Dinosaur metabolism: not too hot, not too cold

WASHINGTON: Dinosaurs weren´t cold-blooded -- like modern-day reptiles -- nor were they warm-blooded -- like mammals and birds, according to a study out Friday aiming to answer a question that has intrigued paleontologists for decades.

Instead, the prehistoric creatures´ metabolic rates were somewhere in between, said the report published in the US journal Science.

The results suggest that the common practice of splitting species into two distinct groups -- depending on whether animals regulate their body temperature externally or internally -- is not accurate.

And the answer could help shed light on dinosaur behavior, since warm-blooded animals tend to be more active and grow faster than their cold-blooded counterparts.

To study the metabolism of the long-extinct creatures, a group of researchers led by University of New Mexico biologist John Grady measured annual growth rings in the fossils of several dinosaurs and estimated growth patterns from birth to adulthood.

They compared the results to a baseline of 400 other animal species, both extinct and still alive, and concluded that the dinosaurs´ metabolic rates were somewhere between cold- and warm-blooded animals.

The researchers classified the dinosaurs in an intermediary category, "mesotherms," with metabolic rates closest to those of tuna, certain sharks and the leatherback turtle. "These animals at times rely on internally-generated metabolic heat to maintain body temperatures, while being subject to external temperatures in others," the researchers said, adding that the trait is not common among modern-day animals.

The results could help scientists better understand ecosystems in the Mesozoic Era, from 248 to 65 million years ago. The results could also be used to estimate the metabolic rates of other animals from the period.

Scientists have long debated whether dinosaurs were cold- or warm-blooded -- and since the 19th century have leaned toward the theory they were warm-blooded, based on physiological factors.

That theory was bolstered by the discovery of speedy and powerful dinosaurs, like velociraptors, which scientists suggested must have been warm-blooded in order to burn enough energy.

But the authors of the new study said the intermediary metabolism -- neither too fast nor too slow -- permitted dinosaurs to become much bigger than any other animal and to dominate the ecosystem.

Warm-blooded animals typically need to eat a great deal to maintain their internal body temperature, forcing them into frequent hunts or to eat large quantities of plants. (AFP)

 

Striking similarities between Taliban, FARC Like Pakistan, Colombia is talking to its rebels too

LAHORE: As is the case in Pakistan where the sitting Nawaz Sharif regime is talking to the warring Taliban for the sake of peace, the incumbent Colombian government is also holding a dialogue with a violent guerilla organization at war within the territory of this Spanish-speaking South American state since 1964.

However, numerous Colombian politicians and military commanders stand divided over holding peace parleys with this terrorist outfit known as the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia. Locally, this militant group is called the “Fuerzas Armadas Revolucionarias de Colombia” or FARC.

While a former Colombian President Alvaro Uribe is known as a fierce opponent of the on-going talks, two dissenting Army generals were relieved of duty for the duration of the investigation quite recently in February 2014, according to the esteemed news agency “Reuters.” One of these two generals was the head of the Colombian Army intelligence.

According to a study by Colombia’s National Centre for Historical Memory, over 220,000 people have died in this conflict till date, most of them being civilians.From 1999 to 2008, the FARC, together with the ELN guerrilla group, was estimated to control up to 40 per cent of the territory in Colombia. This insurgent group, which claims to be a peasant army, has often said it was just striving to help country’s farmers get their due rights.

The FARC has been alleged by the June 17, 2002 edition of the BBC and the January 27, 2011 edition of a prestigious globally-prescribed American magazine “The Economist” to have been involved in kidnappings for ransom, illegal gold mining, killing innocent civilians, production and distribution of illicit drugs.

However, as history has it, the dispossession of Colombian farmland had produced 40,000 landless families by 1961 and by end 1969; their number had crossed the 400,000 mark throughout Colombia.

But these figures neither justify FARC’s claims of being a farmer-friendly revolutionary force, nor do these statistics allow it to wage a war against the state and play havoc with the lives of the local citizens and the law enforcement agencies.

While the violent FARC has been classified as a terrorist organization by the governments of Colombia, the United States, Canada, Chile, New Zealand and the European Union. It still derives a lot of moral support from the governments of Venezuela, Brazil, Argentina, Ecuador and Nicaragua etc.

The extent of support that FARC enjoys from the neighboring countries can be gauged from the fact that in 2008, the late Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez had recognized it as a proper Army and a belligerent force that was fighting against the state for a right cause.

On the contrary, successive Colombian regimes have condemned this organization for kidnapping numerous government ministers, governors and senators etc, and killing many in captivity.

For example, in 2003, FARC had assassinated a governor called Guillermo Gaviria Correa, his advisor for peace and a former defense minister Gilberto Echeverri Mejia.In December 2009, another local state governor Luis Francisco Cuellar was killed by FARC.

And now, since November 2012, it is involved in yet another round of peace talks with the Colombian state.Research shows that for the last many decades, many talks were held between Colombian governments and the FARC militants, but then the dialogue process had somehow hit snags and communication had broken down.

As it is happening in Pakistan currently, numerous Colombian governments over the years and the FARC commanders have been agreeing upon the exchange of prisoners held in captivity on either side.

Just to cite one example in this context, in December 2004, the government of Colombia had announced to pardon 23 FARC prisoners in a bid to encourage a reciprocal move. Earlier in November 2004, the FARC had rejected a state proposal to hand over 59 of its captives in exchange for 50 guerrillas imprisoned by the government.

The year 2006 had seen FARC releasing a few civilian hostages including a German citizen, after holding him captive for five years.In November 2012, the FARC had released four Chinese oil workers. The hostages were working for the Emerald Energy oil company, a British-based subsidiary of China’s renowned Sinochem Group.

And in January 2008, former Colombian vice presidential candidate Clara Rojas and a former Congresswoman Consuelo Gonzalez were freed after nearly six years in captivity.In February 2008, innumerable rallies were held in Colombia and across the world, whereby FARC was slated by the protestors and was pressed to release hundreds of hostages.

In November 2013, the Colombian government and FARC had announced that they had come to an agreement regarding the participation of political opposition and would begin discussing their next issue, the illicit drug trade.But talks continue to be held despite an acute shortage of trust and belief on both sides.

A farce gone too far

A farce gone too far

NOW that the Taliban too have nominated their representatives for the negotiations, a state of shambles is unfolding. With both teams more or less standing on the same side of the divide, it is virtually a dialogue within outlawed militant outfits. The government has walked straight into a trap with the Taliban dictating the rules of the game. Now it will be extremely difficult to extricate the country from this intensely dangerous situation. It is a farce that has gone too far. It is all the more theatrical since Nawaz Sharif has set up a four-member team to negotiate with the militants. The team he chose is an interesting mix of a highly controversial ex-intelligence officer, a retired diplomat, a senior journalist and one of his special assistants. Given the soft spot most of these members apparently have for the militant cause, it was not difficult to get the Tehreek-i-Taliban Pakistan’s (TTP) endorsement of the team. The militants could not have wished for a better committee packed with fellow travellers. After all they speak the same language and share the same narrative. Apparently with nothing much to do, the team members spend most of their time projecting themselves on television talk shows. One marvels at the way Rustam Shah Mohmand, a nominee of the Pakistan Tehreek-i-Insaf (PTI) on the team, articulates the Taliban case. Everything will be fine if you give them control of the tribal areas and pull out troops from there, he tells us. So, no big deal; allow the TTP to establish an Islamic emirate in the tribal territory. Never mind if the militants want to extend their rule further to the surrounding districts of KP. Absolutely no harm if Swat is handed back to Mullah Fazlullah and let the TTP control a part of Karachi as well; after all, they’re our brothers. And why must we create problems for the militants if they are helping their Afghan brethren undertake ‘jihad’ against the foreign forces in Afghanistan and hosting holy warriors from other Muslim countries. After all, they are fulfilling their religious obligation. It doesn’t matter if suicide bombers kill some more women and children and continue to blow up schools. ‘Give peace a chance’, don’t we all agree? This argument goes on. It is getting more preposterous after the TTP named its own five-member team for the talks. In a very shrewd move, it picked its representatives from the outside rather than from within its own ranks. It was a masterstroke to include Imran Khan in the team along with hard-core clerics known for their close ties with militant groups. His nomination by the outlawed group may have come as a political embarrassment for the PTI chief, but the TTP’s decision was well calculated. Not only has Imran Khan been one of the most ardent supporters of talks, but to some extent he also owes his party’s victory in the general elections in KP to the militant group. Although he has declined to be part of the team, the TTP can always rely on his support. It’s a politically clever move by the TTP to involve, on its behalf, clerics and leaders of Islamic parties. It not only broadens its support, but also allows the militants space to manipulate public opinion. The talks are to be monitored by a 10-member TTP shura comprising hardened militants with a bounty of millions of rupees on their head. There is a Rs50 million reward for the capture of Fazlullah, the new chief of the TTP. That also raises questions about the legality of the whole process of negotiations. The TTP is a proscribed terrorist organisation, and it is in violation of the Constitution for the state to engage with it. The outfit has declared war on Pakistan and has claimed responsibility for attacking security installations and killing our soldiers. The government would be legitimising all those terrorist actions by unconditionally negotiating with them. There is no indication that the group is willing to give up violence and accept the nation’s Constitution. What the militants really want is the rolling back of the state’s authority from the area of their operation. It has taken the lives of thousands of soldiers to re-establish the writ of the state in most of the tribal territories and pulling back will have disastrous consequences for the country and regional security. One of the myths bought by many of our political leaders is that the TTP is fighting for the democratic and economic rights of the tribal areas. Nothing can be farther from the truth. The fact is that the tribal people have suffered much more through rising Taliban militancy. The militants have slaughtered hundreds of maliks and many more have been killed in suicide bombings on tribal jirgas. The atrocities have forced the people to flee their homes in the conflict areas. It will be disastrous if the TTP is allowed to take control of the tribal belt and enforce its own version of the Sharia system there as is being suggested by members of the government’s negotiating team as well as some political leaders. The people of the tribal areas would be the biggest victims of any such deal. Surrendering to terrorists never brings peace. Conceding to the TTP’s demands would lead to the unravelling of this state. And it will not just be the tribal areas when the entire country is under threat.