21. Mammoth Hair Holds New DNA Source | Science Buzz Mammoth skeleton at the American Museum of Natural History Photo by Mark prehistoric animals mammoths mitochondria DNA genetics paleontology http://www.sciencebuzz.org/blog/mammoth_hair_holds_new_dna_source

@import "sites/all/themes/science_buzz/screen.css"; @import "sites/all/themes/science_buzz/print.css"; Site Navigation Blog Create content Topics Using Earth, Transforming Earth ... Help Be part of the buzz... Login/Register Mammoth hair holds new DNA source by mdr on Oct. 01st, 2007 in Life Science Diversity of Organisms Heredity , and Biological Populations Change Over Time comment Add a new comment Mammoth skeleton at the American Museum of Natural History: Photo by Mark Ryan. A new abundant source of viable DNA has been discovered in the preserved hair of woolly mammoths , those great ancient elephants that once roamed the Pleistocene landscape. The new “life molecule” source opens a whole new world of study of not only mammoths, but a whole array of extinct mammalian species including musk ox, wooly rhinoceros, and even ancient man. Prior to the discovery - the results of which appear in Science magazine - researchers regarded hair shafts as a poor source for mitochondrial DNA. Researchers used to glean the DNA by extracting it from the ground-up bone material or preserved muscle. Unfortunately, that DNA is susceptible to rapid breakdown soon after death due to bacteria contamination and exposure to the elements. “DNA from hair is very clean because it has been encapsulated in keratin, a kind of plastic membrane that protects the hair and the DNA,” explained Thomas Gilbert, one of the study’s authors and a researcher at the University of Copenhagen in Denmark. The research team included scientists from Penn State, and an international consortium of scientists and museum curators.

22. YouTube - Abiwoollcott25's Channel ●Fav prehistoric animals Mammoths, sabretooth tigers and dire-wolves. I like looking up some dinosaurs too^^ ●Celeb/toon crushes I have many but I love Morton (from Horton http://www.youtube.com/user/abiwoollcott25

23. UK Against Fluoridation: May 2006 My family ran an archaeological and paleontological society and dug for fossils in the area known as Bone Valley for prehistoric animals — mammoths, mastodons, sabertoothed http://ukagainstfluoride.blogspot.com/2006_05_01_archive.html

var BL_backlinkURL = "http://www.blogger.com/dyn-js/backlink_count.js";var BL_blogId = "12067496"; UK Against Fluoridation Wednesday, May 31, 2006 USA - logic but will they listen? Fluoride not beneficial Bob Kopitzke The Coloradoan recently published a series of letters stating that the National Research Council's report on fluoride is not relevant to Fort Collins. Not true, under the heading Fluoride in Drinking Water, Page 12, are two subheads natural and artificial: fluoridation of drinking water. Page 13, "this report does not evaluate nor make judgments about the benefits, safety or efficacy of artificial water fluoridation. That practice is reviewed only in terms of being a source of exposure to fluoride." Page 20, "The major dietary source of fluoride for most people in the United States is fluoridated municipal drinking water, including water consumed directly, food and beverages prepared from municipal drinking water and commercial beverages and foods originating from fluoridated municipalities." The NRC report makes it clear that the maximum contaminate level goal would have to be 2 ppm to protect against just one health effect: severe dental fluorosis, pp 93-4. Accepting 2 ppm as the MCGL assumes that a child could develop severe dental fluorosis without being impacted in any other way. Pages 192-193 cite several studies showing a correlation of dental fluorosis with goiter and of increasing fluoride and goiter where fluoride concentration is less than 40 percent of Fort Collins water level at 1 ppm. It is preposterous to think that we can operate between a "beneficial" level of 1 ppm and a toxic level of 2 ppm without controlling how much water or food people consume. This absurd assumption flies in the face of the NRC exposure analysis.

A  B  C  D  E  F  G  H  I  J  K  L  M  N  O  P  Q  R  S  T  U  V  W  X  Y  Z

Page 2     21-23 of 23    Back | 1  | 2