Christy SomosCTVNews.ca Writer

@C_Somos ContactPublished Tuesday, September 14, 2021 9:16PM EDT

Green tree python (Pexexls/Pixabay)

SHARE:

Share7https://platform.twitter.com/widgets/tweet_button.f88235f49a156f8b4cab34c7bc1a0acc.en.html#dnt=false&id=twitter-widget-0&lang=en&original_referer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ctvnews.ca%2Fsci-tech%2Fall-snakes-evolved-from-a-few-species-that-survived-cretaceous-period-asteroid-strike-study-suggests-1.5585724&size=m&text=All%20snakes%20evolved%20from%20a%20few%20species%20that%20survived%20Cretaceous-period%20asteroid%20strike%2C%20study%20suggests&time=1631917582183&type=share&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ctvnews.ca%2Fsci-tech%2Fall-snakes-evolved-from-a-few-species-that-survived-cretaceous-period-asteroid-strike-study-suggests-1.5585724&via=CTVNewsReddithttps://www.facebook.com/plugins/share_button.php?app_id=404047912964744&channel=https%3A%2F%2Fstaticxx.facebook.com%2Fx%2Fconnect%2Fxd_arbiter%2F%3Fversion%3D46%23cb%3Df3fb27f50aa8d64%26domain%3Dwww.ctvnews.ca%26is_canvas%3Dfalse%26origin%3Dhttps%253A%252F%252Fwww.ctvnews.ca%252Ff3ad3416396085c%26relation%3Dparent.parent&container_width=42&href=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ctvnews.ca%2Fsci-tech%2Fall-snakes-evolved-from-a-few-species-that-survived-cretaceous-period-asteroid-strike-study-suggests-1.5585724&layout=button_count&locale=en_US&sdk=joey&size=small

TORONTO — A new study from the University of Bath in the U.K. suggests that all modern snakes evolved from a few species that managed to survive the giant asteroid impact that wiped out the dinosaurs and most living things at the end of the Cretaceous period, between 145.5 and 65.5 million years ago.

The Cretaceous period marked the last period of what’s known as the Mesozoic Era, following the Jurassic period and ended with the extinction of the dinosaurs.

The study, published in the journal Nature Communications, says that the mass extinction event of the asteroid strike was a form of “creative destruction” that allowed snakes to diversify their evolutionary processes, and that snake species began to diversify around that time.

Related Stories

• Scientists receive US$15 million to resurrect woolly mammoth
• No bull: Scientists potty train cows to use ‘MooLoo’
• South Korea to fine Google US$177M for forcing software on devices
• Egypt team identifies fossil of land-roaming whale species

Related Links

• Read the full snake evolution study

Researchers, led by scientists at the University of Bath with collaborators from Bristol and Cambridge in the U.K. and Germany, used fossils and analysis of genetic differences between modern snakes to build a reconstruction of snake evolution, which helped pinpoint the time where modern snakes evolved.

The study results show that all living snakes, more than 4,000 species, trace back to a handful of species that survived the asteroid impact of 66 million years ago.

Researchers posit that snakes’ abilities to shelter underground and forgo food for long periods of time assisted them in surviving the destructive effects of the impact. The subsequent destruction of their competitors at the time from the strike allowed snake species back then to spread to new habitats and continents – spurring evolutionary processes.

That advantage allowed snakes to produce lineages like vipers, cobras, garter snakes and pythons, the study says, and notes that modern snake species, including tree snakes, sea snakes, cobras and boas, only emerged after dinosaurs’ extinction.

The study notes that there is a distinct shift in the shape of snake vertebrae in fossils from the period following the asteroid strike, which fed into the appearance of new species groups, including giant sea snakes up to 10 metres long, according to a release.

“It’s remarkable, because not only are they surviving an extinction that wipes out so many other animals, but within a few million years they are innovating, using their habitats in new ways,” said lead author Dr. Catherine Klein in the release.

The study also suggests that snakes began to spread across the globe during this time, and although the ancestors of living snakes “probably lived in the Southern Hemisphere,” snakes appear to have spread to Asia after the extinction event of the asteroid strike.

“Our research suggests that extinction acted as a form of ‘creative destruction’- by wiping out old species, it allowed survivors to exploit the gaps in the ecosystem, experimenting with new lifestyles and habitats,” said study author Nick Longrich in the release.

“This seems to be a general feature of evolution – it’s the periods immediately after major extinctions where we see evolution at its most wildly experimental and innovative,” he continued. “The destruction of biodiversity makes room for new things to emerge and colonize new landmasses. Ultimately life becomes even more diverse than before.”

Researchers also found evidence of a second diversification event around the time the earth shifted from a warm “Greenhouse Earth” into a cold “Icehouse” climate, which fomented the beginning of the Ice Ages and saw the formation of the polar icecaps.

The study says that the pattern researchers found in snakes’ evolution hints at how global catastrophes with severe and rapid environmental disruptions can drive evolutionary change. 

https://www.ctvnews.ca/sci-tech/all-snakes-evolved-from-a-few-species-that-survived-cretaceous-period-asteroid-strike-study-suggests-1.5585724

Cormorants need your help. Voice your support on these key issues and help educate others on the plight of these birds and other wildlife species.

https://www.greatlakescormorants.com/take-action

Most Farm Subsidies Are “Harmful” to People and the Planet, Says UN

Read Next

What’s the Difference Between Vegan and Vegetarian?

In a new report, the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) sounded the alarm over the consequences of hundreds of billions of dollars in agricultural subsidies that are “harmful to nature and health.” The joint report from multiple agencies within the United Nations comes on the eve of the intergovernmental organization’s Food Systems Summit 2021.

Around the world, $540 billion in support is given to the agricultural sector each year. But the new findings detail that 87 percent of this funding results in food products and practices that “distort food prices, hurt people’s health, and degrade the environment,” while exacerbating inequitable access to nutritious foods.

As the planet faces a worsening climate crisis, one that is accelerated by animal farming and other forms of industrial food production, the new report makes it clear that governments continue to subsidize harmful agricultural practices. Most of the support given worldwide, according to the UNEP, incentivized products with high greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, including beef, milk, and rice. In high-income nations, the largest subsidies among meats went to beef production. Poultry meat, or meat from chickens, ducks, geese, and other birds, was the number three most incentivized product, receiving support in 36 countries. 

This support comes despite the fact that factory farms are a major contributor to harmful GHGs in our atmosphere, worsening climate change, as well as air pollution. In fact, a recent study concluded that 17,900 U.S. deaths per year are caused by air pollution from factory farms. Of the 15,900 directly related to food production, 80 percent of deaths are linked to animal-based foods.

The impacts of government funding for the agriculture sector do not stop at harmful GHGs, the UNEP warns. It also negatively affects the ability of soil to absorb carbon from the atmosphere, preservation of forests and fresh water, and the prevention of biodiversity loss across land and sea. The new report warns that “the most potentially harmful types of support,” those that came without constraints on farming practices to protect the environment, accounted for around 50 percent of agricultural support. 

“The increased clustering and growth in the confinement of animals has led to growing environmental problems in many communities,” the report notes, adding that in areas where factory farms are located, an estimated 30 percent of particulate matter is produced by emissions from livestock. Yet, while animal products were among the commodities given the largest incentives between 2005-2016, “the production of more nutrient-rich fruits and vegetables, such as tomatoes and bananas, was penalized” with less support.

Damage is also likely being done to farmers, already caught up in an inequitable system of industrial agriculture. The UNEP reports that price distortions caused by our current agricultural funding can widen the income gap that exists between small- and large-scale farms and reduce competitiveness in the food industry. Small farmers already hold very little power, contracted by large corporations that control much of their supply chains.

Consumers and communities, too, are impacted when prices are distorted by this misguided funding, which can “hinder consumers’ access to nutritious food, particularly for the poorest.” Food insecurity is already a global crisis. It claims the lives of nine million people every year. Corporate agriculture, on the other hand, promises to feed the world, but instead contributes to the growing food waste problem faced by many developed countries, leaving millions of people hungry.

While this funding is now made more visible to the public, the report cautions that there are more “hidden costs of global food and land-based agricultural systems to the environment and public health,” estimated at $12 trillion per year and growing. These costs include impacts from obesity and undernutrition, pollution, food waste, and inequitable income distribution.

With agricultural incentives projected to reach $1.8 trillion by the year 2030, the UN report calls for changes and declares the imminent Food Systems Summit “a momentous opportunity to generate a groundswell of support for repurposing” of support.

The report notes that “repurposed support policies can incentivize producers to avoid or reduce certain practices (e.g. intensive ploughing, overgrazing) and the use of some inputs (e.g. fertilizers and pesticides) which can damage soils, and to adopt regenerative agricultural practices instead.” 

The time to act is now. The agencies conclude that the decisions made at the Food Systems Summit and in the months and years ahead will either further or hinder 12 or more of the UN’s 17 Sustainable Development Goals.Read More

Not All Food Waste Is Created Equal

The Food We Feed Farmed Animals Has a Massive Environmental Impact

The Hidden Cost of Italy’s Meat Industry

PUBLISHED THU, SEP 16 20217:30 AM EDTUPDATED 6 HOURS AGOSalvador Rodriguez@SAL19SHAREShare Article via FacebookShare Article via TwitterShare Article via LinkedInShare Article via EmailKEY POINTS

https://www.cnbc.com/2021/09/16/homeowners-relocating-because-of-climate-change-wildfires-flooding.html

• For those who are already feeling the direct impact of global warming and can afford to relocate, climate change migration has begun. 
• Nearly half of Americans who plan to move in the next year say natural disasters and extreme temperatures factored into their decision to relocate, according to a survey conducted by Redfin. 
• One in 5 Americans believe climate change is already negatively impacting home values in their areas, and 35% of homeowners have already spent $5,000 or more protecting their homes against climate risk, according to Redfin.

WATCH NOWVIDEO45:19Living on the front lines of climate change — victims of fire and flood

Christy Gentry and her husband have been dealing with California’s wildfires for the past four years. 

In 2017, the couple evacuated their Santa Rosa home for three weeks. In 2019, they were forced to cut a trip to Hawaii short and get their animals and stuff out of their house as a fire approached.

“It was just one thing after another. It was smoke, it was the fire danger, the potential of fire danger, the potential of being evacuated,” Gentry said. “It changed the way we viewed our property.”

After so many fires, Gentry and her husband rented a home in Bend, Oregon, in August 2020 so they would have somewhere to go during the California fire season. 

Fires finally hit their property in September 2020. Although they didn’t lose their home, one of their barns burned down and they couldn’t get back to their property until mid-November. So Gentry and her husband bought a home in Bend in January 2021 and now split time between there and Santa Rosa.

“It comes down to feeling safe,” Gentry said. “Everybody has a little PTSD — I won’t even light candles in my house.”

Christy Gentry is among a growing number of homeowners citing climate change as a primary reason for moving.Courtesy of Christy Gentry

‘Wealthier people can adapt’

Gentry is among a growing number of homeowners citing climate change as a primary reason for moving.

Nearly half of Americans who plan to move in the next year say natural disasters and extreme temperatures factored into their decision to relocate, according to an April survey conducted by real estate brokerage firm Redfin. 

Last month, the United Nations’ climate panel delivered a dire report calling for immediate action. The agency warned that limiting global warming to close to 1.5 degrees Celsius or even 2 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels “will be beyond reach” in the next two decades without rapid and large-scale reductions in greenhouse gas emissions. The report said that at 2 degrees Celsius, heat extremes would often reach critical tolerance thresholds for agriculture and health.

One in 5 Americans believe climate change is already negatively impacting home values in their areas, and 35% of homeowners have already spent $5,000 or more protecting their homes against climate risk, according to Redfin. Meanwhile, 79% of Americans said they would be hesitant to buy a home in areas with increasing frequency or intensity of natural disasters, 75% said they’d be hesitant to buy in an area with extreme temperatures and 76% said they would be hesitant to purchase in regions with rising sea levels, Redfin’s survey found. 

“We know from these surveys that homebuyers, homeowners, homesellers — they’re recognizing the threat of climate change and it is impacting their home’s values and will impact their home’s values,” said Daryl Fairweather, Redfin’s chief economist. 

At the same time, there’s no shortage of buyers for the properties that concerned homeowners are abandoning — in fact, Redfin found that more people are actually moving into areas facing high risk from climate change than out of them, according to an August survey.

Affordability is a major factor. According to Redfin, counties where many homes face high heat risk are less expensive on average.

“Climate change will definitely impact poorer people more than wealthier people,” Fairweather said. “Wealthier people can adapt. They can modify their homes to be more resilient … and they can also just pick up and move. You can sell your home and buy another home somewhere else pretty easily.”

After living in San Jose, California, for 39 years, Kathryn Kelly moved back to her hometown of Natick, Massachusetts, with her family to escape California’s wildfires.Courtesy of Kathryn Kelly

Fleeing fires and rising seas in California

Kathryn Kelly moved back to her hometown of Natick, Massachusetts, in August after more than 30 years living in San Jose, California, in the heart of Silicon Valley. 

Kelly and her husband had grown concerned about the increasing frequency of wildfires surrounding the San Francisco Bay Area and the impact their smoke could have on the long-term health of their 13-year-old daughter. 

“We want to make sure she doesn’t end up with lung cancer when she’s 20 from breathing that kind of air,” Kelly said. 

Last summer, the family escaped the Bay Area fires by heading to their second home in Huntington Beach, in Southern California. Although they were able to get away, they also worry about the potential impact of rising sea levels on their second home. This summer, the family ended up getting caught near one of the California fires as they drove back to San Jose in June.

“The whole mountainside on the freeway was on fire, and it was super scary,” Kelly said. 

These experiences prompted the family to move, and they settled on Kelly’s hometown of Natick. The family is no longer worrying about fires and is excited about how green and lush their new area is. Despite Massachusetts getting its own smoke from wildfires in July, Kelly said these concerns are exponentially higher in California considering its year-round drought conditions.

“We can’t escape the effects of climate change completely by moving to Massachusetts, but we lessen the impact on our health greatly with less smoke and smog year round,” she said.

The Covid-19 pandemic helped ease the way. Although Kelly had already been working from home for several years, her husband had not. But when the pandemic forced corporate workers out of the office and into remote work, his job gave them the flexibility to make a move as long as he remained in proximity to one of their offices. 

“Even though Covid has been such a disaster, it was a pivotal time for us to say ‘This is it. This is our chance to do it,’” Kelly said. 

Kim Romano decided to sell her Key West, Florida, property after being told that raising the home to avoid future floods would cost her $250,000 or more.Courtesy of Kim Romano

Giving up the flooding fight in Key West

The pandemic also played a role in Kim Romano’s climate change migration. 

In July 2020, Romano left her home in Key West, Florida, for Seattle to be near her son during the pandemic. In 2019, Romano had received an estimate that raising her Key West home of 12 years by 7 feet to avoid future floods would cost her $250,000 or more. After arriving in Seattle and falling in love with the city, Romano decided she was going to relocate rather than paying to harden her Florida home.

“I decided that I just need to leave,” Romano said. “The mitigation costs for climate change are already starting, and it’s just going to be way too expensive. I don’t want to spend my money in that way, I’d rather be here in Seattle.”

Following that decision, Romano’s son bought her a home in Seattle in May 2021, and she is now in the process of selling her Key West home.

There are plenty of potential buyers. Consistent with Redfin’s findings that more people are moving into high-risk areas, Romano said that the market is hotter than ever. After buying the house for approximately $650,000 12 years ago, she and her realtor are going to list it for $1.2 million. 

“Basically, it’s a great time to sell,” she said. 

For Romano, who is retired, climate change is the last thing she wants to worry about as she enjoys her golden years. She’d rather just get ahead of it. 

“I feel like this is the last quarter of my last quarter, and I’m going to make good use of it,” Romano said.

Watch the CNBC documentary “America’s Climate Crisis” to hear more stories from people who are being forced to adapt to climate change.