Dolphins Have Longest Memories in Animal Kingdom

Marine mammals can remember their friends after 20 years apart, study says.

New experiments show that bottlenose dolphins can remember whistles of other dolphins they’d lived with after 20 years of separation. Each dolphin has a unique whistle that functions like a name, allowing the marine mammals to keep close social bonds.

The new research shows that dolphins have the longest memory yet known in any species other than people. Elephants and chimpanzees are thought to have similar abilities, but they haven’t yet been tested, said study author Jason Bruck, an animal behaviorist at the University of Chicago.

Bruck came up with the idea to study animal memory when his brother’s dog, usually wary of male strangers, remembered and greeted him four years after last seeing him. “That got me thinking: How long do other animals remember each other?”

I Remember You!

Bruck studied dolphins because their social bonds are extremely important and because there are good records for captive dolphins (as opposed to wild ones).

So he collected data from 43 bottlenose dolphins at six facilities in the U.S. and Bermuda, members of a breeding consortium that has swapped dolphins for decades and kept careful records of each animal’s social partners.

He first played recordings of lots of unfamiliar whistles to the dolphins in the study until the subjects got bored and stopped inspecting the underwater speaker making the sounds.

At this point, he played the whistles of the listening dolphins’ old friends.

When the dolphins heard these familiar whistles, they would perk up and approach the speakers, often whistling their own name and listening for a response.

Overall, the dolphins responded more to animals they’d known decades ago than to random animals—suggesting they recognized their former companions, according to the study, published recently in Proceedings of the Royal Society B.

Cheeky Dolphins

Working with animals as intelligent as dolphins was a challenge, Bruck added. The animals loved participating in the experiment so much that they’d often hover over the speaker, blocking the noise.

Others would begin “whistling directly at me as if I could understand them,” he said.

And one set of cheeky young dolphins swam up to Bruck and started whistling the names of the dominant males in their group in order of rank, perhaps suggesting the names they wanted to hear, Bruck said.

Memory Linked to Smarts?

Why dolphins—which live an average of 20 years in the wild—need long-term memory is still unknown. But it may have to do with maintaining relationships, since over time dolphin groups often break up and reorganize into new alliances.

This sort of social system is called “fission-fusion,” and it’s also seen in elephants and chimpanzees—two other highly intelligent and social beings.

Coincidence? Bruck suspects not: “It seems that maybe complex cognition comes from a place of trying to remember who your buddies are,” he said.

Monogamy’s Boost to Human Evolution

“Monogamy is a problem,” said Dieter Lukas of the University of Cambridge in a telephone news conference this week. As Dr. Lukas explained to reporters, he and other biologists consider monogamy an evolutionary puzzle.

In 9 percent of all mammal species, males and females will share a common territory for more than one breeding season, and in some cases bond for life. This is a problem — a scientific one — because male mammals could theoretically have more offspring by giving up on monogamy and mating with lots of females.

In a new study, Dr. Lukas and his colleague Tim Clutton-Brock suggest that monogamy evolves when females spread out, making it hard for a male to travel around and fend off competing males.

On the same day, Kit Opie of University College London and his colleagues published a similar study on primates, which are especially monogamous — males and females bond in over a quarter of primate species. The London scientists came to a different conclusion: that the threat of infanticide leads males to stick with only one female, protecting her from other males.

Even with the scientific problem far from resolved, research like this inevitably turns us into narcissists. It’s all well and good to understand why the gray-handed night monkey became monogamous. But we want to know: What does this say about men and women?

As with all things concerning the human heart, it’s complicated.

“The human mating system is extremely flexible,” Bernard Chapais of the University of Montreal wrote in a recent review in Evolutionary Anthropology. Only 17 percent of human cultures are strictly monogamous. The vast majority of human societies embrace a mix of marriage types, with some people practicing monogamy and others polygamy. (Most people in these cultures are in monogamous marriages, though.)

There are even some societies where a woman may marry several men. And some men and women have secret relationships that last for years while they’re married to other people, a kind of dual monogamy. Same-sex marriages acknowledge commitments that in many cases existed long before they won legal recognition.

Each species faces its own special challenges — the climate where it lives, or the food it depends on, or the predators that stalk it — and certain conditions may favor monogamy despite its drawbacks. One source of clues to the origin of human mating lies in our closest relatives, chimpanzees and bonobos. They live in large groups where the females mate with lots of males when they’re ovulating. Male chimpanzees will fight with each other for the chance to mate, and they’ve evolved to produce extra sperm to increase their chances that they get to father a female’s young.

Our own ancestors split off from the ancestors of chimpanzees about seven million years ago. Fossils may offer us some clues to how our mating systems evolved after that parting of ways. The hormone levels that course through monogamous primates are different from those of other species, possibly because the males aren’t in constant battle for females.

That difference in hormones influences how primates grow in some remarkable ways. For example, the ratio of their finger lengths is different.

In 2011, Emma Nelson of the University of Liverpool and her colleagues looked at the finger bones of ancient hominid fossils. From what they found, they concluded that hominids 4.4 million years ago mated with many females. By about 3.5 million years ago, however, the finger-length ratio indicated that hominids had shifted more toward monogamy.

Our lineage never evolved to be strictly monogamous. But even in polygamous relationships, individual men and women formed long-term bonds — a far cry from the arrangement in chimpanzees.

While the two new studies published last week disagree about the force driving the evolution of monogamy, they do agree on something important. “Once monogamy has evolved, then male care is far more likely,” Dr. Opie said.

Once a monogamous primate father starts to stick around, he has the opportunity to raise the odds that his offspring will survive. He can carry them, groom their fur and protect them from attacks.

In our own lineage, however, fathers went further. They had evolved the ability to hunt and scavenge meat, and they were supplying some of that food to their children. “They may have gone beyond what is normal for monogamous primates,” said Dr. Opie.

The extra supply of protein and calories that human children started to receive is widely considered a watershed moment in our evolution. It could explain why we have brains far bigger than other mammals.

Brains are hungry organs, demanding 20 times more calories than a similar piece of muscle. Only with a steady supply of energy-rich meat, Dr. Okie suggests, were we able to evolve big brains — and all the mental capacities that come with it.

Because of monogamy, Dr. Opie said, “This could be how humans were able to push through a ceiling in terms of brain size.”

The Hallmarks of Aging

Aging is characterized by a progressive loss of physiological integrity, leading to impaired function and increased vulnerability to death. This deterioration is the primary risk factor for major human pathologies, including cancer, diabetes, cardiovascular disorders, and neurodegenerative diseases. Aging research has experienced an unprecedented advance over recent years, particularly with the discovery that the rate of aging is controlled, at least to some extent, by genetic pathways and biochemical processes conserved in evolution. This Review enumerates nine tentative hallmarks that represent common denominators of aging in different organisms, with special emphasis on mammalian aging. These hallmarks are: genomic instability, telomere attrition, epigenetic alterations, loss of proteostasis, deregulated nutrient sensing, mitochondrial dysfunction, cellular senescence, stem cell exhaustion, and altered intercellular communication. A major challenge is to dissect the interconnectedness between the candidate hallmarks and their relative contributions to aging, with the final goal of identifying pharmaceutical targets to improve human health during aging, with minimal side effects.

Mom’s Placenta Reflects Her Exposure to Stress

The mammalian placenta is more than just a filter through which nutrition and oxygen are passed from a mother to her unborn child. According to a new study by a research group from the University of Pennsylvania School of Veterinary Medicine, if a mother is exposed to stress during pregnancy, her placenta translates that experience to her fetus by altering levels of a protein that affects the developing brains of male and female offspring differently.

These findings suggest one way in which maternal-stress exposure may be linked to neurodevelopmental diseases such as autism and schizophrenia, which affect males more frequently or more severely than females.

“Most everything experienced by a woman during a pregnancy has to interact with the placenta in order to transmit to the fetus,” said Tracy L. Bale, senior author on the paper and an associate professor in the Department of Animal Biology at Penn Vet. “Now we have a marker that appears to signal to the fetus that its mother has experienced stress.”

Bale also holds an appointment in the Department of Psychiatry in Penn’s Perelman School of Medicine. Her coauthors include lead author and postdoctoral researcher Christopher L. Howerton, graduate student Christopher Morgan and former technician David B. Fischer, all of Penn Vet.

Published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, the study builds on previous work by Bale and her colleagues which found that female mice exposed to stress during pregnancy gave birth to males who had heightened reactions to stress. Further research showed that the effect extended to the second generation: The sons of those male mice also had abnormal stress reactions.

Meanwhile, human studies conducted by other researchers have shown that males born to women who experience stress in the first trimester of pregnancy are at an increased risk of developing schizophrenia.

The Penn team hoped to find a biomarker that could account for these changes and risk factors. To be an effective signal of maternal stress, the researchers reasoned, a biomarker would need to show differences in expression between male and female offspring and would need to be different between stressed and unstressed mothers. They also wanted to find a marker that behaved similarly in humans.

Mouse brain cells live long and prosper

Mouse brain cells scamper close to eternal life: They can actually outlive their bodies. Mouse neurons transplanted into rat brains lived as long as the rats did, surviving twice as long as the mouse’s average life span, researchers report online February 25 in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

The findings suggest that long lives might not mean deteriorating brains. “This could absolutely be true in other mammals — humans too,” says study author Lorenzo Magrassi, a neurosurgeon at the University of Pavia in Italy.

The findings are “very promising,” says Carmela Abraham, a neuroscientist at Boston University. “The question is: Can neurons live longer if we prolong our life span?” Magrassi’s experiment, she says, suggests the answer is yes.

One theory about aging, Magrassi says, is that every species has a genetically determined life span and that all the cells in the body wear out and die at roughly the same time. For the neurons his team studied, he says, “We have shown that this simple idea is certainly not true.”

Magrassi’s team surgically transplanted neurons from embryonic mice with an average life span of 18 months into rats. To do so, the researchers slipped a glass microneedle through the abdomens of anesthetized pregnant mice. Then, using a dissecting microscope and a tool to illuminate the corn-kernel-sized mouse embryos, the researchers scraped out tiny bits of brain tissue and injected the neurons into fetal rat brains. After the rat pups were born, Magrassi and colleagues waited as long as three years, until the animals were near death, to euthanize the rats and dissect their brains.

The transplanted mouse cells had linked up with the rat brain cells and developed into mature, working neurons, though they did retain their characteristic small size. Also, because Magrassi’s team had tagged the mouse cells to glow green, the researchers could distinguish between mouse and rat neurons. The mouse cells lived twice as long as they would have in a mouse brain, and they showed signs of aging similar to those of neighboring rat neurons.

Figuring out what’s helping the neurons survive could lead researchers to treatments for human neurodegenerative diseases, such as Parkinson’s and Alzheimer’s, Magrassi says.

Scientists Discover How Animals Taste, and Avoid, High Salt Concentrations

For consumers of the typical Western diet—laden with levels of salt detrimental to long-term health—it may be hard to believe that there is such a thing as an innate aversion to very high concentrations of salt.

But Charles Zuker, PhD, and colleagues at Columbia University Medical Center have discovered how the tongue detects high concentrations of salt (think seawater levels, not potato chips), the first step in a salt-avoiding behavior common to most mammals.

The findings, which were published online in the journal Nature, could serve as a springboard for the development of taste modulators to help control the appetite for a high-salt diet and reduce the ill effects of too much sodium.

The sensation of saltiness is unique among the five basic tastes. Whereas mammals are always attracted to the tastes of sweet and umami, and repelled by sour and bitter, their behavioral response to salt dramatically changes with concentration.

“Salt taste in mammals can trigger two opposing behaviors,” said Dr. Zuker, professor in the Departments of Biochemistry & Molecular Biophysics and of Neuroscience at Columbia University College of Physicians & Surgeons. “Mammals are attracted to low concentrations of salt; they will choose a salty solution over a salt-free one. But they will reject highly concentrated salt solutions, even when salt-deprived.”

Over the past 15 years, the receptors and other cells on the tongue responsible for detecting sweet, sour, bitter, and umami tastes—as well as low concentrations of salt—have been uncovered largely through the efforts of Dr. Zuker and his collaborator Nicholas Ryba from the National Institute of Dental and Craniofacial Research.

“But we didn’t understand what was behind the aversion to high concentrations of salt,” said Yuki Oka, a postdoctoral fellow in Dr. Zuker’s laboratory and the lead author of the study.

The researchers expected high-salt receptors to reside in cells committed only to detecting high salt. “Over the years our studies have shown that each taste quality—sweet, bitter, sour, umami, and low-salt—is mediated by different cells,” Dr. Ryba said. “So we thought there must be different taste receptor cells for high-salt. But unexpectedly, Dr. Oka found high salt is mediated by cells we already knew.”

Sensing the light, but not to see: Study offers insight on the evolution of photosensitive cells

In a primitive marine organism, MBL scientists find photosensitive cells that may be ancestral to the “circadian receptors” in the mammalian retina.

Among the animals that are appealing “cover models” for scientific journals, lancelets don’t spring readily to mind. Slender, limbless, primitive blobs that look pretty much the same end to end, lancelets “are extremely boring. I wouldn’t recommend them for a home aquarium,” says Enrico Nasi, adjunct senior scientist at the Marine Biological Laboratory (MBL). Yet Nasi and his collaborators managed to land a lancelet on the cover of the Journal of Neuroscience last December. These simple chordates, they discovered, offer insight into our own biological clocks.

Nasi and his wife, MBL adjunct scientist Maria del Pilar Gomez, are interested in phototransduction, the conversion of light by light-sensitive cells into electrical signals that are sent to the brain. The lancelet, also called amphioxus, doesn’t have eyes or a true brain. But what it does have in surprising abundance is melanopsin, a photopigment that is also produced by the third class of light-sensitive cells in the mammalian retina, besides the rods and cones. This third class of cells, called “intrinsically photosensitive retinal ganglion cells” (ipRGCs), were discovered in 2002 by Brown University’s David Berson and colleagues. Now sometimes called “circadian receptors,” they are involved in non-visual, light-dependent functions, such as adjustment of the animal’s circadian rhythms.

"It seemed like colossal overkill that amphioxus have melanopsin-producing cells," Nasi says. "These animals do nothing. If you switch on a light, they dance and float to the top of the tank, and then they drop back down to the bottom. That’s it for the day." But that mystery aside, Gomez and Nasi realized that studying amphioxus could help reveal the evolutionary history of the circadian receptors.

Evidence That at Least One Mammal Can Smell in Stereo

Most mammals, including humans, see in stereo and hear in stereo. But whether they can also smell in stereo is the subject of a long-standing scientific controversy.

Now, a new study shows definitively that the common mole (Scalopus aquaticus) – the same critter that disrupts the lawns and gardens of homeowners throughout the eastern United States, Canada and Mexico – relies on stereo sniffing to locate its prey. The paper that describes this research, “Stereo and Serial Sniffing Guide Navigation to an Odor Source in a Mammals,” was published on Feb. 5 in the journal Nature Communications.

“I came at this as a skeptic. I thought the moles’ nostrils were too close together to effectively detect odor gradients,” said Kenneth Catania, the Stevenson Professor of Biological Sciences at Vanderbilt University, who conducted the research.

What he found turned his assumptions upside down and opened new areas for potential future research. “The fact that moles use stereo odor cues to locate food suggests other mammals that rely heavily on their sense of smell, like dogs and pigs might also have this ability,” Catania said.

The Star-Nosed Mole Reveals Clues to the Molecular Basis of Mammalian Touch

Little is known about the molecular mechanisms underlying mammalian touch transduction. To identify novel candidate transducers, we examined the molecular and cellular basis of touch in one of the most sensitive tactile organs in the animal kingdom, the star of the star-nosed mole. Our findings demonstrate that the trigeminal ganglia innervating the star are enriched in tactile-sensitive neurons, resulting in a higher proportion of light touch fibers and lower proportion of nociceptors compared to the dorsal root ganglia innervating the rest of the body. We exploit this difference using transcriptome analysis of the star-nosed mole sensory ganglia to identify novel candidate mammalian touch and pain transducers. The most enriched candidates are also expressed in mouse somatosesensory ganglia, suggesting they may mediate transduction in diverse species and are not unique to moles. These findings highlight the utility of examining diverse and specialized species to address fundamental questions in mammalian biology.

Full article