Tag Archives: sheep

Artists classified the animal kingdom?

Where taxonomy and biology are concerned, my knowledge begins and end with Carl Linnaeus, the Swedish scientist who ushered in modern taxonomy. It was with some surprise that I find out artists also helped develop the field. From a June 21, 2016 news item on ScienceDaily,

In the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries artists were fascinated by how the animal kingdom was classified. They were in some instances ahead of natural historians.

This is one of the findings of art historian Marrigje Rikken. She will defend her PhD on 23 June [2016] on animal images in visual art. In recent years she has studied how images of animals between 1550 and 1630 became an art genre in themselves. ‘The close relationship between science and art at that time was remarkable,’ Rikken comments. ‘Artists tried to bring some order to the animal kingdom, just as biologists did.’

A June 21, 2016 Universiteit Leiden (Leiden University, Netherlands) press release, which originated the news item, expands on the theme,

In some cases the artists were ahead of their times. They became interested in insects, for example, before they attracted the attention of natural historians. It was artist Joris Hoefnagel who in 1575 made the first miniatures featuring beetles, butterflies and dragonflies, indicating how they were related to one another. In his four albums Hoefnagel divided the animal species according to the elements of fire, water, air and earth, but within these classifications he grouped animals on the basis of shared characteristics.

Courtesy: Universiteit Leiden

Beetles, butterflies, and dragonflies by Joris Hoefnagel. Courtesy: Universiteit Leiden

The press release goes on,

Other illustrators, print-makers and painters tried to bring some cohesion to the animal kingdom.  Some of them used an alphabetical system but artist Marcus Gheeraerts  published a print as early as 1583 [visible below, Ed.] in which grouped even-toed ungulates together. The giraffe and sheep – both visible on Gheeraerts’ print – belong to this species of animals. This doesn’t apply to all Gheeraerts’ animals. The mythical unicorn, which was featured by Gheeraerts, no longer appears in contemporary biology books.

Wealthy courtiers

According to Rikken, the so-called menageries played an important role historically in how animals were represented. These forerunners of today’s zoos were popular in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries particularly among wealthy rulers and courtiers. Unfamiliar exotic animals regularly arrived that were immediately committed to paper by artists. Rikken: ‘The toucan, for example, was immortalised in 1615 by Jan Brueghel the Elder, court painter in Brussels.’  [See the main image, Ed.].’

In the flesh

Rikken also discovered that the number of animals featured in a work gradually increased. ‘Artists from the 1570s generally included one or just a few animals per work. With the arrival of print series a decade later, each illustration tended to include more and more animals. This trend reached its peak in the lavish paintings produced around 1600.’ These paintings are also much more varied than the drawings and prints. Illustrators and print-makers often blindly copied one another’s motifs, even showing the animals in an identical pose. Artists had no hesitation in including the same animal in different positions. Rikken: ‘This allowed them to show that they had observed the animal in the flesh.’

Even-toed ungulates by Marcus Gheeraerts. Courtesy: Leiden Universiteit

Even-toed ungulates by Marcus Gheeraerts. Courtesy: Leiden Universiteit

Yet more proof or, at least, a very strong suggestion that art and science are tightly linked.

Animal technology: a touchscreen for your dog, sonar lunch orders for dolphins, and more

A rather unexpected (for ignorant folks like me) approach to animal technology has been taken by Ilyena Hirskyj-Douglas in her June 17, 2016 piece on phys.org,

Imagine leaving your dog at home while it turns on the smart TV and chooses a programme to watch. Meanwhile you visit a zoo where you play interactive touchscreen games with the apes and watch the dolphins using sonar to order their lunch. In the field behind you, a farmer is stroking his flock of chickens virtually, leaving the drones to collect sheep while the cows milk themselves. Welcome to the unusual world of animal technology.

Hirskyj-Douglas’s piece was originally published as a June 15, 2016 essay  about animal-computer interaction (ACI) and some of the latest work being done in the field on The Conversation website (Note: Links have been removed),

Animals have interacted with technology for a long time, from tracking devices for conservation research to zoos with early touchscreen computers. But more recently, the field of animal-computer interaction (ACI) has begun to explore in more detail exactly how animals use technology like this. The hope is that better understanding animals’ relationship with technology will means we can use it to monitor and improve their welfare.

My own research involves building intelligent tracking devices for dogs that let them interact with media on a screen so we can study how dogs use TV and what they like to watch (if anything). Perhaps unsurprisingly, I’ve found that dogs like to watch videos of other dogs. This has led me to track dogs dogs’ gaze across individual and multiple screens and attempts to work out how best to make media just for dogs.

Eventually I hope to make an interactive system that allows a dog to pick what they want to watch and that evolves by learning what media they like. This isn’t to create a toy for indulgent pet owners. Dogs are often left at home alone during the day or isolated in kennels. So interactive media technology could improve the animals’ welfare by providing a stimulus and a source of entertainment. …

This 2014 video (embedded in Hirskyj-Douglas’s essay) illustrates how touchscreens are used by great apes,

It’s all quite intriguing and I encourage you to read the essay in it entirety.

If you find the great apes project interesting, you can find  out more about it (I believe it’s in the Primate Research category) and others at the Atlanta Zoo’s research webpage.

Murdoch University (Australia) encourages* bone formation in sheep

It’s time to finally publish this which has been languishing in drafts folder: from a Sept. 16, 2014 news item on Nanowerk (Note: A link has been removed),

Murdoch University [Australia] nanotechnology researchers have successfully engineered synthetic materials which encouraged bone formation in sheep (“The synthesis, characterisation and in vivo study of a bioceramic for potential tissue regeneration applications”).

The advancement means the successful use of synthetic materials in bone grafts for human patients is a step closer. The material could also have potential future applications in fracture repair and reconstructive surgery.

A Sept. 16, 2014 Murdoch University news release, which originated the news item, notes

Currently the patient’s own bone, donated bone or artificial materials are used for bone grafts but limitations with all these options have prompted researchers to investigate how synthetic materials can be enhanced.

Dr Eddy Poinern and his team from the Murdoch Applied Nanotechnology Research Group worked with powdered forms of the bio ceramic hydroxyapatite (HAP) to form pellets with a sponge-like structure which were then successfully implanted behind the shoulders of four sheep by collaborators from the School of Veterinary and Life Sciences at Murdoch University.

HAP is already being used in a number of biomedical applications such as bone augmentation in dentistry because of its similarity to the inorganic mineral component of human bone. But treatments of HAP so that it can be successfully used in a bone graft have yet to be developed because of the complexities involved with compatibility and HAP’s load bearing limitations.

The news release goes on to provide a few technical details,

Dr Poinern and his team prepared pellets with varying density and porosity using a variety of chemical methods including sintering, ultrasound and microwaves. Four pellets were implanted into muscles in each of the sheep, later demonstrating good bio-compatibility, including mixed cell colonisation after four weeks and even new bone formation 12 weeks after the surgery.

“Using synthetic materials in this way is difficult and complicated because they need to be engineered to be porous and to replicate the various physical, chemical and mechanical properties found in natural bone tissue,” explained Dr Poinern.

“They also need to be non-toxic and have a degradation rate which will allow for cells from the host to steadily recolonize the area and permit the formation of blood vessels necessary for the delivery of nutrients to the forming bone tissues.

“We already knew that synthetic HAP was a good material to study for possible use in bone-related medicine, but we needed to find out if the pellets we’d engineered were bio-compatible.

“Our results were very positive – our pellets acted as a scaffold for the growth of bone material, made possible because of its porous properties allowing cells to infiltrate.

“The pellets were also very cost effective to make.”

Although the study was small scale and originally intended to test the bio-compatibility of the HAP pellets, the bone growth was beyond what the interdisciplinary team expected.

Associate Professor Martin Cake, who surgically implanted the pellets into the sheep, described the results as “stunning” and said they boded well for the use of engineered HAP in bone implants.

“This material begins as a powder that can be theoretically moulded to any shape, or perhaps one day even 3D printed, then sintered to harden it,” he said.

Dr Poinern said he was hoping to improve and match the physical and mechanical properties of the pellets with those of natural bone tissue in a new study.

“Once these properties have been achieved, further implantation studies will be carried out to establish the feasibility of using this scaffold for bone grafts,” he said.

Here’s a link to and a citation for the paper,

The synthesis, characterisation and in vivo study of a bioceramic for potential tissue regeneration applications by Gérrard Eddy Jai Poinern, Ravi Krishna Brundavanam, Xuan Thi Le, Philip K. Nicholls, Martin A. Cake, & Derek Fawcett. Scientific Reports 4, Article number: 6235 doi:10.1038/srep06235 Published 29 August 2014

This paper is open access.

This news release included information of a type I haven’t previously seen included,

The implantation study was carried out in non pregnant Merino ewes with the approval of Murdoch University’s Animal Ethics Committee and all experiments were conducted in accordance with the Australian National Health and Medical Research Council’s (NHMRC) Code of Practice for the care and use of animals for scientific purposes.

In accordance with the ethical principles of the Code, the sheep were simultaneously used in an unrelated trial involving surgery of the stifle joints.

After the pellets were removed, the sheep were humanely euthanased.

I’m glad to see the information and hope more research groups follow suit.

One final note, Murdoch University, Eddy Poinern, and Dereck Fawcett have been mentioned here before in an Aug. 1, 2014 posting about ‘green’ chemistry involving eucalyptus leaves, and gold nanoparticles.

* ‘encourage’ corrected to ‘encourages’ on Oct. 7, 2014 at 1315 hours PDT.