Mairead Cain
Mr. Ippolito
A.P. Biology
27 March 2018
University of Georgia. "Vampire bat immunity and infection risk respond to livestock rearing." ScienceDaily. ScienceDaily, 26 March 2018. <www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2018/03/180326140237.htm>.
For my current event report, I decided to read and analyze the article, “Vampire bat immunity and infection risk respond to livestock rearing,” from the online news source Science Daily. The article discusses the study of how human provided food, such as bird feeders and livestock, affects the immunity and disease rate of vampire fats. The research endeavor was led and organized by Daniel Becker, a doctoral student at the University Georgia Odum School of Ecology. The study showed several different results from observing the vampire bats. In several cases, infection rates lowered as the vampire bats didn’t need to worry as much about food sources. Their bodies only focus was spent towards maintaining a healthy immune system. However, the provided food sources led to more reproduction and therefore the subsequent rapid spread of disease. The supplied food would also lead to more interactions between populations who do not normally interact, “allowing pathogens to cross over from one species to another -- including to humans.” The team conducted the study by taking hair and blood samples from various bats and observing their gender and maturity level. “The vampire bats in low- and high-livestock habitats have very different immune profiles. Vampire bats in the high-livestock sites really showed immune data skewed toward innate immunity, but vampire bats in low-livestock areas are investing more in adaptive immune response.”
Considering the fact that this article describes the “cross-species transmission of pathogens,” it is evident that it is important to the world of biology. This can be dangerous for the humans in the area. Despite this, Becker described how easily this problem could be avoided. “It's when you start clearing vast tracts of forest that's probably a big driver of what's going on here, because then you're depleting the bats' natural food and replacing it with this new food source, and that's having all these individual and population level consequences for the bats.” Future studies involving these vampire bats could help scientists further understand the “cross-species transmission of pathogens.” If scientists find more ways to observe the various transmissions, then they can surely make large strides down the path of further understanding how to avoid such occurrences.
Overall, I believe the article “Vampire bat immunity and infection risk respond to livestock rearing,” was very well written and equally informative. The authors easily simplify the advanced science behind the data to allow all readers to be able to interpret the information given. Many of the terms used are also defined and described. The authors go into amazing description when discussing how such transmissions could be avoided. In an effort to improve the article, the authors should have discussed why, exactly, such transmissions are bad for the humans involved. It would have also been beneficial for the article to immediately go into detail with how the researchers were able to obtain vampire bat blood and hair samples.
Sarah Goodell
ReplyDeleteMr. Ippolito
AP Bio: Current Event Comment
10 April, 2018
Current Event #21
University of Georgia. "Vampire bat immunity and infection risk respond to livestock rearing."
ScienceDaily. ScienceDaily, 26 March 2018.
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2018/03/180326140237.htm
This week, I read Mairead’s review on the ScienceDaily article titled “Vampire bat immunity and infection risk respond to livestock rearing.” Specifically, Mairead did three things well in her reflection. Firstly, she provided her audience with a strong, detailed summary of the original article. By doing so, Mairead properly prepared her readers and set-up the rest of her review. Secondly, she did a great job including quotes from the original article itself. She was able to paraphrase quotes from the article’s author and include direct quotes from the research team. In doing this, Mairead established herself as a credible critic. Finally, Mairead successfully critiqued the author of the original article, incorporating both strengths and weaknesses that she found. Through critiquing the author, Mairead was able to prepare her readers before they read the original article.
Although Mairead’s response was outstanding and highly descriptive, she could have improved upon two aspects in particular. Firstly, she could have discussed more about where researchers will go from here and what they will study next regarding vampire bats and the threats they pose. If she had done this, she would have answered some of the questions that readers are left with after reading her review. Secondly, Mairead could have expanded upon the importance section of her reflection. By specifically addressing the consequences that would result from the “cross-species transmission of pathogens” and how those would affect humans, Mairead could have provided more information for her audience and could have given them more of an incentive to read the original article.
I chose to read Mairead’s article because the issue regarding vampire bats seemed very pressing and I had not previously heard of this topic. The subject that Mairead chose to read about is important because it indirectly affects humans through infections in livestock. As humans, we have a responsibility to understand the ways in which we may be affected by surrounding organisms. We are also held accountable for taking care of our livestock and other domestic pets. I enjoyed reading Mairead’s response and hope to learn more about this topic in the future and to read more of her reviews.