Iris

community study **Week 4: Sustainable Development ** Sustainability has become a buzzword in the past few decades, but what exactly does it mean and how can we as a society strive to maintain a sustainable future? I went digging around Wikipedia to find out.

To achieve sustainability, we must first understand what is means to be a sustainable society. One of the very best guidelines is a combination of definitions from the Brundtland Commision and the Sustainable Society Index. A sustainable society is a society that:
 * meets the needs of the present generation
 * does not compromise the ability of future generations to meet their own needs,
 * in which each human being has the opportunity to develop itself in freedom, within a well-balanced society and in harmony with its surroundings

Since the social aspect of sustainability is faring the best compared to the environment and economy, as seen in the graph above, the two most important categories to focus on are environmental wellness and economic wellness. These two comprise one overarching pattern of economic growth -- sustainable development. We as a society need to somehow integrate production and development in industry with the environmental health that is necessary to a future of global sustainability. One of the easiest ways to solve this dilemma is to look at the 24 indicators of a sustainable society. The web below shows the the distance to sustainability, which is represented by the outermost circle of the web.

A look at this web points to two of the lowest indicators, Consumption of Renewable Energy, and Organic Farming, meaning that these two categories are the least close to reaching a sustainable level. By making just one of these indicators more sustainable, the global sustainability index can improve. The easier of the two to change is consumption of renewable energy. Society should find an alternate source of energy to fossil fuels and in turn lessen the use of non-renewable energy sources. media type="custom" key="19162002" In this TED talk, Rob Hopkins talks about preparing for a future without oil, a source of non-renewable energy on which the world has been far too dependent. Rather than exacerbate our current situation and keep using oil, he explains that we should sacrifice our luxuries to build systems and communities that are completely independent of fossil fuels. Perhaps this transition can save us from a doomed future, and instead, help to achieve a balanced and sustainable world.

**Week 3: Bioluminescence ** The Robbins Park trip this past Thursday was not only important in that we collected data as a part of an ongoing study, but it was also neat to see the interaction of organisms at the sites we worked. I decided to look further into the organisms that lived in bodies of water (rivers, ponds, lakes, seas, etc) and I stumbled upon a super-fascinating facet of biology -- bioluminescence. //A bioluminescent dinoflagellate// Bioluminescence is the release of energy by a chemical reaction in the form of light emissions by living organisms. Essentially, an organic molecule called luciferin is oxidized and a series of chemical reactions takes place in order to create fascinating displays of light (ie. fireflies in the summer). To learn more, read here: ( []) media type="custom" key="18973468" Here is an example of how bioluminescence can be useful for escaping from predators. This shrimp discharges streams of luminescence to confuse and disorient the angler fish. Scientists are much closer to discovering the true origins of how organisms can produce bioluminescence. This article ([]) explains that organisms like krill actually use special muscles to create their glow, and its contractions and relaxations help to control the intensity of light emitted. //Lobate ctenophores giving off a luminescent glow// It's neat to know that bioluminescence isn't just a part of the "Avatar" world, but also a hugely prevalent aspect of marine life and life in general. I hope you find this as cool as I did!

**Week 2: An Affluent Future** Throughout this week, we watched two videos of Hans Rosling. The one that struck my interest most was "Hans Rosling and the magic washing machine". He argued that the washing machine was the greatest invention of mankind, and noted that increased technological advancements lead to better standards of living and more widespread education. But my question after listening to his talk was this: How does the wealth that comes with higher living standards affect biodiversity? I decided to take a further look. What I found was fascinating. The idea that affluence plays a role in environmental harm has been around since the 1970’s. During that time, Paul Ehrlich and John Holdren incorporated affluence into their IPAT equation which stated: I = PAT, where I is human impact, P is population, A is affluence, and T is technology. You can read more about it here: ( []) While biodiversity is not directly mentioned in this theory, it is ultimately linked to environmental health. Biodiversity is the measure of variation among life forms from microbes to animals, and the state of the environment will hold a direct impact on the diversity of organisms it supports. With a growing human impact on the environment, there is no way that biodiversity will not experience detrimental effects.

Also, in an article from the National Center for Biotechnology Information ([]), research was collected that supported the IPAT model. Eventually, growth in the population and rise in the economy will have adverse effects on the environment, since greenhouse gas emissions will be exacerbated. This issue of affluence and the environment is more prevalent today than ever, as the number of consumers is increasing in growing nations such as China and India. These consumers follow the paths of Western countries, with appliances and automobiles becoming the norm. The need for more material wealth brings the need for more energy and the extraction of raw materials. One of the most important results of this material increase is the decreasing biodiversity. Land that is vital to a number of plants, animals, and other organisms will be destroyed and many organisms will lose their surroundings, killing them. media type="custom" key="18681998" align="center"

Additionally, I found a neat TED talk that explains the consequences of a too-full economy and using too much of the Earth's resources. Here, Paul Gilding suggests that we slow down overall productivity in order to sustain the Earth's population in future years.

<span style="display: block; font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; text-align: left;">After attempting to understand more about the relationship between growing wealth and the environmental impact of humans, I still had one final question: Is it possible that changes in technology could allow for affluence to rise without hurting biodiversity?

**<span style="color: #127dab; font-family: 'Palatino Linotype','Book Antiqua',Palatino,serif; font-size: 210%;">Week 1: Human Genetic Evolution ** <span style="color: #000000; font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;">After watching Juan Enriquez's TED talk on the field of genomics, I was intrigued by the idea of genome mapping as the major gateway into the future of science. At about 8:26, Mr. Enriquez mentions the possibility of tracing the primordial ancestor by analyzing human genomes, since each of our gene codes is a record of where and how humans have evolved. I decided to further research this topic and found a really interesting video about the nature of human diversity and evolution through the analysis of DNA.

//<span style="background-color: #ffffff; color: #800080; font-family: 'Palatino Linotype','Book Antiqua',Palatino,serif; font-size: 18px;">"From a genomic perspective, we are all Africans." // media type="custom" key="18443864" Svante Pääbo, the director at the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology, discusses the research he and his team conducted to understand the origins of humans. He notes that there is more genetic variation inside the continent of Africa than outside of it, and that most of the gene codes found outside of Africa are closely related to those found within Africa. This observation leads to the conclusion that part of the African variation colonized the rest of the world and caused the diversity of the world as we know it.



Additionally, Pääbo's research points to the mixing of Neanderthals and the modern human species. You can take a look at the similarities in genetic sequences here: [] //Neanderthal bone fragments from the Vindija Caves in Croatia which were used to conduct the majority of the research.// __** A similar project: **__ An article from the Public Library of Science ([]) summarizes the results and conclusions from the study of gene flow of sub-Saharan Africa to Eurasia. In short, the study showed that Southern European and Middle Eastern populations inherited small percentages of African genetic material and confirmed the estimated dates of genomic mixture by looking back in history at times of population migration.