Slashdot Mirror
Over 100 Frog Species Discovered in Sri Lanka
randomErr writes "An ecological treasure trove of brightly colored and diverse new frog species has been discovered on the tea-plantation-covered island of Sri Lanka. The discovery of more than a hundred new rain-forest species makes the country a new center of frog diversity and increases the urgency for protecting what little forest it retains."
The Mexican Staring Frog of Southern Sri Lanka
Thank you Trey and Matt.
Overrated / Underrated : Moderation
One more crippling bombshell hit the already beleaguered *BSD community when IDC confirmed that *BSD market share has dropped yet again, now down to less than a fraction of 1 percent of all servers. Coming on the heels of a recent Netcraft survey which plainly states that *BSD has lost more market share, this news serves to reinforce what we've known all along. *BSD is collapsing in complete disarray, as fittingly exemplified by failing dead last [samag.com] [samag.com] in the recent Sys Admin comprehensive networking test.
You don't need to be a Kreskin [amazingkreskin.com] [amazingkreskin.com] to predict *BSD's future. The hand writing is on the wall: *BSD faces a bleak future. In fact there won't be any future at all for *BSD because *BSD is dying. Things are looking very bad for *BSD. As many of us are already aware, *BSD continues to lose market share. Red ink flows like a river of blood.
FreeBSD is the most endangered of them all, having lost 93% of its core developers. The sudden and unpleasant departures of long time FreeBSD developers Jordan Hubbard and Mike Smith only serve to underscore the point more clearly. There can no longer be any doubt: FreeBSD is dying.
Let's keep to the facts and look at the numbers.
OpenBSD leader Theo states that there are 7000 users of OpenBSD. How many users of NetBSD are there? Let's see. The number of OpenBSD versus NetBSD posts on Usenet is roughly in ratio of 5 to 1. Therefore there are about 7000/5 = 1400 NetBSD users. BSD/OS posts on Usenet are about half of the volume of NetBSD posts. Therefore there are about 700 users of BSD/OS. A recent article put FreeBSD at about 80 percent of the *BSD market. Therefore there are (7000+1400+700)*4 = 36400 FreeBSD users. This is consistent with the number of FreeBSD Usenet posts.
Due to the troubles of Walnut Creek, abysmal sales and so on, FreeBSD went out of business and was taken over by BSDI who sell another troubled OS. Now BSDI is also dead, its corpse turned over to yet another charnel house.
All major surveys show that *BSD has steadily declined in market share. *BSD is very sick and its long term survival prospects are very dim. If *BSD is to survive at all it will be among OS dilettante dabblers. *BSD continues to decay. Nothing short of a miracle could save it at this point in time. For all practical purposes, *BSD is dead.
Fact: *BSD is dying
In all suriousness, the French used to do nuclear testing near Sri-Lanka. COuld these be corrupted genes? If not, where can I be a tree hugger and send money to?
Sig (appended to the end of comments you post, 120 chars)
The discovery of more than a hundred new rain-forest species...
The new finding increases the island's previously known tree frog diversity more than fivefold to over 100 species.
So did they find 100 species, or did they find a few more, bringing the Total to 100. They found at least five, because they talk about some later down, but shoddy reporting...
Also, what exactly makes a species? Just because they look different doesn't mean they are a different species. White people look alot different from black people. Same species. Did they do DNA comparisons? How different is different?
This reminds me of the Darwin thing with the birds on the island that gave him the idea of evolution. Most scientists say, if the birds in question weren't so "holy" because of darwin, they wouldn't be classified as different spiecies at all, because the differences are so minor.
Discovered in one corner of the plantation were hundreds of used highlighter pens.
-- I have monkeys in my pants.
the real story:
Evaluating Sri Lanka's amphibian diversity
The national geographic article is fluffy trash drawing conclusions that the scientist involved did not come to.
"We are destroying enviroment before we even know what we are destroying so give us money so we can save the enviroment."
Pethiyagoda hypothosizes the exact opposite. That the destruction of corridors of rainforest created islands of rainforest where the frogs species differentiated. The dry land acted like a natural barrier would.
So, destroy the rainforest but do it in strips so we can artificially create new species to replace the ones we loose in the destruction of the rainforest.
If voting were effective, it would be illegal by now.
"The discovery of these species is just an indication that we are losing some of the world's most important resources before we even know what those resources really are..."
Okay, they found some radioactive frogs. They didn't find Sean Connery's pony tail and the cure for cancer.
--"The perfect example of the man of action is the suicide." - William Carlos Williams
Would this diversity indicate...
1) rapid adaption was necessary in an environment that was becoming more harsh at human hands?
2) the frogs are flourishing? Is the environment's supposed toxicity is not hampering frogs in nearly profound ways as previously speculated?
3) there was a miscount in the first place? This is Sri Lanka. Might it have much less biological study than the African Savannah, the Australian Outback, or even the Brazilian rain forest?
It's also a beautiful country in general, besides being war ravaged for the past few decades, it's nice to see the country move on and to have people take interest in it once again.
But how will they taste sauteed with a little butter?
Do you suppose the phrase "a new center of frog diversity" will be showing up on their tourism literature soon?
Is it weird in here, or is it just me?
Imagine a beowulf cluster of these!
Do you think one of the new frogs found is the hypno-toad? 'Cause I could really use one of those.
Ed Wedig
Graphic design services
docbrown.net
The traditional answer to the question of species definition is that of reproduction. When two populations stop interbreeding they become a new species. The cause can be anything from differences in range, morphological differences, behavioral differences, to lots of other stuff. When Population A stops having sex with Population B, they're different species. For us non-biologists that's probably good enough.
If you don't believe the reporter about the count, perhaps you'll believe the guy with the PhD?
The simultaneous discovery of more than 100 species is...astonishing news," said David Skelly of Yale University's School of Forestry and Environmental Studies in New Haven, Connecticut
Now, on to my *first* reaction to your post.
Stop being such a freakin' humbug and engage your sense of wonder. These dudes out in Sri Lanka found 100 new species in a single study! You must give them major props for that. Read the article further and you will see that
Five of the new species are tree frogs that lay eggs in homespun foam baskets suspended above water--from whence the tadpoles take their first dip. The remainder are all species that produce young on the forest floor in robust eggs. These direct-developing young avoid being tadpoles and emerge as fully fledged, if tiny, versions of their parents.
This is very interesting stuff here. New reproduction stuff, cool new behavior... This is interesting! blah... I'm done.