Human mortality rate and the resilience of women in the abortion case study Essay Example for Free

Human mortality rate and the resilience of women in the abortion case study Essay In 2014, the abortion rate in the United States was 14.6 abortions per 1,000 women. It is the lowest abortion rate recorded since Roe v. Wade, the Supreme Court ruling that legalized abortion in the United States in 1973. One of the fears of the decision was that it would lead to an increase in abortions and the termination of pregnancies could have a detrimental effect on the women receiving the abortions. While the increase in legal abortion access did see a rise in abortions, a study published in JAMA Psychiatry found that legal abortions did not cause a significant increase in mental health issues among women that have experienced abortions. With a long history of trauma and disease that caused premature deaths at extraordinary rates, humans have evolved to overcome trauma. Humans are inherently resilient, largely due to the high amount of traumatic experiences our ancestors experienced and the genes dedicated to survival that were passed generation after generation. It is not an unreasonable to believe that abortions could have a severe impact on women’s mental health. Terminating a pregnancy and losing an unborn child has high potential of being a traumatic experience that could potentially have long-standing mental health effects. A study published in JAMA Psychiatry, followed 1,000 women who sought out consultation on potentially getting an abortion. The study followed these women for five years after they received or were denied an abortion. The researchers found that those who received abortions were no more likely than those that were denied abortions to have experienced anxiety, depression, low self-esteem, or feelings of life dissatisfaction. Only those that were denied abortions due to being too far along in their pregnancies experienced negative mental health problems, but the study noted that after six months, the negative mental health effects returned to the range observed in other groups in the study. The study shows that humans are extremely resilient and that we often overcome even the most difficult events that can occur in our lives. Modern life is far more safer and less fraught with trauma that our past, where mortality rates across the board were much higher. In evolutionary terms, it makes sense that we are as resilient as we are, considering we would not exist otherwise. For obvious reasons, there are no concrete statistics on mortality rates from our ancient past, but it is believed to be extraordinarily high compared to today, where the worldwide average life expectancy is 71 years. The infant mortality rate in particular is believed to have been very high in prehistoric times. Even in recent times before the advent of standard hygienic norms in hospitals, infant mortality rates were much higher they are today. Hungarian physician Ignaz Semmelweis observed in 1846 that the neonatal mortality rate was five times lower when women   gave birth at a midwives’ clini c, compared to births that took place in hospitals by male doctors. He figured out that the doctors were performing autopsies in the hospitals and the midwives were not. Semmelweis hypothesized that harmful microbes were being transferred from the autopsy bodies to the women giving birth. When Semmelweis advised the doctors to sterilized their hands and tools before delivering babies, the neonatal mortality rate dropped dramatically. Today, it is very rare for a baby to be lost during childbirth, but even within he past century, neonatal deaths would not have been all that uncommon. Modern medicine has drastically cut down on mortality rates for various diseases and medical conditions. It is estimated that approximately 300 million have died due to smallpox. English physician Edward Jenner is credited with the discovery of the smallpox vaccine, which has been successfully deployed worldwide. As a result, smallpox is the only infectious disease that has been fully eradicated globally, with the last World Health Organization declaring it officially eradicated in 1979. Before this time, it wouldn’t of been uncommon to have known members of your own family who had died from smallpox. Other deadly diseases like polio and measles have also been eradicated in the developed world due to vaccines. Infectious diseases caused by bacteria have been largely controlled by the invention of antibiotics. Before Alexander Fleming isolated a mold called Penicillium notatum to be used as the world’s first antibiotic, it wouldn’t have been uncommon for people to die due to an infected cut. The Oxford Constable, Albert Alexander cut his face while gardening and an infection caused by staphylococci and streptococci spread to his scalp and eyes. He was treated with pencillin for five days, but eventually doctors ran out of penicillin and Alexander succumbed to the infection. The world offers many dangers to our mortality and humans have faced these dangers for hundreds of thousands of years. Trauma and disease are in a constant battle with our mortality and only those that could overcome adversity would pass their genes to the next generation. In that evolutionary context, it is not surprising that we often overcome even the darkest of traumas. It will be interesting to see where the evolutionary direction that resiliency will go in our modern world where we are far less likely to face the same dangers that our ancestors faced on a daily basis.

Comparing UK and US Gang Culture

Comparing UK and US Gang Culture Popular perceptions of gang activity are often based on sensationalized images created in the media. They vary from dramatic reports of â€Å"gangland† shootings to images of young men terrorizing the local neighborhood. Indeed, there are elements of gang culture that are criminal and threatening for the local population; however, gang culture is so complex that a single definition has yet to be agreed upon by social scientists. The primary issue of controversy is whether criminality is a central and causal. Thrasher’s (1927) pioneering study was the first to look at group processes and psychology of gang life. Through his study of 1,313 Chicago gangs, he concluded gangs are part of the psychological and group process of teenagers in economically deprived communities. He believed gangs are: group(s) originally formed spontaneously, and then integrated through conflict†¦.characterized by the following types of behavior: meeting face to face, milling, movement through space as a unit, conflict, and planning. The result†¦.is the development of tradition, unreflective internal structure, esprit de corps, solidarity, morale, group awareness, and attachment to a local territory. (pg 46) By the ‘50s and ‘60s, the popular view changed – the perception of gangs became one of fear and threat.. Miller (1975) and Klein (1971) published papers defining gangs as innately criminal. Miller’s pessimistic perspective is apparent in his classification of gangs as: â€Å"a group of recurrently associating individuals with identifiable leadership and internal organization, identifying with or claiming control over territory in the community, and engaging either individually or collectively in violent or other forms of illegal behavior† (pg 9). Miller was echoed by Klein (1971), who defined gangs as: â€Å"any denotable group of youngsters who†¦..recognize themselves as a notable group†¦. (and) have been involved in a sufficient number of delinquent incidents to call forth a consistent negative response from†¦..residents and/or law enforcement agencies† (pg 13) This theme was taken up by law enforcement agencies, and the idea of the gang as a part of the moral order of the community was subsequently gone. The sociological definition of gang was replaced by terms mainly useful to law enforcement, which are still used to this day. Brantley and DiRosa of the FBI (1994) describe gangs as groups of â€Å"individuals†¦..who associate on a continual basis for the purpose of committing criminal acts†. But other researchers maintain the Thrasher group process hypothesis. Moore argues against Miller and Kleins definitions, as she believes they are circular: the definitions include the very behaviour i.e. crime that they are trying to understand. Thrasher and Moores definitions differ significantly from Klein and Millers. Moore (1998) believes criminality is not inherent to gangs and views them instead as â€Å"unsupervised peer groups†¦socialized by the streets rather than by conventional institutions.† The debate continues, and the lack of agreement regarding the defining features of gangs has made consistent findings and generalizations problematic. Criminal activity remains a pivotal issue in the debate; the criminality of gangs waxes and wanes, and to use criminality to distinguish a group from a gangs is a misleading and unhelpful process. The Phenomenon â€Å"Gang† in the UK and USA Discuss. Anywhere in the world were there are unsettled neighborhoods or a transient population, there are likely to be gangs of youths, coming together to seek the security, sense of belonging and structure they lack in their communities. Traditionally, UK interventions to curtail gang activity have been based largely on the US model, where gang conflict has a long and complex history. However research into why youths join gangs in the UK found important differences between British gangs and their US counterparts, which has lead to a change in the British governments approach. British gangs tend to be gentler than those in America, which are more likely to generate distinct identities, rigid structures and be involved in criminal acts (Klein, 1995). UK gangs lack the American-style initiation ceremonies and specific styles of clothing. In the USA large portions of the population exist on the edge of communities, creating breading grounds for criminal street gangs. In certain urban ghettos men rejoice when they reach 25 years of age because gangland fighting kills more young people than illness or accidents (Community Cares, 1994). Often these areas will be economically deprived. The longstanding social security system in the UK has prevented the same situation occurring. The USA takes a different approach and makes frequent cuts in its social program, investing instead in its penal system. In 2003 the British government proposed to revamp youth services, in an effort to reverse the 18% decrease in youth services since the 1980’s. The new legislation places a requirement upon all local authorities to meet certain standards by 2005, and expects them to critically assessment the youth service provision within their area. Councils were asked to make a promise to youths to provide not only the usual meeting places for personal and social development, (i.e. youth clubs and activities), but also programmes related to peer education and ways of ensuring their views are heard. The government pledged  £83m to the programme. However, the British government are also taking a stronger stance against â€Å"antisocial behavior†, which frequently involves gangs of adolescents. Although the new anti-social behavior legislation is not aimed specifically at gangs, its purpose is to reduce feelings of intimidation within communities, which is often concurrent with gang formation. Once an Anti-Social Behavior Order (ASBO) is issued, the accused must abide by the stipulations in the ASBO or potentially face criminal proceedings. The US was similarly preoccupied with anti-social behavior in the 1990’s, when task forces such as Operation Weed and Seed, and the Office of Community-Oriented Policing Services anti-gang drive, had at it’s core the desire curb or contain street gangs. New legislation was passed and many states enacted statutes to assist law enforcers. In both the US and UK, this was a response to a concerned electorate, made anxious by the tabloid media. There must be a move in the US towards interventions that do not criminalize young people. The question that should be asked is why are young people joining gangs. The answer is well researched; the need for structure, nurturing, a sense of belonging and perceived economic opportunity create breeding grounds for gangs. If goverments adopt adequate social security programs to meet these basic needs, gangs will not evolve – they ultimatly reflect the society that has shaped them. References Brantley, A. C., DiRosa, A. (1994) Gangs: A National Perspective. The FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin. New York Klein, M. W. (1995) The American Street Gang. Oxford University Press. New York. Koutos, L., Brotherton, D., Barrios, L. (2003) Gangs and Society: Alternative Perspectives. Columbia University Press. Miller, W. (1975) Violence by Youth Gangs and Youth Groups as a Crime problem in Major American Cities. Washington Department of Justice. Washington. Moore, J. W. 1998. â€Å"Understanding Youth Street Gangs: Economic Restructuring and the Urban Underclass.† In M. W. Watts (Ed.), Cross-Cultural Perspectives on Youth and Violence (pp. 65-78), Stamford, CT: JAI. Thrasher, F. M. (1927) The Gang: A Study of 1,313 Gangs in Chicago. Chicago III. University of Chicago Press. USA (1994) Community Cares (1994). Socialist review, 179. Retrieved February 10, 2006, from http://pubs.socialist reviewindex.org.uk/sr179/msmith.htm

Rainbow Parrotfish Scarus Guacamaia

Rainbow Parrotfish Scarus Guacamaia Abstract The rainbow parrotfish Scarus guacamaia is a prominent herbivore in the coastal waters of southeastern Florida whose life history is strongly linked to a dependence on both mangrove and coral reef habitats. Rainbow parrotfish also serve in maintaining the health of coral reefs by keeping algal populations in check. Using NOAA fisheries data from the Mangrove Visual Census and the Reef Visual Census, this study focused on observations of this species in Biscayne Bay and the Upper Florida Bay in order to quantify occupancy and to examine the different factors that affect the presence and absence, and the ontogenetic shifts present in this species between juvenile and adult stages. Logistic regression was used to predict abundance and occurrence using the environmental variables of temperature, dissolved oxygen, salinity, average depth, and distance from channel openings. Presence and absence were also measured against mangrove cover, bottom substrate type, and shoreline development. It was found that salinity, average depth, and distance from channel openings were significant in predicting the occurrence of this species, while temperature and dissolved oxygen were not. Conservation efforts for this species, listed as vulnerable under the IUCN, need to be given greater consideration as the health of this and other parrotfish may be useful in determining the management breadth and priorities on coral reef ecosystems across the Caribbean Sea. Key words: rainbow parrotfish, mangroves, logistic regression, conservation, land-use planning. Acknowledgements In completing this thesis research, I would foremost like to thank my advisor, David W. Kerstetter, Ph.D., and committee members John F. Walter III, Ph.D. and Richard E. Spieler, Ph.D., whose input and guidance has been critical in moving forward through this project. I would like to thank David L. Jones, Ph.D. for his assistance on equations and statistics. For their assistance in various aspects of ArcGIS, I would like to thank Brian K. Walker, Ph.D. and Kristian Taylor. Notably, I would like to thank James A. Bohnsack, Ph.D. and Joseph E. Serafy, Ph.D. and their work, without whom, this research could not have taken place. I would like to thank my lab mates, especially Bryan Armstrong, Shannon Bayse, Amy Heemsoth, Cheryl Cross, and Kerri Bolow for all their feedback, inquiries, assistance and advice throughout the entire research process. Finally, I would like to thank my family and all my friends for their tireless support and unfailing encouragement in the completion of my thesi s work. Introduction Life History of the Rainbow Parrotfish Rainbow parrotfish Scarus guacamaia is the largest herbivorous fish in the Atlantic Ocean and Caribbean Sea and is found in both mangrove and coral reef habitats (Mumby 2006). The rainbow parrotfish is a large, heavy-bodied, and laterally compressed fish, compared with other species of reef fish. It has a fusiform body shape with dull orange fins possessing streaks of green extending into the dorsal and anal fins; median fin margins are blue in color with the dental plates appearing a blue-green. In this species there appears to be no obvious color differentiation based on sex (Cervigà ³n 1994). Rainbow parrotfish are behaviorally cautious in nature, and are generally observed in isolation, though they can be found in schools of up to thirty individuals (Dunlop and Pawlik 1998). It has a daily home range of about 1000 m3 (Smith 1997), and occupies varying depths from the surface to 25 m. It depends on corals for shelter and space to inhabit (Cole et al. 2008) and seeks shelter under ledges at night or when threatened. The species has been shown to use the angle of the sun as an aid in returning to these shelters (Smith 1997). Rainbow parrotfish are herbivorous fish that, like most members of the Scaridae family, feed mainly by scraping macro-algae from coral structure (Bellwood et al. 2004). However, it has also been observed to feed directly on coral (Rotjan and Lewis 2006) and gut content analyses have revealed spicules from feeding on sponges (Dunlop and Pawlik 1998). Rainbow parrotfish life history characteristics are reasonably well known. It is a protogynous hermaphrodite, meaning individuals in this species undergo a sex change between their initial phase, where they are generally female and terminal phase, where they are male. Terminal phase male rainbow parrotfish defend a territory and a harem of females, and when the male dies, the most dominant female will become the dominant male, with her ovaries becoming functional male testes (Streelman et al. 2002). Like other species in this family, peak spawning occurs primarily in warmer summer seasons from May to August, but can occur year-round, and there is an active period of recruitment into the population occurring around February in this region (Haus et al. 2000). Spawning is found to take place generally around dusk, and may correlate to either the lunar cycle or the high tide, as this is an optimal time for egg dispersal. The initial phase is composed of females while the terminal phase i s composed of sexually mature males. Rainbow parrotfish aggregate into territories that contain a group of females and the dominant male, which pair-spawns almost exclusively within this group (Munoz and Motta 2000). The rainbow parrotfish is a relatively large reef fish, compared to most species of reef fishes in the Caribbean, and can achieve a maximum length of 120 cm (TL). The estimated K value of 0.293 equates to a minimum population doubling time of approximately four and a half to fourteen years (Robins and Ray 1986; Randall 1962). Observations of rainbow parrotfish have been made in waters with temperatures ranging from 12-36  °C, salinities ranging from 23.74 to 39.1 †° (parts per thousand), and dissolved oxygen concentrations ranging from 2.4 to 14.07 †° (Serafy et al. 2003). The species wide range of tolerances to these factors is most likely an adaptation to the wide range of its known habitats. These habitats range from estuaries to offshore areas, both of which are subject to large pulses of freshwater and storm events. The varied thermal and oxic conditions cannot be exploited by less tolerant species and may be beneficial in providing refuge from predators, foraging gr ounds, or potential nursery areas (Rummer et al. 2009). The diet of rainbow parrotfish has been shown to be variable across life stages and habitats. In the Dunlop and Pawlik (1998) study, sponge spicules were found in higher masses in the individuals collected from the mangrove sites as compared to those from coral reefs, suggesting there are shifts in diet preference based on the food sources available. A secondary food source is coral, as rainbow parrotfish has been classified as a facultative corallivore based on direct observations, meaning coral can be either a majority of their diet or only a minor component. These fish impose more permanent and chronic pressures on scleractinian corals (those that generate a hard skeleton such as Montastrea and Porites species) meaning there is repeat scraping activity on these corals, and the damage caused is longer lasting. However, chronic predation may play a factor in regulating distribution, abundance, and fitness of certain prey corals (Cole et al. 2008). Though not fully known, this corall ivory may be part of an ontogenetic diet shift, meaning coral is only an important food source for part of their lives, accounting for less than five percent of their bites (Cole et al. 2008). Along with this diet selectivity comes the ability to cause significant damage to corals by biting off growing tips or large portions of skeletal material, which means they are capable of having a disproportionately large impact on the physical structure of Caribbean reefs (Cole et al. 2008). It has also been observed that grazing reduced the density of zooxanthellae and increased the severity of a bleaching event in Belize (Cole et al. 2008). Rainbow parrotfish use a feeding method of scraping or grinding algae from the coral or other rocky substrate, and sometimes inadvertently ingests coral animals as well. The hard coral substrate is broken down through its digestive system, and the excretion of this limestone material is one of the main sources in the creation of the sand surrounding cora l reefs in the Caribbean. Parrotfishes are known to become progressively more important to coral reef ecosystems upon reaching a certain key size around 15-20 cm, at which point they become functionally mature (Lokrantz et al. 2008) and their actions provide a significant impact on the coral reef. This impact increases exponentially as there is a non-linear relationship between body size and scraping function. Calculations have suggested that up to 75 individuals with a size of 15 cm are required to functionally compensate for the loss of a single 35 cm individual, and a 50% decrease in body size can result in a 90% loss of function provided to the ecosystem (Lokrantz et al. 2008). In addition, the level of grazing impact in mangrove systems is also a power function of body length. A conservative estimate places the home range of S. guacamaia at 1600 m3 (Mumby and Hastings 2008), which is larger than that of many other scarids. Rainbow parrotfish also represents approximately 14% of the total grazing intensit y measured for mangrove depauperate systems (Mumby and Hastings 2008). The majority of the rainbow parrotfish diet consists mostly of short epilithic turf algae, cropped algae, red coralline algae, and filamentous algae (Mumby and Hastings 2008), and they feed heavily upon Halimeda opuntia, a green calcareous alga. Juvenile scarid abundance has also been shown to be positively related to the percent cover of Dictyota spp. algae at site level in the Florida Keys (Kuffner et al. 2009). Similar parrotfish species have been observed consuming whole pieces of the thallus rather than grazing on the attached epiphytes, and taking more bites from H. opuntia and fewer bites from coral than would be expected from the percent cover of different microhabitats (Munoz and Motta 2000). While not quantitatively known for rainbow parrotfish, a mean home range for similar parrotfish species, redband parrotfish and redtail parrotfish, in the Florida Keys was observed to be 4371.5 +/- 5869.5 m2 (Munoz and Motta 2000); the standard error was found to be high due to a low nu mber (n = 7) of study sites. Due to overlap in microhabitat and foraging areas in these home ranges, interspecific aggression between parrotfish species takes place when one species attempts to use defended resources to the detriment of the defending species. This aggression involves vigorous chasing over comparatively large distances, as well as biting. Engaging in resource defense behavior was found to be advantageous as the benefits gained outweighed the cost (Munoz and Motta 2000). Aggression has also been observed to be greater when encountering other parrotfish species as opposed to non-parrotfish species and rainbow parrotfish were instigated into these aggressive encounters most often by redband parrotfish Sparisoma aurofrenatum (Munoz and Motta 2000). Scarus guacamaia is most closely related phylogenetically to midnight parrotfish Scarus coelestinus and striped parrotfish Scarus iseri, with Scarus clades having root nodes at between 2 and 3 million years ago, thus implying that most Scarus species are products of recent speciation. This speciation likely occurred around the time of the complete closure of the Isthmus of Panama at approximately 3.1-3.5 million years ago (Smith et al. 2008). The pantropical distribution and the relatively recent ages of the divergence of the four main clades of Scarus imply that fluctuations in sea level and patterns of differential cooling of the oceans during the Pliocene and Pleistocene may be the driving forces behind the rapid radiation in this genus, which is today largely restricted to the complex reefs built by hard corals (Smith et al. 2008). Alternatively, processes of ecological speciation and divergence due to sexual selection remain a possible explanation for the rapid radiation of parr otfishes, which all have pelagic larval phases and highly similar morphology (Smith et al. 2008). The protogynous mating system of parrotfishes, where species aggregate and have male-dominated haremic systems organized by color recognition, has also been proposed as a possible driving force for speciation via sexual selection mechanisms (Smith et al. 2008). The phylogeny of parrotfish suggests a gradual shift from browsers living in seagrasses to excavators inhabiting rock and/or coral reefs to scrapers found exclusively in association with coral, with Sparisoma being considered the transitional genus (Streelman et al. 2002). It can be assumed that the Scarus genus has always had a habitat association with coral reefs as the Scarus genus is the third radiation off of the Sparisoma lineage (Streelman et al. 2002). Of the parrotfishes, S. guacamaia is the only species that possesses an obligate and functional dependence on the mangrove habitats (Nagelkerken 2007; Mumby 2006). This dependency has been shown quantitatively in the Mumby et al. (2004) study in which the species suffered local extinctions that corresponded with the removal of mangrove stands, and the extent of mangrove coverage in a region is one of the dominant factors in structuring reef communities. Mangrove connectivity enhances the biomass of rainbow parrotfish on neighboring coral reefs, because grazing influences the cover of macroalgae on reefs and high levels of parrotfish grazing has been shown to lead to a twofold increase in recruitment of Porites and Agaricia corals in the Bahamas (Mumby and Hastings 2008). Biomass of rainbow parrotfish has been shown to more than double when coral reefs were located adjacent to rich mangrove resources, defined as mangrove stands with 70 km or greater of fringing red mangrove Rhizophora mangle located in a region of 200 km2, equating to coverage of 35% (Mumby 2006). Juveniles of this species, those less than 30 cm total length (TL), are observed almost exclusively in mangrove habitats, while all individuals observed on the coral reef were greater than 25 cm TL (Dorenbosch 2006). Average sizes of 10.1 cm and 14.6 cm TL have been recorded in mangroves and seagrass beds, respectively (Nagelkerken et al. 2000). The species of juvenile reef fishes that utilize mangroves and seagrass beds do so because of the high food availability, the presence of shade and shelter that the mangroves provide, and a reduced risk of predation due to the plant and root configurations. There is also a lessened chance of interaction with predator species as well as low predator abundance and efficiency (Verweij et al. 2006). Shallow water habitats such as mangroves and seagrasses, are believed to contain less piscivores than the reef (Verweij et al. 2006) possibly because the energetic cost s of chasing the smaller fish in these habitats outweigh the gains of catching one of the prey fish. The turbidity of the water can also negatively affect predator efficiency due to scattering and reduction of light by suspended particles (Verweij et al. 2006). There is significant interannual variability in species composition that may be expected in mangrove fish communities, but spatial factors have been found to contribute more to differences in fish community structure than seasonality (Robertson and Duke 1990). Verweij et al. (2006) tested the effects of plant structure, shade, and food upon rainbow parrotfish foraging behavior using artificial seagrass leaves and artificial mangrove roots. Rainbow parrotfish showed the same trends as those of pooled herbivores, showing highly significant Poisson regression results for the tested variables of structure, food, structure*food, and location of the experimental unit. In this study, 72 individuals were observed ranging in size from 7.5-15.0 cm. The behavior observed was broken down into 2.8% of individuals resting (spaced evenly throughout the water column), 91.7% foraging, and 5.6% swimming. Eighty-four percent of the rainbow parrotfish observed foraging in the study were found in the artificial mangrove roots, with six percent foraging on artificial seagrass leaves. It was determined that the presence of higher surface area on the root structure provided more substrate for algae, which allowed for diurnal feeding (feeding that occurs in the da ytime) on the fouling algae and epiphytes in mangroves and seagrass beds. Rainbow parrotfish observed in this study were also found to be preferential to experimental units with the highest structural complexity. Caribbean region mangroves and seagrass beds function as foraging habitats, but are not used continuously as shelter during the daytime (Verweij et al. 2006). The value of these habitats is diminished with decreased water clarity from turbidity originating from terrestrial run-off, leading to population declines in this and other species (Freeman et al. 2008). Seagrass minimum light requirements differ between species and systems. Halodule and Syringodium seagrass species often require more than 24-37% surface light intensity (Freeman et al. 2008). These seagrass species consistently require minimum light levels that are an order of magnitude higher than the requirements of terrestrial plants or other photosynthetic marine organisms. Reduced subsurface light intensity has c aused seagrass declines and the subsequent re-suspension of unstabilized sediments has impeded recovery of these seagrass systems, increasing the pressure placed on species such as the rainbow parrotfish that depend on them (Freeman et al. 2008). However, presence of preferential habitat is not the only contributing factor determining abundance. It is possible that habitat configuration has an influence on the connectivity between mangroves, seagrasses, and coral reefs and this configuration in terms of providing pathways and connections to the reef affects fish assemblage composition, fish density and size, and species richness (Dorenbosch et al. 2007). Local recruitment patterns can also play a major role. In a study off Curaà §ao, juvenile densities on the reef were comparable to those in seagrass beds, suggesting that this species can also use the coral reef as a nursery (Dorenbosch et al. 2004). Dorenbosch et al. (2007) concluded that for rainbow parrotfish, migration among these habitats most likely takes place along the coastline. The presence of seagrass-mangrove bays along the coasts of these islands strongly influences the distribution pattern of this species on the coral reef (Dorenbosch et al. 2004). The absence of seagrass beds and mangroves was shown to lead to reduced density of those species that utilize seagrass-mangrove bays in juvenile stages (Dorenbosch et al. 2004). For island sites, this migration was observed to occur on the sheltered or leeward shores, where most adult individuals were observed on coral reefs between 0 and 10 km from mangroves. However, no significant linear relationship was present between mean total density of adult rainbow parrotfish on these reefs and the distance to the nearest stands of mangroves (Dorenbosch et al. 2006). There was also reduced density or complete absence of juvenile rainbow parrotfish on the coral reefs that were farther than nine kilometers from the mangrove and seagrass habitats used by fish of juvenile ages. The density of these species is additionally regulated on local scales by variable habitat structural complexity and the available vegetation. Herbivory, measured by rates of grazing, was found to be highest at the maximum habitat complexity site (Unsworth et al. 2007). This suggests that the increased shelter and food abundance provided by denser seagrass beds may have increased fish abundance resulting in these higher levels of herbivory (Unsworth et al. 2007). Herbivory was found to increase away from patchy seagrass areas whilst increasing distance from a reef reduced the rate of herbivory due to a reduction in fish migration. Observed high levels of herbivory, however, may only be a short-term effect of irregular grazing by shoals of juvenile and sub-adult scarids (Unsworth et al. 2007). Rainbow parrotfish migrate across habitats in accordance with its life history stage, and will grow as large as possible before moving on to the next habitat (Mumby et al. 2004). Utilization of intermediate nursery habitats has been hypothesized to increase survivorship of small fish (Mumby et al. 2004). The intermediate nursery stages between mangroves, seagrass beds, and patch reefs serve the function of alleviating predatory bottlenecks in early demersal ontogeny (Mumby et al. 2004). A predatory bottleneck occurs when pressure from predation prevents a large percentage of a population from reproducing. The presence of seagrass beds has also been linked to significantly higher densities of rainbow parrotfish on coral reefs (Dorenbosch et al. 2006) while other studies (e.g., Gonzalez-Salas et al. 2008) have found differing results with respect to these nursery habitats. Noting high abundance of juveniles and adult members of S. guacamaia in coral reef habitats and a total absence in mangrove stands, it appears that mangroves in certain regions do not function as obligate habitats and that seagrass and coral rubble become the primary alternative for nursery, growth, and reproduction (Gonzalez-Salas et al. 2008). It is possible that with removal of mangrove forests the rainbow parrotfish are adapting to utilize other habitats that offer similar survival benefits. The reduced benefits of these marginal habitats may not provide rainbow parrotfish with the resources necessary to survive across their entire life history, allowing only temporary survival through one life stage or another (Rummer et al. 2009). This selective use, which is defined as use of a particular habitat patch disproportionately relative to its availability, can be exhibited either seasonally or spatially, and proximity rather than suitability has been found as the dominant pattern of habitat use (Faunce and Serafy 2008). Mangrove shorelines across broad spatial scales are not equivalent in thei r value as fish habitats due to the inherent patchiness within the ecosystem. A measure of total habitat area may therefore overestimate the amount of functional habitat utilized by these fishes. In addition, species richness and total number of fishes collected adjacent to mangrove shorelines has been shown to decline with increasing inland distance from creek mouths and oceanic inlets, with water depth greatly related to fish use (Faunce and Serafy 2008). Rainbow parrotfish are valuable members of the communities with which they are associated. The grazing activities of these parrotfish are beneficial in preventing algal overgrowth and enhance coral reef resilience to algal blooms and other competitor species (Hughes et al. 2007). The species also facilitates settlement and survival of corals by scraping and bioeroding the hard dead coral substratum and are crucial for the regeneration and maintenance of coral reefs (Lokrantz et al. 2008). Rainbow parrotfish and other scarid species participate in not only the uptake of carbon into the food chain in their direct consumption of seagrass, but also indirectly contribute to the detrital food chain with the removal of decaying seagrass material, which potentially results in the widespread dispersal of seagrass material into surface waters. Detached seagrass may also be cast onto the shore where it decays and may re-enter the system as detritus (Unsworth et al. 2007). Rainbow parrotfish may be equally important in influencing seagrass export from the system by the high rates of material discarded during consumption. The unattached plant matter, estimated to be as high as 11% of seagrass growth, becomes subsequently removed from the system by weather and currents (Unsworth et al. 2007). This figure is in addition to the amount consumed in grazing which causes the loss of at least 16% of the seagrass growth each day (Unsworth et al. 2007). In spite of their ecological role and importance, S. guacamaia populations are thought to be in decline and to have been fished to ecological extinction in Brazil, as well as other areas of the Caribbean (Floeter 2006). Rainbow parrotfish has been listed as vulnerable on the IUCN Red List. This designation means the species is facing a high risk of extinction in the wild based on one or more of the following five criteria: reduction of population size, shrinking geographic range, a population with fewer than 10,000 mature individuals, restricted population extent, or quantitative analysis showing the probability of extinction in the wild is at least 10% within 100 years (the full explanation of which are detailed in the 2004 IUCN criteria; version 2.3, Roberts 1996). Given this information and the ecosystem role of the species developing a model that details occurrence provides a means to assess the health and function of this parrotfish in this region. In addition, one may apply the methods not only throughout the range of this species, but it may be possible to apply this model to other parrotfish species and similar families across the Florida Reef Tract and the Caribbean Sea. Characteristics of the Biscayne Bay and Florida Reef Tract Region The Biscayne Bay region receives high numbers of larvae from offshore spawning adults and functions as a source point for juveniles and adults to migrate to the reef tract (Wang et al. 2003). The region also contains some of the most pristine habitat within the Florida Keys (Ishman 1997). The coastal shelf of the Florida Keys is characterized by shallow and highly variable topography, where currents are influenced by tides, wind, and the very energetic offshore Florida current system (Haus et al. 2000). The eddies and meanders of the Florida Current make it possible for upwelling and larval transport to occur across the shelf, and the scale of these perturbations can vary from slow moving mesoscale gyres to faster moving, sub-mesoscale eddies (Haus et al. 2000). Velocities of these eddies can range from 0.53 m/s to 0.80 m/s along the inshore edge of the Florida Current (Haus et al. 2000) and the variability of those velocities can have an impact on dispersal and the resulting end loc ations of larvae (Haus et al. 2000). Patch reefs in this region occupy a significant portion of the water column, which leads to variability in the water depth. These protrusions have the potential to change the strength and direction of the tidal flow in the bay. The northern Florida Keys contain over 4,000 patch reefs, composed generally of cemented reef (47.3 +/- 2.2% cover) and pavement (20.1 +/- 2.1%), with varying amounts of rubble, boulders and sand (Kuffner et al. 2009). The benthic community observed on these patch reefs is largely dominated by macrophytes, encrusting invertebrates, and suitable settlement substratum found beneath a substantial canopy of gorgonian (soft) corals (Kuffner et al. 2009). Macroalgae occupies a large portion of space on the reefs, especially Dictyota spp. (15.4 +/- 0.8% cover) and Halimeda tuna (11.7 +/- 0.6% cover). Live scleractinian corals account for only 5.8+/- 0.6% of the benthos (Kuffner et al. 2009). The tides are generally weak, with a semidiurnal height range of approximately 0.5 m (Haus et al. 2000). As measured in Caesar Creek, tidal velocity can exceed 25 cm/s, while current measurements within the inlets have shown peak tidal velocities in excess of 50 cm/s (Haus et al. 2000). These channels commonly referred to as the ABC Channels because of their names: Angelfish Creek, Broad Creek, and Caesar Creek form the main outlet from the southern end of Biscayne Bay onto the Florida reef tract. The ABC Channels convey large oscillating tidal flows and wind driven flows between the bay and the ocean, and transport through these corridors predominantly shows a semi-diurnal cycle with amplitudes of 500 m3/s, 300 m3/s, and 250 m3/s respectively (Wang et al. 2003). Based on observations, there is a net outflow at Angelfish and Caesar Creek, but an inconsistent inflow in Broad Creek (Wang et al. 2003). With the tidal flows and the input of freshwater, the residence times of the water varies widely from several months in the more enclosed Barnes Sound and circulation-restricted Card Sound (Ishman 1997), to about a month in the western parts of South Biscayne Bay, and nearly zero in the vicinity of the ocean inlets (Wang et al. 2003). The area encompassing Biscayne Bay south to Card Sound and Barnes Sound forms a barrier island lagoon system that exhibits estuarine characteristics near points of freshwater inflow during the wet and early dry season (Wang et al. 2003). This lagoon system leads to broad salinity regimes that are highly variable throughout the year, and vary greatly across relatively small areas of only several kilometers due to high freshwater input through canals (as opposed to groundwater), and limited tidal flushing. Salinity variations in Biscayne Bay primarily result from canal discharges through gated control structures, as well as smaller freshwater exchanges in the Bay driven by overland runoff, rainfall, and evaporation (Wang et al. 2003) and upwelling from groundwater (Ishman 1997). The greatest salinity fluctuations occur near canal mouths in Barnes Sound and along the western margin of Biscayne Bay. The smallest fluctuation ranges were observed near ocean inlets (Wang et al. 2003), where the vertical variations of salinity in the water column ranged from less than 0.2 †° to a maximum salinity change of 0.8 †° from top to bottom in the vicinity of the inlet mouth (Haus et al. 2000). In the Pelican Bank region of Biscayne Bay (see Figure 10), good circulation results in regular flushing and average salinities range from 33 to 35 †° (Ishman 1997). Water flow characteristics in this region are also determined by a network of drainage canals used for agricultural and industrial purposes. These canals also function to control flooding, which has greatly altered the distribution of freshwater within the watershed, as well as the quantity, quality, and timing of freshwater discharges to Biscayne Bay (Wang et al. 2003). This has led to greater pulses with larger peak discharges in the wet season and less freshwater reaching Biscayne Bay in the dry season due to reduced terrestrial storage and lowered groundwater levels (Wang et al. 2003). Increased runoff not only affects salinity conditions in coastal waters, but also can be a mechanism for increased nutrient loading (Rudnick et al. 2006). There exists a coastal ridge, bisecting the Bay, which acts as a groundwater divide, with water west of the ridge flowing toward Florida Bay. The outputs of freshwater from the canals have punctured massive holes through the ridge, changing the d irection and characteristics of the flow, and the qualities of the watershed (Wang et al. 2003). This region also is characterized by large coverage of submerged aquatic vegetation such as seagrasses, and wide availability of phytoplankton, microalgal and macroalgal species. Florida Bay is approximately 2000 km2 in total surface area, with 95% bottom coverage of seagrasses, characterized by sparse, patchy beds of Thalassia testudinum interspersed with locally abundant Halodule wrightii (Fourqurean and Robblee 1999). However, in the spring of 1991, Florida Bay exhibited a shift from a system characterized by clear water to one of extensive and persistent turbidity and phytoplankton blooms, which limits the ability of the seagrass to grow and function properly by reducing penetration of light in the water column (Fourqurean and Robblee 1999). This seagrass die-off was not accompanied or preceded by noticeable decreases in water clarity or increases in colonization by epiphytes, however. There were many hypothesized causes for this die-off which include hypoxia and sulfide toxicity , the loss of the estuarine nature of the system, overdevelopment of the seagrass beds, chronic hypersal

Bankruptcy :: essays research papers

Chapter 7 Bankruptcy vs. Chapter 13 Bankruptcy   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Chapter 7 and Chapter 13 bankruptcies are full of advantages and disadvantages. But at the same time they are very different. Without knowing these differences a person could lose many things from money to possessions. Chapter 7 bankruptcy can wipe out most of ones debts but certainly not all of them. Certain kinds of debt are not covered by the terms of Chapter 7. Some examples of debts that must be paid after filing for bankruptcy would include child support, alimony, income taxes and penalties, student loans, and court ordered damages due to unfair and unrightous acts. Bankruptcy courts handle your financial problems until the case ends. A court assumes control of all ones debts that are owed and all property that is not exempted. A person, trustee, is appointed to be in charge of your debt. The trustee collects property that can be taken and sells it to repay some creditors. That property can be surrendered to the trustee, one may pay the market value of it or one also may choose to trade exempt property with nonexempt property. A small number of people actually lose property when filing bankruptcy. If a person changes their mind about filing for bankruptcy they may ask the court to dismiss the case. At the end of the process the court would discharge most of the debts and one is unable to file for Chapter 7 bankruptcy again for at least another six years.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Chapter 13 bankruptcy us mostly used to make up any type of debt payments and pay things off and in some cases it can be used to stop a foreclosure on a house. Chapter 13 bankruptcy cases usually last up to 5 years. During that time one would have to live under a strict budget that would require discipline. Most debtors that file for chapter 13 bankruptcy never pay back all their creditors all that they owe. That can ruin your credit because it stays on file for at least 10 years. Money management seminars are available to those that have paid 75% or more of their debt. Chapter 13 bankruptcy allows creditors to get at least some of their money back. Debtors keep all of their property and would out a compulsory, court-enforced plan to repay a portion of their debts over a certain period of time. With Chapter 13 bankruptcy some debts may be discharged but alimony and child support continue to be an obligation that must be fulfilled.

Mind Diminishing :: essays research papers

Mind Diminishing Reality TV seems to have taken over television in America today. Shows such as The Real World, Elimidate, American Idol, and Extreme Makeover are just a few of these reality TV shows that are being watched in our living rooms today. While many of these shows display the reality of day-to-day life of certain people, various reality television shows effect American society as many become idealistic to the people on the shows. Shows such as, The Swan and Extreme Make Over are shows that completely remake and rebuild one’s outer image. Episode after episode women change their weight, nose, lips, etc. by plastic surgery hoping to become â€Å"beautiful.† Unfortunately, The Swan and Extreme Make Over make transform the meaning of beauty on the show and hypnotize many into believing that beauty comes in a certain shape and form of skinny and thin. Skinny and thin may seem to be â€Å"reality† on television, where in actuality; the average American woman is about a size 8 and is going to grow as obesity has spread throughout the U.S. The Swan and Extreme Make Over are shows that are far from reality and diminish the minds of young women in America as they brainwash these teens to completely change whom they are just to be accepted and acknowledged in a society based on looks and outer beauty. The Swan and Extreme Make Over are similar reality TV shows that turn the† ugly" into "beautiful" through plastic surgery. Both reality television shows begin with women who have self-issues on how they look as well as issues with their self-confidence. The people in these shows have no physical features wrong with them what so ever, they unfortunately are just not content with themselves. They begin on these shows hoping to change one or two body parts, yet, undergo whole head to toe transformations. From liposuction, tummy tucks, lip and breast enhancement, the women end up looking completely different. The participants on The Swan and Extreme Make Over are mainly women who do not fit society’s norm of what we call beautiful, as society has a certain form of beauty. Beauty is tall, skinny, and long legged. Women appear on The Swan and Extreme Make Over hoping to completely change their outer looks as well as gain self-confidence and self worth within themselves. While the makeovers only change their outer looks, they cannot change deep feelings that are really going on in ones head.

Karl Marxs Estranged Labor Essay example -- essays research papers fc

Karl Marx's Estranged Labor In Karl Marx's early writing on "estranged labor" there is a clear and prevailing focus on the plight of the laborer. Marx's writing on estranged labor is an attempt to draw a stark distinction between property owners and workers. In the writing Marx argues that the worker becomes estranged from his labor because he is not the recipient of the product he creates. As a result labor is objectified, that is labor becomes the object of mans existence. As labor is objectified man becomes disillusioned and enslaved. Marx argues that man becomes to be viewed as a commodity worth only the labor he creates and man is further reduced to a subsisting animal void of any capacity of freedom except the will to labor. For Marx this all leads to the emergence of private property, the enemy of the proletariat. In fact Marx's writing on estranged labor is a repudiation of private property- a warning of how private property enslaves the worker. This writing on estranged labor is an obvious point of basis for Marx's Communist Manifesto. The purpose of this paper is to view Marx's concept of alienation (estranged labor) and how it limits freedom. For Marx man's freedom is relinquished or in fact wrested from his true nature once he becomes a laborer. This process is thoroughly explained throughout Estranged Labor. This study will reveal this process and argue it's validity. Appendant to this study on alienation there will be a micro-study which will attempt to ascertain Marx's view of freedom (i.e. positive or negative). The study on alienation in conjunction with the micro-study on Marx's view of freedom will help not only reveal why Marx feels labor limits mans freedom, but it will also identify exactly what kind of freedom is being limited. Karl Marx identifies estranged labor as labor alien to man. Marx explains the condition of estranged labor as the result of man participating in an institution alien to his nature. It is my interpretation that man is alienated from his labor because he is not the reaper of what he sows. Because he is never the recipient of his efforts the laborer lacks identity with what he creates. For Marx then labor is "alien to the worker...[and]...does not belong to his essential being." Marx identifies two expla... ...gative liberty. He states "...[private] property is...the right to enjoy ones fortune and dispose of it as one will; without regard for other men and independently of society." Private property for Marx is the mechanism by which man can be separate from other men and pursue his (negative) liberty. Marx's writings on estranged labor and in The Communist Manifesto are a clear repudiation of private property. What can be deduced then is that Marx does not favor negative liberties. Negative liberties require private property to exist and private property is for Marx the enslaver of the proletariat. With negative freedom eliminated from the discussion we are left with Positive or prescribed freedoms. Positive freedom, as was identified above, is the freedom to pursue specified options. That is, freedom to do certain things. Man is not necessarily given a choice of what these options are, he is simply free to pursue them whatever they may be. Positive freedoms then are the freedoms Marx likely wishes to uphold by denouncing estranged labor.Bibliography Bibliography 1Marx, Karl, The Early Marx, 2Marx, Karl and Engles, Freidrich, The Communist Manifesto, London, England, 1888

Community Development

Community Development Planning Lecture 1: Understanding the key concepts of Community, Community Development & Economic Development Course Learning Outcomes †¢ Explain the key concepts of social infrastructure in spatial planning †¢ Analyze social infrastructure issues in spatial planning †¢ Identify the various challenges of social infrastructure in spatial planning practices Community †¢ Various definitions: ? People who live within a geographically defined area and who have social and psychological ties with each other and with the place where they live (Mattessich and Monsey, 2004) ?A grouping of people who live close to one another and are united by common interests and mutual aids (National Research Council 1975) †¢ These definitions refer to people and the ties that bind them, then only to geographic locations †¢ It means, without people and the connections/ties, community will be only a collections of buildings and streets. †¢ However commun ity does not necessarily means â€Å"living physically close to one another†.It also refers to social connections at other than living place such as workplace, sports centre, clubs or groups, or political affiliations. †¢ Community can also be created through special interest or conditions such as disability, gender, belief †¢ In this era of social media (such as FB, Twitter) madness, communities can be created on virtual platform. Community Development (CD) †¢ Community Development is defined and described as.. – the process of developing stronger communities of people and the social and psychological ties they share. The educational process to enable citizens to address problems by group decision-making – Involvement in a process to achieve improvement in some aspect of community life – All these processes will result in an outcome which is the improvement of community capital. Community Capital Human Capital †¢ Labour supply, skills , experience, capabilities Physical Capital †¢ Buildings, streets, infrastructure Financial Capital †¢ Community financial institutions, micro loan funds, community development banksEnvironmental Capital †¢ Natural resources, weather, recreational opportunities Social Capital Social Capital †¢ Social Capital refers to the ability of residents to organize and mobilize their resources for the accomplishment of consensual defined goals †¢ It refers to the extent to which members of a community can work together effectively to develop and sustain strong relationships, solve problems and make group decisions, and collaborate effectively to achieve common goalsSocial Capital †¢ Some scholars make distinction between bonding capital and bridging capital †¢ Bonding capital refers to ties within homogenous groups (e. g. races, gender, people with the same economic background) †¢ Bridging capital refers to ties among different groups Community developme nt chains Capacity building process Developing the ability to act Social capital Ability to act Community development outcome Taking action Community improvement Development ready communityEconomic development †¢ Community development and economic development is highly sinergistic. †¢ Community development – a planned effort to produce assets that increase the capacity of residents to improve their quality of life. The assets include: physical, human, social, financial, environmental †¢ Economic development – the process of creating wealth through the mobilization of human, financial, capital, physical and natural resources to generate marketable goods and services. The definitions are clearly parallel : community development is to produce and improve assets, economic development is to mobilize these assets which will bring greater benefits for the community ie. more goods, services, jobs etc. †¢ Both types of development are highly dependable on ea ch other as most businesses will look for development-ready communities that are equipped with strong and established communities, good infrastructure, abundant supply of labour, safety, telecommunication etc.Community and economic development chains Community development outcome Taking action Community improvement Development ready community Economic development outcome Job creation Increased income and wealth Increased standard of living Capacity building process Developing the ability to act Social capital Ability to act Economic development process Creating and maintaining ED programs Mobilizing resources The end Community Development Community Development Planning Lecture 1: Understanding the key concepts of Community, Community Development & Economic Development Course Learning Outcomes †¢ Explain the key concepts of social infrastructure in spatial planning †¢ Analyze social infrastructure issues in spatial planning †¢ Identify the various challenges of social infrastructure in spatial planning practices Community †¢ Various definitions: ? People who live within a geographically defined area and who have social and psychological ties with each other and with the place where they live (Mattessich and Monsey, 2004) ?A grouping of people who live close to one another and are united by common interests and mutual aids (National Research Council 1975) †¢ These definitions refer to people and the ties that bind them, then only to geographic locations †¢ It means, without people and the connections/ties, community will be only a collections of buildings and streets. †¢ However commun ity does not necessarily means â€Å"living physically close to one another†.It also refers to social connections at other than living place such as workplace, sports centre, clubs or groups, or political affiliations. †¢ Community can also be created through special interest or conditions such as disability, gender, belief †¢ In this era of social media (such as FB, Twitter) madness, communities can be created on virtual platform. Community Development (CD) †¢ Community Development is defined and described as.. – the process of developing stronger communities of people and the social and psychological ties they share. The educational process to enable citizens to address problems by group decision-making – Involvement in a process to achieve improvement in some aspect of community life – All these processes will result in an outcome which is the improvement of community capital. Community Capital Human Capital †¢ Labour supply, skills , experience, capabilities Physical Capital †¢ Buildings, streets, infrastructure Financial Capital †¢ Community financial institutions, micro loan funds, community development banksEnvironmental Capital †¢ Natural resources, weather, recreational opportunities Social Capital Social Capital †¢ Social Capital refers to the ability of residents to organize and mobilize their resources for the accomplishment of consensual defined goals †¢ It refers to the extent to which members of a community can work together effectively to develop and sustain strong relationships, solve problems and make group decisions, and collaborate effectively to achieve common goalsSocial Capital †¢ Some scholars make distinction between bonding capital and bridging capital †¢ Bonding capital refers to ties within homogenous groups (e. g. races, gender, people with the same economic background) †¢ Bridging capital refers to ties among different groups Community developme nt chains Capacity building process Developing the ability to act Social capital Ability to act Community development outcome Taking action Community improvement Development ready communityEconomic development †¢ Community development and economic development is highly sinergistic. †¢ Community development – a planned effort to produce assets that increase the capacity of residents to improve their quality of life. The assets include: physical, human, social, financial, environmental †¢ Economic development – the process of creating wealth through the mobilization of human, financial, capital, physical and natural resources to generate marketable goods and services. The definitions are clearly parallel : community development is to produce and improve assets, economic development is to mobilize these assets which will bring greater benefits for the community ie. more goods, services, jobs etc. †¢ Both types of development are highly dependable on ea ch other as most businesses will look for development-ready communities that are equipped with strong and established communities, good infrastructure, abundant supply of labour, safety, telecommunication etc.Community and economic development chains Community development outcome Taking action Community improvement Development ready community Economic development outcome Job creation Increased income and wealth Increased standard of living Capacity building process Developing the ability to act Social capital Ability to act Economic development process Creating and maintaining ED programs Mobilizing resources The end