This World Biodiversity Day (May 22), Worldwatch Institute is raising awareness of biodiversity losses worldwide and what individuals and institutions can do to confront these trends. The current rate of species extinction is up to 1,000 times above the Earth’s normal extinction rate, a level of loss that has not occurred since the extinction of the dinosaurs 65 million years ago. The Worldwatch Institute, in its recently released report State of the World 2012: Moving Toward Sustainable Prosperity, highlights the threats to biodiversity and methods for combating the exploitation and degradation of ecosystems and their services.

From 1980 to 2008, an average of 52 species per year moved one category closer to extinction on the International Union for Conservation of Nature’s Red List of Endangered Species—-a rate that shows no signs of slowing. Although mass extinctions have occurred on Earth throughout geologic time, the current loss of biodiversity is the first to be caused overwhelmingly by a single species: humans. The five principal pressures causing biodiversity loss are habitat change, overexploitation, pollution, invasive alien species, and climate change, all of which are almost exclusively human driven.

“The current model of consumer societies is destroying the planet and its resources,” said Bo Normander, Director of Worldwatch Institute Europe and a contributing author to State of the World 2012. “This must change in order for the planet to sustain future generations.”

At the 1992 United Nations Conference on Environment and Development in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, leaders made a commitment to preserve biological resources by signing the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), but there remains a fundamental lack of political will to act on biodiversity threats. In 2002, the CBD promised “a significant reduction of the current rate of biodiversity loss” by 2010, yet within those eight years, most countries failed to meet their targets.

To combat the loss of Earth’s natural capital, scientists strive to assign concrete values to natural resources with the hope that an economic appreciation of ecosystem services may facilitate improved planning and management of Earth’s systems. Yet progress on developing accurate, straightforward, and widely accepted measures for assessing ecosystem values remains slow.

“Accurate valuation of ecosystem services is vital to create greater accountability and awareness of the ecological impact of our actions,” said Erik Assadourian, Worldwatch senior fellow and State of the World 2012 project co-director. “By understanding ecosystem services in monetary or physical terms, leaders can assess and improve the sustainability of their policies.”

Current international practices discount future generations by effectively valuing ecosystem services at zero. Such undervaluing is often a result of society’s ignorance of the full benefits that humans derive from an intact ecosystem. Thus, individuals make decisions based on the immediate financial gains of logging a forest, for example, instead of considering the “invisible” benefits of the forest, such as carbon sequestration, flood protection, and habitat for pollinators.

Valuing ecosystems and their services is difficult as knowledge is limited by the complexity of environmental systems. Many linkages between organisms are yet to be discovered, and slight perturbations may have dramatic, unforeseen consequences. Despite these challenges, scientists and politicians attempt to frame the benefits provided by ecosystems using relatable monetary or physical indices. The two most common methods are to create a common asset trust, which “propertizes” the public good without privatizing ecosystems; and to pay for ecosystem services, such as when farmers are paid to leave land fallow for improved soil health.

In State of the World 2012, Worldwatch provides several recommendations for enhancing ecosystem service valuation, including:

Manage ecosystem services on an appropriate scale: Ecosystem services must be evaluated on spatial and temporal scales, in order to determine which institution can effectively manage that ecosystem. Collaboration between scales of government and those managing the services is vital.

Include the global poor in valuation: The world’s poor and indigenous groups rely heavily on natural resources and common goods for sustenance and livelihood. Many attempts at valuing ecosystem services, such as designating a forest as a preserved trust, have excluded indigenous groups from their traditional sources of food and fuel—-an approach that not only is unjust, but will also undermine the long-term success of these efforts.

In addition to these approaches to valuation, Worldwatch champions initiatives that protect biodiversity, such as urban gardening and beekeeping, inclusive forest protection, and the creation of Marine Protected Areas (MPAs), or zones in the world’s oceans or coastal waters where activities like fishing and mining are strictly regulated. These added protections increase biodiversity within the MPA, which in turn enriches the surrounding waters and ecosystems. Despite the known advantages of MPAs, they protect only 0.8 percent of the world’s oceans.

Worldwatch applauds these efforts to combat the loss of global biodiversity. But to truly protect biodiversity and value ecosystem services effectively, multinational cooperation is required. Worldwatch’s State of the World 2012, released in April 2012, focuses on steps in biodiversity protection and other areas that can be taken at Rio+20, the 20-year follow-up to the historic 1992 Rio Earth Summit, to make progress toward sustainable development.

So good.

Benefits to the Environment

The number one reason to switch to handmade clothing is that it helps reduce global warming, and does not waste and pollute precious natural resources like water. Different handmade clothing labels will use different types of environmentally friendly practices for their green clothing products.

Manufacturing Process

Since commercial clothing is mass produced in factories, it wastes enormous amounts of energy and produces a lot of green house gas emissions and toxic wastes, all of which are dumped into the air, ground and water. Handmade clothing companies avoid this process all together, by hand making the piece from start to finish.

Coloring

To achieve all the bright colors that are so attractive, commercial clothing production involves the use of highly toxic industrial dyes. These dyes are made of one of the most polluting, harmful chemicals, which are dumped into the rivers, lakes and other bodies of water during the manufacturing process. This renders the water undrinkable and harmful to health. On the contrary, handmade clothing is made either with natural dyes produced from plant extracts, or a different type of commercial grade dyes that are not as toxic and harmful to the environment.

Fabrics

Many handmade clothing companies will use fabrics that have been produced in Eco-friendly ways, such as cotton and silk that has been hand-loomed. The processing of natural fibers such as cotton into fabric is one of the most polluting industrial processes that wastes a lot of water, requires a lot of energy, and utilizes highly toxic chemicals. Production of synthetic fibers such as polyester is even more harmful to the environment. Many designers make their contribution to the environment by avoiding this process all together, and making upcycled handmade clothing. This means that they recycle old clothing and give it a brand new life, helping reduce both the amount of new clothing that is being produced as well as the amount of waste from its disposal.

Limited Quantities

No matter how you slice it, production of any type of clothing takes a toll on the environment. Handmade clothing companies mitigate this effect by producing clothing in very small quantities. Handmade clothing is intended to be worn for a long period of time, instead of prompting consumers to constantly buy more clothing, thus fueling the demand for mass production.

Labels and Packaging

Many handmade clothing companies ensure that their clothing is green all the way. The clothing tags, labels and packaging materials are often also handmade from recycled fabrics and papers, helping reduce waste and pollution.

Personal Benefits

Exclusive style and design

If you have, or would like to develop a distinct personal style, handmade clothing allows you a wide range of opportunities to do just that. Many handmade pieces are either one-of a kind, or produced in small, limited edition quantities. Long gone are the days when handmade clothing was the equivalent of hippie clothing. While hippie style is one of the trends in handmade fashion, there are plenty of other modern and classical styles that would satisfy a wide variety of tastes. Handmade clothing also does not have to look like it was made by your grandmother, unless that is something you like. Many handmade clothing brands offer high quality of craftsmanship that is indistinguishable from commercial manufacturing.

Durable and long lasting

Handmade clothing is made out of high quality materials, with a high level of personal attention, and quality control from the maker. It is made to last for years, rather than to be discarded after one or two seasons.

Health Benefits

A lot of handmade clothing is made out of premium textiles such organic cotton, Eco-friendly modal fabrics and silk. These fabrics will not only feel amazing to your skin, but will also be none-toxic and none-allergenic. Unlike commercial synthetic fabrics, these natural fabrics are also more breathable, and do not trap heat and moisture. This means that you will feel comfortable both in hot and cool temperatures, and sweat less.

Custom Made

One of the most attractive benefits of handmade clothing is that it can be custom made. Depending on the type of clothing and the company that makes it, pieces can be tailored to your measurements, you can choose your own colors and patterns, add writing, and do a variety of other things to make a piece truly your own. Moreover, handmade clothing and accessories such as scarves make excellent gifts for people who would like something special and more personal.

Why does handmade clothing cost more than many commercial brands?

Handmade clothing is more expensive primarily due to the labor intensive nature of the process. Taking automated processes out of the equation of clothing production, means that everything from design, to coloring to sawing is made by human hands. Therefore this process becomes much more difficult and time consuming. Also, many handmade, eco-friendly clothing brands choose to use fabrics produced in environmentally safe ways, which also cost more than commercial fabrics. If they choose to outsource part of their production, they pay higher prices for labor to make sure that there are no environmental, or human rights violations in the process. Finally, some handmade clothing, such as wearable art pieces, may cost more because of its unique and exclusive design.

About the Author

Aleksandr Biyevetskiy is an avid proponent of green building technology for residential and commercial construction, and a big fan of sensible sustainability for business, government, and society. Some of the topics that Alex likes to write about include (among other things) residential metal roofing, social and competitive ballroom dance, Eco-friendly and energy efficient Green LED lights, residential and commercial ground source heating and cooling for homes and businesses, and environmentally friendly PVC roofing systems for residential and commercial flat and lower slope roofs. Alex also maintains a personal blog, in which he covers a variety of concurrent/relevant topics at www.tampile.com/blog/.

Global warming may initially make the grass greener, but not for long, according to new research results.

The findings, published this week in the journal Nature Climate Change, show that plants may thrive in the early stages of a warming environment but then begin to deteriorate quickly.

“We were really surprised by the pattern, where the initial boost in growth just went away,” said scientist Zhuoting Wu of Northern Arizona University (NAU), a lead author of the study. “As ecosystems adjusted, the responses changed.”

Ecologists subjected four grassland ecosystems to simulated climate change during a decade-long study.

Plants grew more the first year in the global warming treatment, but this effect progressively diminished over the next nine years and finally disappeared.

The research shows the long-term effects of global warming on plant growth, on the plant species that make up a community, and on changes in how plants use or retain essential resources like nitrogen.

“The plants and animals around us repeatedly serve up surprises,” said Saran Twombly, program director in the National Science Foundation (NSF)’s Division of Environmental Biology, which funded the research.

“These results show that we miss these surprises because we don’t study natural communities over the right time scales. For plant communities in Arizona, it took researchers 10 years to find that responses of native plant communities to warmer temperatures were the opposite of those predicted.”

The team transplanted four grassland ecosystems from a higher to lower elevation to simulate a future warmer environment, and coupled the warming with the range of predicted changes in precipitation–more, the same, or less.

The grasslands studied were typical of those found in northern Arizona along elevation gradients from the San Francisco Peaks down to the Great Basin Desert.

The researchers found that long-term warming resulted in loss of native species and encroachment of species typical of warmer environments, ultimately pushing the plant community toward less productive species.

The warmed grasslands also cycled nitrogen more rapidly. This should make more nitrogen available to plants, scientists believed, helping plants grow more. But instead much of the nitrogen was lost, converted to nitrogen gases in the atmosphere or leached out by rainfall washing through the soil.

Bruce Hungate, senior author of the paper and an ecologist at NAU, said the study challenges the expectation that warming will increase nitrogen availability and cause a sustained increase in plant productivity.

“Faster nitrogen turnover stimulated nitrogen losses, likely reducing the effect of warming on plant growth,” Hungate said. “More generally, changes in species, changes in element cycles–these really make a difference. It’s classic systems ecology: the initial responses elicit knock-on effects, which here came back to bite the plants. These ecosystem feedbacks are critical–you can’t figure this out with plants grown in a greenhouse.”

The findings caution against extrapolating from short-term results, or from experiments with plants grown under artificial conditions, where researchers can’t measure the feedbacks from changes in the plant community and from nutrient cycles.

“The long-term perspective is key,” said Hungate. “We were surprised, and I’m guessing there are more such surprises in store.”

Co-authors of the paper include George Koch and Paul Dijkstra, both at NAU.

Marine researchers have definitively linked the collapse of oyster seed production at a commercial oyster hatchery in Oregon to an increase in ocean acidification.

Larval growth at the hatchery declined to a level considered by the owners to be “non-economically viable.”

A study by the scientists found that increased seawater carbon dioxide (CO2) levels, resulting in more corrosive ocean water, inhibited the larval oysters from developing their shells and growing at a pace that would make commercial production cost-effective.

As atmospheric CO2 levels continue to rise, this may serve as the proverbial canary in the coal mine for other ocean acidification impacts on shellfish.

Results of the research are published this week in the journal Limnology and Oceanography, published by the Association for the Sciences of Limnology and Oceanography (ASLO).

The research was funded by a grant from the National Science Foundation (NSF)’s Science, Engineering and Education for Sustainability (SEES) Ocean Acidification solicitation.

“Studies funded by NSF’s SEES Ocean Acidification solicitation are well-positioned to determine the specific mechanisms responsible for larval mortality in Pacific Northwest oyster hatcheries,” said David Garrison, program director in NSF’s Division of Ocean Sciences.

“This is one of the first times that we have been able to show how ocean acidification affects oyster larval development at a critical life stage,” said Burke Hales, an Oregon State University (OSU) chemical oceanographer and co-author of the paper.

“The predicted rise of atmospheric CO2 in the next two to three decades may push oyster larval growth past the break-even point in terms of production.”

The owners of Whiskey Creek Shellfish Hatchery at Oregon’s Netarts Bay experienced a decline in oyster seed production several years ago and looked at potential causes, including low oxygen and pathogenic bacteria.

Alan Barton, who works at the hatchery and is a co-author of the journal article, was able to eliminate those potential causes and shifted his focus to ocean acidification.

Barton sent samples to OSU and to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s Pacific Marine Environmental Laboratory for analysis.

The results clearly linked the production failures to the CO2 levels in the water in which the larval oysters were spawned and spent the first 24 hours of their lives. That first day is a critical time when the oysters develop from fertilized eggs to swimming larvae and build their initial shells.

“The early growth stage for oysters is particularly sensitive to the carbonate chemistry of the water,” said George Waldbusser, a benthic ecologist at OSU.

“As the water becomes more acidified, it affects the formation of calcium carbonate, the mineral in shells. As the CO2 goes up, the mineral stability goes down, ultimately leading to reduced growth or to mortality.”

Commercial oyster production on the West Coast of North America is a 273-million-dollar industry each year. It has depended since the 1970s on oyster hatcheries for a steady supply of the seed used by growers.

In recent years, the hatcheries that provide most of the seed for West Coast growers have suffered persistent production problems.

At the same time, non-hatchery wild stocks of these oysters also have shown low recruitment, putting additional strain on a limited seed supply.

Hales said that Netarts Bay, where the Whiskey Creek hatchery is located, experiences a wide range of chemistry fluctuations.

The researchers believe that hatchery operators may be able to adapt to take advantage of periods when water quality is at its highest.

“In addition to the impact of seasonal upwelling, the water chemistry changes with the tidal cycle and with the time of day,” Hales said. “Afternoon sunlight, for example, promotes photosynthesis in the bay. That production can absorb some of the carbon dioxide and lower the corrosiveness of the water.”

The researchers also found that larval oysters showed a delayed response to the water chemistry, which may cast new light on other experiments looking at the impacts of ocean acidification on shellfish.

In the study, they found that larval oysters raised in water that was acidic, but non-lethal, had significantly less growth in later stages of their life.

“The takeaway message here is that the response to poor water quality isn’t always immediate,” said Waldbusser.

“In some cases, it took until three weeks after fertilization for effects from the acidic water to become apparent. Short-term experiments of just a few days may not detect the damage.”

The research was also supported by NOAA and the Pacific Coast Shellfish Growers Association.

Other authors of the journal article include Chris Langdon of OSU’s Hatfield Marine Science Center and Richard Feely of NOAA’s Pacific Marine Environmental Laboratory.

Analysis of data from the National Science Foundation- (NSF) funded 10-meter South Pole Telescope (SPT) in Antarctica provides new support for the most widely accepted explanation of dark energy, the source of the mysterious force that is responsible for the accelerating expansion of the universe.

The results begin to hone in on the tiny mass of the neutrinos, the most abundant particles in the universe, which until recently were thought to be without mass.

The SPT data strongly support Albert Einstein’s cosmological constant–the leading model for dark energy–even though researchers base the analysis on only a fraction of the SPT data collected and only 100 of the over 500 galaxy clusters detected so far.

“With the full SPT data set we will be able to place extremely tight constraints on dark energy and possibly determine the mass of the neutrinos,” said Bradford Benson, an NSF-funded postdoctoral scientist at the University of Chicago’s Kavli Institute for Cosmological Physics.

Benson presented the SPT collaboration’s latest findings, Sunday, April 1, at the American Physical Society meeting in Atlanta.

These most recent SPT findings are only the latest scientifically significant results produced by NSF-funded researchers using the telescope in the five years since it became active, noted Vladimir Papitashvili, Antarctic Astrophysics and Geospace Sciences program director in NSF’s Office of Polar Programs.

“The South Pole Telescope has proven to be a crown jewel of astrophysical research carried out by NSF in the Antarctic,” he said. “It has produced about two dozen peer-reviewed science publications since the telescope received its ‘first light’ on Feb. 17, 2007. SPT is a very focused, well-managed and amazing project.”

The 280-ton SPT stands 75 feet tall and is the largest astronomical telescope ever built in the clear and dry air of Antarctica. Sited at NSF’s Amundsen-Scott South Pole station at the geographic South Pole, it stands at an elevation of 9,300 feet on the polar plateau. Because of its location at the Earth’s axis, it can conduct long-term observations.

NSF manages the U.S. Antarctic Program through which it coordinates all U.S. scientific research on the southernmost continent and aboard ships in the Southern Ocean as well as providing the necessary related logistics support.

An international research collaboration led by the University of Chicago manages the South Pole Telescope. The collaboration includes research groups at Argonne National Laboratory; Cardiff University in Wales; Case Western Reserve University; Harvard University; Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität in Germany; the Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory; McGill University in Canada; the University of California, Berkeley; the University of California, Davis; the University of Colorado Boulder; and the University of Michigan, as well as individual scientists at several other institutions.

SPT specifically was designed to tackle the dark-energy mystery. The 10-meter telescope operates at millimeter wavelengths to make high-resolution images of Cosmic Microwave Background (CMB) radiation, the light left over from the big bang.

Scientists use the CMB to search for distant, massive galaxy clusters that can be used to pinpoint the properties of dark energy and also help define the mass of the neutrino.

“The CMB is literally an image of the universe when it was only 400,000 years old, from a time before the first planets, stars and galaxies formed in the universe,” Benson said. “The CMB has travelled across the entire observable universe, for almost 14 billion years, and during its journey is imprinted with information regarding both the content and evolution of the universe.”

The new SPT results are based on a new method that combines measurements taken by the telescope and by NASA and European Space Agency X-ray satellites, and extends these measurements to larger distances than previously achieved.

The most widely accepted property of dark energy is that it leads to a pervasive force acting everywhere and at all times in the universe. This force could be the manifestation of Einstein’s cosmological constant that assigns energy to space, even when it is free of matter and radiation.

Einstein considered the cosmological constant to be one of his greatest blunders after learning that the universe is not static, but expanding.

In the late 1990s, astronomers discovered the universe’s expansion appears to be accelerating according to cosmic distance measurements based on the relatively uniform luminosity of exploding stars. The finding was a surprise because gravity should have been slowing the expansion, which followed the big bang.

Einstein introduced the cosmological constant into his theory of general relativity to accommodate a stationary universe, the dominant idea of his day. But his constant fits nicely into the context of an accelerating universe, now supported by countless astronomical observations.

Others hypothesize that gravity could operate differently on the largest scales of the universe. In either case, the astronomical measurements point to new physics that have yet to be understood.

As the CMB passes through galaxy clusters, the clusters effectively leave “shadows” that allow astronomers to identify the most massive clusters in the universe, nearly independent of their distance.

“Clusters of galaxies are the most massive, rare objects in the universe, and therefore they can be effective probes to study physics on the largest scales of the universe,” said John Carlstrom, the S. Chandrasekhar Distinguished Service Professor in Astronomy & Astrophysics, who heads the SPT collaboration.

“The unsurpassed sensitivity and resolution of the CMB maps produced with the South Pole Telescope provides the most detailed view of the young universe and allows us to find all the massive clusters in the distant universe,” said Christian Reichardt, a postdoctoral researcher at the University of California, Berkeley and lead author of the new SPT cluster catalog paper.

The number of clusters that formed over the history of the universe is sensitive to the mass of the neutrinos and the influence of dark energy on the growth of cosmic structures.

“Neutrinos are amongst the most abundant particles in the universe,” Benson said. “About one trillion neutrinos pass through us each second, though you would hardly notice them because they rarely interact with ‘normal’ matter.”

The existence of neutrinos was proposed in 1930. They were first detected 25 years later, but their exact mass remains unknown. If they are too massive they would significantly affect the formation of galaxies and galaxy clusters, Benson said.

The SPT team has been able to improve estimates of neutrino masses, yielding a value that approaches predictions stemming from particle physics measurements.

“It is astounding how SPT measurements of the largest structures in the universe lead to new insights on the evasive neutrinos,” said Lloyd Knox, professor of physics at the University of California at Davis and member of the SPT collaboration. Knox will also highlight the neutrino results in his presentation on Neutrinos in Cosmology at a special session of the APS on Tuesday, April 3.

NSF’s Office of Polar Programs primarily funds the SPT. The NSF-funded Physics Frontier Center of the Kavli Institute for Cosmological Physics, the Kavli Foundation and the Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation provide partial support.

Scientists are reporting new evidence that the Deepwater Horizon oil spill has affected marine life in the Gulf of Mexico, this time species that live in dark ocean depths–deepwater corals.

The research used a range of underwater vehicles, including the submarine Alvin, to investigate the corals. The findings are published this week in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS).

The scientists used a method known as comprehensive two-dimensional gas chromatography to determine the source of the petroleum hydrocarbons found.

The lead author of the paper, chemist Helen White of Haverford College in Pennsylvania, is part of a team of researchers led by Charles Fisher of Penn State University (PSU).

The group includes Erik Cordes from Temple University, and Timothy Shank and Christopher German from the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution (WHOI), which operates the submersible Alvin.

Fisher, Cordes, Shank and German are co-authors of the paper, along with other scientists from WHOI, Penn State, Temple and the U.S. Geological Survey.

“The biological communities in the deep Gulf of Mexico are separated from human activity at the surface by 4,000 feet of water,” says White.

“We would not expect deep-water corals to be affected by a typical oil spill. But the sheer magnitude of the Deepwater Horizon oil spill makes it very different from a tanker running aground and spilling its contents.

Because of the unprecedented nature of the spill, its effects are more far-reaching than those from smaller spills on the surface.”

The study grew out of a research cruise in October 2010 that was part of a Bureau of Ocean Energy Management and National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration project.

Using the remotely-operated vehicle (ROV) Jason II, the team initially looked at nine sites more than 20 kilometers from the Macondo well.

The researchers found deep-water coral communities unharmed there.

But when the ROV explored another area 11 kilometers to the southwest of the spill site, the team was surprised to find coral communities covered in a brown flocculent material and showing signs of tissue damage.

“We discovered the site during the last dive of the three-week cruise,” says Fisher.

“As soon as the ROV got close enough to the community for the corals to come into clear view, it was obvious that something was wrong. There was too much white and brown, and not enough color on the corals and brittle stars.”

Once the scientists were close enough to zoom in on a few coral colonies, “there was no doubt that this was something we had not seen anywhere else in the Gulf,” says Fisher. “This is what we had been on the lookout for, but were hoping not to see.”

The coral communities were at a depth of 4,300 feet in close proximity to the Macondo well, which had been capped three months earlier after spilling an estimated 160 million gallons of oil into the Gulf.

At the time the damaged corals were spotted, the effects could not be directly linked to the Deepwater Horizon oil spill.

Then in December, 2010, the scientists set out on a second research cruise to the Gulf.

A National Science Foundation (NSF) RAPID grant funded their return. NSF RAPID awards allow scientists to respond quickly to issues such as natural disasters–in this case, the oil spill.

“Through the RAPID award,” says Rodey Batiza of NSF’s Division of Ocean Sciences, “the researchers were able to analyze the oil spill’s effect on the area’s deep-sea corals, and compare changes in the corals’ condition over a relatively short time-period.”

It’s easy to see the effect of oil in surface waters, “but this was the first time we were diving to the seafloor to look at the effects on deep-sea ecosystems,” says White.

The team used the autonomous underwater vehicle Sentry to map and photograph the ocean floor, and the submersible Alvin to get a better look at the distressed corals.

Alvin holds a pilot and two passengers, and is equipped with viewports and cameras.

Alvin also has robotic arms that can manipulate instruments to collect samples. During six dives in Alvin, whose manipulator claws were modified with a cutting blade, the team collected sediments and samples of the corals and filtered material from the corals for analysis.

“Collecting samples from the deep ocean is incredibly challenging, and Alvin is crucial to this kind of work,” says White.

“The primary aim of the research was to determine the composition of the brown flocculent material covering the corals, and the source of any petroleum hydrocarbons present,” says White.

Because oil can naturally seep from cracks in the floor of the Gulf, pinpointing the source of petroleum hydrocarbons in Gulf samples can be challenging, especially since oil is made up of a complex mixture of chemical compounds.

However, there are slight differences in oils that can be used to trace their origin.

To identify the oil found in the coral communities, White worked with Christopher Reddy and Robert Nelson at WHOI using an advanced technique called comprehensive two-dimensional gas chromatography, pioneered by Reddy and Nelson for use in oil spill research.

The method, which separates oil compounds by molecular weight, allows scientists to “fingerprint” oil and determine its source.

This petroleum analysis, coupled with a review of 69 images from 43 corals at the site performed by Pen-Yuan Hsing of PSU, yielded evidence that the coral communities were affected by oil from the Macondo spill.

“These findings will have a significant effect on deep-water drilling, and on the monitoring of oil spills in the future,” White says.

“Ongoing research in the Gulf will improve our understanding of the resilience of these isolated coral communities and the extent to which they are affected by human activity.

“Oil had a visible effect on the corals, and it’s important to determine whether they can rebound.”

More analysis here.  Obama finally sets aside his dream of bipartisanship and calls it like it is.  The Republicans are misguided, and care only about the rich, if we continue to allow them to do what they are doing we will decline as a nation.

A new study from the Carbon Trust reveals a divide between Generation Y’s¹attitude to carbon reduction in the East and West.  The study, which questioned over 2,500 young people aged 18-25, across five continents in Brazil, China, South Africa, South Korea, UK and the USA, sought to understand whether tomorrow’s consumers are concerned about climate change and will favour brands that reduce their carbon emissions.

The research, which was commissioned by the Carbon Trust and conducted by TNS, reveals that Generation Y in China is leading the call for brands to reduce their impact on the environment.  83% of young people questioned in China say they would be more loyal to a brand if they could see it was reducing its carbon footprint, compared to 73% in Korea, 55% in the UK and 57% in the USA.  60% of Chinese young adults who participated in the research say they would stop buying a product if its manufacturer refused to commit to measuring and reducing its carbon footprint, followed by 57% in Brazil, 53% in Korea and 35% and 36% in the US and UK respectively.

Tom Delay, Chief Executive of the Carbon Trust, comments, “These new findings are startling. 60% of young adults questioned in China would stop buying a product if its manufacturer refused to commit to measuring and reducing its carbon footprint, compared to just 35% of those in the U.S. Perhaps it is the Chinese, and not the U.S. consumer, that really holds the key to unlocking the mass demand for the new low carbon products necessary to deliver an environmentally sustainable economy. If global brands don’t build international carbon reduction strategies even faster, they risk missing out on the spending power of emerging economies.”

There is also evidence that young adults want brands to be clearly accountable for their action on carbon. 81% of those questioned in Brazil said companies should be obliged to provide proof of their policy to reduce their carbon footprint, higher than any other nation. 68% of those surveyed worldwide want to see companies’ carbon impact quantified by an independent organisation. This is highest in China at 84% and lowest in the USA at 55%. Across all the markets, on average a third of young consumers (33%) say they are prepared to buy a more expensive product if it has a lower carbon footprint.

When asked which products and categories can do the most to reduce their carbon footprint 68% of young consumers cited consumer electronics companies in the top three, followed by consumer healthcare brands (50%), clothes manufacturers and retailers (50%), and food manufacturers and retailers (48%).

Through using its carbon reduction and footprinting services, Carbon Trust customers around the world have put £3.7 billion on their bottom line and cut their carbon emissions by 38 million tonnes.

“Carbon footprinting makes perfect business sense. We are increasingly advising businesses overseas, and international brands, on their carbon reduction strategies, as the financial and reputational benefits of lowering emissions go global,” says Delay.

Later this week, the Carbon Trust will launch its Standard in Korea and announce the first four Asian companies to receive the Carbon Trust Standard for reducing their organisational carbon footprints.  And today it opens a novel new exhibition in London to showcase company action on carbon.  The world’s first ‘Carbon Footprinting’ Gallery, will explore the proactive steps global brands, including Tesco, Danone, Manchester United and BT, are taking to lower their carbon footprint.  The exhibition takes place at the Future Gallery in London from 2nd April – 4^th April.

Key Statistics from the Research

Across the six markets, the research suggests that…

• 78% want their favourite brands to help reduce their carbon footprint.  This is highest in China (88%), followed by South Africa (86%), Brazil (84%), Korea (81%) and USA and UK (66%)
• 70% would be more loyal to a brand if they could see it is reducing its carbon footprint.  This is highest in China at 83%, followed by Brazil at 77%
• 68% of young adults questioned globally would like to see companies’ carbon impact quantified by an independent organisation – this is highest in China at 84%and lowest in the USA at 55%, in the UK it is 56%
• Young adults believe consumer electronics (68%), consumer healthcare brands (50%),clothes manufacturers and retailers (50%),and food manufacturers and retailers (48%),have the greatest responsibility to reduce carbon
• 46% would find carbon footprinting on packaging useful and it would influence their purchase.  This rises to 63%in Brazil, 53%in China, 52% South Africa.33%in the UK and 34%in the USA would find it useful
• 33% would buy a more expensive product if it had a lower carbon footprint – of those prepared to spend more, they would be prepared to pay a mean average of 28% more for lower carbon products
• 29% of young adults globally want to reduce their carbon footprint but are confused about how to go about it
• 28% of young adults globally are trying to reduce their carbon footprint but feel they could do more and 21% feel they are doing their bit to reduce their carbon footprint

Both of these products have earned their Energy Star Ratings, and you can buy either one, depending on your personal household needs and preferences. Currently CFLs cost less than LEDs and both can be purchased at local hardware stores. Imagine that if every American made this simple switch, we would collectively save about $600 million in annual energy costs, and prevent 9 billion pounds of greenhouse gas emissions per year!

What is the Energy Star Rating?

When a product earns an Energy Star Rating, it means that the product meets strict guidelines set forth by the US Environmental Protection Agency. To qualify, the product must deliver exceptional features, performance and comfort for consumers, while also utilizing less energy. The ultimate goal of products with this rating is to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and other pollutants caused by the inefficient use of energy.

What are CFL Lights?

CFL lights, also known as fluorescent lights, are small, energy efficient, produce better light, and are available in a variety of sizes, shapes and colors. They use advanced technology to produce light, which is different from conventional incandescent lighting. In a CFL, electric current is driven through a tube that contains argon an mercury vapor. Combined, they generate invisible ultraviolet light that excites a fluorescent coating (phosphor) on the inside of the tube, which then emits visible light. Because of this process, CFLs take a little longer to become fully lit (30 seconds-3 minutes).

What are the benefits of CFLs?

1. Last 10 times longer than conventional lights

2. Produce 75% less heat, helping you save on cooling costs.

3. Use 75% less energy than conventional lights to produce the same amount of light

4. Save about $30 dollars on electricity costs over their lifetime.

Different Types of CFL Lights

Spiral Bulbs

Spiral bulbs are the most popular type of CFL lights and can replace almost any conventional light bulb in your house. They can be used in wall scones, pendant fixtures, ceiling fans, as well as floor and table lamps. They provide just as much as light a conventional bulbs, but use less energy. Spirals are available in a variety of colors such as soft white, daylight, natural light, allowing you to create the mood that you prefer. There are spirals for dimmers and three-way switches.

In 2007, Americans saved $1.5 billion by switching to CFLs, and helped the environment by removing as much greenhouse gas pollution as planting 2.85 million acres of trees would.

Covered A Shape Bulbs

These CFL bulbs are a favorite among many consumers since they combine the efficiency of the spiral bulbs with the look and feel of incandescent lights. If you don’t like the look of spirals, A shaped bulbs are the way to go. They can be used in ceiling fans, pendant fixtures, and in floor and table lamps.

Globe Bulbs

Globe bulbs are essentially spiral bulbs with a decorative cover. Their ideal place of use is in places where you can see them such as in bathroom vanity bars and ceiling pendants.

Tubed Bulbs

Tubed bulbs are straight versions of the spirals. They work well in lamps that have slender covers, such as wall scones, but can also be used in floor and table lamps.

Candle Bulbs

If you love decorative light fixtures where you can see a light bulb, candle CFL bulbs are a great option. Moreover, their sleek shapes allow you to use them in more narrow fixtures where a globe bulb will not fit.

Indoor Bulbs

Indoor CFLs are specifically designed to direct light out of the fixture, as well as to withstand the heat that builds up inside of them. Consequently, they are best used in recessed ceiling lights, and in ceiling fans.

3-way and dimmable CFLs

If you have fixtures and lamps with dimmer switches, you need to make sure that you read the labels on the package and purchase dimmable CFL lights. These bulbs maintain light color more consistently than incandescent bulbs, and dim 10-40% of their original brightness. Similarly if you have fixtures, or lamps with three-way switches, you need to buy special three-way CFL bulbs. Both types of bulbs come in a Soft White color. All of the CFL light bulb types are available in a 3-way and dimmer versions.

Environmental Downside of CFLs

The only downside to CFLs, is the fact that they contain mercury, and thus require proper recycling procedures. As homeowner, you can simply return your old CFls to the store where you bought them, and they will take care of the recycling process for you.

What are LED Lights?

LEDs (Light Emitting Diodes) are semiconductors that emit light when an electric current passes through them. Environmentally friendly LED lights are even more energy efficient than either traditional light bulbs, or CFLs. LEDs fit directly into an electrical circuit, and because they do not have a filament, and can last a long time without burning out. LEDs are best used in direct light situations such as recessed down lights, flashlights, and integrated light fixtures. They can come in a variety of colors including white light.

What are the benefits of LED lights?

1. LEDs are manufactured with an epoxy resin, which means that that they are highly durable and will not break, unlike a conventional bulbs, or a CFLs.

2. LEDs emit light in a specific direction, so they do not waste extra energy in the form of heat and light. By comparison, a CFL releases about 80% of its energy as heat.

3. LEDs do not get very hot, and require far less electric power than traditional light bulbs.

4. Unlike CFLs, LEDs do not contain toxic mercury.

5. LED light bulbs can last about 10 times longer than a CFLs.

About the Author

Aleksandr Biyevetskiy is an avid proponent of green building technology for residential and commercial construction, and a big fan of sensible sustainability for business, government, and society. Some of the topics that Alex likes to write about include (among other things) residential metal roofing, social and competitive ballroom dance, Eco-friendly and energy efficient Green LED lights, residential and commercial ground source heating and cooling for homes and businesses, and environmentally friendly PVC roofing systems for residential and commercial flat and lower slope roofs. Alex also maintains a personal blog, in which he covers a variety of concurrent/relevant topics at www.tampile.com/blog/.

Tornadoes claim hundreds of lives and cause billions of dollars in damages in the United States. But the tornado outbreak across the South on April 27, 2011, was startling, even for veteran forecasters such as Greg Carbin at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Storm Prediction Center (SPC) in Norman, Okla.

“Through the 24-hour loop here, almost 200 tornadoes had occurred in that period of time and, unfortunately, over 315 fatalities. Primarily Alabama was hit hardest but also fatalities in Tennessee, Georgia, Mississippi, and Virginia for this event,” says Carbin.

As the warning coordination meteorologist at SPC, he would like to see tools that could help predict these killer storms.

“So, that was sobering, you know. Why? Why so many fatalities? Why so much destruction?” asks Carbin.

With support from the National Science Foundation (NSF), computer scientist Amy McGovern at the University of Oklahoma is working to find answers to key questions about tornado formation. Why do tornadoes occur in some storms, but not in others?

“The problem is that if you need to understand the atmosphere, there are a whole lot of variables out there,” says McGovern. “There’s pressure, there’s temperature, there’s the wind vector. And none of the radars, none of the current sensing instruments can get that at the resolution that we really need to fundamentally understand the tornadoes,” she says.

While video from storm chasers and data from Doppler radar can help meteorologists understand some aspects of tornadoes, McGovern uses different, powerful tools: supercomputers, and a technology known as data mining.

“Data mining is finding patterns in very large datasets. Humans do really, really well at finding patterns in small datasets but fail miserably when the datasets get as large as we’re talking about,” she says.

McGovern and her team don’t just study “real” storms. They create supercomputer simulations to analyze how constantly changing storm components interact. And each storm they create may generate a terabyte of data.

Computer models developed at the National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR) help us understand how weather patterns develop. This visual was created from data generated by a tornado simulation calculated on the National Center for Supercomputing Applications (NCSA) IBM p690 computing cluster. From the models, meteorologists are learning which conditions lead to devastating storms--knowledge that helps communities prepare for disasters before they strike.

“What we’re doing with our simulations is actually being able to sense all of these fundamental variables every 50 to 75 meters,” she explains.

She works with many weather experts, including research meteorologist Rodger Brown, at the National Severe Storms Laboratory. He’s helping to sort out what’s usable information in the simulation, and what’s not needed within the enormous amount of data. He points out some of the “unknowns” on a computer animation.

“There’s some of the bad noise bouncing off the edge of the grid. Somehow, it’s noise being amplified, some sort of gravity waves or something. So we’re going to have to do some more experimentation to find out what the problem is,” says Brown.

Even though there are still many questions to answer with these simulations, McGovern says there’s no hardware right now that could be deployed in a tornado to get so many observations. And even if it did exist, it would likely get destroyed in just about any storm.

Kelvin Droegemeier, professor of meteorology and vice president of research at the University of Oklahoma, has studied severe weather in “Tornado Alley” for many years. He’s excited by the collaboration of meteorology and computer science.

“It’s a game-changer, complete game-changer. Radar leads off basically with detecting something that’s already present; the numerical model gives us the opportunity to actually project it and predict it far in advance,” he says.

“So, instead of warning on a detection based on radar [and] some visual sighting, you’re actually warning based on what a numerical forecast model will tell you. So, imagine a tornado warning being issued before a storm is even present in the sky,” says Droegemeier.

“Amy McGovern has pursued interdisciplinary research early in her career,” says Maria Zemankova, program director for the Information and Intelligent Systems (IIS) Division of the Directorate for Computer and Information Science and Engineering (CISE) at the NSF. “A computer scientist, her CAREER award was actually co-funded by CISE and NSF’s Geosciences Directorate. It’s impressive how she’s been able to forge collaborations among researchers in both disciplines of computer science and the atmospheric sciences to yield actionable results.”

But while the ability to predict tornados so far in advance would be a breakthrough, there’s another variable that is even harder to predict than a dangerous storm: human behavior.

“That’s a very interesting challenge that also brings in the whole social behavioral issues of, how would people react. Would they kind of dismiss that as, well, there’s not even a storm, I looked outside, the skies are clear?” says Droegemeier.

He notes what meteorology students are learning today is very different from what he learned. And it involves not only collaboration with computer scientists like McGovern, or the electrical engineers building new radars, but other experts as well.

“Learn how to talk to social scientists, learn how to communicate your science outcomes to the Kiwanis Club, to other communities that really need to understand what we’re doing. Because it’s only through that broad understanding, I think, that we can really solve the problem of tornadoes and severe storms and other kinds of hazardous weather,” says Droegemeier.

As a professor of computer science, McGovern says research like this, designed to improve tornado prediction, makes an important point in her classes.

“Computer science can really make a difference to the real world, and I’m trying to bring that to the students,” she says.

McGovern also stressed how critical the level of trust needs to be in working with the forecasters who will be making life-saving warnings to thousands of people.

“I can see it has to be really easy to use, and they have to understand it deeply. They don’t want something that just says, ‘here’s the probability.’ It has to be something that we can print out, draw, use some form to say to the meteorologist, ‘this is exactly what we see is going on,” she says.

She has spent time observing and interacting with forecasters and some of the technologies they use at the Storm Prediction Center–and it’s been an eye-opener.

“It was in the Hazardous Weather Testbed Office, and I got to see them using the different models, and saying, ‘this model says this, this is why we think this is right, this model says this, but we don’t believe the model and this is why.’ So I got to see the humans using the technology and understanding why they like it, and why they don’t, and to me that was pretty darn enlightening!” says McGovern.

This is simply amazing…

To download this video or to watch it in full go to: svs.gsfc.nasa.gov/goto?3827

This visualization shows ocean surface currents around the world during the period from June 2005 through Decmeber 2007.

NASA/Goddard Space Flight Center Scientific Visualization Studio

One with sea levels 40 to 70 feet higher than at present, according to research results published this week in the journal Geology.

The scientists, led by Kenneth Miller of Rutgers University, reached their conclusion by studying rock and soil cores taken in Virginia, New Zealand and the Eniwetok Atoll in the north Pacific Ocean.

They looked at the late Pliocene epoch, 2.7 million to 3.2 million years ago, the last time the carbon dioxide level in Earth’s atmosphere was at its current level and when atmospheric temperatures were 2 C higher than they are now.

“The difference in water volume released is the equivalent of melting the entire Greenland and West Antarctic Ice Sheets, as well as some of the marine margin of the East Antarctic Ice Sheet,” said H. Richard Lane, program director in the National Science Foundation’s Division of Earth Sciences, which funded the work.

“Such a rise of the modern oceans would swamp the world’s coasts and affect as much as 70 percent of the world’s population.”

“You don’t need to sell your beach real estate yet, because melting of these large ice sheets will take centuries to millennia,” Miller said.

“The current trajectory for the 21st century global rise of sea level is 2 to 3 feet due to warming of the oceans, partial melting of mountain glaciers and partial melting of Greenland and Antarctica.”

Miller said, however, that the results highlight the sensitivity of Earth’s great ice sheets to temperature change, suggesting that even a modest rise in temperature would result in a large sea-level rise.

“The natural state of the Earth with present carbon dioxide levels is one with sea levels about 70 feet higher than now,” he said.

Imagine what the future may well look like on a very blue planet.

Rutgers colleagues James Wright, James Browning, Yair Rosenthal, Sindia Sosdian and Andrew Kulpecz join Miller in the research.

Other co-authors are Michelle Kominz of Western Michigan University; Tim Naish of Victoria University of Wellington in New Zealand; Benjamin Cramer of Theiss Research in Eugene, Oregon; and W. Richard Peltier of the University of Toronto.

At the University of Oklahoma’s Aquatic Research Facility in Norman, zoologist Caryn Vaughn shows off freshwater mussels that she’s recently collected from rivers in the southeastern part of the state. One river alone may have as many as 30 species of mussels.

“They have very colorful names. This is the pistol grip, because you can hold it in your hand like a pistol,” says Vaughn. There are also mussels commonly known as the rabbitsfoot, bankclimber, pigtoe, pimpleback, and fatmucket. Vaugn is in a good location to do her research. Oklahoma is home to 55 mussel species all together, out of the approximately 300 mussel species found across North America.

These invertebrates play a crucial role in river ecosystems.

“I’ve had colleagues call them ‘fuzzy rocks’ because algae grow on them, but they’re really important filter feeders. They’re very important ecologically and they’re actually very interesting as well,” she says.

With support from the National Science Foundation (NSF), Vaughn studies mussels’ role in their environment. “Almost 70 percent of the species are considered threatened in some way. They’re the most globally threatened freshwater organism there is,” she says.

Vaughn works with the mussels in large bathtub-sized tanks where she and her team have recreated the stream environment. But, in this lab setting, they can control such factors as temperature and flow rate.

Mussels need plentiful water to thrive, and healthy fish to reproduce. Vaughn explains their unusual reproductive strategy.

“Freshwater mussels can’t move very far. So the way they get around is by sticking their larvae on a fish. And the fish takes it to a new habitat,” she says.

Vaughn showed some underwater video shot by biologist Christopher Barnhart of Missouri State University, which shows how mussels lure their fish host.

“The flesh of the mussel looks like a little minnow. It waves in the water. When a predator fish bites down on that, the glochidium (larval mussels) will be dispersed and infect the fish gills. Just one of the many little tricks mussels use for attracting fish hosts,” continues Vaughn. “There are elaborate strategies for attracting the right kind of host, and then after they attach to the fish and grow into a juvenile, then you have to fall into the right habitat and riverbed to grow up into an adult. So, it’s really a complex lifecycle, which is not well adapted to things humans are doing to the landscape.”

Most mussels look pretty rough on the outside. But for decades, the beautiful iridescence of their inner shells caused them to be harvested to make fancy buttons. Their shells were also used to make the small beads that were put in freshwater oysters to seed pearls. The availability of cheap plastic and other synthetic materials finally put an end to most mussel harvests for those products.

The human need for water is now the biggest danger to mussels. Habitat destruction, fragmentation from dams, and more recently an intense drought in the southern plains have all contributed to destruction of mussel beds.

“This one river that we’ve been working in for over 20 years, we probably lost a third of the mussels in that river because of water levels. We probably could have saved a lot of them if we had better water management practices in place at the time of the drought. So we really need to take what we know and use that to help them manage the resources, so we can keep the mussel populations, while meeting human needs. That’s a difficult thing to do,” says Vaughn.

In the rivers she studies, there are often dozens of different species of mussels together in beds. That diversity, she’s found, makes all the animals healthier.

There are 35 species in the Little River in southeastern Oklahoma, and perhaps 20 different species may live very close together.

“When the fatmucket and the bankclimber are together, do they do something different than mussels when they are just by themselves? They’re definitely in better condition when they’re in more diverse beds,” says Vaughn.

The almost constant water filtering done by freshwater mussels provides a benefit for humans as well.

“Most of their bodies are these big gills, and they’re filtering particles out of the water column, so they’re filtering water and taking impurities out of it,” explains Vaughn.

“So, the direction that we’re trying to go next in our research is to put monetary values on these services that mussels are providing. We know how many mussels are out there, we know the rates at which different species filter water. So we ought to be able to compare the biofiltration of mussels to how much it costs for us to treat water, like in a water treatment plant. And hopefully show that, if you leave the mussels in the river or if you restore mussels to the densities that they used to have, then it will save you this much money in water treatment,” says Vaughn.

Believe it or not, mussels can live 30 to 50 years! Because of their longevity, and the current threats to their habitat, Vaughn and her team don’t keep the mussels they take from the field.

“We bring them into the lab, we tag them, we use them in our experiments and then we take them back and set them free, basically because they’re so long-lived, we don’t want to cause any undue mortality,” she says.

Mussel shells also shelter and nurture insect larvae and other tiny creatures. Another reason, Vaughn says, to help these mussels stay strong!

Science allows us to access that wonder.

Decades ago, marine scientists made a startling discovery in the deep sea. They found environments known as hydrothermal vents, where hot water surges from the seafloor and life thrives without sunlight.

Then they found equally unique, sunless habitats in cold areas where methane rises from seeps on the ocean bottom.

Could vents and seeps co-exist in the deep, happily living side-by-side?

No one thought so. Until now.

That’s exactly what researchers uncovered during a submersible expedition off Costa Rica. They’ve coined a new term to describe the ecosystem: a hydrothermal seep.

A description of the scientists’ findings, including a large number of deep-sea species that previously had not been described, is published in a paper by Lisa Levin of the Scripps Institution of Oceanography in La Jolla, Calif., and colleagues.

The paper appears in the March 7, 2012, issue of the journal Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences.

Levin and the team were surprised to find a hybrid site in an area where only cold seeps had been reported.

“The discovery shows that we still have much to learn about hydrothermal vents and methane seeps and about the vast depths of the oceans,” said David Garrison, director of the National Science Foundation’s (NSF) Biological Oceanography Program, which funded the research.

“We need to re-think the boundary,” he said, “of where a vent begins or a seep ends.”

The most interesting aspects of the site, said Levin, “are the presence of vent-like and seep-like features together, a vast cover of tubeworms across large areas, and a wealth of new species.”

Called Jaco Scar, the site lies at a tectonic plate margin off Costa Rica. There an underwater mountain, or seamount, is moving under the tectonic plate.

Jaco Scar’s animals range from those that inhabit hot vents or cold seeps, to species that exist in both settings.

In addition to tube worms, the team documented deep-sea fish, mussels, clam beds and high densities of crabs.

Because so little is known about the deep ocean, the researchers say it’s likely that other hybrid or “mosaic” ecosystems remain undiscovered, possibly with marine life specialized to live in such environments.

“Plenty of surprises are left in the deep sea,” said Levin. “There are new species, and almost certainly new ecosystems, hidden in the oceans.”

The human presence in Alvin, a submersible, deep-diving research craft was key to the findings.

“The site had been visited by other researchers using remotely-operated vehicles,” said Levin, “but it wasn’t until human eyes saw shimmering water flowing under a tubeworm ‘bush’ that we really understood how special Jaco Scar is.”

Co-authors of the paper include Greg Rouse, Geoffrey Cook and Ben Grupe of the Scripps Institution of Oceanography; Victoria Orphan and Grayson Chadwick of the California Institute of Technology; Anthony Rathburn of Indiana State University; William Ussler III of the Monterey Bay Aquarium Research Institute; Shana Goffredi of Occidental College; Elena Perez of the Natural History Museum in London; Anders Waren of the Swedish Museum of Natural History; and Bruce Strickrott of the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution.

The research was also supported by the Center for Research in Marine Sciences and Limnology, University of Costa Rica.