HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: des@helix.nih.gov (David E. Scheim)
Subject: CD ROM biology/medical reference library?
Organization: NIH
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993 18:25:21 GMT

We are looking for a biology and medical reference library -- our particular 
area is eye research -- on one CD disk that could be accessed on a CD-ROM 
drive on our 486 PC-server (Microsoft LAN Manager Network).  Any suggestions?
Thanks.

/*********************************************************************/
/*                      --- David E. Scheim ---                      */
/* BITNET: DES@NIHNEI31                                              */
/* INTERNET: desl@helix.nih.gov          PHONE: 301 496-2194         */
/* CompuServe: 73750,3305                  FAX: 301 402-1065         */
/*                                                                   */
/* DISCLAIMER: These comments are offered to share knowledge based   */
/*   upon my personal views.  They do not represent the positions    */
/*   of my employer.                                                 */
/*********************************************************************/
Newsgroups: sci.bio
From: david@mks.com (David Rowley)
Subject: Human Genome Project Status?
Organization: Mortice Kern Systems Inc., Waterloo, Ontario, CANADA
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1993 15:30:08 GMT

Where would I find out the current status of the project to
map and sequence the Human (and other) genomes?

Is there a mailing list somewhere?

Thanks,
David Rowley
david@mks.com

-- 
     ll  // // ,~/~~\'   David Rowley
    /ll/// //l' `\\\     Mortice Kern Systems Inc.
   / l //_// ll\___/     35 King Street North, Waterloo, ON, Canada N2J 2W9
O_/                      519/884-2251, FAX 519/884-8861, david@mks.com
From: swf@tools3teradata.com (Stan Friesen)
Newsgroups: sci.bio
Subject: Re: Are Buffalo Tongues Rough?
Keywords: buffalo
Date: 5 Jan 93 19:05:48 GMT
Distribution: world
Organization: NCR Teradata Database Business Unit

In article <1ibk15INN9p4@shelley.u.washington.edu>, adrian@stein.u.washington.edu (Adrian Mariano) writes:
|> A friend of mine has heard many times that buffalo tongues are
|> extremely rough.  Supposedly, if they lick human skin, they will rip
|> it off.  

I suspect that this is rather exagerated.  It is quite possible that the tongue is
sufficiently rough to cause pain when a human is licked, but I doubt it is much
rougher than that.

|> He might have been referring to bison rather than buffalo.  

Almost certainly that is what he meant - unless he lives in Asia or Africa.

|> Does anyone know if this is true?  I'd like some references about
|> this, and why they do or do not have rough tongues.

As I remember it things, even cows have rough tongues.  I suspect it is related
to the way they eat.

-- 
sarima@teradata.com			(formerly tdatirv!sarima)
  or
Stanley.Friesen@ElSegundoCA.ncr.com
Newsgroups: sci.bio
From: winalski@adserv.enet.dec.com (Paul S. Winalski)
Subject: Re: Brain Size. Modern vs Neanderthal
Reply-To: winalski@adserv.enet.dec.com (Paul S. Winalski)
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation, Nashua NH
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 18:48:03 GMT


In article <1993Jan6.195512.1@acad3.alaska.edu>, nsmca@acad3.alaska.edu writes:
|>
|>Brainsize..If I remember correctl Neanderthal man had a larger brain cc than
|>modern man on the adverage. Itsnot how big, its how you use it..

If I remember correctly, there is no statistical difference.

|> Neanderthal
|>seemsed to be more peaceful or less vicious as modern humans..

What is the basis for this observation?

--PSW
From: mlevin@husc8.harvard.edu (Michael Levin)
Newsgroups: sci.bio
Subject: culturing planarians: help!
Date: 5 Jan 93 20:10:01 GMT
Article-I.D.: husc3.1993Jan5.151002.19028
Distribution: usa
Organization: Harvard University Science Center


     How do people culture planarians? I'm having trouble because once
I put a piece of liver into the water, it becomes dirty and they die
(even if I promptly remove the liver and change the water). Is there
anything one can do (put something into the water, etc.)? Please reply
to mlevin@husc8.harvard.edu.

Mike Levin
From: crystal@glia.biostr.washington.edu (Crystal)
Newsgroups: sci.bio
Subject: Motionless sleep
Date: 6 Jan 93 19:31:08 GMT
Organization: University of Washington
NNTP-Posting-Host: glia.biostr.washington.edu

Over the years, I've heard and seen time-lapse film of people tossing and
turning and changing positions multitudes of times during the night.

Well,  I sleep like a dead body.

My XSO brought it up one evening, and I didn't believe him, so we placed something on hip as I went to sleep.  I woke about 4 hours later, and as I rolled over
the thing on my hip fell off - reminding me of the experiment. I was shocked!

I have performed this experiment many times since...it's weird...I apparently
wake up before turning over.  And I seem to remain in the same postion for 
3-4 hours at a time.

Now, for YEARS, beginning when I was a child, I would sleep with a cat (or cats)and I remember being very careful not to roll over and squish the critter I was
sleeping with.  In fact, I do NOT "roll" over, but instead, pick up my body, and
place it in the same place, simply facing the opposite direction. (For several
years I slept with 2 cats: one liked to snuggle against my back and the other
liked to be in my arms, and when I changed position, they would crawl over me 
to get back into their positions.  To this day, I sleep much better with someone
or some thing in my arms.)

As a result, I am quite capable of sleeping comfortably on a 24-inch wide mat,
in spite of the fact that I am 100 lbs overweight.

Is this sleeping pattern in any way detrimental to my health?  I'm 38 now, and
I seem to keep this "dead body" sleep pattern whether I sleep with a cat or
not.

A curiosity, to be sure....

Crystal
  ;>
Newsgroups: sci.bio
From: 90dobias@evans.ensmp.fr (Philippe DOBIAS <90dobias@cc.ensmp.fr>)
Subject: Ground Bacteria
Organization: Ecole des Mines de Paris
Distribution: sci
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 93 11:41:45 GMT

Hi !

I'm trying to separate bacteria from soil samples.
The fact is that these nasty things seem like glued
to the sand. We've tried shaking and ultrasound, but
I'm not really conviced this allows a complete
recovery of all cells.
Besides, I would like to have them as much unaltered
as possible. Someone suggested using hydrolyse ezymes.

Does anybody out there have any other info/experience/ideas ?

Thank's a lot !

	Ph. Dobias

e-mail to 90dobias@cc.ensmp.fr or BITNET : 90dobias@FREMP11
From: sjbuckle@minster.york.ac.uk
Newsgroups: sci.bio
Subject: Quiz question
Date: 4 Jan 93 11:02:02 GMT
Organization: Department of Computer Science, University of York, England

I would be grateful if somebody out there could provide me with the answer to
the following question which came up in a newspaper quiz.

   Who was responsible for the work, the Evolution of Genetic Systems ?

Please E-mail to sjbuckle@minster.york.ac.uk. Thanks.
From: swf@tools3teradata.com (Stan Friesen)
Newsgroups: sci.bio
Subject: Re: Brainsize - the great brain race
Date: 10 Jan 93 18:07:46 GMT
Distribution: world
Organization: NCR Teradata Database Business Unit

In article <C0LJ17.LJu@newcastle.ac.uk>, w.p.coyne@newcastle.ac.uk writes:
|>    The paper says "Jerison discovered that repiles were
|> small-brained 300 million years ago and remain so today.  
|> His plot (logarithmic) of brain size against body size for
|> every known reptile species, extant and extinct, produced 
|> a straight line.  The
|> dinosaurs, many of which had much bigger bodies than living 
|> reptiles, fall
|> squarely on this line, belying the myth that they lumbered to 
|> extinction because they were especially stupid."

Hmm, this seems to contradict what I have seen in other sources.
For theropod dinosaurs, at least, the regression line I have seen falls
slightly above that for typical reptiles.

Of course it is true that if you lump all dinosaurs together you get a result
that is essentially the same as for other reptiles.
[That is the large brains of theropods and the small brains of sauropods cancel
each other out].

|>                 -----------------------
|>   You say birds have brains almost as large as mammals.  According
|> to some of Jerison's work there is actually a massive overlap between
|> the brain size (relative to body size) of mammal species and of bird 
|> species

Yep, that there is.  But, given the spread around the averaged regression line,
this is not quite the same thing as saying they have the *same* brain size.
I do believe that the avian regression line is slightly below that of mammals.

An interesting note - the largest brained dinosaurs (Stenonychosaurus and its
close relatives) actually fall in the lower avian range (That is the relative
brain size is above that of the smallest-brained birds).

-- 
sarima@teradata.com			(formerly tdatirv!sarima)
  or
Stanley.Friesen@ElSegundoCA.ncr.com
From: luckey@rtfm.mlb.fl.us (Jon Luckey)
Subject: Re: why (evolutionarily) are zebras striped?
Organization: We don't need no stinkin' batches!
Distribution: usa
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1993 20:13:07 GMT

mlevin@husc8.harvard.edu (Michael Levin) writes:


>    Does anyone have any ideas why zebras are striped? Surely in the
>sense of camouflage, those yellowish african plains call for a
>monotone antelope-like color. Why are they striped? Please reply to
>mlevin@husc8.harvard.edu. 

>Mike Levin

Theory I heard was that it was supposed to be 'confusing' as opposed
to limiting detection.  That when you have a herd of zebra bouncing
in your field of vision, its hard to aquire a target.

Sort of like using chaff to avoid radar as opposed to using stealth.
From: rowe@pender.ee.upenn.edu (Mickey Rowe)
Newsgroups: sci.bio
Subject: Re: "Falling" Asleep
Date: 8 Jan 93 22:07:09 GMT
Organization: University of Pennsylvania

In article <C0Io7F.BrH@iat.holonet.net> ken@iat.holonet.net 
     (Ken Easlon) writes:

>I distinguish the sense of "down" [during dreams] from the perception of
>gravity (pressure, effort) because I believe the sense of "down" in dreams
>is imagined, coming from the direction of my feet when I dream I am
>standing, where gravity perception when I drift back to wakefulness is
>coming from another angle.

On this facet of the conversation, I don't think that we disagree as
much as it might at first have appeared.  If we disagree at all here,
I think it's only in that I'm trying to get across that I think that
your feet (and hence the direction to them) is imaginary in your
dreams.  As you begin to wake, you become aware of your body, and the
imagined "to your feet" lines up with the actual "to your feet"
perhaps before you become aware of the direction of "to the earth".
If, in your dream "to your feet" lined up with "to the earth", you
recognize this discrepancy as you come to.  I think that this scenario
is consistent with your observations.  Do you agree (not necessarily
with the scenario, but with the consistency)?

>Ken Easlon                | "...somebody spoke and I went into a dream..."

Mickey Rowe     (rowe@pender.ee.upenn.edu)
Xref: sparky sci.bio:4856 bionet.general:2050 bionet.users.addresses:503
From: rmt@unh.edu (Roy M. Turner)
Newsgroups: sci.bio,bionet.general,bionet.users.addresses
Subject: Question: Garrett Hardin
Date: 11 Jan 93 12:17:05
Organization: Computer Science Department/Marine Systems Eng. Lab., U. New
	Hampshire
Distribution: sci
Reply-To: rmt@cs.unh.edu (Roy M. Turner)
NNTP-Posting-Host: agate.unh.edu


Does anyone know if Garrett Hardin is still alive and, if so, what his US Mail
address is?  Thanks. --Roy
--
-------------
Roy M. Turner
Research Assistant Professor
Department of Computer Science/Marine Systems Engineering Laboratory
Kingsbury Hall, University of New Hampshire, Durham, NH 03824
Internet:   rmt@cs.unh.edu			Phone: (603)862-2980
Newsgroups: sci.bio
From: wadley@mullauna.cs.mu.OZ.AU (Gregory Robert Wadley)
Subject: How to DIGEST in vitro?
Organization: Computer Science, University of Melbourne, Australia
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 23:02:52 GMT

Can anyone help me with this problem?

I'm trying to find a 'standard formula' for artificial human digestive juice.

I've read the methods section of a few papers, and it seems to change
from experimenter to experimenter. Some use just pepsin and HCl, some
also add trypsin, and so on.

Is there an accepted standard?

Thanks, -Greg.
From: onar@hsr.no (Onar Aam)
Newsgroups: sci.bio
Subject: Re: Gould versus Dawkins
Date: 4 Jan 93 08:35:00 GMT
Organization: Rogaland University Centre

>   (Aside: when I hear the term 'emergent' I reach for my revolver.
>Because emergence is not an actual phenomenon in the system being
>studied.  On the contrary, emergents are artifacts that 'emerge' when
>an observer does not understand how the system works. That is, an
>emergent is something that a certain observer did not expect, because
>of ignorance or inability to predict that outcome.)

Perhaps you are operating with the wrong defenition of emergent? The term
emergent is meant as a counterstrike to reductionism. It is merely the
recognition that understanding the properties of the building blocks of a 
system will not yield the properties of the system. Besides, when a property is
concidered emergent then the property is independent of the chemical
nature of the elements. Ex. the properties of neural networks will arise in
networks consisting of neurons just as much as they will arise in a network which
is simulated on a computer.


 

Onar.
From: djd@csg.cs.reading.ac.uk (David J Dawkins)
Newsgroups: sci.bio
Subject: Re: Gould versus Dawkins
Date: 6 Jan 93 15:36:25 GMT
Organization: University of Reading

mls@panix.com (Michael Siemon) writes:

>In article <1993Jan2.065434.23370@news.media.mit.edu> minsky@media.mit.edu (Marvin Minsky) writes:

>>I don't think this makes sense, at least for anyone who has read
>>Dawkins' book, The Extended Phenotype -- because Dawkins would be the
>>first to agree that it is not at all a matter of "simple summations".

>I would note that _The Extended Phenotype_ opens with a preface in
>which Dawkins is at pains to deny/disclaim meaning what many readers
>(both careful and careless, biologically educated and generalists)
>have read _The Selfish Gene_ to mean (and which is the target of
>Gould's animus in the review.)  Given the crude way in which one
>sees Dawkins clever phrases used on the net, I am with Gould in my
>animus, even though much of TEP (and indeed TSG, when rendered of
>its rather high polemic content) has interesting and intelligent
>things to say.  I think that Dawkins is either disingenuous or a
>totally negligent author.

WOW! Is disingenuous good?  Wait 'til I tell Ma!

-Dave Dawkins "What the hell's a Phenotype, and who'd want to extend it
               anyway?"

-- 
djd@csg.cs.rdg.ac.uk
djd@csug.cs.rdg.ac.uk
davidd@integ.uucp
Newsgroups: sci.bio
From: Hanna Tuomisto <hantuo@utu.fi>
Subject: Address list of tropical biologists
Organization: University of Turku
X-Useragent: Nuntius v1.1a2
Date: Tue, 5 Jan 93 15:01:31 GMT

In the newsgroup bionet.biology.tropical it was decided that an address
list will be established for biologists who are interested in the
tropics. The aim is to enhance communication among researchers who are
scattered around the world.

The list will work on the principle that people who want to be included
in the list send to me their e-mail and postal addresses, together with
any additional information they think the colleagues should know. After
some time I'll e-mail the list to everybody who is included, and send to
bionet.biology.tropical a note to tell what the current situation of the
list is. Thereafter I will update the list as new addresses come in, and
send the updated list to the participants and an update note to the
newsgroup.

Everybody who is interested is welcome to participate. Please note that
since I'm not fond of typing, I would like to have all entries sent to me
by e-mail so that they can be copied to the list without modification.

Hanna Tuomisto              hantuo@utu.fi
Department of Biology
University of Turku, Finland
Newsgroups: sci.bio
From: carlf@panix.com (Carl Fink)
Subject: Re: Info on brewing beer at home.
Organization: PANIX Public Access Unix, NYC
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 00:23:43 GMT

  I don't know anything about brewing...but I'd suggest you post 
your question on rec.crafts.brewing, where I'm sure there are plenty
of knowledgeable people to help you.

-- 
Carl Fink          carlf@panix.com, C.FINK4(GEnie), or CF427620I@LIUVAX.BITNET
  "Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our
  inclinations, or the dictates of our passions, they cannot alter
  the state of facts and evidence"     --      John Adams
Xref: sparky sci.bio:4820 bionet.plants:816 bionet.population-bio:147
From: toby@stein.u.washington.edu (Toby Bradshaw)
Newsgroups: sci.bio,bionet.plants,bionet.population-bio
Subject: Re: Plant riparian population genetics
Date: 8 Jan 1993 00:07:55 GMT
Organization: University of Washington, Seattle
NNTP-Posting-Host: stein.u.washington.edu

In article <1993Jan7.215342.22845@cbfsb.cb.att.com> djd@cbnewsg.cb.att.com (david.j.daulton) writes:
>Regarding populus tichocarpa, I read that this is one of the "balsam
>poplars", and one of the most fragrant plants to have in one's garden.
>Specifically, it is supposed to smell really good when the buds first open
>in the spring.  So, I sent off for one, but when it arrived, no smell.  
>
>I tried keeping it in a pot, but it died during the winter.  Before I order
>another, was the book wrong, and this is not fragrant plant, or did it
>arrive after its fragrant phase, or did the nursery send me the wrong
>tree?

P. trichocarpa ("black cottonwood") is a member of the section
Tacamahaca ("balsam poplars").  The yellow, sticky bud resin
is the smell of spring in the Pacific Northwest, and can be
quite strong near a big stand.  P. balsamifera has a stronger,
less pleasant (to me) smell.  I wouldn't recommend planting
either species near a dwelling with sewers or septic tanks,
as the Populus are notorious for clogging them with a
profusion of greedy roots.

Toby Bradshaw                       |
Department of Biochemistry          |  Will make genetic linkage maps
and College of Forest Resources     |            for food.
University of Washington, Seattle   |
toby@u.washington.edu               |
From: wcalvin@stein.u.washington.edu (William Calvin)
Newsgroups: sci.bio
Subject: Re: Brain Size. Modern vs Neanderthal
Date: 7 Jan 1993 17:45:29 GMT
Organization: University of Washington
NNTP-Posting-Host: stein.u.washington.edu

nsmca@acad3.alaska.edu writes:

>Brainsize..If I remember correctl Neanderthal man had a larger brain cc than
>modern man on the adverage. Itsnot how big, its how you use it.. Neanderthal
>seemsed to be more peaceful or less vicious as modern humans..
>Michael Adams alias Ghost Wheel/Morgoth NSMCA@acad3.alaska.edu


1.  Neanderthals had bigger brains but also bigger bodies; their
brain/body ratio was smaller than ours.

2.  Neanderthals more peaceful?  Not likely.  Here is an excerpt from my
book THE ASCENT OF MIND (1990; the data mostly comes from Erik Trinkhaus):

      ...But the Neandertals lived with much more stress,
probably due to episodes of starvation diets; you can see
evidence of disrupted growth in their teeth.  Certainly, they died
far earlier; only 8 percent of adults made it past 35 years of age,
compared to about 50 percent in aboriginal populations.  A
possible reason:  three out of four adults that lived past 25 years
of age had some evidence of healed bone fractures, compared to
perhaps one in four in modern aboriginal populations.  Trauma
that quickly killed the individual isn't counted, as it is difficult
to tell fresh breaks from postmortem breakage; only partially
healed fractures are distinctive enough to count with confidence,
so the percentage is undoubtedly even higher.  And, of course,
infant and child mortality meant that many didn't even make it
into adulthood at all, to be counted by such statistics.
      That so few Neandertal adults survived to 35 years, and
that so many of them were maimed by injuries, suggests a life
full of hazards not faced by the groups to which we compare
them.  Perhaps their methods of hunting involved getting too
close to the angry animal.  Perhaps they hunted only deer and
the like rather than a wide range of species (and so were hurt by
their bad years).  Perhaps there was bloody rivalry between
different bands of Neandertals for hunting territories.  Conflict
with early modern Homo sapiens, the invariable focus of popular
discussion, is unlikely to explain very much of the Neandertal's
short, brutal lives, as most would live their lives without ever
seeing the other version of Homo sapiens.


    William H. Calvin   WCalvin@U.Washington.edu
    University of Washington  NJ-15
    Seattle, Washington 98195 FAX:1-206-720-1989
From: philjohn@garnet.berkeley.edu ()
Newsgroups: sci.bio
Subject: Re: Gould versus Dawkins
Date: 5 Jan 1993 04:33:13 GMT
Organization: University of California, Berkeley
NNTP-Posting-Host: garnet.berkeley.edu


This is a follow-up on Gould's review of Helena Cronin's book:

The New York Review of Books for January 14, 1993, has letters
critical of Gould from John Maynard Smith and Daniel Dennett. 
Maynard Smith says that he disagrees with many points in Gould's
"curiously ill-tempered review" of Helena Cronin's book.  He
comments on only one: Gould seemingly attacks the entire
"kinship selection" approach to the origin of altruism merely
because it is not adequate to explain altruism in humans, 
although it is widely accepted for animals.  Maynard Smith
remarks that:

"It turns out that the failure is no more than this; the gene-
centered argument cannot explain human altruism, which is often
directed to non-relatives.  Coming from anyone this argument
would be odd, but from Gould it is astonishing.  For years he has
been inveighing against those who regard evolution as an
inevitable progress culminating in man, and emphasizing the
marvelous diversity of life.  Now he tells us that a biological
argument fails if it cannot explain some feature peculiar to
humans."

Gould in response tries to clarify his point: he "allowed that
gene selection has resolved many cases of animal altruism" but
objected to Cronin's bringing in humans at the end of the
argument in "the longest chapter in her book."

Comment: Gould often argues that there is nothing very special
about humans, and yet any suggestion that natural selection has
any importance whatever in the area of human behavior and
capacities seems to send him into orbit.  This probably
represents the conflict between Gould the Darwinist and Gould the
left-wing political guru, who wants humanity to be writing on a
clean slate.  Berkeley anthropologist Vincent Sarich describes
Gould's stance as creationism (in the area of human behavior)
without the supernatural creator.

Daniel Dennett's long letter accuses Gould of outrightintellectual 
dishonesty in distorting an opponent's (i.e. Dawkins') position to
make it a "straw man," and then declaring what the opponent really 
said to be a grudging concession to the power of Gould's attack!
A clearly wounded Gould in reply attributes Dennett's angry 
denunciation to "the pungently rarified air of Cambridge,
Massachusetts," and thanks God (!) for "Fenway Park and my local
Bowl-a-drome, where these mental pirouettes can be temporarily
put aside and a semblance of populist normality attained."

Anyone for bowling?
Newsgroups: sci.bio
From: daviess@gov.on.ca (Stephen Davies)
Subject: Levels of blood cholesterol & wine/grape juice consumption
Summary: Relationship between wine/grape juice consumption & blood cholesterol
Keywords: cholesterol wine grape juice
Organization: Government of Ontario
Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1993 20:53:48 GMT

I've heard of a relationship between lowered levels of cholesterol in
the blood with consumption of wine or grape juice.  If anyone knows of
technical references or information on this topic I'd like to hear it.
Please email me or post to0 sci.bio.  Thakns in advance

daviess@gov.on.ca
Newsgroups: sci.bio