Login

Join for Free!
114042 members


[Help] Wombat

Animals!

Moderator: BioTeam

[Help] Wombat

Postby soulshine » Thu Mar 09, 2006 5:08 am

Hello

Ive seen searching the net for resources about Wombats chemical changes to the environment....Also a family tree of the wombat [ was it called family tree?] .
soulshine
Garter
Garter
 
Posts: 6
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2006 11:32 am

Postby David George » Thu Mar 09, 2006 6:49 am

You must be knowing how to classify an organism.I will give it for wombat
Kingdom: Animalia
Phylum: Chordata
Class: Mammalia
Subclass: Marsupialia
Order: Diprotodontia
Suborder: Vombatiformes
Family: Vombatidae
Genus:Vombatus
Species:ursinus
There are different genus and species in wombats.
The one given above is just an example and its scientific name is Vombatus ursinus note that the starting letter of the species should always be in small letters.This called scientific classification it can be called the family tree but it is better you use the other one.Any doubts.
"Nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of evolution"
-Theodosius Dobzhansky
User avatar
David George
Coral
Coral
 
Posts: 317
Joined: Tue Feb 21, 2006 12:48 pm
Location: India [place where religion rules people]

Postby ilovelepidoptera » Thu Mar 09, 2006 7:59 pm

There are three different species of wombat; the classification above is for the common wombat. The other two species are endangered, they are:
Southern hairy nosed wombat (Lasiorhinus latifrons)
and Northern hairy nosed wombat (Lasiorhinus krefftii).
COuldn't find anything about chemical changes though i'm afraid.
ilovelepidoptera
Garter
Garter
 
Posts: 6
Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2006 3:23 am


Postby soulshine » Fri Mar 10, 2006 4:41 am

Thanks for ur help..[ it helped ]..but same here i still cant find a chemical changes
soulshine
Garter
Garter
 
Posts: 6
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2006 11:32 am

Postby David George » Sat Mar 11, 2006 12:31 pm

The scientists plotted diet changes over 140,000 years of two species of large, flightless birds--the now-extinct Genyornis and the surviving emu (Dromaius)--in three Australian locations. They then corroborated their findings by analyzing ancient wombat teeth. “What your mother told you is true: You are what you eat,” stated co-author of the study Marilyn Fogel of Carnegie. “Eggshells and teeth both contain evidence of these animals’ diets in different forms of carbon. All three animals were plant eaters. Different types of plants metabolize different forms of carbon in distinctive ways from the CO2 they take up during photosynthesis. The tell-tale carbon varieties were preserved in the eggshells and teeth and told us what types of plants the animals ate. We saw a sudden shift in plant type coincident with the arrival of humans. The shifting diet shed light on the extinctions. The animals that relied mostly on the more palatable plant forms died out, such as Genyornis, while the animals that adapted to the less nutritious plants survived, including the emu.”

There are three isotopes, or varieties, of carbon found in nature12C, 13C and 14C. They differ in the number of neutrons in the nucleus. By far the most abundant variety is in the lightest, 12C. About 1% is 13C, a heavier sibling with an additional neutron. There is even less 14C, the unstable, radioactive heavyweight of them all.

“13C is the key,” Fogel explained. “There are two main ways plants metabolize 13C . About 85% of plants belong to what is known as C3 photosynthesis group. This group incorporates less 13C than plants belonging to the second most common class, C4. Thus the differences in 13C that we detected in the eggshells and teeth pointed to the type of plants that were consumed. Although, both types of plants were present before the extinctions, we saw a quick shift in dominance from C4 drought-resistant trees, shrubs and grasses, to C3 desert plants. ”

Why did the scientists point to humans as the instigators of the ecological changes? First, they ruled out the other usual suspect--global climate change. They looked at their data in 15,000-year intervals back to 140,000 years ago. The period included dramatic climate changes, but no changes in the diet and environment until an abrupt transition was noted that corresponded to the arrival of humans. “Humans are the major suspect,” commented Fogel. “However, we don’t think that over-hunting or new diseases are to blame for the extinctions, because our research sees the ecological transition at the base of the food chain. Bands of people set large-scale fires for a variety of reasons, including hunting, clearing, and signaling other bands. Based on the evidence, human-induced change in the vegetation is the best fit to explain what happened at that critical juncture.”

I think this is what you were tryig to say.I took it from a website since I did not know how to quote it.
"Nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of evolution"
-Theodosius Dobzhansky
User avatar
David George
Coral
Coral
 
Posts: 317
Joined: Tue Feb 21, 2006 12:48 pm
Location: India [place where religion rules people]


Return to Zoology Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

cron