Animals and ecosystem: Validity of the laws of nature.
“Every action made by nature cannot be done in a shorter way with the same means” (Leonardo Da Vinci[1]
Let’s imagine a huge and perfect machine the gears of which are all in connection among them, the movement of the smallest of them influences all the others.
It happens similarly in nature where all living beings, but also elements (air, water, land, rains, gas….) are linked one another through relations of interaction the study of which was defined with the word ecology.
Every organism, both plants and animals, is considered as a set. The different sets react among them, linking up or rather turning into more complex sets which changes in the environment continually modify.
Each of the elements in a system can become a part of another in an everlasting changing the final result of which is, anyway, homeostasis.
The complex of all this, as far as the whole land is concerned, is known as ecosystem.
All the elements of ecosystem aim at balance [2].
Let’s imagine, instead of the gears of our machine, more animal species where every creature tries to survive and reproduce. All this implies that every species tends to increase endlessly, depriving, this way, other species of space and resources.
In order to keep balance among these species,nature has selected a regulating system at genetic feedback [3] (genetic retroaction or negative retroaction).
This mechanism involves herbivores and plants, predators and preys, parasites and hosts.
As a particular population, animals in our study, increases numerically, some inferior genetic types are generated. The word “inferior” doesn’t have to deceive us and we could replace it with”susceptible or sensitive“.
Anyway inferior genetic types are weaker and therefore they are subjected, more easily, to the classical factors of numerical reduction of animals: predation, food want, competition, diseases.
As it was established by E B Ford [4], [5], numerical increase, inevitably, leads to reduction and vice versa; so we have some fluctuations with periods in which population may be, numerically, higher or lower.
Once the number of animal population is reduced, selective pressure ceases and original genetic types return because nature tends to genetic homeostasis.
If a population of gazelles tends to increase numerically, at a certain point, cubs, sick weak and unfit to run and escape from predators, are generated. Shortly after, under the pressure of predators which represent, in this case, the natural selection, these weak creatures disappear and the original population, under a genetic point of view, is restored.
The same happens among predators: as the number of gazelles increases, lions, having more food at their disposal, reproduce more easily, breed more cubs and risk autoestinction (because of the same estinction of preys). At this point, even among lions, inferior genetic types start to appear: weaker, less fit to running and predation. The latter are less fit to survival and they can hardly reproduce, so the population of lions tends to return to the original condition from a genetic point of view.
[1] Leonardo Da Vinci. Codice Arundel, foglio 175(1478-1518). British Lbrary London. Reprinted in Leonardo Da Vinci Scritti Letterari, pgg.66. BUR Milano 1991.
[2] Heish, quoted in: The Ecology of plague by Pollitzer R and Meyer Kand F. Chapter 13 pgg.474 of Studies in Disease Ecology Edited by May J M Hafner Publishing Company, INC New York,1961.
[3] Pimentel D. Animal population regulation by the genetic feedback mechanism. Am Nat XCV: 881, pgg.67-79.
[4] Ford E B. Mendelism and evolution, pgg.122. Methuen and CO.LTD London 1931.
[5 Ford H D and Ford E B. Fluttuation in number, and its influence on variation, in Melitea Aurina, Rott. (Lepidoptera). Trans Entom Soc 78:345-51 London 1930.
[6] Elton C S. Plagues and the regulation of numbers in wild mammals. J Hyg 24(2):138-163. London 1925
[7] Elton C S: Research on rodent control by The Bureau of Animal Population. Sept 1939-July 1947. London 1954
[8] Pimentel D. Op. e Pag.cit.
[9] Ratcliffe F N, Meyers K, Fenessy B V and Calaby J H.Myxomatosis in Australia A Step Towards the biological control of the Rabbit. Nature N.4134 July5,1952 Pgg.7-11
[10] Myers K. Marshall I D and Fenner F. Studies in the Epidemiology of Infectious Myxomatosis of Rabbits. III. Observations on two succeding Epizootics in Austrialian Wild Rabbits on the Riverine Plain of South-Eastern Australia. 1951-1953. J Hyg 52(3): 337-360 1954
[11] Fenner F,Marshall I D A Comparison of the Virulence for European Rabbits (Oryctolagus cuniculus) of Strains of Mixoma Virus Recovered in the Field in Australia, Europe and America J Hyg.55,2:149-191.1957
[12] Fenner F,Meyers K. Myxomavirus and Myxomatosis in retrospect, the first quarter century of a new disease. Pgg.539-570 in Kurstak E and Maranosh EDS. Viruses and Environment 3D International Conference on Comparative Virology. Mont Gabriel,Quebec.1978
[13]Pimentel D Op e Pag.cit.
To be contnued in:
2°)Mechanism at negative retroaction or genetic feedback 2/4
3°)Mechanism at negative retroaction or genetic feedback 3/4
4°)Mechanism at negative retroaction or genetic feedback 4/4
Translated from “Il Virus Intelliente” by Enrica Narducci
Ferdinando Gargiulo offers you a new perspective on why new viral epidemics, assaults, infanticides, suicide epidemics and even environmental catastrophes. Always engaged in his research decides to create a blog to offer his readers content of high value.