Gorilla society: What we know and don't know

Science is fairly certain that the gorilla lineage separated from the remainder of the hominoid clade about eight million years ago, 2 , 4 and that the chimpanzee lineage and hominin clade did so about a million years after that. 1 , 2 However, just this year, 2007, it was discovered that although the human head louse separated from the congeneric chimpanzee body louse (Pediculus) around the same time as the chimpanzee and hominin lineages split, 3 the human pubic louse apparently split from its sister species, the congeneric gorilla louse, Pthirus, 4.5 million years after their host lineages split. 3 No tested explanations exist for the discrepancy. Much is known about hominin evolution, but much remains to be discovered. The same is true of primate socioecology in general and gorilla socioecology in particular.     

What we know and don't know about Earth's missing biodiversity

Estimates of non-microbial diversity on Earth range from 2 million to over 50 million species, with great uncertainties in numbers of insects, fungi, nematodes, and deep-sea organisms. We summarize estimates for major taxa, the methods used to obtain them, and prospects for further discoveries. Major challenges include frequent synonymy, the difficulty of discriminating certain species by morphology alone, and the fact that many undiscovered species are small, difficult to find, or have small geographic ranges. Cryptic species could be numerous in some taxa. Novel techniques, such as DNA barcoding, new databases, and crowd-sourcing, could greatly accelerate the rate of species discovery. Such advances are timely. Most missing species probably live in biodiversity hotspots, where habitat destruction is rife, and so current estimates of extinction rates from known species are too low.     

The origin of life: what we know,what we can know and what we will never know

The origin of life (OOL) problem remains one of the more challenging scientific questions of all time. In this essay, we propose that following recent experimental and theoretical advances in systems chemistry, the underlying principle governing the emergence of life on the Earth can in its broadest sense be specified, and may be stated as follows: all stable (persistent) replicating systems will tend to evolve over time towards systems of greater stability. The stability kind referred to, however, is dynamic kinetic stability, and quite distinct from the traditional thermodynamic stability which conventionally dominates physical and chemical thinking. Significantly, that stability kind is generally found to be enhanced by increasing complexification, since added features in the replicating system that improve replication efficiency will be reproduced, thereby offering an explanation for the emergence of life''s extraordinary complexity. On the basis of that simple principle, a fundamental reassessment of the underlying chemistry–biology relationship is possible, one with broad ramifications. In the context of the OOL question, this novel perspective can assist in clarifying central ahistoric aspects of abiogenesis, as opposed to the many historic aspects that have probably been forever lost in the mists of time.     

What teen mothers know

In the United States, low-income or minority populations tend toward earlier births than the more advantaged. In disadvantaged populations, one factor that may exert pressure toward early births is “weathering,” or pervasive health uncertainty. Are subjective perceptions of health related to fertility timing? Drawing on a small sample of intensive interviews with teenage mothers-to-be, I suggest that low-income African American teenagers may expect uncertain health and short lifespans. Where family economies and caretaking systems are based on kin networks, such perceptions may influence the decision to become a young mother. Heuristic typologies of ways socially situated knowledge may contribute to the reproduction of fertility timing practices contrast the experiences of poor African American interviewees, working class white interviewees, and middle-class teens who typically postpone childbearing.     

Correlates of immune protection in HIV-1 infection: what we know, what we don't know, what we should know

The field of vaccinology began in ignorance of how protection was instilled in vaccine recipients. Today, a greater knowledge of immunology allows us to better understand what is being stimulated by various vaccines that leads to their protective effects: that is, their correlates of protection. Here we describe what is known about the correlates of protection for existing vaccines against a range of different viral diseases and discuss the correlates of protection against disease during natural infection with HIV-1. We will also discuss why it is important to design phase 3 clinical trials of HIV vaccines to determine the correlates of protection for each individual vaccine.     

Membrane fission by dynamin: what we know and what we need to know

The large GTPase dynamin is the first protein shown to catalyze membrane fission. Dynamin and its related proteins are essential to many cell functions, from endocytosis to organelle division and fusion, and it plays a critical role in many physiological functions such as synaptic transmission and muscle contraction. Research of the past three decades has focused on understanding how dynamin works. In this review, we present the basis for an emerging consensus on how dynamin functions. Three properties of dynamin are strongly supported by experimental data: first, dynamin oligomerizes into a helical polymer; second, dynamin oligomer constricts in the presence of GTP; and third, dynamin catalyzes membrane fission upon GTP hydrolysis. We present the two current models for fission, essentially diverging in how GTP energy is spent. We further discuss how future research might solve the remaining open questions presently under discussion.     

The Drosophila circadian clock: what we know and what we don't know.

Circadian rhythms are regulated by endogenous body clocks, which are formed by rhythmic cycles of clock gene expression. Almost all reviews of the Drosophila circadian clock state that the intracellular oscillator is based on a simple negative feedback loop. However, not many 'simple' feedback loops in biology last for 24 h. Instead, the Drosophila clock is a series of precisely timed steps that are deliberately slow. In this paper, I will discuss the current model for how the Drosophila clock is regulated, and ask what questions remain to be answered.