Article Title: On The Termination of Species Author/Source:W.

Wayt Gibbs

A: List the major ideas, concepts or key points- point by point - Im just glad Im retiring soon and wont be around to see everything disappear, said P. Dee Boersma. - Their bias toward mammals, birds and fish undermines scientists ability to predict reliably the scope and consequences of biodiversity loss. - Why we care about the planets portfolio of species and its diminishment. - The three kinds of argument we use to try to persuade politicians that all this is important none is totally compelling. - Danish statistician Bjorn Lomborg says the reports of death of biodiversity are exaggerated. Internal uncertainty and public apathy, scientists question the conservation movement's overriding emphasis on preserving rare species and threatened hotspots in which they are concentrated. - Mays claim that humans appear to be causing a cataclysm of extinctions more severe than any since the one that erased the dinosaurs 65 million years ago may shock those who havent followed the biodiversity issue. - And in a 1998 survey of biologists, 70 percent said they believed that a mass extinction is in progress; a third of them expected to lose 20 to 50 percent of the worlds species within 30 years. - May's claim will shock those who haven't followed the biodiversity issue, but prompt no gasp from conservation biologists. They heard variations of this since 1979 - Their calculations are seriously flawed by three flawed by three false assumptions. - One is that species of plants, mammals, insects, marine invertebrates and other groups all exist for about the same time by a factor of 10 or more, with mammal species among the least durable. - Second, they assume that all organisms have an equal chance of making it into the fossil record. - The third problem is that May and Wilson use an average life span when they should use a median.

- Over the past 200 years, he gures, the rate of loss among mammal species has been some 120 times higher than natural. - They certied 60 of the 87 mammals listed by IUCN as extinct but claim that only 33 of the 92 freshwater sh presumed extinct by IUCN are denitely gone forever. - For every species falsely presumed absent, however, there may be hundreds or thousands that vanish unknown to science. - Even invertebrates known to be extinct often go unrecorded: when the passenger pigeon was eliminated in 1914, it took two species of parasitic lice with it. They still do not appear on IUCNs list. - Kevin Higgings presented a computer model that tracks artificial organisms in population, simulating genetic mutation rates, reproductive behavior and ecological interactions. Found that in small population, mutations are mild enough that natural selection doesn't filter them out which shortens time to extinction. - We have more time than we fear to prevent future catastrophes in areas where humans have been part of ecosystem for a while and less time to avoid them in what little wilderness remains pristine. - Losses of species are inevitable. Many believe saving evolution is the most important rather than species. B: Summarize the AUTHORs main point or idea- at LEAST 1-2 paragraphs Why we care about the planets portfolio of species and its diminishment. Mays claim that humans appear to be causing a cataclysm of extinctions more severe than any since the one that erased the dinosaurs 65 million years ago may shock those who havent followed the biodiversity issue. Their calculations are seriously flawed by three flawed by three false assumptions. One is that species of plants, mammals, insects, marine invertebrates and other groups all exist for about the same time by a factor of 10 or more, with mammal species among the least durable. Second, they assume that all organisms have an equal chance of making it into the fossil record. The third problem is that May and Wilson use an average life span when they should use a median.

C: Write a reaction paragraph to the article stating your own thoughts on the topic, using specific citations from the article to support your views Over the past 200 years, he gures, the rate of loss among mammal species has been some 120 times higher than natural. I believe that there is an unknown of the real rate of extinction; its difficult to calculate or determine the rate of extinction. For every species falsely presumed absent, however, there may be hundreds or thousands that vanish unknown to science.

So What? Its hard to find the current rate of extinction Its hard to protect the species

Say Who? W. Wayyt Gibbs Robert M. May- Oxford Zoologist Ross D. E. MacPhee- curator of mammalogy Kevin Higgins-Of University of Oregon Woodruff-Ecologist at University of California at San Diego

What If? We know exactly the current rate of extinction? - We could know how many species will lose - We could find the way to protect them

What Does This Remind Me Of? Sudoku- If we can find a number, and then we can find the next number. Just like if we can know the exactly current rate of extinction, then we can know the rate of losing animal and how to protect them.