Speaker 1: Welcome to Creature Future production of iHeartRadio. I'm your host
Speaker 1: of Many Parasites, Katie Golden. I studied psychology and evolutionary biology,
Speaker 1: and today on the show, it's a listener questions episode.
Speaker 1: You send me your questions to Creature Future pod at
Speaker 1: gmail dot com, and I do my best to answer them.
Speaker 1: These can be questions about animals, about your pets, about wildlife,
Speaker 1: about evolution, about the environment, and I will try to
Speaker 1: answer all of your questions. So let's get right into
Speaker 1: it with our first listener question by Katie. I hope
Speaker 1: you had a great summer. I'm a seventh grade science teacher.
Speaker 1: This year is part of our ecology unit. I'm planning
Speaker 1: on having students focus on ephemeral pools, including raising some
Speaker 1: triumphs under various conditions in our classroom. I was wondering
Speaker 1: if he'd be willing to do a show on ephemeral
Speaker 1: pool organisms, including these adorable, charismatic little guys. I love
Speaker 1: the show. Best wishes, Amanda m I Amanda, so I'm
Speaker 1: so happy that you're enjoying the show. That's a fantastic
Speaker 1: suggestion for an episode that I'm definitely interested in doing.
Speaker 1: When I was a kid. I was given some desiccated
Speaker 1: try up eggs in one of those little kids, and
Speaker 1: I managed to bring I think a couple to life
Speaker 1: for a little while, very briefly, but I had no
Speaker 1: idea what I was doing. I used tap water, probably
Speaker 1: not the right salinity, so they didn't last very long.
Speaker 1: And yeah, I think this is an excellent episode suggestion.
Speaker 1: I do want to do a full episode on ephemeral pools,
Speaker 1: including tryops, but for now I'll just do kind of
Speaker 1: a brief overview. First of all, what is a tryup?
Speaker 1: What is Amanda talking about? It is a little crustacean.
Speaker 1: It looks a lot like a tiny horseshoe crab or
Speaker 1: some kind of alien. They have this plate like body
Speaker 1: and a segmented tail that forks at the very end
Speaker 1: into these two long tips. They're called triops because they
Speaker 1: have three eyes. Two are these close together compound eyes
Speaker 1: on the top of their head. They're so close together
Speaker 1: they're almost like kind of merged into one another, like
Speaker 1: Sonic the hedgehog, almost, And then they have a third
Speaker 1: eye in between them. And this eye is a simple
Speaker 1: eye with a single lens. So triups mature very quickly,
Speaker 1: and there are many different species of tryops, but in
Speaker 1: general they only live to be around ninety days, so
Speaker 1: their eggs, on the other hand, depending on the species,
Speaker 1: can remain dried out for years. So let's talk a
Speaker 1: little bit about ephemeral pools. It sounds very mystical and magical,
Speaker 1: and it is so. Ephemeral pools, also sometimes called vernal
Speaker 1: pools or informally potholes, are small seasonal pools of water
Speaker 1: that come during wet seasons and tend to dry out cyclically.
Speaker 1: So this means that they generally don't house fish, except
Speaker 1: that there are some fish like killifish that have specifically
Speaker 1: adapted to having really brief, fast live spans and produce
Speaker 1: eggs that can survive desiccation, so they can live in
Speaker 1: these ephemeral pools. But generally speaking, usually there's a lot
Speaker 1: of invertebrate species. You also have some amphibian species. So
Speaker 1: what all these species have in common is that they
Speaker 1: have to be able to reproduce within the wet season
Speaker 1: and produce eggs that can survive the dry season. So
Speaker 1: they have to hatch quickly when they are exposed to water,
Speaker 1: and they have to mature very quickly and reproduce and
Speaker 1: then lay eggs that we'll be able to survive being
Speaker 1: dried out. So that's actually why, Like, if you ever
Speaker 1: got sea monkeys, which are also known as brin shrimp
Speaker 1: more technically or tryops, and you know, you can buy
Speaker 1: these kits. You can get them sent to your house.
Speaker 1: I know, back in probably I think like the fifties
Speaker 1: used to. They used to advertise sea monkeys and magazines
Speaker 1: and kids could send in their hard earned cash for
Speaker 1: a little packet of sea monkeys and a little plastic
Speaker 1: aquarium and maybe or maybe not have them come to life.
Speaker 1: Certainly they did not look like the pictures on the packaging,
Speaker 1: but they were brine shrimp. And the reason that you
Speaker 1: can revive these dried out shelf stable eggs is that
Speaker 1: their eggs are very hardy. They survive being dried out.
Speaker 1: They go into this sort of like suspended not quite
Speaker 1: suspended animation because it's an egg, so it is not
Speaker 1: yet fully matured organism, but yeah, it's in a it's
Speaker 1: in a state of stasis, so you can keep them
Speaker 1: relatively easily, and then once you expose them to water,
Speaker 1: hopefully of the right salinity and hardness, then they will
Speaker 1: hatch they'll come to life. So other ephemeral pool residents
Speaker 1: are amphibians like salamanders, newts, and frogs. So the nice
Speaker 1: thing about being an amphibian is you can move around,
Speaker 1: so as your pool is drying up, you can maybe
Speaker 1: find another pool that isn't as dry. But they it
Speaker 1: is also important for them to lay eggs that survive
Speaker 1: being dried out. There's some amphibians that will bury themselves
Speaker 1: in the mud to survive dry periods as well. So
Speaker 1: there are other types of adaptation and ephemeral pools happen
Speaker 1: all over the world. So you'll have very different species
Speaker 1: depending on where you are, but you can have in
Speaker 1: one ecosystem for one kind of ephemeral pool, like hundreds
Speaker 1: and hundreds of different species who are taking advantage of
Speaker 1: the cycle, the dry wet cycle. So this is really
Speaker 1: cool stuff. I definitely want to do a full episode
Speaker 1: on this. So thank you so much for the question, Amanda,
Speaker 1: and good luck to you and your kids and raising
Speaker 1: an army of tryops. I'm very interested. Let me know
Speaker 1: how that goes, all right, onto the next listener question.
Speaker 1: This one is really really good. In fact, I would
Speaker 1: say this is less of a question and more that
Speaker 1: someone bringing me some research to my attention and a
Speaker 1: very good summary of it. So I'm just gonna read
Speaker 1: you the whole email. Hi, Katie, I just happen to
Speaker 1: read the most mind blowing scientific paper I've ever come across,
Speaker 1: and it's relevant to your interests. It begins with the
Speaker 1: statement living organisms are assumed to produce same species offspring
Speaker 1: and cites two sources, one of which is the origin
Speaker 1: of species. So you know you're in for a wild ride.
Speaker 1: A bunch of ant species have queens that lay only
Speaker 1: princess eggs when they mate with their own males. To
Speaker 1: make workers, they have to mate with males of entirely
Speaker 1: different species. The workers are thus all hybrids. And this
Speaker 1: isn't even the key finding. Apparently this is just a
Speaker 1: thing some ants do, and it has been known for
Speaker 1: a while. No, the finding has to do with Mesor Ibericus,
Speaker 1: the queens of which have to mate with mesoor structor
Speaker 1: to make workers. So these are the main two species
Speaker 1: that we're going to be talking about. The problem is
Speaker 1: that m Ibericus and M. Structor don't live in the
Speaker 1: same place, so m Ibericus queens do some crazy cellular
Speaker 1: jewurry brokery to lay eggs that hatch into M. Structor males. Yes,
Speaker 1: these are queen ants that lay eggs of an entirely
Speaker 1: different species. So when it's time to mate, the queen's
Speaker 1: princesses fly off and mate with both m Ibericus and M.
Speaker 1: Structor ants from other colonies. Then they do something akin
Speaker 1: to indosymbiosis on the M structor sperm. Quick note from me.
Speaker 1: Endosymbiosis meaning that you have a symbiote, another organism living
Speaker 1: inside you. Symbiosis is a non judgmental term of a
Speaker 1: close relationship between two organisms. Can range from mutualism to parasitism,
Speaker 1: so in this case it's not necessarily parasitism. Probably closer
Speaker 1: to mutualism all right. So back to the email. They
Speaker 1: do something it can to endosymbiosis on the M structor sperm,
Speaker 1: taking it into the queen's own cells but not merging
Speaker 1: its nucleus. The queen can thus regulate fertilization and mitosis.
Speaker 1: She can lay diploid pure strain m Ibericus eggs that
Speaker 1: hatch into princesses haploid m Ibericus eggs that hatch into
Speaker 1: m Ibericus males, So diploid and haploid. Diploid is two
Speaker 1: sets of chromosomes, usually coming from the mother and the father.
Speaker 1: Haploid is one set, usually in this case coming just
Speaker 1: directly from the maternal line. So okay, so all so far,
Speaker 1: very normal for ants. They lay diploid female eggs with
Speaker 1: genes from both the mother and the father, but then
Speaker 1: haploid males with genes usually just from the mother. But
Speaker 1: here's where it gets kind of finicky. So so back to
Speaker 1: the email. They have haploid instructor eggs. So this is
Speaker 1: the other species we were talking about. M. I. Buricus
Speaker 1: is the queen, and they're laying haploid instructor eggs that
Speaker 1: hatch into instructor males and diploid hybrid eggs that hatch
Speaker 1: into workers. So these ants can both create basically male
Speaker 1: clones of another species as well as the hybrid workers.
Speaker 1: All right, back to the email. This is amazing, right.
Speaker 1: The authors bring up some important points in the discussion section.
Speaker 1: The sexual behavior of these ants means we really need
Speaker 1: to rethink the whole concept of speed. She's because kate
Speaker 1: nature cares not what boxes we put things into. They
Speaker 1: also describe such interspecies mating and ants as a form
Speaker 1: of sperm parasitism, but it's ambiguous which is the parasite
Speaker 1: and which is the host. One way to look at
Speaker 1: it is that M. I. Buricus is just using instructor's
Speaker 1: sperm to make more in my Burcus, not letting their
Speaker 1: captive instructors mate with princesses of their own species. But
Speaker 1: from a selfish gene perspective, one could say that mstructor
Speaker 1: is piggybacking off the hard work of M. My bu
Speaker 1: because using a whole other ant species to perpetrate the M.
Speaker 1: Structor genome nature sure is wild and confusing. I guess
Speaker 1: I should ask a question, shouldn't I? Is this the
Speaker 1: wildest form of reproduction we know? Or do other species
Speaker 1: get even crazier? Are there any other animals that laugh
Speaker 1: in the face of our attempts to define the species?
Speaker 1: Keeping great Chris, M Hi, Chris, so amazing email, great,
Speaker 1: great detail, an amazing study that you bring out. So
Speaker 1: I read the paper you sent me. The paper is
Speaker 1: called one mother for two species via obligate cross species
Speaker 1: cloning in ants. So your summary, Chris is perfect. I
Speaker 1: just want to reiterate stuff because like, there's a lot
Speaker 1: of a lot of things going on. These queens of
Speaker 1: the m Ibericus ants are producing a lot of different offspring.
Speaker 1: So this incredible species of ant Mesor Ibericus was found
Speaker 1: to use the sperm of a different species, mesr structor.
Speaker 1: So the m Ibericus queens are able to use the
Speaker 1: DNA of their own species to produce both male and
Speaker 1: female offsprings, but they cannot produce workers. So their free
Speaker 1: male offsprings are future queens and the male offsprings are
Speaker 1: their own species and used for mating for producing more
Speaker 1: future queens. Ah. But they need the inmstructor DNA this
Speaker 1: other species DNA to produce workers. But they don't only
Speaker 1: use it to produce workers. They use this DNA to
Speaker 1: produce clones of males from this other species, haploid males
Speaker 1: that are only getting their DNA from the instructor DNA,
Speaker 1: as well as hybrid females that have both m Ibericus
Speaker 1: DNA and in instructor DNA, and those hybrid workers are
Speaker 1: essential to the functioning of the colony. So the ability
Speaker 1: of the m Ibericus ant to produce workers has become
Speaker 1: entirely dependent on instructor DNA. The researchers found that worker
Speaker 1: hybrids primarily had the DNA of cloned instructors, although some
Speaker 1: were wild types. So it means that sometimes the queens
Speaker 1: had directly mated with instructors they found in the wild
Speaker 1: and produced produced workers from these matings. But a lot
Speaker 1: of these workers are entirely produced by clones of this
Speaker 1: other species. So the queen kind of becomes like a
Speaker 1: clone factory where she's producing clones of this other species
Speaker 1: that are then used to meete with to produce hybrid workers. Meanwhile,
Speaker 1: she's still doing normal ant things where she's producing future
Speaker 1: queens as well as males of her own species. So
Speaker 1: the high amount of workers who are fathered by clones
Speaker 1: means that, very uniquely among ant species in my Bericus,
Speaker 1: queens create a steady supply of clones. You know, like
Speaker 1: in Man. I didn't watch all the prequels to Star Wars,
Speaker 1: but you know in Star Wars they make a bunch
Speaker 1: of a clone army. It's what these queens are doing,
Speaker 1: and then they use these clones to father worker ants.
Speaker 1: And the study authors liken this to domestication. Definitely very strange,
Speaker 1: very very weird dynamics going on. I think this study
Speaker 1: is really really cool Chris, As you pointed out, the
Speaker 1: concept of species is more of an art than a
Speaker 1: rule in nature. The most simple definition of a species
Speaker 1: is the biggest category of organism in which the individuals
Speaker 1: can mate and produce fertile offspring. This definition is definitely lacking.
Speaker 1: What about asexual organisms? Right, So you could say, like, ah,
Speaker 1: but so then a species also includes those that individuals
Speaker 1: can asexually reproduce. But again, this definition isn'tcomplete given that
Speaker 1: hybrids exist, and while most hybrids like mules, are not fertile,
Speaker 1: you can sometimes have hybrid species that are fertile. So
Speaker 1: often biologists use other markers, either DNA, morphological differences, evolutionary
Speaker 1: history to help refine the definition of species. So like
Speaker 1: in this case of these ants, these two species diverged
Speaker 1: a really long time ago, millions of years ago, and
Speaker 1: then it seems like this symbiotic relationship developed after they
Speaker 1: had diverged. So that's kind of why they would say
Speaker 1: these are different species, even if they're incorporating these other
Speaker 1: ants regularly into their mating. But it's definitely a fuzzy category.
Speaker 1: There's a lot of gray area, just as there is
Speaker 1: for most things in biology. But yeah, of course, there's
Speaker 1: so much debate when it comes to species, particularly differentiating
Speaker 1: between species and subspecies. There are a whole like species
Speaker 1: complexes where you have things often things like butterflies or frogs,
Speaker 1: where you have a huge diversity of species, and then
Speaker 1: some of them are morphologically genetically extremely similar and can
Speaker 1: even potentially mate with each other, but they have a
Speaker 1: few differences. So the question is, at one point are
Speaker 1: they a different species who can just kind of mate
Speaker 1: with each other and produce fertile offspring, and at what
Speaker 1: point are they different. It's very hard. It's very hard
Speaker 1: to kind of make these categories. There's much a lot
Speaker 1: of thought that goes into it that I don't I
Speaker 1: don't quite understand. I'm certainly not the authority on what
Speaker 1: exactly counts as a species. As for Chris's other question
Speaker 1: about whether this is the wildest form of reproduction we know,
Speaker 1: I'd say it's really subjective. To me. This study is
Speaker 1: really really cool. It's very exciting that you have an
Speaker 1: ant species that is basically producing clones of another species
Speaker 1: that they're using as a farm for genetic material to
Speaker 1: create worker ants. That's incredible. But there's so many examples
Speaker 1: of really weird life cycles, super super strange, lots of
Speaker 1: cases of sexual and asexual reproduction, assisted reproduction from like
Speaker 1: other species, sexual parasites, that all get pretty freaky. I
Speaker 1: would say, I think that the what is strangest is
Speaker 1: going to be subjective. But I'll offer up an example
Speaker 1: of an extremely strange form of reproduction. So I cannot
Speaker 1: recall if I've talked about this on the show show before,
Speaker 1: but this is the Adactylidium, which is a microscopic arthropod
Speaker 1: whose entire life cycle is extremely messed up. So these
Speaker 1: are mites. These are teeny teeny teeny tiny mites. Their
Speaker 1: microscopic you really can't see them barely at all, I
Speaker 1: doubt with the naked eye. So let's start with the
Speaker 1: pregnant female. She has up to eight embryos inside her,
Speaker 1: all female, and then she has one male embryo. These
Speaker 1: develop into reproductively mature mites inside of her, and the
Speaker 1: male mates with all the sister females fertilizing them, So
Speaker 1: all of this is already happening inside the pregnant female.
Speaker 1: Then the offspring eat their way outside of their own mother,
Speaker 1: who's only a few days old herself, which kills which
Speaker 1: kills her. So this is not the only form of
Speaker 1: matrophagi in the animal kingdom. There are other animals that
Speaker 1: will eat their own mothers, but this is certainly, I think,
Speaker 1: the only case where you have already pregnant females inside
Speaker 1: the mother then eating their way outside. You think this
Speaker 1: sounds really unfair for the females. The males don't have
Speaker 1: much of a life either. After impregnating all of his
Speaker 1: sisters inside his own mother, he has no further purpose.
Speaker 1: Even if he gets outside of the mother with the sisters,
Speaker 1: he doesn't have any instinct to feed or to mate.
Speaker 1: He just patiently waits for death to come. The females, meanwhile,
Speaker 1: will find a thrip EGGA thrip is another teeny tiny
Speaker 1: art pod, So they find an egg of this other
Speaker 1: species to feed on, and they are already pregnant because
Speaker 1: they were fertilized while they were still inside the mother.
Speaker 1: So they feed on an egg and after a few
Speaker 1: days the same thing happens to them. So it's a
Speaker 1: pretty thankless existence for these mites. Life is an endless
Speaker 1: genetic production line and little else. Thankfully, their microscopic they
Speaker 1: do not have many brain cells around, not much neural like,
Speaker 1: they do have neural cells, but it's not I wouldn't
Speaker 1: feel too much existential horror on their behalf because probably
Speaker 1: they're not super aware of what's going on. So really
Speaker 1: it's us who get to ponder the existential ramifications of
Speaker 1: the existence of these Adactylidium mites. So there you go.
Speaker 1: I don't know. I wouldn't say it's cooler than the
Speaker 1: ant study. I think producing an army of clones of
Speaker 1: another species that you harvest their DNA from for your
Speaker 1: own workers is also pretty messed up. Nature's very, very
Speaker 1: creatively messed up. There's lots of examples. Here's just another one.
Speaker 1: Hope you enjoyed that, all right, So we'll take a
Speaker 1: real quick break and then get back with another listener question.
Speaker 1: So here's another listener question. Hi Katie, longtime listener, first
Speaker 1: time questioner. Could you discuss the management of invasive species
Speaker 1: and non native species? I find myself torn due to
Speaker 1: my love for animals. I understand that invasive species can
Speaker 1: negatively impact or even devastate native species, but I have
Speaker 1: a hard time with calling them. I suppose it just
Speaker 1: upsets me that animals have to suffer due to human errors.
Speaker 1: I know that invasive species have to be managed in
Speaker 1: some way, but what goes into the decisions on how
Speaker 1: to manage them? Who typically has the say and how
Speaker 1: they're managed? Are the management strategies usually successful? What happens
Speaker 1: when a species is not native but also not harmful?
Speaker 1: Would they just be left alone? Are there examples of
Speaker 1: non native species being beneficial? Interested in any information about this? Really,
Speaker 1: I'd love to know your thoughts so I can understand
Speaker 1: it all a bit better. Thank you, Ashley from Kalamazoo. Hi, Ashley,
Speaker 1: So this is a great question, and I totally get
Speaker 1: where you're coming from. Invasive species aren't evil. It's not
Speaker 1: their fault. They usually had no real say and where
Speaker 1: they ended up, and they're just trying to survive. Controlling
Speaker 1: them is usually very important in protecting ecosystems. But what
Speaker 1: about when they simply adapt to their new home without
Speaker 1: wreaking havoc? That's a great question. So we know that
Speaker 1: certain species like cane toads, cats, black rats, zebra muscles,
Speaker 1: longhorn beetles, these are all examples of animals that are
Speaker 1: invasive that can be incredibly dangerous to native species. You'll
Speaker 1: notice that I mentioned cats I'm talking about the same
Speaker 1: type of kiddies that we have as pets. Feral cats
Speaker 1: can indeed be considered invasive where they freely roam, breed,
Speaker 1: and kill native species, particularly birds. Usually, though we're less
Speaker 1: comfortable hunting and killing cats because we love them. They're pets,
Speaker 1: so controlling them usually involves spaying and neutering campaigns, though
Speaker 1: we do also sometimes trap them and euthanize them. That
Speaker 1: does certainly happen either way. I think people are more
Speaker 1: squeamish about being the idea of colling feral cats, right
Speaker 1: even though we do to a certain extent do it,
Speaker 1: although we do it humanely with euthanasia. Yeah, rightfully, So,
Speaker 1: we were uncomfortable with the idea of calling these feral
Speaker 1: pets that we're the ones who introduced them, and we
Speaker 1: also kind of have a more personal relationship with them,
Speaker 1: so we understand we frankly like see them more as
Speaker 1: an animal with emotions, even though there's plenty of invasive
Speaker 1: species that we call that are similarly you know, animals
Speaker 1: that have feelings, right, So, like it's just it's kind
Speaker 1: of a matter of perspective. Because these are pets, we
Speaker 1: empathize with them more even though there's plenty of perfectly complicated,
Speaker 1: intelligent animals who are also invasive species. So unfortunately, like
Speaker 1: doing a lot of spain and neutering or trapping in,
Speaker 1: euthanasia isn't always an option. Uh So, for instance, on islands,
Speaker 1: rats can be really really dangerous. So rats are extremely fertile,
Speaker 1: they produce a lot of offspring, and so in some places,
Speaker 1: if they are not controlled quickly, they can very effectively
Speaker 1: wipe out native island populations, and so usually conservationists will
Speaker 1: use lethal methods in these in these cases, like using poisons,
Speaker 1: which I think is it's sad, right, Like, I think
Speaker 1: rats are intelligent little animals. Some people keep them as pets.
Speaker 1: I'm sure people who own rats as pets will kind
Speaker 1: of really sympathize with this, right because you see, like, yeah,
Speaker 1: they they they're they they have they they have a brain,
Speaker 1: they have a mind. You know, they're they're simple creature.
Speaker 1: But they that doesn't mean that they don't have emotions
Speaker 1: and they don't have a level of social intelligence. So
Speaker 1: the control of rats is I think always for me
Speaker 1: at least, been kind of an uncomfortable an uncomfortable thing
Speaker 1: to reckon with, right because in terms of protecting ecosystems
Speaker 1: and also protecting human health, controlling rats is pretty important.
Speaker 1: But on the other hand, you know, poisoning them rat
Speaker 1: poison has a lot of problems, one being that it
Speaker 1: is not necessarily very humane way of killing an animal, right,
Speaker 1: And then the other is that if you do have
Speaker 1: rat populations where they're also predators, you can cause ecological
Speaker 1: damage if the predators are eating rats who have been poisoned.
Speaker 1: So I really only think in cases where you are
Speaker 1: very time constrained, right where rats could easily overtake, say
Speaker 1: like an island with a lot of vulnerable bird species,
Speaker 1: and you have to control their population really quickly. I
Speaker 1: do see why conservations and will sometimes use this, but yeah,
Speaker 1: it's certainly not ideal, but at this point, right, logistically,
Speaker 1: sometimes it's what has to be done. But that doesn't
Speaker 1: mean that humane options are always inconvenient or more expensive.
Speaker 1: In fact, I'll bet that at some point more humane
Speaker 1: methods will become like the standard. So there are some
Speaker 1: wildlife advocates who point out that hunting right, like one
Speaker 1: method of colling, is really ineffective. At this point, right,
Speaker 1: we don't have there's just not enough people who need
Speaker 1: sustenance from huntings that are going out and say like
Speaker 1: colling wild boar populations, So it's it's expensive then to
Speaker 1: like actually set about trying to purposefully coal and hunt
Speaker 1: wild boar. So, uh, there's got to be a more
Speaker 1: effective and also more humane option for being able to
Speaker 1: control their populations because wild boar can be very destructive
Speaker 1: to their ecosystem. And that's also an example of an
Speaker 1: animal who I think is intelligent. I'm not against hunting them, right, Like,
Speaker 1: I think that that's certainly in a lot of ways
Speaker 1: no more if less inhumane than factory farming. But if
Speaker 1: you have to cull a bunch of wild bore, right,
Speaker 1: that's just more you're and it's not for using their meat, right,
Speaker 1: it's just because they are an invasive pest. It's not
Speaker 1: a great situation. And I think it would be really
Speaker 1: good if we came up with more humane options, and
Speaker 1: we are so. Researchers and a college's conservationists are coming
Speaker 1: up with more humane methods of controlling populations, and they've
Speaker 1: already tried this on gray squirrels. So in the UK,
Speaker 1: conservationists are trying to control the gray squirrel population, which
Speaker 1: is an invasive species from North America. So you know,
Speaker 1: there you go, Britz, you got you got a lot
Speaker 1: of our movies, but you also get our terrible squirrels.
Speaker 1: So these squirrels are really not a benign invasive species.
Speaker 1: They may be cute, but they're devastating the native red
Speaker 1: squirrel population in the UK as well as other species
Speaker 1: as well as vegetation, so they're not They're not great
Speaker 1: in terms of their presence in the UK. Not the
Speaker 1: squirrel's fault, but they're there and they're causing problems. So
Speaker 1: controlling the squirrel population with hunting not very effective. Poisoning
Speaker 1: them not very humane. But also if you have wild species,
Speaker 1: like say foxes that are native to the region hunting
Speaker 1: squirrels and they get a squirrel that's been poisoned, that's
Speaker 1: not good for the fox. So it's like there's not
Speaker 1: a great solution there. So what they're coming up with
Speaker 1: is oral contraceptives. So this is not a completely new idea.
Speaker 1: The idea of basically baiting animals with contraceptives so they
Speaker 1: are rendered infertile has been used in a lot of
Speaker 1: different cases to try to control populations. It's even on
Speaker 1: the genetic level, for mosquito control, creating genetically modified males
Speaker 1: that are infertile to reduce the mosquito population. But this
Speaker 1: is something that is I think being put into practice
Speaker 1: more so for these gray squirrels. What they'll do is
Speaker 1: they will lace this hazel nut spread that apparently the
Speaker 1: squirrels really love with an oral contraceptive. They put it
Speaker 1: in bait boxes that are specifically designed to be accessible
Speaker 1: mainly by the gray squirrels. They try to make it
Speaker 1: specific so it's really only the gray squirrels getting at
Speaker 1: it rather other than a different species or you know,
Speaker 1: a different type of animal that they don't want getting
Speaker 1: to this contraceptive. So then the squirrels go and eat
Speaker 1: the hazel nuts and instead of being killed and poisoned,
Speaker 1: they are rendered infertile. This trick would definitely work on me,
Speaker 1: by the way, I love hazel nuts. Hazel nuts spread
Speaker 1: in a box that's free, Yes, please glad it's not poison.
Speaker 1: But yeah. So this is a potentially very effective way
Speaker 1: of controlling their population that is already being used in
Speaker 1: some instances, and I think probably especially as we if
Speaker 1: we put more research into it, and we're able to
Speaker 1: maybe even like create contraceptives that are really specific to
Speaker 1: a species of animals, So even if another animal eats it,
Speaker 1: they're not going to become infertile. Only the targeted animal will.
Speaker 1: I think that we could really have very humane ways
Speaker 1: of controlling invasive species that are really efficient and you know,
Speaker 1: in the long run, if you invest in the short term,
Speaker 1: in the long run much more cost effective. So I
Speaker 1: don't think that being humane about it is at odds
Speaker 1: with efficiency with cost effectiveness, and so I definitely see
Speaker 1: this as hopefully being the future of controlling invasive species populations.
Speaker 1: All right, So let's talk just some of your other
Speaker 1: questions because those are also really interesting. So, like you mentioned,
Speaker 1: who basically gets to say and how invasive species are managed.
Speaker 1: That's a very complicated issue because it's going to differ
Speaker 1: depending on your country, your locality. Even when you look
Speaker 1: at one country, the management of it is going to
Speaker 1: depend on the administration. So for an example, in the US,
Speaker 1: there are a few federal agencies who are involved in
Speaker 1: controlling invasive species. Generally speaking, this as part of the
Speaker 1: National Invasive Species Council within the US Department of the Interior.
Speaker 1: It's a it's a bunch of it's like kind of
Speaker 1: a group of people from various federal agencies who oversees
Speaker 1: what to do about invasive species, monitoring them and then
Speaker 1: actions taken. In twenty nineteen, during Trump's first administration, he
Speaker 1: effectively disbanded the National Invasive Species Council by defunding it.
Speaker 1: So for a while it was kind of disbanded, and
Speaker 1: then under Biden it was reinstated. Currently, I have not seen.
Speaker 1: I mean, there's so much news that's constantly happening, so
Speaker 1: it's pretty hard to keep up with everything that's going on.
Speaker 1: But I don't think it's been officially disbanded. I imagine
Speaker 1: it's definitely been affected by government budget cuts, right, So
Speaker 1: I don't know if it is as functional as it was.
Speaker 1: I think it still exists, but yeah, the cuts to
Speaker 1: funding for a lot of these programs, I would imagine
Speaker 1: also has an impact on the National Invasive Species Council.
Speaker 1: So I my point in bringing all this up is
Speaker 1: that invasive species are typically managed by government agencies, but
Speaker 1: those are subject to the policies put in place by leaders.
Speaker 1: So it's a very it's a it's a pretty complicated
Speaker 1: political question that you bring up, like who is actually
Speaker 1: monitoring this, who is managing it, who decides what to do.
Speaker 1: And again it can also just depend locally, right, you
Speaker 1: may have uh, state agencies or city agencies who have
Speaker 1: their own their own like monitoring species monitoring, and so
Speaker 1: they might come to separate decision. And so let's address
Speaker 1: your question of like, are there invasive species who are
Speaker 1: beneficial or benign? I looked into this, I think that
Speaker 1: there usually uh, it's it kind of depends on what
Speaker 1: you how you define a benefit, right and who who
Speaker 1: is benefiting. So, because you could argue that say, like
Speaker 1: the European honeybee in the US is beneficial to humans
Speaker 1: because we get honey from them, right, It's a big
Speaker 1: agricultural industry of honey, and certainly we enjoy having honey.
Speaker 1: There's a lot of crops and so on that are
Speaker 1: that we grow intentionally, and so in terms of beneficial
Speaker 1: there are certainly arguments to be made that certain invasive species,
Speaker 1: right of crops and animals benefit human beings. Now, in
Speaker 1: terms of the environment, I think it's a little harder
Speaker 1: to make the case for invasive species being beneficial for
Speaker 1: the local habitat. I think often there may be some
Speaker 1: there can be some trade offs, right, Like it can
Speaker 1: benefit certain species, especially. I'm going to talk mostly about
Speaker 1: plants here because it's usually the ones that are more benign.
Speaker 1: Are plants not always the case. There can be some
Speaker 1: really nasty plants that choke out local plants, So plants
Speaker 1: are not Just because it's an invasive plant does not
Speaker 1: mean that it's going to be benign, But a lot
Speaker 1: of the benign species happen to be plants. And you know,
Speaker 1: I think it's like, in some cases, an invasive plant
Speaker 1: may benefit y some of the wildlife there, right, Like
Speaker 1: you maybe have honeysuckle or something that benefits certain birds
Speaker 1: in the area, but then the downside is that that
Speaker 1: might outcompete some other kind of plant, right, So saying
Speaker 1: it benefits it's a little tricky because, like there's certainly
Speaker 1: invasive species that do not cause the collapse of a
Speaker 1: local ecosystem. Saying it's beneficial to the local ecosystem is
Speaker 1: usually a little more granular, where it might benefit some
Speaker 1: species and actually be a detriment to other species, and
Speaker 1: so making a determination of it overall, like improving an
Speaker 1: ecosystem is usually a little bit more complex. But in
Speaker 1: terms of there are some cases where an invasive species
Speaker 1: is much less harmful then we fear when it first
Speaker 1: arrives on the scene. And an example of this is
Speaker 1: the spotted lantern fly. If you live on the east
Speaker 1: coast of the US, you've probably you're probably pretty familiar
Speaker 1: with this. It's a black and red spotted flying insect.
Speaker 1: It's actually a species of plant hopper. It's invasive. It's
Speaker 1: from South Korea. Initially, conservations were very concerned that it
Speaker 1: would kill a lot of local hardwood trees because plant
Speaker 1: hoppers are they there. Their big thing is they go
Speaker 1: onto plants and they suck out the juices, and so
Speaker 1: researchers were rightfully, in my opinion, very concerned that these
Speaker 1: could have a really negative impact on trees, given that
Speaker 1: in their native homes they will attack trees, and these
Speaker 1: trees that we have in the eastern US did not
Speaker 1: co evolve with spotted lantern flies, so they don't have
Speaker 1: the same defenses as trees in their native environments. So,
Speaker 1: you know, environmental experts were quite concerned and there was
Speaker 1: a lot you probably heard a lot of news about
Speaker 1: like you're supposed to kill them on site, and these
Speaker 1: are going to be a menace Fortunately, at least as
Speaker 1: far as the research has shown so far, they're not
Speaker 1: as destructive as they originally had feared. I'm going to
Speaker 1: make a distinction of like, this does not mean they're good.
Speaker 1: They're not good or even benign. But they're not killing
Speaker 1: off the trees in the way that initially had been feared.
Speaker 1: That doesn't mean that the conservationists the experts were wrong
Speaker 1: to sound the alarm. I think it's much better to
Speaker 1: approach an invasive species with a lot of caution, try
Speaker 1: to nip it in the bud if you can. Obviously
Speaker 1: we weren't able to stop there from being this invasion,
Speaker 1: but you know, I think the caution was definitely warranted.
Speaker 1: But it's simply the nature of science and research that
Speaker 1: you when something novel happens, right like an invasive species
Speaker 1: comes to an ecosystem. You can guess about certain things
Speaker 1: that might happen, but you can't know until you get
Speaker 1: the data. And once you get the data, you revise
Speaker 1: your understanding of the situation. In this case, local hardwood
Speaker 1: tree populations where these spotted lantern flies have been around
Speaker 1: I have not been dying off as was feared. That
Speaker 1: doesn't mean the lantern flies are benign, they still damage
Speaker 1: the trees. The trees are able to withstand the damage
Speaker 1: a lot better than what had initially been feared. You
Speaker 1: still have the problem of these things damaging trees, right, So,
Speaker 1: like if a tree is stressed from a lantern fly,
Speaker 1: can imagine if say there's another invasive species, or say
Speaker 1: there's a fungus or disease that attacks these trees, you
Speaker 1: could in the future still see some kind of really
Speaker 1: serious consequence to the invasive spotted lantern fly. So I
Speaker 1: wouldn't say that this is enough to say like, ah,
Speaker 1: we don't really need to control their population because they're
Speaker 1: not killing trees as had been feared. The fact that
Speaker 1: they injure and stress the trees is already not great,
Speaker 1: and it could be you know, there are it could
Speaker 1: be one factor that in the future, in some kind
Speaker 1: of event where the trees are put under some other
Speaker 1: kind of stress, that could be really devastating. So uh,
Speaker 1: it is. It's of course new information and data that
Speaker 1: I don't think should be ignored, but it doesn't necessarily
Speaker 1: change the calculus that spotted lantern flies still are not
Speaker 1: necessarily a benign invasive species. Now this is an interesting thing,
Speaker 1: and people were instructed to kill these on site, and
Speaker 1: I think still are so. As an individual killing lantern flies,
Speaker 1: or even as like a collective of everyone when they
Speaker 1: see one, killing one is probably not going to do
Speaker 1: a whole lot to the lantern fly population. There's just
Speaker 1: too many of them, and just by stomping the ones
Speaker 1: you see is not gonna probably make much of a
Speaker 1: dent in the lantern fly population. I mean, if this
Speaker 1: were the case, we would since we all, I would imagine,
Speaker 1: try to kill as many mosquitoes as we can that
Speaker 1: would somehow have an effect on the mosquito population, and
Speaker 1: it just does not really have a significant effect. So
Speaker 1: certainly lantern flies may not be quite as numerous as mosquitoes,
Speaker 1: but still they have a healthy population. So killing them
Speaker 1: on site, given their ficundity meaning they have a lot
Speaker 1: of offspring and their numbers, is not probably going to
Speaker 1: really do much of a dent to their numbers. The
Speaker 1: reason that experts were saying to kill them when you
Speaker 1: see them, the reason that was the instruction was the
Speaker 1: more serious potential problem is that a lantern fly could
Speaker 1: hitchhike with a human and go somewhere else like into
Speaker 1: another region where they're not they have not taken hold,
Speaker 1: so like for instance, getting in your car, getting on
Speaker 1: your clothes, in some of your property, that's you know,
Speaker 1: moving as humans, we like to move around the country.
Speaker 1: And then if that happens and you have a hitchhiker
Speaker 1: and then they start to invade a new region in
Speaker 1: the US, that could be quite consequential. So the killing
Speaker 1: them on site is more of a way to prevent
Speaker 1: them from Like when you encounter one and it's near
Speaker 1: you and you kill it, that reduces the chance that
Speaker 1: you're going to have a hitchhiker lantern fly that you
Speaker 1: bring with you to another region in the US. I think, honestly,
Speaker 1: like I know that public sort of communication, science communication,
Speaker 1: public health communication, all these things are really complicated. I
Speaker 1: always think that it's better to explain everything to people.
Speaker 1: Maybe you can do the simple flyer of like kill
Speaker 1: these guys on site because they're invasive, but having some
Speaker 1: explanation as to the why. Right, these aren't going to
Speaker 1: be dangerous to human beings, They're not going to bite you,
Speaker 1: and you're not necessarily on a crusade to stomp out
Speaker 1: the lantern flies. Maybe like at the very beginning it
Speaker 1: might make a difference. Honestly, I'm pretty doubtful that as well.
Speaker 1: I think that there's only a few cases in organisms
Speaker 1: that don't reproduce as quickly, like the giant Asian hornets.
Speaker 1: We were able to control their population before they got
Speaker 1: a foothold, but they're just not as they don't lay
Speaker 1: as many eggs. They don't they don't have the ability
Speaker 1: to reproduce that lantern flies have. So anyways, so that's
Speaker 1: why you are instructed to kill them on site. It
Speaker 1: is to prevent you from having them as a hitchhiker.
Speaker 1: So if you're not planning at all to move outside
Speaker 1: of your you live on the eastern coast of the US,
Speaker 1: and you're not traveling anywhere, and you just see one
Speaker 1: in your backyard and you don't really feel like killing it,
Speaker 1: you're not doing anything wrong. It is pretty much exclusively
Speaker 1: the purpose is, like, you know, it gets in your car,
Speaker 1: on your stuff, and then you travel somewhere. So yeah,
Speaker 1: it's I think that it is. Really there's a lot
Speaker 1: of nuance and to this phenomenon of invasive species. I
Speaker 1: think it's tricky communicating with the public about it because
Speaker 1: usually the efforts are focused on trying to prevent the
Speaker 1: most serious harms that could happen due to invasive species,
Speaker 1: which might leave little room for subtlety in public messaging.
Speaker 1: Right Like you're saying, like, look, lantern flies are a
Speaker 1: really cool animal and cool insect and plant hoppers are
Speaker 1: amazing and interesting, but also like, you know, kill them.
Speaker 1: You know, it's a complicated thing, right, So I do
Speaker 1: think that we can both control invasive species understand the
Speaker 1: harms that they cause, while also appreciating life, right Like,
Speaker 1: I kind of sometimes feel like I get where I've
Speaker 1: had this question a few times, and I get where
Speaker 1: you're coming from. This discomfort of sometimes it feels like
Speaker 1: when there's an invasive species and sort of an effort
Speaker 1: to call them, it gives people this like almost permission
Speaker 1: maybe to feel like, I don't know, like there is
Speaker 1: like an evil enemy to destroy, right, sort of like
Speaker 1: in Starship Troopers, right like, Ah, these are insects that
Speaker 1: we can destroy and stamp out and with a relish,
Speaker 1: And I don't necessarily think it's like really really bad,
Speaker 1: right Like, I don't think it's you know, like wanting
Speaker 1: to stomp on an invasive insect makes you a bad person.
Speaker 1: But I think in general, uh, the kind of like
Speaker 1: the way that we view invasive species as almost like malicious, right, Yeah,
Speaker 1: I think that that is a little odd, right, it's
Speaker 1: ascribing a moral system to them that these insects they
Speaker 1: haven't they they didn't decide to accidentally fly over to
Speaker 1: the US and some ship shipment of goods, so you know,
Speaker 1: to kind of like have this this idea of them
Speaker 1: as being evil invaders is certainly not the case. And
Speaker 1: I think like the way that the best way really.
Speaker 1: I think obviously we can just ignore invasive species because
Speaker 1: they can be really devastating. And also I really don't
Speaker 1: think it's wrong for conservationists and in collegists to be
Speaker 1: very cautious at the beginning of noticing that their invasive
Speaker 1: species around, right, So like if they have a really
Speaker 1: strong primary response to it, right, and then it turns
Speaker 1: out that it's not as devastating as they had feared
Speaker 1: it would be, it's not because they're stupid, it's not
Speaker 1: because they made some kind of mistake. It's that it's
Speaker 1: a huge question because like we simply may not know
Speaker 1: what exactly the consequences will be of an invasive species.
Speaker 1: It could be a little bad but not super bad,
Speaker 1: or could be something like cane toads that are just
Speaker 1: this really really insidious force of kind of the worst
Speaker 1: type of invasive species that really destroys things, are really hearty,
Speaker 1: really tough to get rid of. Again, the cane toads
Speaker 1: don't know what they're doing. They're not evil, they have
Speaker 1: no intention of driving other animals to extinction. They're innocent
Speaker 1: in this situation, but they are really devastating, And so
Speaker 1: it makes sense, I think, to have this really strong
Speaker 1: response to invasive species. But I think that like having
Speaker 1: a full understanding of the situation, being really open to
Speaker 1: new information and data as it comes in, which means
Speaker 1: funding researchers. Like the more funding that we put into research,
Speaker 1: not just in monitoring, but also new techniques of controlling,
Speaker 1: like the what I mentioned with the gray squirrels contraceptives.
Speaker 1: That's going to be the kind of thing that I
Speaker 1: think not only will make this more humane and will
Speaker 1: prove our understanding of invasive species, but I think ultimately
Speaker 1: is going to be more effective than a lot of
Speaker 1: the methods that we currently use. Right So, I I
Speaker 1: do not think ecologists conservationists are are in the wrong
Speaker 1: on this at all. I think, if anything, we need
Speaker 1: to be putting more funding into it so that we
Speaker 1: can refine the tools that we use in controlling invasive species,
Speaker 1: and I think those do those will become more humane.
Speaker 1: The high the more technologically advanced that we become, the
Speaker 1: more humane in this case, I think things will be.
Speaker 1: So yeah, I think I don't think it's incompatible the
Speaker 1: respect for life, but also the understanding of how to
Speaker 1: control invasive species and just for goodness sakes, we have
Speaker 1: to research it. It's really important. So thanks you guys
Speaker 1: so much for listening. I will answer the guests who
Speaker 1: squawking Animal sound guessing game next week. Until then, please
Speaker 1: do send me your questions at Creature Future podu at
Speaker 1: gmail dot com. I really enjoy answering these questions, and
Speaker 1: also if you guys point out cool researcher stories, always welcome.
Speaker 1: I learn a lot from these emails too, so I
Speaker 1: really appreciate that. Thanks to you guys so much for listening,
Speaker 1: and thanks to the Space Classics for their super awesome
Speaker 1: song Exo Alumina. Creature features a production of iHeartRadio. For
Speaker 1: more podcasts like the one you just heard, visit the iHeartRadio,
Speaker 1: app Apple podcasts or hey, guess what where have you
Speaker 1: listened to your favorite shows. I'm not your mother. I
Speaker 1: can't tell you what to do. I don't even feel
Speaker 1: confident in telling you whether or not you should kill
Speaker 1: spotted lantern flies. But don't let them hitchhike with you,
Speaker 1: all Right, If you see a spotted lantern fly and
Speaker 1: it's sticking out, it's a little proboscis and sort of
Speaker 1: a hitchhiking gesture. Ignore them, leave them alone, don't let
Speaker 1: them in your car, don't bring them down to another
Speaker 1: US state. It's it's not going to be a good situation.
Speaker 1: See you next Wednesday. Mm hmm