engineering information technology : Quarter 1

Showing posts with label Quarter 1. Show all posts

A Palace of Bird Beaks

online engineering degree/engineering degree online/online engineering courses/engineering technology online/engineering courses online/engineering technician degree online/online engineering technology/electronic engineering online

In class, I've been learning about race and inheritance. This week we read a folktale from the Yemen Oral Tradition called A Palace Of Bird Beaks. The story told of an all-powerful king whose wife wanted him to build her a palace constructed only of bird beaks. At first he intends to fulfill her request, calling all the birds in the world to him and commanding them to give up their beaks. Then, a single bird, a hoopoe, who originally fails to answer his call comes forward and presents him with three riddles, each chosen to remind him of the need for empathy. The story ends with the king realizing his mistake and rewarding the hoopoe for its wisdom.

Empathy
Human against self

The most important theme in the tale was empathy, or lack of it. Empathy is defined as the ability to share and relate to another's feelings. In the story, the hoopoe attempted to make the king feel empathy through the riddles it asked him, but didn't expect him to actually be lenient, as shown when "The hoopoe bowed its head... and it waited in silence to hear the harsh punishment of the king."

However, the hoopoe also showed great wisdom in its choice of riddles, as each inspired a new kind of empathy or understanding in the king. The first riddle reminded the king of a belief they both shared (that all creatures should be free), leaving him to conclude that what he was doing was enslaving his fellow beings. The second riddle told him of an emotion they both shared (sadness) and reminded him that he was causing sadness in the soon to be beak-less birds. The final riddle taught him of the importance of a birds beak - "something delicate enough to put food in a babies mouth yet strong enough to bore holes in the hardest wood."

Everyone has the ability to have empathy, however it is a survival trait still ingrained in many people to instinctively put themselves or someone they care about above other people or species. The king in the story was in example of this. His power and eagerness to use it to appease his wife blinded him, and it took the hoopoe's riddles to remind him to have empathy for the birds as well.

Survival of the Fittest
Human against human

The king, in a way, is a representative of people who believe themselves superior to other people based on differences of appearance or personality. He allowed himself to be inconsiderate of others in pursuit of his wife's request, to temporarily believe he was better then them, Many people are similarly inconsiderate of others when they're focused on themselves or people like them alone, and can believe they are superior to others. However, we are not genetically created to act a certain way towards others are personality only has a little basis in our genes (such as how certain genetic disorders cause behavioral issues like aggressiveness or shyness). However, the main force shaping personality is our environment. It is the influence of society and the people around us that encourage certain traits within us and suppress others.

Because of this, it would be incorrect to view our genes as racist. Racism is a social construct and racist people have learned their behaviors from society, not from their genes. Genes are what they are - and since the diversity of humans is part of why we are so successful as a species, genes cannot be biased towards one particular variety of humans.

Power In Nature
Human against nature

The king and his mistakes could not only represent how humans sometimes view other humans, but also how we as a race view nature and the rest of the world around us. Traditionally, our role in the environment has been one of imbalance and excess. We have always been a species that strives for expansion and innovation, something which is likely the reason we have such an advanced civilization today. However, what most believe sets us apart as a species from the rest of nature is our ability to understand and not by restricted by our place in nature.

Unfortunately, as with the king, the power and perspective we have has, in a way, blinded us to the impacts we have made on the environment and our fellow inhabitants of it. Like how the king intended to remove an essential part of an entire species, humankind have caused 322 species extinctions in the past 500 years. We have treated the environment we live in horribly in our quest for advancement, and only recently have we begun to realize the impacts of what we've done.

It is our job, as the species that created the damage, to use the influence of our power to have empathy and fix what we have damaged. We need to speak up for the species we have not protected like we have our own and stop using harmful environmental practices. There will be no helpful hoopoe for us, reminding us to have empathy whenever we act selfishly. It is up to us to recognize when we aren't having and empathy and up to us to do something about it.

Eye Color and Genetics

In class, I've been studying inheritance and genetics. This week's article, titled "Eye Color and Genetics," was about eye color and polygenic traits. This relates to what I'm learning because previously we'd only learned about traits controlled by single genes and this article provided an interesting expansion. This article made me want to learn more about polygenic traits, how they work, and how much more we have to learn about them.

Word Relationships

Over the last few weeks, we've been learning a lot of new terms and ideas about genetics. Because of this, it is important to make sure I understand the relationships between individual terms. Below, I have a few sets of words and their corresponding sentences.

A hybrid (or heterozygous) trait is a pair of a dominant and a recessive allele - whenever there is a hybrid trait, the dominant trait always dictates the phenotype.

A Punnett square can be used to determine the genotype of the offspring of two organisms.

A recessive trait is always masked by a dominant trait and is therefore only expressed in a phenotype when paired with itself.

In Mendelian inheritance, genes come in dominant and recessive alleles.

Inheritance Patterns

The past few weeks we've studied three main patterns of inheritance: dominance/recessiveness. (Mendelian inheritance), incomplete dominance, and codominance (both non-Mendelian inheritance). An additional pattern of inheritance we studied briefly was sex-linked traits.

Dominance/recessiveness is the most straightforward method of inheritance. In this pattern, each allele has two copies, dominant (A) and recessive (a). Whenever the dominant allele is present (when the genotype is either AA or Aa) it is expressed in the phenotype. The recessive allele is only expressed when there is no dominant allele present (aa). An example of dominance/recessiveness is dwarfism. Dwarfism is a dominant trait, and therefore whenever it is present, even in just one copy of an allele, it is expressed.

Incomplete dominance is a bit more complicated. When incomplete dominance occurs, the two alleles are both partially dominant. This results in the two blending to create a new variety. For example, if a tall horse and a short horse mated, incomplete dominance would result in a medium-sized horse.

Codominance is when both alleles are fully dominant and are both expressed. An example of this is in blood types. If two parents have AA and BB blood, their offspring will be AB, a codominant blend of their parent's blood types.

Sex-linked traits work differently than all of the above. They are inherited through a child's sex chromosomes, usually the X chromosome. Because of this, whether or not a sex-linked trait is expressed can depend on the sex of the offspring. An example of this is colorblindness. Colorblindness is more common in males simply because of the fact that they have only one X chromosome. Females have two, therefore if only one chromosome has the mutation, it is not expressed - they have to have the mutation in both of their X chromosomes to be affected.

Eye Color And Polygenic Traits

A polygenic trait is a trait controlled by multiple genes. Due to their complexity, polygenic traits are not fully understood yet.

An example of a polygenic trait is eye color. In the article, the author says that "In the simplest models of eye color, there are two genes involved." Each gene has two possibilities - for one, brown or blue; for the other, green or blue. These variants have their own pattern of dominance: the brown is dominant over the green and blue, the green is dominant over the blue, and the blue is recessive to all. Once this is understood, the the genes work themselves out so that the most dominant gene is expressed.

Only The Best Genes Survive

In class I've been studying race and genetics, specifically dominant and recessive genes. This week we read an article titled "From Farm To Lab To Table," which talked about selective breeding and GMOs. This article relates to what I'm learning because we've been focusing a lot on inheritance and selective breeding is very relevant to that. This article has made me want to learn more about the history of GMOs.

Only The Best Genes Survive

In the article we read this week, the author used the phrase "only the best genes survive." So what does this phrase mean?

The phrase is referring to artificial selection, or selective breeding, which is the process by which humans use animal and plant breeding to selectively develop certain traits by choosing which plants or animals will reproduce.

Image result for selective breeding corn

Another meaning the phrase could refer to, though it was not mentioned in the article, is natural selection. This is basically the natural version of selective breeding - the process by which an organism better adapted to it's environment (this is where it differs from selective breeding - the trait that suits the animal better, not the trait that suits the human) tends to produce more offspring.

An example provided by the text is the eggplant. The eggplant was originally just what is sounds like - a small, white, egg-shaped plant. Over the generations, because of selective breeding, eggplant became what it is today - much larger and much purpler. This is because, in history, farmers chose to replant the bigger and more colorful eggplants because they also happened to have a less bitter taste.

Genetic Modifications

In recent years, a new form of selective breeding has appeared. It's called genetic modification. It is basically a more direct version of selective breeding only available because of our modern knowledge of genetics. It involves directly modifying the genes of a plant or animal to exacerbate or suppress a certain trait - with the same results as natural selection, just faster.

A benefit of GMOs (genetically modified organisms) is that when successful, it adds something useful or takes away something bad, something which can help our civilization advance and develop.

A con to GMOs is monoculture. Monoculture is when you rely on a single variety of a crop. This can come with some risks - yes, you always get the good trait, but you could also be relying on a crop especially susceptible to a particular disease or mutation.

For example, in the article is says that "Today, the Cavendish variety represents 99% of commercially exported bananas, but its reign as king banana may come to an end."

The articule uses this as an example of monoculture. Cavendish bananas are all genetically the same, cloned so that the trait of being resistant to a historic strain of the Panama disease is guaranteed in every banana. Unfortunately, this also means that the Cavendish banana is now unable to adapt to fight off a new strain of the Panama disease and therefore may, as stated in the article, "lose it's place as top banana."

We Are All Related

In class I've been studying race and genetics. This week, I read an article called "We Are All Related." It explained how isolation and adaptation led to physical diversity and compared the terms race and ethnicity. This article helped me understand my learning by explaining more about the science that led to our idea of race in the first place.

The Diversity of Human Beings

Last week we determined that our idea of race is just that - an idea. So where did our impression that there are different races come from? Well, physical traits are inherited from your parents - half from each - through genes. These days, you're likely to get a very different mix of ancestral traits from each parent, because of how modern transportation allows us to mingle with people from every part of the world.

Image result for national geographic melting pot mixed race

In history, though, this type of travel wasn't possible. In fact, many people lived in small, close-knit communities where outsiders were rare or even unheard of. Because of this isolation, an isolation that stretched across generations, the traits common in that community would be continually traded around, resulting in the people of that community eventually looking very similar to one another. This type of isolation died away when communities started to invade one another - for example, when the Vikings invaded many villages along the coast of Europe, they left a trail of their genes and traits behind them.

After I learned about isolation, I made an interesting connection to something I had heard of previously. National Geographic predicted what the human race would look like in 2050 if we continue to mix at our current rate. They were basically saying that without the isolation that originally made us grow to look so different in the first place, eventually traits regulated by dominant alleles will make all of us look similar - look like we're all one "race."

Climate also affects the traits that are passed down through the generations - certain body types or skin colors are suited for particular climates (thinking back to the example from RACE: The Power of an Illusion about a walk from Africa to Norway) - but I'll elaborate more on that idea in the next section of this post, but it should be considered when trying to precisely define our idea of race.

The article took a shot at defining that idea, and I think I'd agree with their explanation: "it is a label given to a group of people that share different kinds of a temporary mix of genetic materials common to all humans."

Adaptation

Adaptation is defined as a change or process of change by which an organism or species becomes better suited to its environment.

Adaptation is used to explain race because because of adaptation, certain traits were selected for people who lived in different areas, because certain body types and skin colors are better for certain geographical areas. For instance, dark skin protects against the sun better and a more compact body type is better for colder temperatures.

According to the definition, the term 'adapting' can refer to both individuals and entire species. Humans tend to be unusually good at adapting as individuals - take, for example, how people from everywhere live pretty much everywhere this days and have no trouble based on their appearance. People with extremely pale skin can and do live in equatorial areas and people with very dark skin can live in cold, cloudy areas without inhibition.

This raises a question - in a cold, not particularly sunny place with a wide spectrum of skin colors (such as MN). will it all eventually lighten to a paler color that absorbs vitamin D more easily? In my opinion, it could (especially if no one entered or exited the state for an extended period of time) but most likely won't., because it depends not only on whether an individual gets a certain amount of sunlight but also on heredity and how various melanin-determining genes are passed on through the generations.

Ethnicity

Ethnicity is defined by the article as the combination of physical and cultural characteristics common to a group of people.

When comparing this definition to society's definition of race, you find many similarities - in fact, the definition we give to race really makes more sense for ethnicity, with one crucial difference - race involves the idea that the physical similarities of a group determine their cultural characteristics and capacity while ethnicity acknowledges the separation.

The message I've been trying to convey here and, in fact, a message at the heart of our learning in class, is that all humans are related and fundamentally equal. This raises yet another question. If this is true, how did we get to a world where racism is tolerated and human existence isn't equal?

Well, near the beginning of the article, there is a paragraph that speculates that our idea of race originates from "our need to make sense of the great diversity of humankind," or, in my mind, our need to label the differences between ourselves and others, a need to set ourselves apart, for superiority. This, I think, is a darker side of the human nature, and is one big reason that our outdated concept of race continues to exist and be used to judge people, hence our racist world.

I think the best way to stop this injustice is by raising awareness, If everyone understood that science proves that skin color is literally only skin deep, then I believe we would be making a big step towards eliminating racism. After all, I believe every person has the capacity to understand the simple yet somehow complex idea used to conclude the article: that, in the end, we are all a member of the same race - human.

The Illusion of Race

Image credit: www.museumofman.org

In class I have been studying race and genetics. This week we watched a film called "RACE: The Power of an Illusion," explaining how the idea of race has changed throughout history, where it originated from, and what it is in the first place. It introduced some fascinating ideas and elaborated more on many topics I'd only heard of briefly before, such as eugenics and the studies that have been conducted on the topic of racial differences. It made me want to learn more about all of the topics it introduced, and made me think about things I hadn't really thought about in depth before.

Race is a Biological Myth

In "RACE: The Power of an Illusion," Alan Goodman, an anthropologist, says that "to understand why the idea of race is a biological myth requires a major paradigm shift." Even as someone who has had people around me mention the idea of race as an imaginary construct, I still agree with this statement. I've never cared about race as a difference between people, but still somehow had ingrained in my mind that race was somehow an important concept. Despite society now generally condemning racism, race still comes across as an important enough difference that racial differences should be commented on, and while racial equality should certainly be celebrated, part of reaching the ultimate equality is stop caring so much about those differences – surface differences, differences of skin, hair, and eyes – in the first place.

Image credit: 7-themes.com

Because of this, I still had a shift to make after watching this film. The tiny part of my brain insisting that there had to be some biological difference that sparked the entire issue of racial disparity in the first place finally had to dissolve completely, and while it was a shift, it definitely wasn't an unwelcome shift, or a difficult one to make. The analogy presented in the video summarized it very well: "it was like hearing that someone had discovered the world was round, believing it in a sort of abstract manner, then climbing a mountain and seeing for yourself the horizon curving against the sky."

Skin Color

Near the end of the "RACE: The Power of Illusion," the students studying race in the film were asked whether they'd trade the skin color for another. My father is from a Caucasian background, light skin running far back in his family. My mother was born and lived in India until she went to college, and nearly everyone on her side of the family has darker skin and hair. I have light skin and brown hair, – can easily pass as 'white' – my coloring presumably passed down from my father's side. But really, I could just as easily have been born with darker skin and hair, and I don't believe that would change who I am in any fundamental way.

Image credit: www.pbs.org

The color of my skin, of my parents skin, derives from our ancestors and how close they lived to the equator. My dad's ancestors lived in an area with not much sunlight, and in order to get the right amount of vitamin D, their bodies stopped producing a lot of melanin, which is what darkens your skin and protects you from the UV in sunlight. My mother's ancestors lived in a warm, sunny climate where they got plenty of vitamin D and needed that extra protection against UV rays, so they kept the higher amounts of melanin. Was that difference important for each line to survive in the climates the lived in? Yes. Does it signify any deeper difference in ability or capacity? No.

So, to conclude, trading my skin color for another would not have a significant impact on my life, so I wouldn't mind if I had to, nor if I simply kept what I have now. It might change people's expectations for me or how they see me in general, but that's a social issue, not a biological one, and in the end, I wouldn't let it influence my life.

Our idea of race, solely based on external appearance, is really about the perceptions of the people around us and even ourselves, not any genetic marker or biological trait. Really, does the color of your skin matter more than the size of your feet, or how tall you are, or how long your fingers are? In the end, variations in appearance should be part of what makes individuals unique instead of automatically sorting them into biologically mythical groups.

Effects of Turbidity on Living Things

This week in class we explored how plants react to changes in the amount of sunlight that they receive. I was surprised to learn that bacteria photosynthesize too, the process is not limited to plants and algae. It is important to investigate water quality indicators and tell others about my results because a lot of us take good quality water for granted, and don't always think about people for whom finding good or even just fair quality water is a challenge.

The reason we used "sunlight" and "lack of sunlight" to explore how successfully a plant grows was to further explore how turbidity can affect water quality. In my experiment, my results showed that the plant without light, the plant with a higher level of "turbidity" did much worse than the plant with light, with a lower level of "turbidity." In my hypothesis, I originally stated that the plant with light would do better than the one without, because the one without wouldn't get the nutrients it needed from the light. I therefore proved myself correct through this investigation, because my results matched my hypothesis,

Image credit: en.wikipedia.org

During photosynthesis, oxygen and sugars (glucose) are produces. They are both the result of photosynthesis because the oxygen is the by-product of the water, carbon dioxide, and nutrients during the process and the glucose is specifically produced to help the plant grow. I think this investigation is related to photosynthesis because turbidity is the amount of suspended particles, or murkiness, in the water, and suspended particles block and absorb sunlight before it can reach many water plants. So, when we compared plant growth with light and no light, we were also comparing what could have been two levels of turbidity,

Changing other influences on plant growth, such as the amount of water or nutrients, affects the plants because a plant needs the correct amount of all its influences to grow properly. High turbidity in a river causes changes in a plant's ability to photosynthesize. Other water quality indicators that signal a problem for photosynthesis in plants include lack of nutrients (specifically, nitrates and phosphates) in the water, because nutrients are one of the key components for photosynthesis.

Image credit: fish-notes.blogspot.com

The following might happen to other living things in the ecosystem if a plant cannot complete
photosynthesis:the plant species might die, causing a collapse in the ecosystem and a scarcity of DO, which they use up as they decompose. It would also not use up carbon dioxide and give oxygen, which would affect nearby life.

It is important to know how specific water quality indicators impact the water and living organisms with the water because then when there is a problem with a body of water or life within a body of water, we can use our knowledge of specific indicators to locate and stop the source of the problem.

The River Continuum

Image credit: nsismke.blogspot.com

This week I read "The River Continuum." The article was about the four functional feeding groups of macroinvertebrate aquatic insects: shredders, collectors, scrapers (also called grazers), and predators. It also showed where each group lives within a river. Their purpose within the river or stream is to help decompose the natural debris in the water. Below are some of the words and terms from the article and their definitions.

Specialized adaption is when an organism adapts because of a specific circumstance or surrounding. For example, black fly larvae use a fan to capture their tiny food particles.

Organic materials are the natural matter found in a river such as leaves, twigs, branches, and dead aquatic life. Macroinvertebrate aquatic insects eat and grow on them.

Shredders are the group of aquatic insects which eat pre-softened food with large mouthparts. Their job is to take care of the larger pieces of of the organic material.

Collectors are the group that eat the little pieces of is the suttter that shredders leave behind. They have special adaptations too, like how the free-living caddisfly spins a net to catch their food.

Scrapers eat algae from the surface of rocks. They build homes out of stones and stick to them with suction cups and stickiness on their abdomens.

Predators eat the other types of aquatic insects. Their job is to keep the other groups' populations down.

Geomorphology is basically the study of the shape of the earth's structures. It relates to our blogging and classwork because the geomorphology of a stream affects the quality of its water, which affects the aquatic life, including the four groups of insects.

Riparian means of or around water. For instance, vegetation growing by a river could be called riparian vegetation.

Substrate is something on which something else grows. For example, the algae the scrapers eat grows on rocks. Those rocks would be substrate.

Image credit: www.stroudcenter.org

Shredders, collectors, scrapers, and predators are found at the headwaters of a river. These functional feeding groups are found in this location because there is a wide variety of organic material found there, so the shredders and collectors are particularly abundant.

As well, all four groups are found at the mid reaches of a river. However, the abundance of shredders decreases, because most of the large organic material is found at the headwaters. The collectors still have plenty of smaller food, though, and scrapers have plenty of algae-ey rocks to feed off of too.

Collectors and predators are found in the lower reaches of a river. Collectors thrive because there is still no shortage of tiny pieces of organic material, even in the wider part of a river, Predators also live there because they can eat the collectors.

It is important to know which macroorganisms are present in a source of water because they affect the water quality too, just like all the other indicators I posted about. They affect the amount of natural matter in the water, as well as the other microorganisms that live in it too.

How Water Quality Affects Ecology of a Community

I hypothesize that the water from Jar 5 (left) came from a forest stream. One indicator is its turbidity, which is fairly high, as you might find in a shallow natural stream. It's DO is also pretty high too, which suggests that it was probably a moving water source, like a stream, and can support small aquatic life. Finally, it's pH level is slightly alkaline, so it would be good to drink, but not perfect. Taken together, I would rate this good quality water, because while it doesn't have unhealthy levels of anything, but it isn't filtered.

Sign that could be posted by culvert

This water could also be from a culvert, because the same indicators could apply to both locations. While they may not seem particularly similar, the actually do have some similarities. Most of the water in a culvert is rainwater, and it flows, which could explain the fairly high level of DO. Also, both locations are shallow, and could turn up bottom sediment, which would lead to a level of turbidity. Since rainwater is usually alkaline (except where there are high levels of air pollution), the pH levels would make sense too. While I wouldn't recommend drinking this water, if you did, you would probably be okay.

Image credit: gardenpool.org

In my experiment to determine how fertilizer concentration affects the growth of duckweed plants (pictured left), I determined that the lowest concentration of fertilizer, 0.25%, was best for the duckweed growth. That water's duckweed grew many more fronds (leaf like protuberances on the surface of the water) than the other four concentrations. The two highest percentages, 1% and 2%, were bad for the plants, leaving most of the plants dead within five days. The duckweed plants with the concentration of 0.5% and the control were okay for the duckweed, too. This leads me to think that when we use fertilizer in our gardens and yards to help our own plants grow, we are actually affecting the outside environment. When it rains, the rainwater mixes with the soil, then flows down to the nearest body of water. My experiment shows that even 1-2% of fertilizer concentration in the water can make it a worse environment for plants like duckweed to grow, and it's possible that the fertilized soil-infused water collectively could reach that percentage, affecting the body of water's aquatic plant growth. All in all, the concentration level of phosphates and nitrates impacts water quality and plant growth positively in moderation, but negatively in excess.

Image credit: bjsilliman.wordpress.com

If I were to come across a body of water like the one pictured right, I would determine the quality of the water by using many but not all of the tests we've learned about so far. Specifically, I would include turbidity, pH level, check for organisms and parasites like amoeba, and its temperature. My reasoning is fairly simple - the tests I chose would determine whether it's quality was good for humans only, other types of organisms, or none. For instance, if the pH level was very acidic, I would be able to tell that the water quality wasn't very good for any type of life. If there were organisms or parasites in the water, I would know that it wouldn't be good for humans to drink, but maybe okay for other animals, as with the turbidity. Finally, its temperature would tell me how good it was for both humans and animals, because warm water is both a less good environment for aquatic life, and more likely to host things that are bad for humans too. Judging from the picture of this water alone, I would rate it's turbidity level pretty high, and guess that there would be a fair amount of organisms within it. I would recommend it for boating and canoeing, but not necessarily for swimming, and definitely not for drinking unfiltered.

Beneath MN's Surface

Image credit: www.mustesielu.deviantart.com

This week I read the article "Beneath MN's Surface." I was surprised to learn that there were any deadly water amoeba as far north as Minnesota, because I had heard that they needed especially warm conditions to survive, like in Florida or Texas. While it can definitely be disturbing or depressing to read articles like this, it is still important to know about the things they describe, and sometimes so we can remedy them.

Video credit: www.youtube.com/watch?v=7pR7TNzJ_pA

One water parasite that Minnesota's waters may be becoming more hospitable towards is deadly water amoeba, or Naegleria fowleri. The amoeba causes amebic meningoencephalitis, by basically traveling up your nose and living in, eating, and infecting your brain. While I haven't yet learned about deadly water amoeba's effects on non-human organisms, it does change our environment by making us more wary of swimming in warm water. As far as what is creating a space for deadly water amoebas to show up in Minnesota, it is probably because of global warming, and the summer heat waves which increase the risk of contracting amebic meningoencephalitis.

Around August 31st, a mysterious oily red film appeared on the surface of Richfield Lake. It resembles no natural algae or plant product, and is currently unidentified. It's appearance was noted by many people living nearby, and one Brigit Johnson said "It was shiny and red. I just thought it looked scary." Initial tests by scientists did not identify the substance, and even now it has not been identified. Personally, from how it has been described, I have some ideas as to what it is. Since it is on the surface of the lake, it is probably lighter than water, and hydrophobic. My guess is that it's either some sort of discarded chemical substance or an oil-based paint or something similar, but it could always be taken to an analytic chemist to know for sure. The article does not suggest that it probably won't affect humans, because Richfield's drinking water does not come from the lake. However, it still may affect some of the aquatic life in the lake. Hopefully, though, since it isn't a naturally produced substance, it should be a one-time occurrence.

The importance of determining water quality is so that we can know how pure and good the water we are using to drink and swim in is, as well as the water we use for other things, like boating or sailing. As water-conscious citizens, I think all should be aware of the quality of water that is their community. If a source of water is compromised it could negatively affect the health of both humans (especially those who are less wealthy, because they may not be affording personal house filters or purified bottles water)and many other animals. Finally, one way I could advocate for clean water is by working with my family to buy less toxic products, knowing that some of it will end up in the groundwater.

Water Quality Indicators

Image credit: http://www.nihonsolid.co.jp

     This week I read an article about water quality indicators. The term communities is a good term to use when thinking about aquatic ecosystems because the organisms in the ecosystems depend on each other and the state of the water they live in to survive and thrive. One thing I learned more about was the effect of phosphates and nitrates on water, and how that directly affects the growth of water plants. I was slightly surprised to learn that many types of aquatic life prefer cooler water to warmer water.

   Temperature is one big indicator of water quality because it directly affects the amount of dissolved oxygen, or DO, in the water. Cooler water higher levels of DO, and warmer water has lower levels of DO. If temperature in the water increases, many of the aquatic organisms inhabiting it leave or die, because the water is too warm for them to thrive. Often, warm-water organisms will replace them. One big reason for temperature change like that is humans, and the many things we dump into lakes, rivers, and streams. Temperature changes caused by humans are called thermal pollution. Scientists and aquatic environmentalists can check for thermal pollution by testing the temperature of a river, lake, or stream at its source. Then, they move to a different point in the river, lake, or stream, and test the temperature again. If there is a big difference, then the water is probably thermally polluted. Generally, excellent quality water is 0-4 °F, and poor quality water is 18°F or greater.

     Another indicator of water quality is turbidity. Turbidity is basically the measure of how clear the water is. Turbid water has things like clay, silt, and bottom sediment suspended in it, which makes the water brownish or murky. Turbidity affects the quality of water because it affects the temperature of the water - suspended particles block and absorb sunlight. Then, of course, all of the effects of temperature start to occur. Turbidity levels are mainly affected by soil erosion, bottom sediment disturbance, and urban runoff.

     The last indicator of water quality I'm going to write about is plant growth. Algae and other water plants need a small amount of phosphates to grow. Too many phosphates or nitrates, however, increase the plant growth drastically. When there is too much algae, from increased amounts of phosphates and nitrates, it's called an algal bloom. The algal blooms are not good for the waterway, because they block sunlight from the roots of water plants, and when they decompose, the DO levels decrease. The main human sources of phosphates and nitrates in the water are fertilizer, laundry detergent, and sewage. The way to stop water quality decreasing from human-affected plant growth, is to be more effective about stopping phosphates and nitrates from entering the water. This can be done at farms, by building a barrier to stop large quantities of fertilized earth entering the water, and by watching were we dump our sewage.

     In class I have been studying water quality, and how fertilizer concentration affects the growth of duckweed. The article I read relates to my learning because knowing the indicators of water quality will help me understand other things about water quality. I would like to learn more about turbidity, and what natural levels of it are good for common aquatic life.

The Face of a Spider

Image Credit: http://www.tarantulaspider.net

The Face of a Spider by David Quammen is a story about one day when the author returns home to find his living room filled with black widow spiders - baby ones. Spawned by a single female that Quammen had been avoiding dealing with, the article is about his minor moral crisis, and the major question: How should humans act towards members of the other species? His solution is eye contact.

I participated in the discussion around the question "What is importance if eye contact with other species, according to Quammen?" Before the discussion, I thought that Quammen says it is important to make eye contact because by doing so, we are respecting the other creature as we might another human, and respecting that they may have emotions too. After the discussion, I thought mostly the same thing, but now I thought Quammen emphasized more the emotional aspect over the respect aspect.

The part of the text that led me to thinking was, "Look for signs of embarrassment, rancor, or guilt. Repeat the following formula like a mantra 'This is some mother's darling, this is some mother's child."

When I was listening to the discussion around the question "How should humans behave toward members of the other living species?" I was intrigued when someone expressed the view that humans should seriously empathize with other species, think of them like human beings, and then still kill them. If I could have added a comment to the discussion, I would have replied to a question posed: "In the end, why does the spider hide it's face in 'distrust'?" and said that, in my opinion, Quammen was over-personifying - that it was highly unlikely that a random arachnid should feel distrust at a face that is just one of many goggling through the glass throughout the day.

I think, when a person has to make the decision to kill or not to kill, it definitely makes them a better person, or at least more comfortable as themselves with their views, because it forces them to reflect on themselves. What do they care about more? What, to them, is right or wrong?" At the end of such a reflection, after having make a decision, I feel like a person would feel more comfortable with their views.

Humans, as a species, have made a pretty indecisive choice in this decision. We go all out trying to protect some species, such as polar bears and spotted animals, but practically ignore many others. Why? Well, we can't practically go to either extreme - saving all endangered species or saving none - so we make choices. People are more willing to fund protection for animals that they know about, like a bear or an owl, and an animal that appeals to them, whether it's considered 'cute,' 'cool,' or 'beautiful.'

There have been groups of people who've gone an extreme, like the Jainist religion of India, whose central belief is ahimsa, do no harm. Rigorously devout Jains would do things like refrain from cutting their hair, to avoid hurting lice, and cover their mouth with a cloth, to avoid inhaling gnats. Personally, I think it is a nice idea - sharing the earth without harming other life - but just, in the end, wishful thinking. To exert that much energy against such a natural, relentless instinct, to kill, if necessary, to survive - I just don't think that works,

engineering information technology

Source of knowledge Engineering and information technology.

Pages