temp

Bizarre 'gunslinger' octopus caught for first time

For the first time, the tiny male of a bizarre species of octopus, which carries a slew of stinging weapons and is 100 times smaller than its females, has been captured alive by Australian scientists off the Great Barrier Reef.

The find was made by a group of scientists from the universities of Melbourne, Tasmania and Leeds, during a 'blackwater hang' - a night dive suspended in deep water. The discovery is described in the latest issue of the New Zealand Journal of Marine and Freshwater Research.

"You always hope you might bump into something like this," said Dr Mark Norman, an honorary fellow at the department of zoology at the University of Melbourne. "The chance is infinitesimally small."

Dead males have been found in trawls and plankton nets before, but this is the first time a live one has been seen. Known as the blanket octopus, or Tremoctopus violaceus Chiaie, it spends its entire life cycle in the open ocean, so either sex is rarely encountered.

"We know so little about the sea," Norman told ABC Science Online. "These are one of those almost mythical creatures of the sea. For us, it's as exciting as swimming with a giant squid."

While other octopus species also have size differences between the sexes - known as sexual size-dimorphism - the blanket octopus is the most extreme example known. The male specimen discovered is 2.4 cm long, weighing just 0.25 kg. Mature females have been measured at 2 m in length, weighing about 10 kg.

The male seems to have adapted to his small size, having a comparatively large eye which could help in locating females. Being small may also mean that they take less time to mature.

But for the male, sex is a one-off and probably fatal affair. They allocate one of their arms to reproduction, keeping it in a pouch in the centre of their tentacles. When they mate, the pouch ruptures, sperm is injected into the tip of the modified arm, which is then severed and passed to the female.

Thereafter, the male then almost certainly dies, while his detached arm remains in the female's mantle cavity until it is used to fertilise her eggs. Females are often found with several arms in their cavity, indicating competition amongst males.

The scientists have never found a dead male with a new arm, suggesting that they die after mating. Other octopuses are known to be able to drop off their arms as decoys to predators, in the same way that some lizards lose their tails. Arms tend to grow back in six to eight weeks.

But the blanket octopus' kamikaze approach to fertilisation - shedding an arm that keeps living when the rest of the animal dies - is only found in a couple of other octopuses, said Norman. "It looks like the arms do live for a long time [inside] the females."

The small size of the male may be an adaptation for self protection. Male and immature female blanket octopuses arm themselves with weapons snatched from competitors, taking stinging tentacles from the Portuguese man-of-war jellyfish and holding them in the suckers of two pairs of their upper arms - like a gunslinger with a pair of revolvers.

When threatened, they pull their arms over their bodies and expose the stinging tentacles. 

But this only works if the octopus is small and would probably not be enough to protect a large mature female: no female longer than 7 cm has been observed to carry the tentacles. Scientists speculate that the bigger suckers in the mature animal may not be able to hold the tentacles without stinging themselves. http://www.abc.net.au/science/news/stories/2003/776877.htm

do jellyfish

Toxic sea

Analysis of a 380-million-year-old crab-like fossil from Western Australia has painted a gruesome picture of the events leading to one of Earth's major mass extinctions.

Climate change and a devastating meteorite have both been fingered as causes for the decimation of marine life during the late Devonian period.

But research published in a recent issue of the journal Geology suggests the extinction occurred as a result of a toxic ocean, devoid of oxygen.

"We think there was anoxia, where toxic levels of hydrogen sulfide are released into the zone where light penetrates into the ocean," says organic geochemist Professor Kliti Grice, of Curtin University.

"A modern analogue of the conditions that existed at this time is the Black Sea."

Grice and colleagues, including PhD student Ines Melendez, reached their conclusions after analysing a 380 million-year-old crab-like fossil from the Gogo Formation in Canning Basin, Western Australia.

They identified chemical remains of various biological molecules, known as biomarkers, that helped paint a picture of environmental conditions at the time.

The researchers found a derivative of cholesterol, confirming for the first time that the fossil was the remains of a crustacean.

And they found biomarkers of photosynthesising phytoplankton, which the crustacean would have fed on.

Grice and colleagues also found biomarkers of green sulfur bacteria, also called Chlorobi which would have photosynthesised using hydrogen sulfide instead of water.

She says Chlorobi made a special pigment that enabled them to capture light of longer wavelengths, making it possible from them to survive in the murky waters beneath the bloom of phytoplankton.

"The ocean became stratified with an oxygen layer and an anoxic layer, and where the Chlorobi lived, right at the point where hydrogen sulfide is abundant," says Grice.

Last but not least, the researchers found biomarkers of sulfate-reducing bacteria, which would have lived even deeper down in the ocean and survived by degrading organic matter using sulfate instead of oxygen. This would have been the original source of the hydrogen sulfide on which the Chloribi thrived.

Grice says the condition of the ocean was identical to that which occurred during a later mass extinction at the end of the Permian, the largest extinction event in the past 600 million years.

The crustacean may have sunk to its death at the bottom of the ocean, intoxicated by hydrogen sulphide, says Grice, where it was preserved for hundreds of millions of years.

Preservation

The researchers say the 15-centimetre wide crustacean was exceptionally well preserved by a combination of processes.

Grice says the hydrogen sulphide chemically preserved the muscle tissue in the crustacean, as well as organic molecules from the green sulfur bacteria.

"The molecules and the fossil were all preserved by the same mechanism, and that has never been reported in such detail," says Grice.

The fossil was further preserved by a calcium carbonate encasement built by the sulfate-reducing bacteria.

The levels of biomarkers from sulfate-reducing bacteria were particularly high in this encasement, Grice says.

The research was funded by the Australian Research Council. http://www.abc.net.au/science/articles/2012/11/14/3632446.htm

do jellyfish

Fish tails

Fish tails stir up world's oceans

Creatures large and small may play an unsuspectedly important role in the stirring of ocean waters, according to a study.

So-called ocean mixing entails the transfer of cold and warm waters between the equator and poles, as well as between the icy, nutrient-rich depths and the sun-soaked top layer.

It plays a crucial part in marine biodiversity and, scientists now suspect, in maintaining earth's climate.

The research is published in today's edition of the journal Nature.

The notion that fish and other sea swimmers might somehow contribute significantly to currents as they move forward was first proposed in the mid-1950s by Charles Darwin, grandson of the legendary evolutionary biologist of the same name.

But this was dismissed by modern scientists as a fishy story.

In the 1960s, experiments compared the wake turbulence created by sea creatures with overall ocean turbulence.

They showed that the whirls kicked up by microscopic plankton or even fish quickly dissipated in dense, viscous water.

On this evidence, sea creatures seemed to contribute nothing to ocean mixing.

The clear conclusion was that the only drivers of note were shifting winds and tides, tied to the gravitational tug-of-war within our solar system.

Old theory re-established

But the new study by Kakani Katija and Joan Dabiri, of the California Institute of Technology, goes a long way toward reviving the 20th century Darwinian view, and uses the quiet pulse of jellyfish to prove the case.

Katija and Dabiri devised a laser-based system for measuring the movement of liquid.

They donned scuba gear and then released dye in the path of a swarm of jellyfish in a saltwater lake on the Pacific island of Palau.

The video images they captured showed a remarkable amount of cold water followed the jellyfish as they moved vertically, from deeper chillier waters toward the warmer layers of the surface.

Katija and Dabiri say the 1960s investigators had simply been looking in the wrong place.

They had been on the alert for waves or eddies - signs that the sea was being stirred up in the creatures' wake - rather than vertical displacement of water.

What determines the amount of water that is mixed is the size and shape of the animal, its population and migratory patterns.

Influence on climate

Churning of the seas is a factor in the carbon cycle.

At the surface, plankton gobble up carbon dioxide (CO2) through photosynthesis.

When they die, their carbon-rich remains may fall gently to the ocean floor, effectively storing the CO2 for millennia - or, alternatively, may be brought back to upper layers by sea currents.

William Dewar of Florida State University in a commentary, also published in Nature, says the new paper challenges conventional thinking.

"Should the overall idea of significant biogenic mixing survive detailed scrutiny, climate science will have experienced a paradigm shift," he says.

http://www.abc.net.au/science/articles/2009/07/30/2640838.htm

do jellyfish

Earliest animals flexed their muscles

A group of British and Canadian palaeontologists have found fossils that show the earliest evidence of animal locomotion.

The team from the University of Oxford and Memorial University of Newfoundland, found fossilised trails left by Ediacarans, an enigmatic assemblage of soft-bodied creatures that lived 30 million years before modern animals evolved.

The find, in 565 million-year-old rocks at Mistaken Point in Newfoundland, Canada, appears in the current issue of the journal Geology.

The discovery of 70 fossilised trails, each about 5 to 17 centimetres long, is comparable to the kinds of marks left in the sea floor by modern animals like sea anemones, the researchers say.

Although they can't pin the trails to a specific creature, the discovery shows at least some of the Ediacarans were mobile, and hence must have had muscles.

Similarities in the trails to the modern-day anemone Urticina suggest the organisms that left the fossil traces may have had a muscular 'foot', the researchers say.

"This is exciting because it is the first evidence that creatures from this early period of Earth's history had muscles to allow them to move around, enabling them to hunt for food or escape adverse local conditions and, importantly, indicating that they were probably animals," says University of Oxford PhD student Alex Liu.

The Ediacarans are the earliest complex organisms before the Cambrian 'explosion of life' which marked the development of modern complex life.

But debate continues over just exactly what the Ediacarans looked like, or even what they were.

Stranger than fiction

"Some of the later species - particularly in Australia and the White Sea - do in my view seem to be early animals," says Lui. "But the morphological characteristics of earlier forms, [such as] those in Newfoundland, leave their biological affinities difficult to resolve at present - though we are working on it."

Professor Pat Vickers-Rich of Monash University in Melbourne, has recently been studying Ediacaran fossils in Namibia. She says palaeontologists originally thought the Ediacarans were jellyfish, worms and soft corals.

"Now we know they are so different to anything we know today," she says.

"Some of them were absorbers, absorbing their nutrients directly through the chemical environment with no mouth parts at all. Others, like Rangea had a kind of proboscis that grazed microbial mats."

Vickers-Rich says the Namibian fossils, from a locality called the Nama group in southern Namibia, represents the "last gasp of the Ediacaran fauna".

No one knows how the Ediacarans became extinct, but Rich hypothesises it may have been due to a build up of oxygen and changing oceanic chemistry, which may have favoured the new Cambrian animals.http://www.abc.net.au/science/articles/2010/02/17/2821290.htm

do jellyfish

Working out whether a snake has delivered venom with its bite may one day be determined by a simple blood test, new Australian research suggests.

The discovery could dramatically improve snakebite treatment in tropical rural areas, particularly in the developing world, where snakebite is a major health issue.

The work, previously published in Nature Scientific Reports, was presented this week at the Australian Society for Medical Research Annual Scientific Meeting in Sydney.

Senior author Dr Geoffrey Isbister, at the University of Newcastle's School of Medicine and Public Health, says the delivery of snakebite antivenom is often delayed until symptoms appear. This can sometimes be too late.

"The important thing is to be able to give the right patients antivenom early," says Isbister. "We need to identify in the first few hours if we've got envenomation."

"At the moment that is based on whether the patient feels a bit sick; but you also feel like that when you've just been confronted by a snake."

Isbister says once signs of paralysis and muscle damage begin to appear, it cannot be reversed by antivenom.

"Everyone thinks [antivenom] is this magic thing, but it doesn't reverse most things that have happened," he says.

"You've got to get the antivenom into the circulation early to bind to the snake toxins before they get to the muscles, before they get to the nerves and do the damage."

The scale of the snakebite problem is large with the World Health Organisation recognising it about four years ago as a tropical disease.

Isbister says there are one to two million cases of snake envenomation, with a potential fatality rate of 100,000 deaths worldwide.

Snakebite treatment is hampered by the availability of antivenom; high reaction rates to antivenom; and difficulties in diagnosing envenomation to allow early antivenom treatment.

Isbister says the development of a cheap diagnostic test for envenomation that can be done at the bedside is critical in addressing these issues.

Cheap detection tool

For this latest study his team, including Dr Margaret O'Leary at the University of Newcastle and Dr Kalana Maduwage from University of Peradeniya, Sri Lanka, focused on a common enzyme in snake venoms - phospholipase A2 (PLA2).

Using samples from confirmed snakebite patients in Sri Lanka and Australia they checked to see if PLA2 could be detected in the blood.

Pre-antivenom samples were collected from venomous bites from samples collected from Russell's viper, hump-nosed pit viper, Indian cobra, Indian krait and five red-bellied black snake were included in the study. These were compared with PLA2 levels in a group of un-envenomated patients.

Isbister says the levels of PLA2 were elevated in all those who had been bitten and injected with venom.

He says confirmation of envenomation means only patients who require antivenom will receive it.

"Even in a health clinic in Africa if you have antivenom then this test would help guide whether to give it rather than travelling eight hours to a hospital where it would be too late," he says.

Bringing it to the bedside

This can also have major financial implications even in developed countries such as Australia where antivenom is available at more than 90 per cent of hospitals, Isbister adds.

He says while thousands of cases of "snakebites" would appear at hospitals, only about five to 10 per cent would have envenomation.

"What comes into hospital is a suspected snakebite," he says adding this can range from being "attacked" by a stick, a bite by a non-venomous snake, to an attack from a venomous snake that didn't cause any effects.

Isbister warns against too much excitement as the analysis for this study involved expensive laboratory testing.

However, he says the "proof of concept" findings make it now feasible to begin research on development of a cheap testing kit.

"The actual test itself is not too complicated," he says, "it's working out a way you can do that simply at the bedside." http://www.abc.net.au/science/articles/2014/06/05/4018712.htm

do jellyfish

Jellyfish see world through complex eyes

Box jellyfish, which have no brain and only a basic nervous system, are enjoying newfound evolutionary status with research revealing they have surprisingly sophisticated eyes.

And it appears Australian jellyfish may have the most sophisticated visual systems of all.

Researchers from Lund University in Sweden studied a small Caribbean species of jellyfish, Tripedalia cystophora, found in mangrove swamps in Puerto Rico.

They report in today's issue of the journal Nature that the jellyfish boast impressive optical apparatus: a total of 24 eyes clustered at each of the creature's four corners.

While 16 eyes are simple 'pigment pits' to collect light, the remaining eight, a pair in each eye cluster, have complex lenses. 

Despite this complexity the position of the retinas means the images the jellyfish receive are blurred.

But researchers believe the sophisticated optical set-up is designed to give jellyfish a wide field of vision to help them navigate, rather than to focus on prey.

Sophisticated stingers

"This research is groundbreaking. It really drives jellyfish up the evolutionary tree," says Dr Jamie Seymour, director of the Tropical Australian Stinger Research Unit at James Cook University in Queensland.

While he says all species of box jellyfish have a visual system similar in structure, Australian box jellyfish appear to have the most sophisticated eyes of all.

Seymour says recent research conducted in the waters of Far North Queensland by Dr Dan Nilsson from the Swedish research team suggests that Australian jellyfish can see "pretty much across the entire light spectrum".

He says their vision even appears to outdo that of birds, who are at the top of the 'visual' ladder.

"Having said that, they are not capable of producing nice crisp images because the images are actually focussed behind the retina, which causes them to blur."

Needing to see

Seymour says Australian box jellyfish need superior vision "because they are active, visual hunters" compared to the Caribbean variety that live in murky waters and fed primarily on plankton.

These Caribbean species use their vision mainly to position themselves in one spot in water currents to receive their food.

http://www.abc.net.au/science/news/stories/s1366938.htm

do jellyfish

Fluorescent fish stoke ecological fears

When the world's first genetically-engineered fish, the glow-in-the-dark 'Night Pearl', hit the aquarium market two months ago, its Taiwan developer hoped for a sea of profits. Instead, it has suffered a barrage of criticism.

Environmentalists say that Taikong Corp's fluorescent green fish, each about 5 cm long, pose a threat to the Earth's ecosystem. European groups have been protesting against the fish - injected with a jellyfish gene - for months, and the Singapore government last week seized hundreds of the creatures at customs.

"It's difficult to make a genetic engineering breakthrough, but it's even more difficult to commercialise the product," said Fisher Lin, research manager for Taikong, a Taipei-based pet fish breeder turned biotech firm.

Environmenalists say that if the formerly colourless fresh water ricefish - which now glows green in the dark - is released into nature, it could wreak havoc on the ecosystem. But Lin insists all the transgenic fish are environmentally safe, as they are sterile.

The introduced gene comes from a natural marine organism, and the finished product - the glowing fish - is merely protein and harmless to people or other marine creatures. "The greatest worries about introducing any new GMO [genetically modified organisms] are, first of all, the impact on the ecosystem, and secondly, whether it will cause a threat to human bodies," he said.

"We still have high hopes for the transgenic fish and believe they will sell. But we also know people will have a lot of questions," he added.

Taikong has already launched a second transgenic marine creature, a fluorescent purple zebra fish that has been injected with a gene found in coral, and hopes it and the ricefish would swim into aquariums all over the world.

They also plan to introduce multicolour fluorescent pet fish, including red, purple and blue. Each transgenic fish costs US$17; about 30 times more than a colourless ricefish.

"It's very special," said 28-year-old Su Wen-ling, a graduate student who saw the fish at a biotech fair on the weekend. "But fish is innocent. I don't think it's necessary to apply genetic engineering on fish for people's viewing pleasure. There are plenty of tropical fish that are beautiful." http://www.abc.net.au/science/articles/2003/07/31/913643.htm

do jellyfish

Anti-venom researchers bitten hard

Australia's leading anti-venom research group may close its doors at the end of June following the withdrawal of funding from the Victorian State Government.

The Australian Venom Research Unit has developed anti-venoms to treat people bitten by the country's many poisonous animals, insects and fish for the last seven years.

More than 3,500 bite and sting victims are treated in hospitals around the country each year for potentially deadly venom-related conditions.

According to a report in The Age newspaper today, the unit's annual funding of $100,000 from the Victorian State Government, which pays for the salaries of the unit's director and deputy director, will not be renewed.

The government has told the unit's director, Dr Ken Winkel, that their funding should be the responsibility of the Federal Government.

"This is not just about Australia, it has international implications", Dr Winkel told The Age. "If this unit disappears, it will be a symbolic as well as a practical loss. People are dying every year in Australia and thousands more are dying overseas."

Last week a woman was in a critical condition after being stung by a jellyfish in Western Australia.

"This illustrates that the problems are not solved," Dr Winkel told The Age. "We still have challenges every day. There's still so much to learn about Australia's venomous creatures and managing the effects of their toxins."

A spokesman for the Victorian Department of Human Services said the unit had been given $770,000 in funding over the last seven years.

"We recognise that the unit does important work, but we're not the only beneficiary and we should not carry the financial burden," the spokesman told The Age. "We have approached the Commonwealth and they have been receptive to our approaches and to the unit's plight, but they have not made a commitment as yet."

Australia has provided international leadership in anti-venom research and is the only country to produce anti-venoms for sea snakes, box jellyfish, blue-ringed octopus and stone fish.

The venom unit provides a 24-hour advisory service to medical practitioners on the management of bites and stings, investigates the impact of envenomations on public health, and researches new anti-venoms. http://www.abc.net.au/science/articles/2001/04/30/285724.htm

do jellyfish

Toxic shock from stinger family

Up to eight species of small, almost invisible box jellyfish cause Irukandji Syndrome - and there is no antivenom for their potentially fatal stings.

Dr Peter Fenner, Associate Professor at the James Cook University School of Medicine, and Mr John Hadok, of the Emergency Department at Mackay Base Hospital, have documented the first reported death from Irukandji Syndrome in the in The Medical Journal of Australia.

"More than 100 people are likely to be stung and visit hospital this summer. Tragically this year, for the first time, there were two fatalities from Irukandji Syndrome in North Queensland", said Dr Fenner.

Two middle-aged men were killed by jellyfish stings earlier this year, in separate incidents near Port Douglas and in the Whitsunday Islands.

Dr Fenner believes that the jellyfish responsible for the deaths is an undescribed species of Irukandji that lives around the outer reefs and the Whitsunday Islands of the Great Barrier Reef.

The Irukandji box jellyfish, or cubozoans, are related to the deadly large box jellyfish or stinger Chironex fleckeri, which has killed more than 60 people in Australia.

Irukandji jellyfish have nematocysts, or stinging cells, on the body as well as the tentacles. When touched, these cells fire a tiny shaft into the victim's skin, that delivers the potent venom which causes Irukandji Syndrome.

The basic symptoms develop 30 minutes after being stung. They include severe low back pain; excruciating muscle cramps in arms, legs, belly and chest; sweating, nausea, anxiety, restlessness, vomiting, and headache.

The fatal cases developed such severe hypertension, or high blood pressure, that they died from brain haemorrhages, one within 30 hours after being stung.

"The Irukandji venom causes nerve endings to release large amounts of noradrenaline, the chemical that produces the "fight-or-flight" reaction", says Dr Fenner.

"The smaller blood vessels contract, which leads to the hypertension or high blood pressure, as blood is not able to squeeze through. There is no first-aid treatment for the hypertension."

"The venom is also a direct cardiac toxin, turning the heart into a floppy bag that is not able to pump blood effectively. This leads to pulmonary oedema, or fluid building up in the lungs", he says.

Irukandji Syndrome is most prevalent between early December to mid-February, along the tropical coast from Broome in WA to Rockhampton in Queensland.

Dr Fenner cautions that the development of an effective Irukandji antivenom is not presently possible, especially when the lifecycle of the species is unknown.

Dr Jamie Seymour, Senior Lecturer at the James Cook University School of Tropical Biology in Cairns, says that the syndrome was originally attributed to one species of box jellyfish named Irukandji, or Carukia barnesi.

"In the last few years, as symptoms become better defined, it appeared that people stung in Mackay were showing different symptoms from those stung in Cairns. It led us to wonder if maybe different species are involved."

"We're able to identify cubozoans by taking skin scrapings from people who have been stung, as the nematocysts stay in the skin. Each species has nematocysts of a particular shape", said Dr Seymour.

"There are nematocysts from 7 or 8 skin scrapings that I have never seen before and cannot identify. One of these samples came from the man killed at Whitsunday Islands."

Dr Seymour and other researchers are assisting Dr Fenner by netting 1800 specimens of Carukia barnesi from around Cairns for the Australian Venom Research Unit.

do jellyfish

Ancient brain shows how animals evolved heads

One of the oldest brains ever discovered is providing clues on how the world's first heads evolved.

The over 500-million-year-old brain, described in the latest issue of the journal Current Biology, suggests that rudimentary brains emerged before defined heads.

Defined heads likely emerged later to protect brains.

The ancient brain belonged to a crustacean called Odaria alata, which had a pair of large eyes on stalks. Scientists also often say that Odaria alata looked like a submarine. You can see the resemblance more in this video.

Javier Ortega-Hernández, who authored the study, determined that the eye-like features were connected to a hard, thin and flat body part called the "anterior sclerite." The connection was made possible via nerve endings originating from the front part of the brain.

"The anterior sclerite has been lost in modern arthropods (insects, spiders and crustaceans), as it most likely fused with other parts of the head during the evolutionary history of the group," says Ortega-Hernández, a postdoctoral researcher at the University of Cambridge.

For the study, he compared the remains of Odaria alata with another very ancient creature: a soft-bodied trilobite. Trilobites were marine creatures that were abundant during the Palaeozoic Era, 542-251 million years ago.

Ortega-Hernández next compared the creatures with anomalocaridids, a group of large swimming predators that lived at around the same time as the other studied species.

These larger organisms, like Odaria alata, were found to have a natural plate in the brain region.

"What we're seeing in these fossils," he says, "is one of the major transitional steps between soft-bodied worm-like creatures and arthropods with hard exoskeletons and jointed limbs - this is a period of crucial transformation."

The transformation occurred during what's known as the Cambrian Explosion, which was a period of rapid evolutionary innovation about 500 million years ago when most major animal groups emerge in the fossil record.

Prior to this period, the majority of animal life on Earth consisted of soft-bodied species that resembled algae and jellyfish. The Cambrian Explosion then led to creatures with hard external coverings (exoskeletons), defined heads and jointed limbs.

"Heads have become more complex over time," Ortega-Hernández says.

"But what we're seeing here is an answer to the question of how arthropods changed their bodies from soft to hard. It gives us an improved understanding of the origins and complex evolutionary history of this highly successful group." http://www.abc.net.au/science/articles/2015/05/08/4232198.htm

do jellyfish

No bags, thanks!!! Part 04

Recycle, Reuse, Reduce

Recycling your plastic shopping bags is one of the most obvious courses of action, however only 10% of Australian households take their plastic bags to a central collection point for recycling. This could be due to the fact that HDPE bags can not be put out for collection with other household recyclables, and there is no separate kerbside collection for them as the volume does not support the cost. Instead, bags must be taken to central recycling collection points, such as supermarkets, where there are special bins to collect the bags. Even at these central collection points there is a risk that the bags may end up unsuitable for recycling due to a range of contaminants such as LDPE bags, ink, food, even supermarket dockets if they are left in the bags.

Prior to recycling, of course, the aim should be to reuse your bags. According to the Australian Bureau of Statistics, less than 1% of plastic bags used in Australia are reused, however 82.6% of Australian households say that they reuse plastic bags. This list of possible uses for plastic shopping bags is almost as long as the lifespan of the bag itself!
If you don't want to take your bags back to the supermarket to use again next time you buy your groceries, there are a multitude of ways you can use them around the house, limited only by your imagination. One thing they should not be used for is lining garbage bins. It doesn't matter if you put them straight in your bin as waste or put your other garbage in them, the plastic bags will still end up in landfill, and potentially at large in the environment.

Given the costs and inconvenience associated with recycling, and the fact that reuse only delays the plastic entering the environment, the most sensible option is to cut down on the number of plastic bags that you use, or stop using them altogether. It is estimated that it takes the average Australian family four shopping trips to accumulate 60 plastic shopping bags. If everyone accepted one less plastic bag every time they went shopping, the number of bags used would be reduced substantially.

do jellyfish

Alternatives

There are a range of alternatives to plastic bags. Some retailers save the cardboard cartons that stock is packaged in, so customers can use them to pack their groceries. Others may offer paper bags. Some major supermarket chains have string or calico bags available for sale at a very small price. These bags can be kept in the car and used again and again. The advantage of calico bags is that they are stronger than the plastic bags, and also much easier to carry. It takes a little thought to get used to bringing your own bags, but it is an easy habit to fall into and it is such a relief not to have to pack the groceries away, and then find room to pack away the plastic bags as well!

There are of course situations where you can't beat a plastic shopping bag, such as when buying meat or "messy" items. Thankfully, technology is catching up with the need for a replacement for polythene bags. It was recently reported that supermarkets in Australia will introduce biodegradable bags made from tapioca starch in April 2003. These bags will look and feel like polythene bags but will decompose in three months.

So next time you go shopping, hold your head up proudly as you reuse or refuse a plastic bag. You may not be in a rubber dinghy chasing a whaling boat or pursuing ivory poachers, but you have made a contribution to the future of the planet.
http://www.abc.net.au/science/features/bags/default.htm

No bags, thanks!!! Part 03

Production of plastic bags

Plastic bags are made from ethylene, a gas that is produced as a by-product of oil, gas and coal production. Ethylene is made into polymers (chains of ethylene molecules) called polyethylene. This substance, also known as polyethene or polythene, is made into pellets which are used by plastic manufacturers to produce a range of items, including plastic bags.

You have probably noticed that there are two types of plastic shopping bags - the lighter, filmy bags you get from supermarkets and other food outlets, and the heavier bags you get from other retail outlets, like clothing stores. The supermarket bags are made from high density polyethylene (HDPE), while the thicker bags are made from low density polyethylene (LDPE). Unlike HDPE, LDPE can not be recycled.

While plastic bags may not be the most high tech application of plastics technology, it is certainly one of the most prevalent. According to Clean Up Australia, Australians use in excess of 6 billion plastic bags per year. If tied together these bags would form a chain that is long enough to go around the world 37 times. More than half of these bags (3.6 billion) are made from HDPE.

Management of plastic bag usage

With this number of plastic bags in circulation, it is of little surprise that plastic bags are a significant pollutant. On Clean Up Australia Day in 2002 nearly half a million plastic bags were collected.

Different countries have adopted a range of approaches to discourage the use of plastic bags in an attempt to cut down on the number of bags finding their way into the environment. In South Africa for instance, where an estimated eight billion plastic bags are used annually, the government has implemented new regulations that will see only thicker, more durable plastic bags produced. As well as making them more suitable for reuse, it is hoped that the extra cost associated with their production and supply will prevent retailers giving the higher quality bags away, making their use a more expensive option for consumers.

The use of plastic bags is being discouraged in other countries such as Singapore and Taiwan, while the tax imposed on the use of plastic shopping bags in Ireland has resulted in the use of plastic shopping bags being reduced by 90% in just six months. Prior to the 15 euro cent per bag tax, it was estimated that 1.2 million plastic shopping bags were being handed out in Ireland per year. The money raised from the tax will be used to fund environmental initiatives.

We'll have to wait and see if any of these measures will be adopted in Australia to address the problem here. In September 2002 federal Independent MP Peter Andren and Greens Senator Bob Brown introduced private member's bills into parliament that would put a 25 cent levy on plastic shopping bags, and direct the funds raised to an education program publicising the environmental costs of plastic bags in Australia. This bill was not passed, with the Minister for the Environment and Heritage Dr David Kemp preferring to explore voluntary options for plastic bag control, before imposing another tax on the Australian public.

One of the key voluntary options currently being trialed is the National Packaging Covenant, a self-regulatory agreement between government and industries in the packaging chain that was established in 1999. Over the five year period of the agreement, signatories will aim to minimise the environmental impacts of consumer packaging waste and develop sustainable recycling collection systems. To date there are over 500 signatories to the covenant, representing government, industry and business interests.

While Canberra decides on a national plan of action to reduce the problem of plastic bag pollution, it's easy to put a household action plan in place. http://www.abc.net.au/science/features/bags/default.htm

do jellyfish

No bags, thanks!!! Part 02

Production of plastic bags

Plastic bags are made from ethylene, a gas that is produced as a by-product of oil, gas and coal production. Ethylene is made into polymers (chains of ethylene molecules) called polyethylene. This substance, also known as polyethene or polythene, is made into pellets which are used by plastic manufacturers to produce a range of items, including plastic bags.

You have probably noticed that there are two types of plastic shopping bags - the lighter, filmy bags you get from supermarkets and other food outlets, and the heavier bags you get from other retail outlets, like clothing stores. The supermarket bags are made from high density polyethylene (HDPE), while the thicker bags are made from low density polyethylene (LDPE). Unlike HDPE, LDPE can not be recycled.

While plastic bags may not be the most high tech application of plastics technology, it is certainly one of the most prevalent. According to Clean Up Australia, Australians use in excess of 6 billion plastic bags per year. If tied together these bags would form a chain that is long enough to go around the world 37 times. More than half of these bags (3.6 billion) are made from HDPE.

Management of plastic bag usage

With this number of plastic bags in circulation, it is of little surprise that plastic bags are a significant pollutant. On Clean Up Australia Day in 2002 nearly half a million plastic bags were collected.

Different countries have adopted a range of approaches to discourage the use of plastic bags in an attempt to cut down on the number of bags finding their way into the environment. In South Africa for instance, where an estimated eight billion plastic bags are used annually, the government has implemented new regulations that will see only thicker, more durable plastic bags produced. As well as making them more suitable for reuse, it is hoped that the extra cost associated with their production and supply will prevent retailers giving the higher quality bags away, making their use a more expensive option for consumers.

The use of plastic bags is being discouraged in other countries such as Singapore and Taiwan, while the tax imposed on the use of plastic shopping bags in Ireland has resulted in the use of plastic shopping bags being reduced by 90% in just six months. Prior to the 15 euro cent per bag tax, it was estimated that 1.2 million plastic shopping bags were being handed out in Ireland per year. The money raised from the tax will be used to fund environmental initiatives.

We'll have to wait and see if any of these measures will be adopted in Australia to address the problem here. In September 2002 federal Independent MP Peter Andren and Greens Senator Bob Brown introduced private member's bills into parliament that would put a 25 cent levy on plastic shopping bags, and direct the funds raised to an education program publicising the environmental costs of plastic bags in Australia. This bill was not passed, with the Minister for the Environment and Heritage Dr David Kemp preferring to explore voluntary options for plastic bag control, before imposing another tax on the Australian public.

One of the key voluntary options currently being trialed is the National Packaging Covenant, a self-regulatory agreement between government and industries in the packaging chain that was established in 1999. Over the five year period of the agreement, signatories will aim to minimise the environmental impacts of consumer packaging waste and develop sustainable recycling collection systems. To date there are over 500 signatories to the covenant, representing government, industry and business interests.

While Canberra decides on a national plan of action to reduce the problem of plastic bag pollution, it's easy to put a household action plan in place.

do jellyfish

No bags, thanks!!! Part 01

With all due respect to Kermit the Frog, it's easy being green. Although we may be overwhelmed by the environmental catastrophes that seem to occur around us with alarming regularity, Karen Pearce says there is a simple way each and every person can make a difference. It doesn't involve travelling the world to clean up oil spills or standing in the path of bulldozers to prevent land clearing. It actually involves shopping …

do jellyfish

Plastic shopping bags and the environment

The environmental issues associated with plastic shopping bags have featured in the news in the last couple of months, following the apparent success of the plastic bag tax in Ireland in reducing the number of plastic shopping bags that are used in that country. While this approach has also been suggested for addressing the problem in Australia, the government will examine a number of options before deciding on a management plan. In the meantime, the best thing we can do for the environment is simply reuse, or better yet, refuse a plastic bag when we go shopping. Easy!

Plastic shopping bags have a surprisingly significant environmental impact for something so seemingly innocuous. As well as being an eyesore (next time you are outside, have a look around - you'll be amazed at the number of plastic bags littering our streets and waterways), plastic shopping bags kill large numbers of wildlife each year. In the water, plastic bags can be mistaken for jellyfish by wildlife. This makes plastic bag pollution in marine environments particularly dangerous, as birds, whales, seals and turtles ingest the bags then die from intestinal blockages. Disturbingly, it is claimed that plastic bags are the most common man-made item seen by sailors at sea.

The biggest problem with plastic bags is that they do not readily break down in the environment, with estimates for the time it takes them to decompose ranging from 20 to 1000 years. One of the disquieting facts stemming from this is that plastic bags can become serial killers. Once an animal that had ingested a plastic bag dies, it decays at a much faster rate than the bag. Once the animal has decomposed, the bag is released back into the environment more or less intact, ready to be eaten by another misguided organism. The incredibly slow rate of decay of plastic bags also means that each bag we use compounds the problem, because the bags simply accumulate.

Plastic bags also clog drains and waterways, threatening not only natural environments but also urban ones. In fact, plastic bags in drains were identified as major factors in the severe flooding in Bangladesh in 1988 and 1998. This has resulted in a ban on plastic bags being imposed there early in 2002.

On top of the significant environmental costs, widespread use of plastic bags is also costly in terms of dollars and cents. Apart from the price of the bags themselves, which is four to six cents each, a great deal of money goes into collecting the bags (ie cleaning up!) once they've been discarded.
http://www.abc.net.au/science/features/bags/default.htm

Tiny killer jellyfish born in a tank

A jellyfish with a deadly sting has been bred in captivity for the first time by Australian scientists, opening up the possibility of developing an antivenom.

The tiny box jellyfish, with a bell just 12 millimetres long, is responsible for Irukandji syndrome, a potentially fatal condition that attacks the central nervous system.

Researchers Heather Walling and Lisa-ann Gershwin from the CRC Reef Research Centre at James Cook University (JCU) in Townville announced their results this week.

The jellyfish, Carukia barnesi, had gone through a planktonic stage and were now attached to rocks on the floor of an aquarium at the Marine Aquaculture Research Facility Unit at JCU.

Irukandji jellyfish are found around the northern coast of Australia. And the species grown in captivity is one of nine to cause Irukandji syndrome, which killed two tourists in Australia in 2002.

Gershwin said Irunkandji syndrome began with a mild sting, like a mosquito bite. Within an hour, victims experienced severe lower back pain, shooting pains all over the body, cramping, nausea, vomiting, profuse sweating and coughing.

Depending on the species, loss of motor control and paralysis could follow, with some victims eventually dying of brain haemorrhages or heart failure.

Gershwin, who also works at the Australian Institute of Marine Science, said the deadly syndrome could be responsible for many more deaths not diagnosed at first.

"The significance of being able to breed these little guys is huge," said Gershwin.

Breeding the jellyfish was the first stage to developing an antivenom, she said, which required between 10,000 and 1,000,000 jellyfish.

She said developing an antivenom would involve extracting the toxin from the stinging cells, chopping the molecule up into "different bits" and testing different concentrations of those bits in animals.

Captive breeding also meant more jellyfish toxins were available for scientists to study potential pharmaceutical benefits, and could also allow for rapid diagnostic techniques for Irukandji stings.

"Because of the incredible potency of the toxins, the likelihood of being able to harvest useful chemicals is very high," said Gershwin.

"Researchers require reliable supplies of the jellyfish, which Mother Nature doesn't always provide. People are poised ready to pounce on the next available specimens."

Gershwin said she wasn't sure what defining factor had allowed them to breed the jellyfish successfully; she said it was "mostly luck". Many researchers had been trying to breed the jellyfish since the 2002 deaths.

do jellyfish

Clues to the nervous system

Dr Michael Corkeron from Townsville Hospital, a doctor who is developing a new treatment for the syndrome, said that a better understanding of its physiology would most likely lead to better ways to treat it.

Anything that affected the central nervous system like that might also help researchers understand how the nervous system worked, he said.

And perhaps scientists would find out whether the toxin held clues to mechanisms that could block particular effects on the system, Corkeron told ABC Science Online.

"You have to wonder if something so powerful holds some pharmaceutical benefits," he said.
http://www.abc.net.au/science/articles/2004/04/07/1082414.htm