, but it is cited in the Open Science paper.

Larison has studied many zebras during her field work throughout Africa — including in Kenya, South Africa, Tanzania, Uganda and Zimbabwe. Using the fact that their stripes are unique like fingerprints, she is able to distinguish one zebra from another.

In addition to Rubenstein, arguably the world’s leading expert on zebras, the study’s co-authors were Alec Chan-Golston and Elizabeth Li, former UCLA undergraduates in mathematics; Ryan Harrigan, an assistant adjunct professor in UCLA’s Center for Tropical Research; and Henri Thomassen, a former UCLA postdoctoral scholar and current research associate at the Institute for Evolution and Ecology at Germany’s University of Tübingen.

The research was supported by the National Geographic Society Committee for Research and Exploration.

Larison and her research team have also collected zebra tissue samples and have used cutting-edge technology to sequence zebra DNA to try to identify which genes code for striping. The team is continuing to study the benefits stripes provide.

Source: UCLA

Mapping bats could help stop Ebola's spread

Fruit bats (Pteropodidae) are considered the likely host of the Ebola virus. Credit: Satit Srihin

In the fight against Ebola, mapping fruit bat habitats could be one important step, says a geoinformatics researcher at Sweden's Royal Institute of Technology.

Like the Black Death that ravaged medieval Europe, the Ebola virus' progress through remote areas of West Africa is enabled by lack of understanding about the disease, including its causes and transmission.

Mapping technology however will give responders to the crisis in Africa the upper hand in stopping the spread of the deadly disease, says Skog, a researcher in geoinformatics at Sweden's KTH Royal Institute of Technology.

Skog's research has produced a method that medical professionals can use to visualise the geographical distribution of a disease over time. In his research, Skog has explored the relationship between geography and disease distribution in major epidemics of the past, including the Black Death, the Russian Flu pandemic of 1889, the Asiatic Influenza of 1957 and the swine flu. He says the historical data provides a basis for predicting the course of future epidemics and pandemics.

"My research and method can also be used to report the current state of a pandemic, or predict how extensive the spread will be. And where the disease will strike next," Skog says.

In fact, the way in which Black Death spread during the mid 14th, century bears a no small resemblance to today's Ebola epidemic, he says. Both diseases were hosted by small mammals -- black rats and fruit bats, respectively. But ultimately it was humans that enabled its spread.

"The Black Death was very much depending on total lack of knowledge regarding the etiology of the disease and how to avoid further transmission," Skog says. "That is also the case for the mainly remote locations where Ebola now is spread."

Fruit bats are believed to be the natural hosts of Ebola. These bats are among the creatures that residents of rural West Africa hunt for "bush meat." The disease is also spread by the droppings of the bat, and it is believed to have spread to other types of bush meat, as well as monkeys and pigs that are raised for slaughter.

"The local population is getting part of their nourishment from bush hunting, leading to contact with the virus that is transmitted via body fluids," Skog says, suggesting that closer study of the fruit bat could provide vital answers.

"A guess of mine is that the number of infected fruit bats is a determining factor for an Ebola outbreak," he says. "Are there any known factors that may have changed the ecosystem in favor of the bats? Are the bats affected by the virus too? Do fruit bats always carry the Ebola virus or is the virus fatal to them as well? If so the percentage of infected bats will vary over the years also depending on the immunology of the species."

There are a number of geoinformation technology options available to public health organizations that have sent field crews to respond to the crisis. These, Skog says, including equipping field workers with hand-held GPS devices that feed a central database with data and findings regarding locations of bodies, possible infections and diagnosed cases personnel.

"The data can easily be centrally monitored and used for decisions and policies to mitigate the spread," he says. "Using satellite imagery, population centers can be localized. Collected disease data can also be compared and analysed with environmental and climatologic data to support other efforts to control the spread."

For instance, assuming that fruit bats are the reservoir for the ebola virus, Skog says it would be of interest to find out if the first detected cases in an outbreak are located in or close to a fruit bat habitat. "If the environmental and climatologic parameters for fruit bat habitats can be defined, there is a chance these habitats could be mapped using existing map data and satellite or airborne imagery," he says.

"Then risk areas could be monitored and preventive measures could be performed by health authorities. If the natural reservoir is in fact some other animal, positioning the first cases in each outbreak would still give a clue about what to look for."

Source: KTH The Royal Institute of Technology

Mountain pine beetles get bad rap for wildfires, study says

Following wildfires in 2011, a UW-Madison research team studied lodgepole pine trees in the Northern Rocky Mountains to examine whether earlier outbreaks of mountain pine beetles changed the ecological impact of the wildfires. Credit: Turner Lab

Mountain pine beetles get a bad rap, and understandably so. The grain-of-rice-sized insects are responsible for killing pine trees over tens of millions of acres in the Western U.S. and Canada over the last decade.

But contrary to popular belief, these pests may not be to blame for more severe wildfires like those that have recently swept through the region. Instead, weather and topography play a greater role in the ecological severity of fires than these bark-boring beetles.

New research led by the University of Wisconsin-Madison and the Washington State Department of Natural Resources provides some of the first rigorous field data to test whether fires that burn in areas impacted by mountain pine beetles are more ecologically severe than in those not attacked by the native bug.

In a study published this week in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, UW-Madison zoology professor Monica Turner and her graduate student, Brian Harvey, show pine beetle outbreaks contributed little to the severity of six wildfires that affected more than 75,000 acres in the Northern Rocky Mountains in 2011. They also show that the beetle outbreaks, which occurred from 2000 through 2010, have not directly impacted post-fire recovery of the forests. The study does not, however, address fire behavior, such as how quickly fires spread or how dangerous they are to fight.

While the findings may exonerate the insect scapegoats, they should also help ecosystem managers better respond to changes in the face of climate-driven disturbances, like drought and warmer temperatures.

Large, severe fires are typical in the lodgepole pine forests found throughout the region, even without mountain pine beetle outbreaks. However, as the climate has warmed, outbreaks and big fires have both become more common. The phenomenon of more beetles has meant more dead trees, and some have grown concerned about how beetle attacks and wildfires may interact.

"The conventional wisdom is that a forest of dead trees is a tinder box just waiting to burn up," says Turner, who has long studied the forest landscape of the Mountain West. "There were very little data out there but a lot of concern."

Forests attacked by bark beetles -- which burrow into the bark of lodgepole pines to mate and incubate their larvae -- can seem nothing more than ample kindling for a raging blaze, with their dead wood and dry, reddish-brown needles.

The burrows the beetles carve under the bark of pines, called galleries, choke off water and nutrient circulation in the trees. The trees die and, for the first couple of years, they hold on to their dry, lifeless needles. Scientists call this the "red stage," and some believe these trees could fuel more severe fires.

By year three, most beetle-attacked trees have entered the "gray stage," dropping their once green pine foliage, becoming needleless wood carcasses.

Earlier studies from Turner's group suggested that beetle outbreaks would not lead to more severe fires. But without actual fires, the interaction could not be tested.

However, in 2011, wildfires throughout eastern Idaho and western Montana -- in forests that had experienced varying mountain pine beetle outbreak impacts -- provided opportunity for the research team to begin to answer the question: Do the two disturbances, beetle attacks and wildfire, together change the ecological response of the forest to fire?

Fortunately for the team, among the burned areas studied were pine stands that had not been attacked by beetles. These areas served as controls. Others suffered a range of mortality from the beetles; in some stands, beetles killed nearly 90 percent of the trees prior to wildfire. The fires that raged also ran the spectrum of severity, allowing the researchers to compare a number of variables.

Some study plots comprised mostly live trees, while others contained mostly red-stage or gray-stage trees -- allowing the researchers to assess whether plots with red-stage trees (with dry needles) experienced greater levels of fire severity than plots with mostly gray-stage trees (no needles), as they and others had expected.

The study team examined ecosystem indicators of fire severity, such as how many trees were killed by fire and how much char covered the forests.

Engaging in what Harvey calls "post-fire detective work," in 2012, the scientific team evaluated fire severity in each study plot and stripped sections of bark from over 10,000 trees to determine what killed them, beetles or fire. Beetle galleries can remain visible under the bark even after fire.

As they sifted through the blackened trees and forest floor, the team became covered with ash and soot.

"We looked like coal miners when we were done," says Harvey.

They found that the severity of the outbreak and whether trees were in the red or gray stage had almost no effect on fire severity under moderate burning conditions.

Only under more extreme fire-burning conditions -- when it was hot, dry and windy -- did areas with more beetle-killed trees show signs of more ecologically severe fires, such as more deeply burned trunks and crowns (the part of the tree that includes its limbs and needles). The presence of more gray-stage trees actually had a stronger impact on fire severity than the amount of red-stage trees, to the surprise of the scientists.

Overall, however, Turner says the effects of beetle outbreaks on fire severity took a back seat to stronger drivers -- primarily weather and topography. Fire severity increased under more extreme weather, regardless of pre-fire outbreaks, and forest stands higher in the landscape burned more severely than those at lower elevation as fires moved uphill, building momentum.

"No one says beetle-killed forests won't burn," says Turner. "The data set looks at whether they burn with different severity compared to unattacked forests burning under similar conditions."

The team was also interested in whether beetle outbreaks slowed the recovery of the forests after fires. Lodgepole pines are adapted to fire, containing two types of seed-carrying cones: those that release seeds as soon as they mature and those that require fire to open, blanketing the forest floor with potential new life following a blaze.

By counting the number of post-fire tree seedlings in their plots, the researchers found very little beetle-related impact. Tree seedlings were most numerous where more of the fire-killed trees bore the fire-adapted, or serotinous, cones. Beetle-killed trees likely contributed to post-fire seedling establishment, too, as their seeds remain viable in cones if they are not consumed in fire. Only high-reaching char from tall flames reduced the number of seed-spreading cones.

The scientists emphasize the results may differ in other forest types or with different lengths of time between beetle outbreaks and fire.

"These are both natural disturbances, fire and beetle outbreaks," says Turner. "It's not surprising the ecosystem has these mechanisms to be resilient. What we as people see as catastrophes are not always catastrophes to the ecosystem."

Source: University of Wisconsin-Madison