ARCHAEOPTERIS THE TREE THAT CHANGED THE WORLD

A DISSERTATION ON THE FIRST TREE. 

ARCHEOPTERIIS A TREE, THAT CHANGED THE WORLD SO MUCH IT LED TO ITS OWN EXTINCTION  

The first fossil I ever found was that of a fern. I am not sure what species.  I remember it so well. I was on a field trip in Pennsylvania and there at the foot of a road cut among  a lot of other rocks I picked up a cobble of  red shale. I hit it with the chisel edge of my geologist’s hammer and the rock split apart neatly,  along a bedding plane or weakness in the rock.  There, exposed for the first time in perhaps hundreds of millions of years was the gray, iridescent imprint in a thin carbon film of a fern—a fossil.  It was dark gray—all that was left of the fern was the carbon that made up its atoms— but the carbon “print” was arrayed just as it had been perhaps 300 million years earlier. And every little detail was visible, even the tiny hairs on the stem and leaflets. 

Archeopteris is an extinct genus of primitive tree known only by its fossil remains. It’s leaves were fern like similar to the fossil fern I found so many years ago. This fossil tree -which looks like a Christmas tree—has characteristics of both ferns and conifers.  It lived late in the Devonian period some 380 to 320 million years ago (mya). 

It’s arrival on the scene was a watershed event that forever changed the entire Earth...its atmosphere, is rocky skin,  and the life-forms which lived on its surface.  Then, It quickly became extinct.  It changed the Earth environment so extensively that it “found itself” no longer well adapted to the new ecosystem it created.  It was source of its own extinction 

In the Cambrian , Ordovician, and Silurian of the earth’s near 600 million year history of life, most of the attention of scientists was focused on the fascinating evolution of the invertebrates, brachiopods, corals and reef organisms, while in the Devonian much interest was focused the  bizarre fish which appear in the world’s  oceans at that time.. During most of the Devonian period there was not much happening on land. 

At that time our present continents were not what they look like today, or were even where they are today.  North America was much smaller than at present and  far south of where it is located today.  During the Devonian, what would become North America was much closer to the equator.  Thus  the Devonian climate was much warmer and drier too than it is now.  (Recall that continents drift around on the Earth’s surface to collide  together to produce mountain chains then break apart again in @ 500 million year cycles). 

What is now our present east coast, was then dominated by high coastal mountains. The deep Atlantic did not exist off our east coast shore, there a shallow sea separated early North America from  a line of offshore volcanic islands ( similar to modern day Japan and the Philippine Islands).  Farther away,  to the southeast was another large continental mass called Gondwana.  Gondwana was moving slowly toward North America with which it would collide to form new mountain chains at the suture line,  at the end of the Paleozoic, as it  formed  a super continent called Pangaea. 

The floating continents or land masses themselves were rugged, rocky highlands, with very little or no vegetation. These bare rocky lands were exposed to driving rain, which unhindered by vegetation or water absorbing humus and soil, scoured out deep gullies and drainage channels. The tropical rains must have produced mud flows and earth slides which would have roared down mountains and accumulated in lowlands as muddy barren outwash or fluvial deposits. The earth’s surface  was also exposed to a relentless intense sun. Exposure to heat and cold, to air and water physically and chemically decompose rocks into clays, oxides and other chemical  products which lay on the surface subject to transport down slope by the first heavy rains . These critical mineral elements necessary for plant nutrition  were washed downhill into rivers and into the oceans by surface water. The early and middle Devonian landscape was a hellish place with little greenery, no bugs, no bees, no animals—no shade, and no forests.   

The land of North America during the early part of the Devonian did have some land plants—these were rock encrusting green algae, lichens, ,and liverworts, while club mosses and horsetails were low growing vascular plants that did not have true leaves and reproduced by spores. Ferns occur as well, but  plants did not grow more than a meter high.  The Devonian ferns grew as they do today in moist places close to water sources. The highlands, away from permanent water were barren and without significant vegetation.   There were no flowering plants or seed bearing plants. 

Early in the Devonian, atmospheric oxygen levels were much lowe as a a result of no forests with their layered concentration of green leaves to effectively produce oxygen by photosynthesis from carbon dioxide and water,  Oxygen  perhaps comprised only 17% of the atmosphere (present day oxygen is now at 21%)     Carbon dioxide levels were correspondingly higher too...about 0.3% or @ ten times higher that what we have at present  ( present CO2 comprises  about 0.03%). 

But all this was to change rapidly as the end of the Devonian Period approached, for a new plant was to evolve that changed the entire Earth, its atmosphere, its oceans and almost all living things as well.  This new species -a tree—created new environments, new ecosystems into which new organisms would eventually adapt. Thus it helped diversify all the life on earth, even though it lived only a brief time, in geologic terms, from 380 mya to 320 mya then became extinct. 

The history of how Archaeopteris was discovered is interesting and informative as well.  The first paleontologist to describe  Archeopteris  was John Dawson (1871) who recognized it as an ancient fern and coined the genus name “archeopteris” which is from the Greek, and means: “ancient fern” (αρχαιος = ancient , πτερις = fern).  For to the early paleontologists the leaves  looked just like that of a modern fern—but one that lived nearly 400 million years ago  (380 mya). 

Dawson’s genus name “Archeopteris”  made sense at first—it seemed to be a fern. About  forty years later a Russian paleontologist, Mikhail Zelessky (1911) examining the stumps of fossil petrified trees in a the Ukraine described what he considered a new kind of ancient tree i that he found in Devonian strata. He considered it unusual since the wood tissues showed characteristics of the wood of conifer trees such as spruce and pine. He called this “new species” Callixylon (also of Greek origin. It means: “good wood”).   He did make note of the fact that this new genus of plant was often associated with the “fern” Archeopteris. 

But it was another fifty years later (1960) that Charles Beck also studying Devonian plant fossils came across specimens of Callixylon which had small side branches with the fronds and leaves of  Archeopteris attached to it. It was clear that Archeopteris and Callixylon were parts of the same plant.  [So perhaps had Dawson seen these samples, he may have named the genus “archeodendron” or “ancient tree” instead. But that is how science proceeds- only in fits and starts.]

But what was so unusual about this new plant fossil was that it had characteristics of both ferns and conifer trees. It had fern-like leaves and branches which carried “sporangia” which the sites where spores were produced just like ferns.  Archeopteris, unlike ferns, had spores of of two types: a male and female form, perhaps a precursor to the conifers which produce pollen and cones. Also this tree had a tree trunk with vascular tissues or  wood  just like those of the evergreen or gymnoperms (the cone bearing trees —the conifers, ginkos, and cycads—) of today. 

 

This now extinct tree Archeopteris looked  like a top-heavy “Christmas tree”, but it’s branches were fern like as were its leaves.  It had  a “real” woody tree trunk.  The bole of some petrified specimens  had grown to three to five  feet in diameter and to a height of thirty meters (near 100 feet).  It was the first true tree*.  It’s wood in cross section displayed tree rings,  showing spring and summer growth patterns, similar to those of  a pine or spruce.  It had two different sized spores a male and female division not found in ferns.. Archeopteris with its characteristics of  of both ferns and woody trees grew in wet places close to rivers and streams. But could also grow elsewhere.  It had an extensive root system which went deep into the earth. In some Devonian sites these fossil roots are still visible. 

From about 380 mya when the tree first appears it dominates the land area and out-competed every other species to  very quickly becomes the dominant tree all over the Earth.  Its wide and very rapid dispersal and dominance indicates that its ability to grow tall, rising well above the lower plants to form a true forest canopy gave it a tremendous advantage over those plants which had no woody support tissues or the ability  to carry water upward thirty to one hundred  feet to its leaves.  But that is where the unrestricted sunlight was available, and by being able to move its leaves well above all other plants at the time it had a great advantage.  

Wherever trees can exist today the Archeopteris probably lived there. It’s fossils are found on every continent where the Devonian and early  Carboniferous  strata occur, even on Antarctica. 

It almost immediately became the dominant land tree almost all over the world and perhaps because of its widespread distribution, had a greater role than most any other in transforming the environment of the entire Earth.

It’s tall trees grew close together to form the first forests.  The forest itself is a new ecosystem in which new plants and animals were to become adapted.  Its great volume and display green leaves took in carbon dioxide and produced oxygen, raising the concentration  of that gas and likely making the atmosphere more amenable to land animals and to other plants as well. 

Soon after its world wide spread as dominant forest tree,  we find the appearance of the first land animals. These were land arthropods, millipedes, centipede and spiders. Then too the first tetrapods appear late in the Devonian  (four legged creatures) which evolved from relatives of the bony fish such as the coelacanth and lung fishes which evolved more rigid pectoral and pelvic fins making it possible for them and those who evolved later to literally haul themselves out of the water onto nearly dry land. 

The branches and leaves of Archeopteris may have fallen  seasonally as debris which accumulated on the forest floor then washed into streams, and there created a new nutrient rich environment where other organisms would evolve. The new nutrient rich stream and river waters were to attract marine bony fish into the fresh water environment, and  encourage the tetrapods into these new ecosystems as well..  

The canopy produced  by the Archeopteris generated shade that altered the environment on the ground,  making it more amenable to the emerging tetrapods and land animals and the  first insects who were protected from dehydration and intense solar radiation in the shade of the forest.  

The seasonal fall of fronds and leaves formed the first layers of forest litter and humus from which true soils would develop. Decay organisms (bacteria, fungi and eventually  worms) evolved among the millipedes and centipedes in this new environment at the base of the trees.  

After the advent of Archeopteris dominated forests and the soil they created,  rainwater no longer just washed down slopes carrying loose rock and the valuable chemical products of weathered rock, (with its clay and essential  minerals)  because the Archeopteris’ decaying humus held these critical elements in suspension or by adsorption and absorption in the now newly forming soil so that it and other plants could utilize them more effectively.   The humus also held water like a sponge, resulting in this moisture becoming  available to other plants and animals within the soil. 

This first ancient tree had a well developed root system which had an enormous impact on development of soil systems, on slowing erosion, on stabilizing slopes and on creating new ecosystems for other organisms to evolve.   ( At the Gilboa Pertified Forest, near the Gilboa Dam in Schoharie County, New York there are many tree stumps, fossil leaves and fossilized root systems of these first trees exposed for view.) 

At the end of the Devonian, when Archeopteris forests were widely dispersed this species may have even had a role in the great late Devonian extinctions. Some claim its rapid world growth into forming continental wide forests had the effect of reducing carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere, causing  a global cooling effect.  The fall of global temperatures may have been one (of many) causes resulting in widespread late Devonian marine extinctions.   

[ Extinctions are not all negative events, they have their positive effects too.  Though in extinctions many organisms may die off, the survivors, often better adapted to the new conditions, are able to evolve and take over a food source, unoccupied niche or escape from predation and then—/proliferate. So we might add this result to Archeopteris’ other positive effects.]. 

Others cite extensive volcanism for the Devonian marine extinctions. Such an event could have  caused atmospheric darkening and oceanic cooling. Many black shales are deposited in this period indicating a lack of oxygen in the ocean water. Some suggest the extinctions were the result of an asteroid impact.  Many species of marine invertebrates become extinct during this time.  Trilobites, brachiopods, and reef building organisms were particularly hard hit. Paleontologists claim that  some  50% of all marine genera died out. But there were few impacts to terrestrial organisms. Archeopteris lived on into the Carboniferous so was unaffected. 

The Archeopteris lived from about 380 to 323  mya and then for some reason, it rapidly became extinct.    But while it lived, its leaves and fronds are so common in late Devonian early Carboniferous strata all around the world that it became an excellent marker fossil or index fossil,  used to indicates that the rocks in which it was found are synchronous or of the same age as the  Devonian and Early. Carboniferous strata.  Good index fossils are those that were widely distributed and lived only for short time before extinction.  Come to think of it humans might be —except for being extinct— perfect potential example. 

Perhaps as the result of circumstances it helped to create,  more atmospheric oxygen, less carbon dioxide, true soils, enriched soil nutrients, more stable slopes, etc.,  etc. it was no longer as well adapted to.  In this new ecosystem. Other species that evolved within the forests it created were better adapted and were  able to out-compete Archaeopteris.   

Thus the story of Archeopteris may be a cautionary tale for humans. Archeopteris changed the Earth in innumerable  ways and then quickly became extinct. It was so dominant and so effective in changing the Earth and its environment—it created an Earth so altered that it “found itself” no longer well adapted to the new world it had created, and died out.  Archeopteris  was the source of its own extinction!!

So perhaps we as humans should take note of the history of Archeopteris and beware of the prospect of our own extinction. Because  we too, as a super dominant species have created  a new world, vastly different in atmosphere, temperature, climate, fauna and flora  from that which we emerged as a species and came into prominence about two million years ago.  (This denouement of our own species came after a major extinctions too—that of the Pleistocene megafauna!!)  Have we too changed our environment so drastically and radically that —like Archeopteris—we are too are no longer “adapted” and are slated for extinction? 

Perhaps it’s still not too late. It is time for us to return the Earth closer to conditions that we as a species evolved into and adapted to. 

We might begin this task by reforesting all the areas that we have foolishly deforested over our history—so as to return the CO2 levels back down to lower levels. 

Let’s  all plant a tree. Perhaps we can still save our species and a planet too.  

 

BRIEF SUMMARY OF MENHADEN DATA

SUMMARY OF FALL 2020 MENHADEN (BUNKER) BEACH  STRANDINGS

This last fall, 2020, Menhaden, known locally as “Bunker”,  a species of herring and one of the most important, prolific and numerous “forage fish” in the Atlantic has been reported washing ashore dead or dying all along the east coast beaches from New Jersey, Hudson River, New York Harbor, Connecticut and Long Island. 

As early as September 2020 the State of New Jersey’s  overflights (of the state’s marine environment and beaches) reported masses or “pods” of “bait fish” (Menhaden) observed nearly continuously from Sandy Hook to Cape May on the Atlantic seaboard of that state. These fish,  arriving from the Chesapeake and south continued north and eventually entered the sounds, bays and harbors of New York, New Jersey  and states further north.  But as the “fall run” proceeded these fish became disoriented and stranded on beaches l or died at sea and washed ashore in numbers which raised serious concerns to fishermen, beach walkers and environmentalists  up and down the coast. 

The die off of this critically important fish species—-known as Brevoortia tyrannus to the fish scientists—has been reported most commonly as “normal” and of little consequence.  While others claim the event is related to such diverse and conflicting causes as: too warm sea  water temperatures, or sea water too cold;  scarce food, low oxygen levels, too many fish this year, overfishing by purse seiners, too restrictive catch quotas  placed on purse seiners, too lax quota regulations placed on purse seiners , and the all too common explanation of  “global warming”.  This latter too often cited phenomenon  is that seemingly catch-all  cause for everything and anything which permits those who don’t really know the answer a means  to wiggle off the hook and still seem “scientific” and knowledgeable.  . 

For Long Island Sound, the most common and widely published explanation has been that the “unusual warming”  of the Sound over the summer season persisted into the fall.  This   resulted in  these filter feeding, plankton-eating fish to miss their “temperature cue” to head south and thus they became stranded in the Sound where water  temperatures fell as winter approached and plankton concentrations (upon which these fish depend) declined.  

This may seem a logical explanation at first glance, except for the fact that contemporary fish die off have been reported elsewhere, such as along the New Jersey coast, in the Hudson River and along our Atlantic Coast beaches in New Jersey and on Long Island’s Atlantic coast beaches such as Southampton, New York.  These areas are not shallow enclosed coastal embayments like L I Sound, and fish were not trapped in these venues or were water temperatures falling so rapidly in the well mixed deep open ocean.

Thus, the causes of the die-off has been poorly and inadequately addressed.  Additionally, though many observers have reported fish strandings these are most often simple anecdotal accounts.   No actual measurements or other data  to put this possibly serious event into an historical or  numerical perspective have been reported

The critical question remains. How many of these fish have died?   How does it compare with others?  Is it local or regional?  Is it a serious is threat to the health of this important  fish stock? No one seems to know.  

As a result of simple curiosity and concern, this author conducted 23 observational walking tours along two central Long Island Sound beaches to count stranded Menhaden and make a rough estimate of the number of fish washed ashore,  between Nov 15, 2020 and January 14, 2021. 

The results indicate that during the period between mid-November and mid-January, approximately  752 stranded fish were counted per mile on the 23 day period sampled. On average,  approximately 33 fish of this species were washed ashore per day per mile during the sample period. See “notes” below for other data. 

Attempting to quantify the magnitude of the fish die off in Long Island Sound one could extrapolate from this small linear sample of Central Long Island Sound  by calculating total shoreline mileage of Long Island Sound and assuming that circumstances of fish strandings  beyond the local beach zones  sampled would likely be similar over the length of the entire Sound.  

To that end, it is often claimed by the State of Connecticut that its total L I. Sound  shoreline from New Rochelle to Groton comprises about 330 miles of beach and Sound shore.  Long Island’s shoreline is at least as complex and as long. Thus the total Beach  and shore of Long Island Sound (I use here as a rough and likely minimal estimate)  may comprise an estimated 330 x 2 or 660 miles of beach and shore. 

Thus if the central L I Sound area sampled in this report is in any way representative of circumstances of fish strandings  elsewhere in LI Sound, each mile of shore may have had at a minimum  752 stranded fish over that sample period.  Seven-hundred fifty (752)  fish stranded per mile x 660 miles of shoreline = 495,000 Menhaden fish or nearly one half a million fish washed ashore dead or dying in Long Island Sound.   

That number must be a minimum estimate,  since over the period of 15 November to 14 January there are  60 calendar  days. However,  the  the study sampled only 23 out of 60 or only 38 % of the total days.  Thus the 752 fish stranding figure is likely only a fraction (38%) of the actual total fish strandings.  Calculating that the 752 fish represents only 38% of the total  (752/ 0.38 = 1,979) we can assume that would suggest that nearly 2000 fish were stranded per mile in the study beaches.    

Thus based upon these corrected data,  a likely figure my be closer to 2000 fish stranded per beach mile, or 2000 bunker fish per mile of beach or shore  may have stranded on Long Island Sound.  

Evaluating this another way, The average strandings per day per mile, as noted above is about 33 fish per day per mile.   Thus 33 stranded fish per day x 60 calendar days = 1980 fish stranded over this study period—again a figure close to the 2000 stranded fish per mile over the study period. 

Using the value of 2000 stranded fish per one mile over the 60 day study period, extrapolated to the 660 miles of shoreline in the Long Island Sound suggests that there may be (660 x 2000 = 1,320,000) or one million three hundred thousand  fish may have died and washed ashore only on our own Long Island Sound beaches.

More than one million fish stranded on Long Island Sound beaches, may represent only a small percent of the total estimated stock of these fish, which are purse seined in the hundreds of millions of pounds of fish per year for fertilizer, the fish oil industry and for bait.   But when one considers areas others than Long Island Sound, such as New York harbor and the Hudson River, , New Jersey and elsewhere it may indicate that the numbers suggested for Long Island Sound may be a only a small part of the total regional fish loss this 2020-2021 season, which could conceivably go into the tens of millions of fish or  tens of millions of pounds.  That number then becomes significant when we know that regulators  have recently permitted purse seiners to take 400 million pounds of these fish annually.  

Given the regional importance of this fish species to the health and well being of the general marine ecology and the health and reproductive capacity of other species such as Stripers and Bluefish as well as marine mammals and birds which prey on fish, with this so far unexplained regional die off  we may be facing a serious threat to the health of this important forage fish species and our local marine ecology.    

Notes. 

[Over the study period, a total of nearly 18 miles (17.94 miles) were walked. Each observational tour was conducted close to the surf zone were the the number of recently stranded Menhaden were easily observed in the surf or stranded on the beach, Only live, dead, and recent stranded  Menhaden were counted on each tour.  Water temperature of LI Sound  was recorded, based on the published data (NOAA or “sea temperature.info”).

Each observational walk spanned a distance of between 0.5 miles to 1 mile in length. Total miles over the study period were 17.94 miles.  Counts of recently stranded or live Bunker ranged from 0 fish to 112 fish.  Sea temperatures ranged from 53 degrees F on Nov 15 to 41.5 degrees F on January 14, 2021. 

These data were extrapolated to a standard mile and tabulated as “Stranded Fish per Mile”/per day of observation.  This measure  ranged from a maximum of 172 stranded fish per day/mile to 0 fish per day per mile.  Fish which were observed stranded alive were counted and recorded.  Live strandings were calculated as a percent of the total fish observed for that day.  This value ranged from 0%-33%. Total numbers of live fish swimming weakly in the surf or flapping on the beach were small and most often no live fish were encountered.  This was likely related to the fact that such fish readily drew the attention of sea gulls, which quickly killed and partially  consumed the fish. 

A graph of the data (not published here) reveals that strandings were most numerous between mid-November and mid-December when mean strandings per day were 66 fish counted per day.  From mid-December to mid-January fish counts fell off to an average of 11 per sample day.  LISound temperatures dropped during the initial sampling  (the November to December period) from  53 F to 49.3 F, ( or 3.7 F), while  it fell from 49.3 F to 41.5 F (7.8F) during the later period from mid December to mid-January.]

Clearly more detailed studies of the factors affecting this species such as possible disease,  chemical factors , environmental, human exploitation and management practices  which may be affecting the health of this immensely important fish stock should be undertaken by a regional or Federal agency which could most effectively monitor this species which ranges up and down the entire Atlantic coast.  

Note: On May 6, 2021, I counted one fresh Menhaden washed up on the beach at Mount Sinai, Cedar Beach.  It was fresh and had been partly eaten by gulls.   

COVID VACCINE HOW DOES IT WORK?

 There is a great deal of fear and misinformation circulating about the new vaccine.  

Too many people are simply fearful of the new Phizer / BioNTech  vaccine a collaboration between American Phizer company and German BioN tech.  That is unfortunate since a vaccine will be effective only if a good majority of the population is vaccinated.  I offer here my very simplified version of a highly complex process to help those who are not certain that they should take this step. 

 The word “vaccine” is derived from that for “cow” or  la vacca”.  Why?  

In the 18^th century cows were the source of the vaccine.  Deadly small pox plagues date back to the ancient Egyptians and has infected humans with horrible deadly consequences for thousands of years with a mortality rate which often killed one third of the people infected. Furthermore, those who  survived were often cruelly disfigured with many deep pockmark scars.   These ugly telltale scars figured in the way a vaccine was finally developed for the disease. 

In ancient China, where such plagues are common even in modern times , physicians took note of the fact that survivors of the disease, easily identified as those who had the disfiguring marks on their faces, were protected from a repeat infection. 

 The Chinese  began a form of “vaccination” in which a scraping of the pus from the pustule of an infected person was rubbed  into a scratch  on the skin of another individual. This inoculation of disease germs into the skin  would cause an eruption at the site.  The inoculated person contracted a milder form of the disease.  The vaccinated person was protected from the full force of the disease yet was still faced with with a 3% mortality rate! (Today Covid 19 has a fatality rate of @ 1.4% and we consider that level very threatening. )  But for the ancient Chinese inoculation was a good deal. The inoculation with pus decreased the possibility of death from 33 per 100 down to  3 out of 100.  This was a great improvement.   But one can understand  that the persistent mortality figures for those who were vaccinated  were the outstanding reason why these vaccinations  w ere feared and avoided. 

Centuries later in England, where small pox was a frequent and feared visitor, it was often noted  that milk maids and cow herders were almost all free from the disease and as well the scourge of the all too common, disfiguring pock marks. 

Very few  of these dairy workers  ever contracted or died of the disease.  Early on physicians  of that era ( one was Edward Jenner in 1796) made a connection between the fact that cows were often infected with a mild disease called “cow pox” and milk maids (who were in close daily contact with cows for milking)  often contracted  the same illness. But as a result of that infection, they were it seemed  protected from the much more deadly and disfiguring  “small pox”.  

To later investigators it was clear that what was happening.  The introduction  of disease germs into the human body caused a physiological reaction. The body recognized the cow pox virus as an “invader” and it created antibodies to attack and kill these invading organisms.  These same antibodies were then ready and primed to attack and kill the very similar but more deadly small pox germs if and when they entered the body. 

 Late in the 18^th  Century  Dr. Jenner popularized the practice of “vaccination” by taking a bit of pus from the pustule on the skin of a sick cow infected with cowpox,  make a scratch on the skin of the person to be inoculated and  smear the pus into the wound.  The “vaccinated” person did get sick, but only with a mild-disease....perhaps a few pustules and a mild fever.   They would recover, but were then protected from the fearful, deadly and disfiguring small pox. Jenner concluded that  that those who had been inoculated or “vaccinated” with cow pox had produced and army of antibodies primed to attack any similar appearing invader organisms. 

Here in the American colonies of that era, Benjamin Franklin the autodidact, scientist,  publisher, politician and polymath was well aware of and an advocate for the process of vaccination to protect the people from small pox. Franklin experienced the “plague” as a young man when small pox ravaged Boston in 1721.  

During the 1775 plague however, Benjamin Franklin was unable to convince his wife, that their son Benji should be vaccinated.  Franklin regretted his hesitation to the end of his days when little “Benji”, his dearly loved and only legitmate son —succumbed to the disease.  

An outbreak of small pox  during the Revolutionary War from 1775 to 1782 threatened to weaken and decimate the American troops and end the glorious uprising prematurely, but  George Washington (who also had first hand knowledge of this disease ( and scars to prove it) made the  bold decision to inoculate all of his Continental Army troops with cow pox.  Though there were many who were fearful of the process, most troops obeyed the command and the feared impact of the plague on battle readiness did not impact the Continental forces as some had feared. 

So with this history,  it is clear that though vaccinations are effective,  the associated  negative results have had an oversized impact on public perception —and these have been remembered more than the overall successes.

 But this new “vaccine” from Phizer is something as different from Jenner’s cow pox vaccinations and our own flu and polio vaccines  as  today’s most advanced Tesla electric car is from the old Ford “Model T” of which the only similarity is that both vehicles have four wheels.

The Phizer BioNtech vaccine does not use weakened viruses or parts of the SARS Covid 19 virus to create a form of the virus to inject into the patient to generate the   antibody reaction.  It’s labs have no covid virus and there is no chance of contamination. 

The ingenious researchers have created a protein from “scratch” that mimics the chemical make up of the now so familiar spikes on the “corona” of this now infamous spike-crowned virus.  

It is the spike on the crown of the corona virus which is used to “poke” through the cell membrane of the host cell (human) in the nasal passages or lungs. Once inside the virus takes over that cell’s mechanisms and converts it into a “factory” to make new virus cells. When that invaded cell dies the newly formed corona viruses pour out to infect other cells as they multiply exponentially.  The result is that the patient gets sick—some say they feel like they were “hit by a train”—some die.

The new vaccine uses advanced genetic processes to chemically produce a protein which looks just like the protein which make up the spike on the corona virus.  The  researchers wrapped  this protein in a fatty globule (lipid) to protect it and to permit it to pass through the cell membrane of a human cell.  The cell membranes are also made of fatty lipid substances.  

Once inside the cell, this “mimic of the spike protein” is programmed to encourage  the cell to reproduce copies of itself of this spike protein.  The “protein like spikes” fill the cell and when that cell dies,  the mimic spike proteins are released into the body, which like in other cases we have described above are seen as “invaders”.  The body makes antibodies against these invader “spikes” which then  course all through the body.

The inoculated person’s blood is now primed with antibodies against the spike proteins of any invading corona virus.   They will attack the spikes on the virus and either kill it or prevent it from invading host cells. 

If infected with the SARS Corona virus, the blood cells of the inoculated individual will  recognize these spike proteins  as invaders for which they are prepared with a myriad of antibodies. They attack the spike structures and  disable the virus’  ability to invade or enter host cells and thus prevent the multiplication of the virus. 

Phizer’s vaccine is said to be 95% effective.  Do not make the mistake  Benjamin Franklin made! Go for it!!.  This vaccine can save your life. 

This Phizer vaccine is claimed to be effective against recent new strains of the virus. I suspect that the reason for this is that the Phizer antibodies are designed to target the spike proteins which are more likely to remain stable even as the genetic make up of the virus itself evolves.  

.  That is my unsupported hypothesis    A guess only. 

FRENCH GLOBAL SECURITY LAW IS APPROPRIATE, ESSENTIAL AND SHOULD BE PASSED

MODERN SOCIETIES MUST PASS LAWS TO PROTECT  BOTH POLICE AS WELL AS  THE RIGHT OF FREE SPEECH AND ASSEMBLY.   

TO FAIL IS TO DESCEND INTO MOB RULE. 

France, in alignment with its long history and intellectual traditions, in the face of modern challenges— still remains a clear thinking rational state —determined to protect itself from extermination.  This is in stark contrast with the “new America” which has become unhinged, obsessed with sexual orientation, alleged racism, pampering whining “victims” of every stripe, and feminized males who claim they are “privileged ” and should be punished for it.  

The French, in their rational Gallic wisdom and witnesses to the descent of much of America  into chaos over the violent BLM riots last year, clearly understand the  existential danger posed to the modern state by the juxtaposition of the ubiquitous iPhone and broad  access to the internet.   

In modern America, a teenager with an iPhone and a internet connection could,  by abusing the right of free speech (as in  “yelling ‘fire’ in a movie theater”) could bring down a government and a nation. We have laws which control the right to free speech they must be applied to the use of the internet too. 

France, facing threats to social stability from violent demonstrations, and recent threats from Moslem extremism, has drafted  a “global security law” which attempts to balance the issues of freedom of expression  with the need for a robust and effective police force. 

Watching from across the Atlantic, French parliamentarians were witness to how quickly a city police force formerly seen  as “a premier functioning institution”  could be turned from stalwart defenders of society and it legitimate laws into passive, armed and uniformed  observers of crime and violence and “avid avoiders” of confrontation in the wink of a camera’s eye. 

TV footage of New York’s “finest” standing by and acting as passive  “observers of crime”  or “submissive targets of spittle, bottles, bricks,  Molotov cocktails and worse” as the rioters looted and destroyed  private and public property. And in more than one case the “uniforms” had to retreat like escaping convicts from their own precinct houses, which were then burned to the ground by rioters. 

In these confrontations any police officer attempting to actually control rioters, or apprehend violent perpetrators were faced with a difficult conundrum:   “If I actually subdue and arrest this person (what I am trained and paid to do) and someone photographs me, I may be charged with ‘brutality’ may be dismissed, lose my pension, be charged with a crime, and have to hire an expensive  attorney to defend myself in court. And, if I am convicted, I might even end up in prison in close quarters with the criminals I helped incarcerate.  Or I can simply turn away, ignore the rioter torching a store, or a senior citizen being beaten by bat-wielding criminals, and go about on my way as a regularly paid unconfrontational and safe “uniformed observer of crime.”  

What decision do most officers make? Yes!  Most are likely to act  just as self defensively and rationally as the French and will protect his/her family, income and life.   

What French parliamentarians had to face was the obvious pernicious  effects this new technology would have on the French police force and on the nation’s security.   If police no longer confront criminals, they no longer a function to enforce the laws which the people and the people’s  representatives enact. Such a state descends from the rule of law to a nation ruled by mobs.  

Paris would morph into Doge City of the 1850s.  

France, a nation served by rational parliamentarians made the realization that they must say NO to mob rule and support the police to insure the security of a peaceful functioning nation.  To do otherwise would be to cast the nation and its citizenry adrift into lawlessness and mob rule.  That would result in its citizens being “on their own” in any confrontation with an evildoer—as most resident of New York City now find themselves.  

In cites where mobs rule,  crime  goes up, foot traffic goes down, insurance costs goes up, taxes ruse, businesses abandon high crime cities, property values fall, residents relocate, taxes go up as populations decline and whole economies collapse.  

It’s clear that for a nation to survive, its police must be protected from malicious imagery published on the internet to create intentional harm to a police officer while that officer of the law is attempting to perform his or her professional responsibilities. 

About four weeks ago the French PM, Emanuel Macron announced a new Global Security law for France.  It  included a provision, Article 24, which would make photographing a police officer while in his/her  official capacity as a law officer an offense punishable  by a year in prison and/or a €50,000 fine.  

The far left and the  UN and misguided others have claimed (unwisely) the  law is “controversial” since it limits the rights of those who would report on police practices.  Though there is no limit on such reportage and in fact there are many avenues for complainants to make their case.  

What should be limited is the unwarranted invasion of a photographer into a situation of which the details of the the confrontation, the facts of the case, the context in which the actions are being taken etc. etc.  etc. These photographic invasions and internet dispersions are snippets of behavior which often have little to do with the actual facts of the case,  and are subject to be  misperceived and misused. But their most pernicious effect is on the chilling effect it has on the behavior of police. 

Perhaps sanity will return to America and our Congress will enacts a similar global security law that would protect the rights of police officers to freely and effectively function as those who are tasked with enforcing the laws the people’s representatives enact.  To do less is to submit to the mob!

ON MENHADEN AND MAN. THE BUNKER ARE MAKING THEIR FALL RUN!

 The Atlantic Menhaden (Brevoortia tyrannus) a member of the herring (Clupeidae) family is found in huge schools along our east coast from Maine to northernmost  Florida. Menhaden are  a “forage fish” and perhaps one of the most important fish species in the Atlantic Ocean.  A forage fish serves as prey and a food source for other species in the food chain. They are the first steps of the food chain (or trophic level) and serve by converting the ocean’s primary producers ( algae or phytoplankton) into edible food for larger species. And yet, despite its essential and critical import this common fish is the most under rated, maligned, misidentified, mismanaged, misused  and misunderstood fish species in our local waters.

Menhaden is one of the few species which has retained the name used by native Americans.  The term “Menhaden” is said to be a corruption of the Algonquian unprepossessing term for this species which means: “that which is used as fertilizer”.  The first colonists, who were befriended by Algonquian-speaking native Americans introduced the new-comers  to the hugely abundant Menhaden and to the fact that this fish was also essential to insure a good corn crop. The English colonists assumed it was not necessarily good for much else, and this negative view of the species has continued on though history.  ( Though later colonists in the 1800s realized that since so many other critters were consuming it, it was probably good to eat too, and began preparing it and consuming it as Europeans prepared sardines.)     

Locally , here on Long Island’s north shore, these fish are called “bunker”, short for another name for this fish: “Mossbunker”.   Like so many other local New York names and words, this term is of colonial Dutch origin.  The “horse mackerel” of the Netherlands, called by the local Dutch colonists of New York “marsbanker” has a passing resemblance to our local Brevoortia. The early Dutch colonists simply applied this name to a similar though unrelated fish. It has remained in the vernacular...shortened often to simply “bunker”. 

The Atlantic Menhaden or “bunker” is by any account an attractive fish. It is bluish black above and white below, its  silvery sides are tinged with a brassy luster.  The sea- blue color  of its dorsal surface probably makes it nearly invisible from above, protecting from   its many avian predators, while the white of its belly helps to camouflage it against predators from below. The  fins and lovely deep forked  tail are tinged with yellow. A large black spot is located behind the eye and often several smaller spots are found along its sides.   Its mouth is large with the  lower “jaw”  continuing  to a point behind the level of the eye.  The mouth is rigid and horny.  The jaws are toothless to the touch. With the mouth pried open one can observe  its “gill rakers” arising as two lines of closely spaced, soft,  pliable “comb teeth ”   likely composed of cartilage-covered! soft  tissues which apparently also exude a sticky  mucous.  The gill raker “comb teeth”  are close spaced (@ 1-2 mm apart)  and these arise from both sides of the inner jaw.  In the anterior of the mouth one observes what appears to be the developmental remnant of a short tongue. Another bulbous  double “U” shaped organ is located in the back  of the mouth, and perhaps may be used to sweep the gill rakers clean when the fish swallows the trapped plankton which has accumulated on the raker teeth. 

These gill rakers reveal why Bunker, as any fisherman knows, will not take a baited hook or a lure, since they are wholly filter feeders (animals which filter food from the water which surrounds them)  just like the great baleen or Right Whales of the North Atlantic, as well as basking sharks and even invertebrates such as mussels and oysters. 

Menhaden feed only on plankton, those living organisms which float just below the surface of the water in the sunlit zone.  The Menhaden swim with their mouths open in this level, through  the clouds of microscopic plankton on which they feed.  It is well  documented that the Atlantic Menhaden feeds on both phytoplankton (plants like algae) as well as zooplankton. The former is the “green grass” of the sea, and the latter, are tiny floating organisms (ostracods, copepods, tiny crabs, larvae of shellfish etc.) which feed directly on the algae. 

The phytoplankton ( green plants) use sunlight and  chlorophyll as well as the nutrients dissolved in the sea water in the presence of sunlight to produce complex carbohydrates, oils and proteins which constitute the living, floating organism.  Like any green garden plant, besides water and sunlight  they require  copious levels of nutrients such as nitrates and phosphates to flourish.  

In the open ocean, there is obviously no scarcity of water and oxygen,  but just as in our home gardens,  bright sunlight is essential. That variable is controlled by the seasons.. So we would expect blooms of algae and the filter feeder fish which feed on algae and other plankton to appear in the spring.  As expected, the algal blooms  coincide with high concentrations of nutrients in the water and the increased sunlight-duration (longer days) and sunlight-intensity ( sun higher above horizon resulting in more intense solar radiation overhead).    For these reasons schools  of Menhaden and shoals other filter feeder fish arrive in the spring,, encouraging the commercial and sports fisherman to oil up their equipment and head out to sea or shoreline. 

But these same Menhaden reappear again in the Fall.  Why?  

It seems counter intuitive. In  fall  the temperatures decline, sunlight duration and intensity are  decreasing,  and storms churn up the surface waters.  So what attracts the Menhaden back into Long Island Sound every Fall? 

The answer to that is besides water and sunlight,  green plants (like  the tomato plant in your home garden) are dependent on adequate nutrients.  After a summer of flourishing  growth a gardener would be wise to replenish the nutrients in the soil for their fall plantings.  And in this same manner the ocean phytoplankton are also dependent upon an adequate concentration of nutrients in the water column.

All spring and summer sea water nutrients are slowly used up as they are converted by algae into other organisms in the food chain—zooplankton, small fish,  and bigger fish.  These organisms which feed on the primary producers —live in the water and release metabolic wastes, which sink to the bottom, and then they are eaten by others,  or they die and sink to the bottom where further decay and nutrient releases occur. All of these processes result in nutrients sinking from the top of the water column to concentrate at depth, often out of the photic sunny zone.

But beside the fact that all summer long living organisms slowly deplete nutrients in the upper portion of the water column, but in addition, the top layer of the water column has been warming up as well.   Sunlight penetrates into the upper layer, warming it, while summer storms also tend to mix warm air into the top warm layer of water.  Warm water is less dense than the cooler deep water. The warm water forms a discrete layer which sits on top of the water column. In L I Sound it by mid summer it produces a stable  “warm water cap”  of perhaps 30 feet thick in this “layer cake effect” water column.   Below this warm water cap temperatures fall quickly, this boundary zone, where temperature  changes most rapidly is called the  “thermocline” .

 As noted above in LI Sound this boundary occurs at perhaps thirty feet ( @10 m) or thereabouts below the surface and varies from year to year.  Since the warm water is of a lower density than the deeper cooler more dense water, the two layers do not mix.  Swimmers and divers can often observe this sharp change in temperature.  It is within this upper warm layer that most of the biological activity takes place during the spring and summer seasons. 

The result of the presence of the “warm water cap” and the algal blooms and zooplankton growth which occur there is that critical nutrients for plant growth are soon depleted in this warm zone.   By late summer and early fall, nutrient levels in this upper layer are at their lowest point.  As fall approaches there is still enough light for plants to grow, but the limiting factor for plant growth  is the low level of “fertilizer” nutrients such as nitrates, nitrites and phosphates in the upper warm water layer.

But at this time in the fall, something very interesting happens—it is known as the “Fall Turnover”.  As the cool season proceeds storms churn up the top water layer, sun light decreases and air temperatures drop,  all of which tend to lower the temperature of the surface water cap. By mid November the average temperature of Sound surface waters have fallen almost 20 degrees F (11C) from their high in August.  At some point in this period of the year  the upper warm water layer cools to the temperate of the deeper water, the thermocline dyiappears and the two zones mix as the  warm water cap or “layer cake” pattern breaks down.   At that point deeper, nutrient rich, water can then mix freely with the top nutrient poor  water. This  Fall Turnover is the moving of nutrient rich bottom to thr top into sun light. This is a time for fishermen and others to mark on their calendars. 

At the time of the Fall Turnover surface water temperatures are still well above their winter minimums, nutrient levels are restored to spring levels, sunlight is still more than adequate for photosynthesis and algae are present  in the water. All these factors set the stage for  a resurgence of algal growth and a similar rise  in zooplankton populations.  That sets the stage for the return of the Menhaden which feed on these plankton blooms.  

Then the surface waters are rippled from below and sparkle in the sun as  the subsurface movement of vast impressive schools of Menhaden —the Bunker— begin the fall run.  As boats approach the densely packed blue back dorsal surfaces of bunker schools descend to deeper water and then raise again to continue their open mouthed pursuit of plankton during their  fall run in the Sound.  The huge schools, hundreds or thousands of feet across. enter the estuaries and bays where they furrow the water like cat’s paws of wind. .  They attract predator fish such as Weakfish, Bluefish, Striped Bass and  mammals such  as seals, and in early days even dolphins and toothed whales.  But the massive number crowding into tight harbors and shallow water often reduces water oxygen concentrations, and some fish die or become disoriented and strand on shore. Others are attacked by predators from above and below.  With such large numbers in the water many die and waves wash them to shore. 

During the fall, fisherman and beach walkers often observe large numbers of Menhaden  dead or dying along the strand lines of our north shore Long Island  beaches.  Over several excursions counting stranded fish and estimating distances covered I reckon that tens of thousand s of fish are stranded on our Long Island beaches each time the Menhaden make their seasonal runs.

Though the number estimates of stranded fish  seems like a lot of “dead fish”, it is only a tiny fraction of the the commercial landings of this important, nay critical, forage fish species which is so important over such a an extensive geographic range comprising all of the Atlantic east coast,  Some recent data (Wikipedia: Atlantic Menhaden dl: 12/2020) indicate that commercial purse seiners in 2015 were permitted to  take  approximately 200,000 metric tons off this fish, or roughly 400,000,000 pounds ( or about that many individual one lb fish). Other estimates indicate as much as 500,000 metric tons or half a million metric tons of fish were landed annually in earlier dates.  

The federal agencies which partly control commercial fishing as well as commercial fishermen themselves suggest that the stocks of menhaden are not “overfished”.  There is a technical definition for this term.  But one does not have to be an expert on fish management to understand that by removing the huge numbers (in hundreds of thousands of  tons) of a major forage fish from the coastal ocean to make fish oil, lipstick, animal feed, and fish oil pills —simply  denies this same  amount of hundreds of thousands of metric tons of of food resource to  the many species which have evolved over the millennia to depend on the menhaden as a source of sustenance. Clearly, if we remove this much food from the sea,  we must expect we are denying food to other species and thus must expect a decline in those species of fish and other creatures which depend on that species for survival.  

Keep in mind all wild species live on the knife edge between bare survival  and starvation. Even very small changes in population of a first line forage fish such as the Atlantic Menhaden can be expected to have a deleterious effect on those species which have evolved over thousands of years to depend on the seasonal abundance of these fish.  Thus we must expect such species as the weakfish, striped bass, bluefish, seals, dolphins, and other species which depend on bunker for sustenance to respond by falling in population levels. 

There is no “free lunch” in the sea.  There is no “excess fish stocks” which we can remove without effect on the entire ecological system. In nature every species is part of a tightly connected food web of predator and prey, of food and energy distribution  Change the system somewhere and you will alter the system.  The alterations may be irreversible and catastrophic to certain dependent species.  

So when a fisherman asks: Where did the stripers and bluefish go?  The answer may be: “Sorry but we made a choice, we chose  lipstick and fish oil supplement pills!  

Make your choice.Which would you rather have?

*