· Online dating turns the act of intimacy into a game of words instead of a bond. When you lack the opportunity to manifest that bond through personal interactions, it makes us · This is, in part, the nature of addiction. I love sex, and I don’t have a casual relationship with it. I long for partnership, but looking for it in an online dating app is treachery · Claim it for two reasons. First, a narcissist will want to use it to boost his image. Second, a healthy ego is great protection against deception. Grandiosity and codependency, · Create a compassionate space within and around you for whatever emotions come up, so that they can be seen, welcomed, and loved. If you choose to date online, write a bold, · It’s acceptable on dating apps to ignore a persons efforts without guilt as ‘ghosting’ becomes a common occurrence. There’s issues with expectations too as dating intentions ... read more
Start my own journal. Did we also mention it's free? Keep a journal Keep a journal of your daily activities, your travel, exercise, diet, or thoughts and prayers. Online diary Quickly find past journal entries thanks to an intuitive calendar.
Update from any device With Journalate you can update your online diary from any browser. Track your thoughts everywhere! Go ahead, take a peek Journalate is so easy to use and you can quickly import your posts from Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, and YouTube! From our blog presence of artificial water and fences using the lme4 package [ 31 ]. All these selected explanatory variables S1 Table were included in different combinations in the GLMMs [ 32 ] and we assigned study identity as a random effect to account for dependencies among multiple responses from the same study [ 33 ].
A multi-model selection procedure selected the best models by ranking the candidate GLMMs by their AIC and Akaike weights ω i [ 32 ] and the strength of support for the best and alternate models with AIC differences ΔAIC in the MuMIn package [ 34 ] R-scripts are provided in S2 Appendix. The initial dataset consisted of peer-reviewed papers published in 88 journals see S3 Appendix for complete reference list.
The first paper appeared before s from the Budongo rain forest in Uganda. Over the following 68 years, some 80 sites across the sub-Saharan savannas were subjected to a study on elephant impact. The most studies came from the Kruger National Park in South Africa that had 56 papers published on elephant impact since Thirty-three sites across Africa had only a single paper published on impact.
The number of papers on elephant impact steadily increased each year since the first one in , and the papers used in our meta-analysis only started appearing after S1 Fig. Our final selection of papers came from fourteen study sites distributed across five countries, with five sites in South Africa, four in Kenya, two in Zimbabwe and Tanzania, and one in Uganda Fig 1. The study areas in bright red and with numbers assigned to them were included in the meta-analysis.
Those sites in a lighter red had papers published on elephant impact, but the papers did not meet the criteria that we have set for inclusion in the meta-analysis. In total, we extracted individual comparisons k between elephant presence and absence from the 51 papers n Table 1.
Elephants had a negative impact on tree structure and abundance, and a neutral effect on tree diversity, tree population and the associated ecological processes Fig 2A.
Herb structure was not affected by elephants, whereas diversity was positively and their abundance negatively affected. Vertebrate structure, abundance, population level responses, diversity and the associated ecological processes did not respond to the presence of elephants Fig 2B.
Impacts were also neutral on invertebrate abundance, diversity and on the associated ecological processes Fig 2B. Soil properties responded negatively to elephant presence. The first value in the bracket indicates the number of papers n from which we extracted the variables, and the second is the number of variables k used in calculating the effect sizes.
The frequency distributions of the effect sizes were unimodal. Modes centred on the zero bin classes for trees bin width is 1·27 and effect sizes ranged from -6·18 to 5·56 , herbs bin width 0·68; ranged from The distribution of effect sizes for trees and vertebrates were almost symmetrical, left-skewed for herbs and soil properties, and right-skewed for invertebrates. Frequency distributions of the individual elephant effects k on trees a , herbs b , vertebrates c , and invertebrates d.
Primary productivity was the only explanatory variable included to describe the direct effects that elephants had S2 Table. In contrast, for indirect effects, primary productivity, management interventions, elephant densities, and tree cover were all included as explanatory variables in the best set of models S3 Table. Less than fifteen percent of published studies on elephant impact provided us with enough information to be included in our meta-analysis.
Studies that did provide enough information illustrated that elephants have an impact on the structure and abundance of plants, with no cascading impact on small mammals, birds, herpetofauna, and invertebrate species.
More importantly, we could only explain a relatively small amount of variation in elephant impact using primary productivity. Elephant numbers, study duration, rainfall, tree cover, water provision, and fences could not explain impact. In another recent review, even when elephants and other megaherbivores are absent vegetation structure changes, i. woody biomass and abundance increase [ 23 ], but we still lack information on the indirect effects on other species.
The lack of evidence highlighted by this meta-analysis may challenge current management perspectives on how to deal with elephant impact. We had to exclude most publications because they lacked data, had study designs without controls, or did not present proper statistical information [ 35 ].
This ultimately limited the number of samples from which we could calculate the direct and indirect effects that elephant had for other species in the African savannas. The lack of data resulted in producing relatively wide confidence intervals that overlapped with zero for some of the effect sizes, and may imply that elephants have a neutral effect on co-occurring species. These limitations in the lack of published data therefore may mask the elephant effect, and can only be resolved when we have sufficient information from which to calculate effect sizes.
It calls for the participants in the peer-review process to address these limitations for future synthesis [ 36 ], to be transparent in their work [ 37 ], and to also report on the salient features of each study such as the sizes of control and treatment sites [ 14 , 20 ].
Replicated, randomized, and long-term ecological studies with elephant and other mega-herbivores exclosures in place, might in addition also provide the information from which we can evaluate elephant impact scientifically. Savannas in Africa are heterogeneous, complex, and factors besides megaherbivores i. drought, fire can change savanna structure [ 38 — 39 ]. It remains contentious to separate the effects of elephants from fires, rainfall, soil mineral content, other herbivores, disease, and the impact of people [ 40 — 42 ].
Studies on the conversion of woodland to shrubland, or even to grassland, cannot ignore these alternative explanations as potential drivers of change in the system [ 8 , 43 — 44 ]. To complicate matters, recent evidence indicates that elephants in arid regions suppress woody encroachment ascribed to elevated levels of atmospheric CO 2 [ 15 ] and therefore ultimately prevent the transformation of savannas in Africa.
An added issue in interpreting elephant impact is constrained by some of the underlying assumptions. One such assumption is that statistically significant differences reflect on significant ecological differences, which may not always be the case [ 45 — 46 ]. Another assumption is that the measurement of impact is independent of scale. For instance, changes on an individual tree linked to elephant browsing become insignificant at the greater landscape scale, i. A third assumption deals with a lack of ecological context, because negative values do not necessarily indicate negative impact.
Lower number of species in the presence of elephants could simply be due to competitive exclusion [ 49 ], or because the community consist of pioneer and ruderal species that dominate the early stages of succession, or because of the onset of patch dynamics [ 50 — 51 ].
We propose that the underlying assumption for elephant impact should focus on the current philosophy of conservation, which is to restore and maintain biological diversity [ 52 — 53 ], and where loosing species becomes unacceptable. Our contention here is to introduce heterogeneity, as a measure of variation, to evaluate impact [ 54 ].
If elephants increase the homogeneity in the savanna landscape then impact is negative, and where heterogeneity is higher in the presence of elephants, we deduce then that they contribute positively to the maintenance of savannas in Africa. Disturbances caused by elephant foraging [ 11 ], taken as a negative impact for tree structure and numbers, establishes niches for species to occupy [ 14 ] and thereby increase species diversity and hence heterogeneity.
In contrast, prevailing conditions in parts of Africa that limits elephant space use may increase homogeneity in the savanna landscape.
This fits in with our lack of identifying typical explanatory covariates from which to evaluate impact. If it is not elephant numbers, savanna dynamics, management legacies, and time since afforded protection that explains elephant impact, then the management in the use of space by elephants [ 55 ] remains one of the only possibilities to negate the scale-dependent rates of disturbances of elephant [ 11 ].
This conceptual shift is relevant to conservation management that had concerns in the past on the effect that megaherbivores have on other species. These concerns motivated them to take action and to reduce numbers, i.
through elephant culling, especially when they interpreted negative effects as negative impact [ 10 , 56 — 57 ]. We conclude that elephants can change the plant structure and, but that this impact does not transpire into negative effects for other species that share space with them. Furthermore, in our assessment elephant density does not explain impact.
We propose that the heterogeneity of the African savanna neutralizes the effect of elephants on species, and that elephants contribute positively to the maintenance of savannas [ 15 ]. Currently, there is insufficient evidence to support the notion that reducing elephant numbers per se will alleviate any impact.
Conceptualization: RARG AP RJvA. Data curation: RARG AP RJvA. Formal analysis: RARG AP RJvA. Investigation: RARG AP RJvA. Methodology: RARG AP RJvA. Writing — original draft: RARG AP RJvA. Browse Subject Areas? Click through the PLOS taxonomy to find articles in your field. Article Authors Metrics Comments Media Coverage Reader Comments Figures. Abstract Contradictory findings among scientific studies that address a particular issue may impede the conversion of science to management implementation.
Cameron, University of Tasmania, AUSTRALIA Received: November 24, ; Accepted: May 22, ; Published: June 7, Copyright: © Guldemond et al. Introduction The impact that iconic megaherbivores have on their environment and on other species carries considerable emotion and disagreement [ 1 — 2 ].
Methods We searched for scholarly papers on elephant impact using the Biological Sciences , Scopus , Zoological Record and Wildlife Ecology and Studies Worldwide search engines. Download: PPT. Table 1. The 14 study sites ranked according the numbers of papers produced for each site, and the number of effects included in the meta-analysis. Analysis For the purpose of this meta-analysis we assigned any measurement made in the presence of elephant as treatment values, and those made in elephant absence as the control values [ 3 ].
Results The initial dataset consisted of peer-reviewed papers published in 88 journals see S3 Appendix for complete reference list. Fig 1. Map of sub-Saharan Africa showing the distribution of the 80 sites with elephant populations where studies were done to determine the effect elephant had for other species.
Discussion Less than fifteen percent of published studies on elephant impact provided us with enough information to be included in our meta-analysis.
Supporting information. S1 Appendix. The PRISMA flow diagram. s DOCX. S2 Appendix. R code for the analyses.
S3 Appendix. Complete list of scholarly papers on elephant impact. S1 Fig. The number of papers published each year since on the effect that elephant had on the environment. s TIF. S2 Fig. Frequency distributions of the individual elephant effects k on soil properties.
S1 Table. Type, description, and source of the variables included in the generalized linear mixed-effects models to explain elephant impact. S2 Table. Selection parameters of the candidate generalized linear mixed-effects models that describe the variation in direct effects.
S3 Table. Selection parameters of the candidate generalized linear mixed-effects models that describe the variation in indirect effects. Acknowledgments We thank Morgan J.
Trimble for extracting some of the data from the published figures. Author Contributions Conceptualization: RARG AP RJvA. References 1. van Aarde RJ, Jackson TP, Ferreira SM Conservation science and elephant management in southern Africa.
S Afr J Sc — View Article Google Scholar 2. Environ Plann C Gov Policy — View Article Google Scholar 3. Guldemond R, van Aarde R A meta-analysis of the impact of African elephants on savanna vegetation. J Wildl Manage — View Article Google Scholar 4. Young KD, van Aarde RJ Science and elephant management decision in South Africa. Biol Conserv — View Article Google Scholar 5. Sutherland WJ, Pullin AS, Dolman PM, Knight TM The need for evidence-based conservation.
Trends Ecol Evol — Stewart G Meta-analysis in applied ecology. Biol Lett 6: 78— Estes JA, Terborgh J, Brashares JS, Power ME, Berger J, Bond WJ, et al. Science — Ripple WJ, Newsome TM, Wolf C, Dirzo R, Everatt KT, Galetti M, et al. Sci Adv 1:e Fritz H, Duncan P, Gordon IJ, Illius AW Megaherbivores influence trophic guilds structure in African ungulate communities.
Oecologia — Cumming DH, Fenton MB, Rautenbach IL, Taylor RD, Cumming GS, Cumming MS, et al. View Article Google Scholar Asner GP, Levick SR Landscape-scale effects of herbivores on treefall in African savannas.
Ecol Lett — Gonthier DJ Notes on the seeds deposited in elephant dung at Tarangire National Park, Tanzania. Afr J Ecol — Pringle RM Elephants as agents of habitat creation for small vertebrates at the patch scale. Ecology 26— Stevens N. Erasmus BFN, Archibald S, Bond WJ Woody encroachment over 70 years in South African savannahs: overgrazing, global change or extinction aftershock?
Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci Côté SD, Rooney TP, Tremblay J- P, Dussault C, Waller DM Ecological impacts of deer overabundance. Annu Rev Ecol Evol Syst — Kowalczyk R, Taberlet P, Coissac E, Valentini A, Miquel C, Kamiński T, et al.
For Ecol Manage —
There's bad news for Canadians selling elephant tusks illegally — thanks to science, you can no longer pretend ivory is antique and get away with it. Authorities can now use radiocarbon dating to determine exactly what year an elephant was killed, showing whether its tusks were legally obtained or not.
Environment Canada used the new technique for the first time to convict Toronto-based Five Star Auctions and Appraisals, and company director Chun Al Jin, in February, the department said in a news release this week. But a radiocarbon analysis of the tusks showed that they likely both belonged to the same elephant, killed in plus or minus a year, said Guillaume Labrecque, of the radiochronology laboratory at Quebec's Laval University, who helped conduct the analysis.
Radiocarbon dating is a technique commonly used in forensics and archeology to figure out the age of materials that come from plants or animals, such as bone or wood. It's based on the fact that one form of carbon — carbon — is radioactive and decays over time. Living things are constantly adding new carbon to their bodies, but once they die, the amount of carbon in their tissues declines at a known rate compared to the amount of non-radioactive carbon.
That allows their time of death to be extrapolated. Labrecque said radiocarbon dating of samples from before generally give dates within 15 to 25 years. But younger samples contain higher concentrations of carbon because extra carbon was added to the atmosphere by nuclear tests in the s. That allows more precise measurements. The idea of analyzing elephant tusks with radiocarbon dating to identify illegal specimens was developed by Kevin Uno, a postdoctoral researcher at Columbia University in New York, who published a paper about it in A magazine article about the process was spotted by Todd Kish, a field officer at Environment Canada, who contacted Uno after seizing some suspicious elephant tusks, Uno recalled.
They hit a snag because international laws to prevent the trafficking of endangered species made it illegal to send the tusks to the U. for analysis. So Uno asked Labrecque to use a chemical procedure to convert the material in the tusks to pure carbon dioxide.
A study last year found poachers killed an estimated , elephants across Africa between and , a huge spike in the continent's death rate of the world's largest land mammals. The slaughter was blamed on increased demand for ivory in China and other Asian nations. Pseudonyms will no longer be permitted. By submitting a comment, you accept that CBC has the right to reproduce and publish that comment in whole or in part, in any manner CBC chooses.
Please note that CBC does not endorse the opinions expressed in comments. Comments on this story are moderated according to our Submission Guidelines. Comments are welcome while open. We reserve the right to close comments at any time.
Join the conversation Create account. Already have an account? Illegal elephant tusk vendor convicted with help of radiocarbon dating CBC News Loaded. Science Illegal elephant tusk vendor convicted with help of radiocarbon dating There's bad news for Canadians selling elephant tusks illegally — thanks to science, you can no longer pretend ivory is antique and get away with it.
Social Sharing. Emily Chung · CBC News · Posted: Mar 03, PM ET Last Updated: March 4, Ivory trade: Why elephant poaching is still rampant Under international regulations, tusks can only be legally sold if: The elephant they belonged to was taken from the wild before July 3, The seller can prove they were legally imported into Canada.
Google Elephant system made by B. man helps fight poaching The company had claimed that the tusks were antiques. It sounds awesome.
Uno said this is the first time the technique was used in a true forensics case. CBC's Journalistic Standards and Practices About CBC News.
Related Stories Ivory trade: Why elephant poaching is still rampant Elephant slaughter by poachers in Africa soars to , in 3 years Exclusive. External Links Environment Canada news release.
Become a CBC Member Join the conversation Create account.
· It’s acceptable on dating apps to ignore a persons efforts without guilt as ‘ghosting’ becomes a common occurrence. There’s issues with expectations too as dating intentions Shoa Naqvi. Shoa Naqvi is a bunch of things, an independent researcher, writer and lecturer in humanities who is in love with music. She is a passionate closeted dancer and feels most at home doing that, writing, indulging in academic pursuits like researching & teaching. Shoa also mentors and coaches people to find their voice, to speak better · Contradictory findings among scientific studies that address a particular issue may impede the conversion of science to management implementation. A systematic review of peer-reviewed studies to generate a single outcome may overcome this problem. The contentious topic of the impact that a megaherbivore such as the savanna elephant have for other species and Download Elephant Journal and enjoy it on your iPhone, iPad, and iPod touch. From Meditation to Relationships, Family to Environmental Tips, Yoga and Meditation to Travel and Recipes—we cover all the issues and topics that matter with a sense of humor and journalistic integrity—cutting through fads and making fun of spiritual materialism Like Things, this book is eco-printed, in the USA, and only available here at Elephant Shop. The cloth cover is literally the only plastic-free cloth (most cloth covers nowadays are plastic). Most non-cloth covers are plastic-layered. It's ink-free, the ink is algae, which sucks up carbon! It's printed locally. 46 blocks away. At a · Claim it for two reasons. First, a narcissist will want to use it to boost his image. Second, a healthy ego is great protection against deception. Grandiosity and codependency, ... read more
S1 Appendix. J Biogeogr 79— In contrast, prevailing conditions in parts of Africa that limits elephant space use may increase homogeneity in the savanna landscape. Table 1. Examples of such processes are the damage to trees inflicted by insects due to elephant browsing on those particular trees, thorn and spine growth responses, seed production, and changes to leaf polyphenols, tannins and protein levels ascribed to elephant feeding.Of the remaining 73 papers, 51 of them compared variables in the presence and absence of elephants e. Savannas in Africa are heterogeneous, complex, and factors besides megaherbivores i. Become a CBC Member Join the conversation Create account. You Might Also Like. Import elephant journal online dating social media With our premium plan, you can import your most recent Twitter, Facebook, or Instagram posts.