With five tries to one – three of which came from Julian Savea – New Zealand gave England a harsh lesson in the last game of this summer series with a 36-13 win, writes Alan Dymock in Hamilton LATEST RUGBY WORLD MAGAZINE SUBSCRIPTION DEALS Four tries to the hosts in the half. It was brutal stuff. So much so that Kieran Read was taken off at half-time – they didn’t need him – while Kyle Eastmond was the one carrying the can, being replaced by Luther Burrell after a defensive display that may take some time to recover from.The changes had some effect, because Yarde quickly made amends for his earlier missed tackle by scoring an unlikely pick-and-go try soon after the whistle. Ben Youngs sucked players in after Joe Launchbury set him on his course. Tuilagi did what he did best and the winger could not believe his luck as he plonked over from a yard.Hard working Yarde: The winger was one of England’s bright spots in this lossThere was plenty of back and forth after this and New Zealand even had a man in the bin for cynical maul-play by Wyatt Crockett, but England just could not puncture the All Blacks’ line when they wanted to. Yarde continued to be bright and ambitious, churning up 40-metre runs and putting his hand up whenever the ball was on offer, but even he was getting gobbled up by Savea and Ben Smith when he got anywhere near the Kiwi line.Then, just as the second half looked to be thinning out, the All Blacks showed the extent of their mean streak. A hooter signaled the end of the 80 minutes but instead of knocking a penalty into touch the hosts went on one last attack. Hat-trick hero: Julian Savea profited from poor English defence to score three tries in the Hamilton Test An exhibition of power, pace and perhaps even cruelty was put on by the world champion All Blacks in Hamilton as they put away a lacklustre England with a dominant first half performance, securing a record-equaling 17th Test win in a row on their way.It was a match of contrasting trajectories, with the All Blacks finally clicking while England could not string phases together as they have done on this trip, lacking accuracy in most facets of their game. Yes, England won a few minor skirmishes right at the start of the second half, but their hosts always had enough to blast past the tourists’ midfield in the first, and Julian Savea eventually, greedily, helping himself to three tries.It was a weary end to a tour that had, up to this point, earned England much respect for their endeavour and adventure. If ever there was a game for them to tighten it up sooner and not gift the ball to the All Blacks’ back three, though, this was it.Things were bad for England from the off. Freddie Burns could not send his kick-off ten metres and missed a penalty. Two minutes later, after balls kicked out on the full or gifted to the All Blacks, Savea was benefiting from simple numbers to get his first. Aaron Smith slipped off a Chris Ashton tackle and the monstrous winger cantered in at the corner.Brace yourself: Aaron Smith got two of New Zealand’s five triesBurns clipped over a penalty of his own but there were few breathes between that and Savea scoring a second. Aaron Cruden cruised between England’s centres and the winger stepped inside beyond Ashton, Marland Yarde and Chris Robshaw to dot down after picked the ball of his toes in heavy drizzle.It was a time when England should have been playing ugly rugby, despite their team manifesto, but after a penalty to both sides, Billy Vunipola was taking a yellow card for a suspected high tackle on Cruden. In his absence England huffed and puffed but after seven minutes England coughed up another try. In no time at all Aaron Smith was scoring his own first-half brace as well after Yarde totally missed a tackle on Jane. TAGS: Highlight Phases were accumulated until, three minutes after the 80-minute announcement, Cory Jane was able to scoop a pass over the top with Savea trotting in for his hat-trick and his 23rd try in 22 Tests.As lessons go it was harsh, but there are no prizes in rugby for pushing a team hard for two games out of three. England gained plenty from the first two matches in this series, but New Zealand were just that much better in the end. There is much work ahead for this England team with New Zealand back at Twickenham in November.
Popular in the CommunitySponsoredSponsoredOrangutan found tortured and decapitated prompts Indonesia probeEMGIES17 Jan, 2018We will never know the full extent of what this poor Orangutan went through before he died, the same must be done to this evil perpetrator(s) they don’t deserve the air that they breathe this has truly upset me and I wonder for the future for these wonderful creatures. So called ‘Mankind’ has a lot to answer for we are the only ones ruining this world I prefer animals to humans any day of the week.What makes community ecotourism succeed? In Madagascar, location, location, locationScissors1dOther countries should also learn and try to incorporateWhy you should care about the current wave of mass extinctions (commentary)Processor1 DecAfter all, there is no infinite anything in the whole galaxy!Infinite stupidity, right here on earth.The wildlife trade threatens people and animals alike (commentary)Anchor3dUnfortunately I feel The Chinese have no compassion for any living animal. They are a cruel country that as we knowneatbeverything that moves and do not humanily kill these poor animals and insects. They have no health and safety on their markets and they then contract these diseases. Maybe its karma maybe they should look at the way they live and stop using animals for all there so called remedies. DisgustingConservationists welcome China’s wildlife trade banThobolo27 JanChina has consistently been the worlds worst, “ Face of Evil “ in regards our planets flora and fauna survival. In some ways, this is nature trying to fight back. This ban is great, but the rest of the world just cannot allow it to be temporary, because history has demonstrated that once this coronavirus passes, they will in all likelihood, simply revert to been the planets worst Ecco Terrorists. Let’s simply not allow this to happen! How and why they have been able to degrade this planets iconic species, rape the planets rivers, oceans and forests, with apparent impunity, is just mind boggling! Please no more.Probing rural poachers in Africa: Why do they poach?Carrot3dOne day I feel like animals will be more scarce, and I agree with one of my friends, they said that poaching will take over the world, but I also hope notUpset about Amazon fires last year? Focus on deforestation this year (commentary)Bullhorn4dLies and more leisSponsoredSponsoredCoke is again the biggest culprit behind plastic waste in the PhilippinesGrapes7 NovOnce again the article blames companies for the actions of individuals. It is individuals that buy these products, it is individuals that dispose of them improperly. If we want to change it, we have to change, not just create bad guys to blame.Brazilian response to Bolsonaro policies and Amazon fires growsCar4 SepThank you for this excellent report. I feel overwhelmed by the ecocidal intent of the Bolsonaro government in the name of ‘developing’ their ‘God-given’ resources.U.S. allocates first of $30M in grants for forest conservation in SumatraPlanet4dcarrot hella thick ;)Melting Arctic sea ice may be altering winds, weather at equator: studyleftylarry30 JanThe Arctic sea ice seems to be recovering this winter as per the last 10-12 years, good news.Malaysia has the world’s highest deforestation rate, reveals Google forest mapBone27 Sep, 2018Who you’re trying to fool with selective data revelation?You can’t hide the truth if you show historical deforestation for all countries, especially in Europe from 1800s to this day. WorldBank has a good wholesome data on this.Mass tree planting along India’s Cauvery River has scientists worriedSurendra Nekkanti23 JanHi Mongabay. Good effort trying to be objective in this article. I would like to give a constructive feedback which could help in clearing things up.1. It is mentioned that planting trees in village common lands will have negative affects socially and ecologically. There is no need to even have to agree or disagree with it, because, you also mentioned the fact that Cauvery Calling aims to plant trees only in the private lands of the farmers. So, plantation in the common lands doesn’t come into the picture.2.I don’t see that the ecologists are totally against this project, but just they they have some concerns, mainly in terms of what species of trees will be planted. And because there was no direct communication between the ecologists and Isha Foundation, it was not possible for them to address the concerns. As you seem to have spoken with an Isha spokesperson, if you could connect the concerned parties, it would be great, because I see that the ecologists are genuinely interested in making sure things are done the right way.May we all come together and make things happen.Rare Amazon bush dogs caught on camera in BoliviaCarrot1 Feba very good iniciative to be fallowed by the ranchers all overSponsored Most population monitoring surveys of wild animals and plants are poorly designed, a new study says.Populations that are monitored are sometimes not representative of the community we seek to understand, for example, which can lead to highly misleading estimated trends, scientists say.Existing monitoring programs should be reviewed, scientists say, and available technologies can be used to collect reliable data on population trends. A biodiversity crisis is looming upon us. We are now in the middle of a “sixth great extinction” of animal species, scientists warn, with loss of species about 1,000 times higher than it would have been without human impact.Nearly every country in the world has committed to reducing the rate of loss of biodiversity under the Convention of Biological Diversity (CBD) 2010 and 2020 biodiversity targets. One of the first steps to achieving this is to understand the changes in animal and plant populations in the wild over time.However, population monitoring surveys are often poorly designed, scientists report in a new study published in Biological Conservation. And this could pose a serious challenge to halting species loss, they warn.“To understand the changes in biodiversity and develop conservation programs that will be suitable to mitigate or reverse the losses, it is critical to have good quality surveys that satisfy criteria to produce reliable trends in biodiversity,” Stephen Buckland of the Centre for Research into Ecological Environmental Modelling at the University of St Andrews, U.K., said in a statement.Asian small clawed otter. Photo by Rhett A. Butler.Well-designed surveys should satisfy five criteria, Buckland and Alison Johnston of Cornell Lab of Ornithology, New York, write in the paper. First, monitoring programs must choose sample locations that are representative of the region that the researchers are interested in and not biased towards particular habitats or locations. Second, conservation practitioners must sample a “sufficiently large” number of sites. Sampling too few sites can lead to high bias and low precision of population change estimates, the authors write.Third, monitoring programs must ensure that every target species — both common and rare — are adequately counted. Fourth, species that the practitioners select for monitoring should be representative of all the species in the community they are interested in. Choosing only common and easily detectable species for monitoring, for instance, can lead to misleading trend estimates, the authors write. Finally, the researchers call for repeated surveys over time (for example, every year or once every three years) to help arrive at reliable long-term population trends.“If a scheme produces population trend estimates, policymakers tend to assume that these are accurate and precise,” Buckland told Mongabay. “In reality, the populations monitored may not be at all representative of the community for which inference is required, and so the estimated trends may be highly misleading.”Take the Living Planet Index (LPI), for example. The LPI measures global population trends of mammals, birds, fish, reptiles and amphibian species by using data from sources like government reports, scientific articles and research programs. While cost-effective, LPI suffers from several biases, a study published in January found. Some regions like Europe are heavily over-represented relative to others, for example, as are temperate bird and mammal species while several tropical species and marine fishes remain under-represented.“There are still many places and species for which we do not have good information on biodiversity,” Johnston said. “In some cases there are statistical tools that we can use to account for this missing data, but statistical methods can only take us so far. It is essential that we also assess the ways we collect data.”Goodman’s mouse lemur (Microcebus lehilahytsara). Photo by Rhett A. Butler.While good quality, long-term monitoring surveys are critical, such surveys are not always feasible due to constraints like unavailability of resources. “To conduct a completely watertight survey of a nation’s biodiversity with high precision would require a level of resource that is not feasible even for the wealthiest nations,” Buckland said.The level of expertise required to survey species reliably is also often lacking, he added. Given the constraints with respect to resources and expertise, practitioners frequently compromise on survey designs.Buckland and Johnston are, however, hopeful that survey designs can be improved. Accessible technologies in particular can help individuals and groups collect reliable data on species population trends.“Technologies such as camera traps, acoustic detectors, high-resolution images, drones, etc mean that it is feasible to collect data across wide regions for more taxa than has been possible to date,” Buckland said.Existing monitoring programmes that have been in place for decades, and where strong biases have been identified, also need to be improved, he added. “I think it is necessary to review methods, and implement new approaches. This was done for example for monitoring breeding birds in the UK. The Common Birds Census, which monitored a biased set of locations, was replaced by the Breeding Bird Survey in the 1990s. The two schemes overlapped for several years, allowing bias in the old scheme to be assessed.”Johnston added: “Environmental decisions rely on accurate information about the state of biodiversity. We should continue to collect high quality data and create the best measures we can about the natural world. However, it’s also important that we recognise the weaknesses of each metric and that we continually search for ways to improve the data we collect and the statistical methods used to analyse them.”Camera traps are increasingly becoming more accessible. Photo by Rhett A. Butler.Banner image: A blue-and-yellow macaw (Ara ararauna) in Colombia. Photo by Rhett A. Butler.Citation:Buckland ST, Johnston A (2017) Monitoring the biodiversity of regions: Key principles and possible pitfalls. Biological Conservation 214: 23–34. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2017.07.034McRae L, Deinet S, Freeman R (2017) The Diversity-Weighted Living Planet Index: Controlling for Taxonomic Bias in a Global Biodiversity Indicator. PLoS ONE 12(1): e0169156. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0169156FEEDBACK: Use this form to send a message to the author of this post. If you want to post a public comment, you can do that at the bottom of the page.Follow Shreya Dasgupta on Twitter: @ShreyaDasguptaCorrection 8/24/17: This story was updated to clarify that almost every country in the world has signed up to the CBD 2020 targets. Article published by Shreya Dasgupta Amphibians, Animals, Biodiversity, Birds, Conservation, Endangered Species, Environment, Forests, Innovation In Conservation, Mammals, Plants, Reptiles, Research, Wildlife
Most origin-of-life researchers have acknowledged the extreme improbability of the genetic code arising by chance. Their approaches to get around this problem have varied considerably since the Miller experiment succeeded in generating a few amino acids. Despite the celebrations that 1953 experiment generated (05/02/2003), it did not even begin to approach the problem of solving the origin of the code that stores and directs the information of life. Can that problem be swept away by a bombastic title from a press release? Rockefeller University sent this up the flagpole: “Model Suggests How Life’s Code Emerged From Primordial Soup.” Science Daily then dutifully distributed the claim with no critique. The press release began by acknowledging that the Miller experiment did not solve the problem of the origin of the genetic code. The basis of their claim is that the chemical or physical properties of RNA molecules make a code inevitable. Jean Lehmann said, “All these molecules have different properties and these properties define their interactions. What are the constraints that allow these molecules to self-organize into a code? We can play with that.” Lehmann did not consider whether it would be appropriate for a critic to play with different rules: e.g., defining the constraints that prohibit molecules from self-organizing into a code.” Nevertheless, by playing according to the pro-evolutionary rules, the research team decided that transfer-RNAs (tRNA) were not as finicky about the molecules they associated with back in the primordial soup age. Using intelligent design, they “developed an algorithm to incrementally change the concentration of each molecule. Their goal was to see which conditions, if any, could coax the system to specifically translate codons in a nonrandom fashion.” In short, they wanted to coax the right amino acids to associate with the right transfer-RNAs. Why molecules would want to do such things, or who would wish to reward them if they did, they did not say. They just wanted to present a theoretical framework, with a little bit of experimental support, to get “one step closer to understanding how life first began.” They did not state the criteria for measuring whether the step actually gets them closer or farther. Their paper, published in PLoS One,1 mentioned some things the press release glossed over: e.g., tRNA binding occurs with the help of a family of enzymes that associate the genetic code with the protein code: “A major issue about the origin of the genetic system is to understand how coding rules were generated before the appearance of a family of coded enzymes, the aminoacyl-tRNA synthetases.” For more on that problem, search on “synthetase” in the search bar above (e.g., 06/09/2003, 05/26/2004, 01/31/2007, bullet 3). They apparently thought that if a loose translation already existed, the synthetase enzymes would “emerge” in due course. For all this, their paper did nothing to explain how the information in the genetic code emerged; their system could do no better than to translate genetic gibberish. In the paper’s Discussion section, they said, “Although the molecular organization of genetic code is now known in detail, there is still no agreement on the reason(s) for which it has emerged.” After that, they acknowledged the chicken-and-egg problem: “Although these facts are fundamental, and have inspired scenarios for the evolution and the expansion of the code, evolutionary considerations may not, in essence, provide an answer to the origin of the code (since it is a prerequisite for biological evolution).” They realize that natural selection cannot be invoked before replication – and replication requires an accurate code. Here’s the last part of the paper:In conclusion, our results show that the properties of amino acids and RNA can naturally impose a partially coded polymerization along RNA templates. We also found that the associated coding mechanism is remarkably robust against mismatches. When supplied with “meaningful” RNA sequences, translation systems of this kind should be capable of generating pools of proteins a small fraction of which will be functional. The feed-back action of these proteins on the translation itself may further increase its efficiency, allowing more codons to be added to its repertoire. In this evolutionary perspective, it can be speculated that a critical effect of emerging synthetases will be to establish only the [amino acid � tRNA] configurations that are fit for translation, a “learning” action that RNA alone cannot logically achieve.1. Lehmann, Cibils and Libchaber, “Emergence of a Code in the Polymerization of Amino Acids along RNA Templates,” Public Library of Science One, 4(6): e5773; doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0005773.OK, CEH volunteer police, time to take Apollos the Baloney Detector Dog and round up some more suspects (09/30/2007 commentary). These guys are not only charged with impersonating a scientist, but committing thought crime by being willfully ignorant and selling their ignorance publicly as science. Round up Science Daily as accomplices. Suggested sentence: watching Unlocking the Mystery of Life and reading Signature in the Cell. Public vagrancy at Rockefeller University is against the law. Ignorance is no excuse.(Visited 8 times, 1 visits today)FacebookTwitterPinterestSave分享0
Share Facebook Twitter Google + LinkedIn Pinterest OMAHA (DTN) — Corn and soybean inspections were neutral to bearish while wheat inspections were neutral in the latest USDA export inspections report, according to DTN Lead Analyst Todd Hultman.Corn inspections totaled 25.7 million bushels for the week ended Thursday, June 13, below the 40.7 mb needed each week to reach USDA’s export estimate of 2.200 bb. Inspections for 2018-19 now total 1.608 billion bushels, down 4% from the previous year. The overall pace of corn inspections is neutral to bearish in 2018-19, Hultman said.Soybean inspections totaled 24.8 mb for the week ended Thursday, June 13, below the 30.5 mb needed weekly to reach USDA’s export estimate of 1.700 bb. Inspections for 2018-19 now total 1.31 bb, down 26% from the previous year. The overall pace of soybean inspections is neutral to bearish in 2018-19, Hultman said.Wheat inspections totaled 13.8 mb for the week ended Thursday, June 13, below the 17.4 mb needed weekly to reach USDA’s export estimate of 900 mb. Inspections for 2019-20 now total 29.3 mb, up slightly from the previous year. The overall pace of wheat inspections is neutral early in 2019-20, Hultman said.(AG)© Copyright 2019 DTN/The Progressive Farmer. All rights reserved.
Reacting to VVS Laxman’s stunning decision to retire immediately, tributes puroed in from all quarters: Virender Sehwag: “VVS is one of the finest human beings to have played cricket. One of the main pillars of the team and a true friend. Words are not enough.” Harbhajan Singh: “Everyone knows Laxman was an amazing cricketer, but he was surly the best human being I have ever met. A legend has walked into the cricketing sunset. What a player! So many good days spent with him. Gonna miss you VVS. God bless you with all the happiness in future.” Suresh Raina: “From carrying his innings to carrying himself, VVS has shown immense class. Will miss you Laxman bhai.” Michael Clarke, Australian captain: “Congrats to VVS Laxman on an amazing career.” BCCI: “Not many batsmen made batting look as easy as VVS Laxman. He was an exceptional cricketer, who excelled in pressure situations. The classic innings that he essayed in crisis situations shaped the history of Indian cricket, none more so than the 281 against Australia at Kolkata in March 2001. If a cricketer’s greatness is to be measured in terms of his performances against the best opposition of his time, then Laxman stands right at the top. His record against Australia, the world’s no. 1 team for the better part of his career, speaks for itself.”
World Cup Trophy Tour 2018 Andrea Pirlo, Sir Geoff Hurst and the World Cup Trophy Tour by Coca-Cola Last updated 1 year ago 18:38 1/23/18 1/11 Andrea Pirlo, Sir Geoff Hurst and the World Cup Trophy Tour by Coca-Cola Coca-Cola/Goal Coca-Cola/Goal Full screen 1 of 11 Share Close On Monday the FIFA World Cup Trophy Tour by Coca-Cola kicked off with a launch event in London. FacebookTwitterRedditcopy World Cup Trophy Tour 2018