Amelia Orth
Oct 6, 2021
Chemistry D odd
Current Event Review
University of Bath. "Modern snakes evolved from a few survivors of dino-killing asteroid." ScienceDaily. ScienceDaily, 14 September 2021, <www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2021/09/210914111218.htm>.
I reviewed the article titled "Modern snakes evolved from a few survivors of dino-killing asteroid" written by a group in the University of Bath, a public research university. This article summarizes a study suggesting that all living snakes evolved from a handful of species that survived the giant asteroid millions of years ago, which had wiped off dinosaurs and most other living things. This extinction of other species allowed snakes to diversify into other forms of their species filling the spots of their previous competitors. This discovery is proven by the fossils found which dictated the genetic differences and to pinpoint the time that modern snakes evolved. “Their results show that all living snakes trace back to just a handful of species that survived the asteroid impact 66 million years ago, the same extinction that wiped out the dinosaurs” (University of Bath). The fossils also helped to distinguish how these species of snakes were changing. Physical changes such as their length and shape of parts of their body in the fossils. The article goes more into detail on this idea. “Fossils also show a change in the shape of snake vertebrae in the aftermath, resulting from the extinction of Cretaceous lineages and the appearance of new groups, including giant sea snakes up to 10 metres long” (University of Bath). The article goes into detail of what kind of species these snakes started to diversify into. They were producing lineages such as cobras, vipers, pythons, garter snakes and boas. These new species started discovering new habitats for themselves and pray. During this time the snakes began to move around the globe and start diversifying.
The studies show that this is a form of creative destruction, wiping out old species and allowing survivors to fill the gaps and explore new habitats. The study also showed a shift in the world. Going from a green earth to the formation of an Ice Age. This constant pattern seen in snakes is concerning for the world today. “The patterns seen in snakes hint at a key role for catastrophes -- severe, rapid, and global environmental disruptions -- in driving evolutionary change” (University of Bath). This shows a connection to society today and how this can become a growing concern.
The strengths of this article were definitely going into detail about how snakes have diversified after surviving the asteroid millions of years ago. As well as what species these snakes have become after spreading across the world that we are familiar with today. Some weaknesses are definitely not going into much depth about how this is affecting our world today. It does say that there is a growing concern how snakes can survive in many conditions, but not knowing exactly what will happen if this occurs. Besides the rapid spread of them, how is it dangerous to current day life? Overall this article was very informative and interesting and I would like to see what it says about the future.
Bruno Kahraman
ReplyDeleteOct 21, 2021
Chemistry C even
Current Event Comment
I read Amelia Orth's review of "Modern snakes evolved from a few survivors of dino-killing asteroid" written by the University of Bath, and I think Amelia did a good job writing her review. One thing that I found interesting was how the review explains that the evolution of snakes after the asteroid collision was found through snake fossils. It says, "The fossils also helped to distinguish how these species of snakes were changing. Physical changes such as their length and shape of parts of their body in the fossils." I found this interesting as I didn't consider at first how fossils effect our understanding of evolution (or even snake evolution) Another thing I found interesting that the review brought up was how the shapes of snakes evolved. It says, "'Fossils also show a change in the shape of snake vertebrae in the aftermath, resulting from the extinction of Cretaceous lineages and the appearance of new groups, including giant sea snakes up to 10 meters long' (University of Bath)." I found it interesting how the snakes also existed in the water and could grow up to 10 meters long! A third thing I found interesting in the review was what kinds of species the snakes broke off into. It says, "The article goes into detail of what kind of species these snakes started to diversify into. They were producing lineages such as cobras, vipers, pythons, garter snakes and boas." I found it interesting how many different species of snakes evolved since the prehistoric asteroid collision and that list was only scratching the surface of different species of snakes.
While Amelia's review kept me interested throughout my reading, it had a few spots that left me confused or could've used improvements. On of these spots was the review's continuation after the prehistoric asteroid crash. It says, "These new species started discovering new habitats for themselves and pray. During this time the snakes began to move around the globe and start diversifying. " This felt like a lackluster continuation and leaves me with questions like how did the snakes move across continents, did climate impact their movement, and are they still diversifying to new habitats? Another spot in the review that left me confused was the existence of snakes before the prehistoric asteroid crash. It says, "This article summarizes a study suggesting that all living snakes evolved from a handful of species that survived the giant asteroid millions of years ago, which had wiped off dinosaurs and most other living things. This extinction of other species allowed snakes to diversify into other forms of their species filling the spots of their previous competitors." This leaves me confused as to how snakes operated before the prehistoric asteroid collision. It makes me question what these early snakes looked like, and how they operated in the same ecosystem as dinosaurs.
While Amelia's review had a few spots that could've used improvements, one aspect of her review is the cycles of creation and destruction our planet constantly goes through. It says, "The studies show that this is a form of creative destruction, wiping out old species and allowing survivors to fill the gaps and explore new habitats. The study also showed a shift in the world. Going from a green earth to the formation of an Ice Age. This constant pattern seen in snakes is concerning for the world today." Our planet has gone through so many life and death events from the prehistoric asteroid collision, to the ice age. Today we are faced with the event of climate change, which threatens the existence of our ecosystems and dozens of species. Unlike with the prehistoric asteroid collision, where the snakes and species of the planet had no way of preventing the collision, we are able to minimize the impact and recover better. However, we have to all address the problem and come together as soon as possible.
Damian Engenheiro
ReplyDeleteMr. Ippolito
Current Event 5
10/22/21
University of Bath. "Modern snakes evolved from a few survivors of dino-killing asteroid." ScienceDaily. ScienceDaily, 14 September 2021, .
https://bhscorechem.blogspot.com/2021/10/modern-snakes-evolved-from-few.html#comment-form
Modern Snakes Evolved from a few Survivors of Dino-Killing Asteroid
The review of the article, “Modern Snakes Evolved from a Few Survivors of Dino-Killing Asteroid”, by a group in the University of Bath, a public research university, really explained and dissected the article very well. I like how the reviewer explained the basics about the topic at first. The reviewer tells us about how we know that snakes survived after the asteroids and what changed about them like their “length and shape of parts of their body.” I also like how the reviewer explains what new species the snakes started to diversify into, such as “cobras, vipers, pythons, garter snakes and boas.” It’s really interesting to see how snakes could survive the asteroids and then diversify into so many different species. Finally I liked the end where the reviewer critiqued the article saying that you need to explain how this could affect us. The article didn’t have this and I agree with the reviewer that it is very important to keep the reader more knowledgeable about how this finding can affect us.
Although the review was overall well written and explained, there were some things that could be improved. For example, I was wondering how the snakes survived the asteroids and not the dinosaurs. It is almost unbelievable that they could do that. There wasn’t any elaboration on that and I would like to know how they survived. Also, I would have liked to know more about how they adapted and how they diversified into different species. That would be interesting to learn about so there could be more information on that.
Overall,I really enjoyed reading about this article because it was interesting to read that snakes survived the asteroids and not the dinosaurs. I also found it interesting how the snakes have diversified into different species over time. Although there were some things the review could elaborate more on, it was overall very well written and explained. This article looked very interesting in how we are learning about how we are learning more about snakes and where they came from and I’m glad I chose to comment on it.
Liam Greenfield
ReplyDeleteMr.Ippolito Chemistry C-Even
Current Events #5
October 21, 2021
Modern snakes evolved from a few survivors of dino-killing asteroid
University of Bath. "Modern snakes evolved from a few survivors of dino-killing asteroid." ScienceDaily. ScienceDaily, 14 September 2021,
Amelia’s Review of the article “Modern snakes evolved from a few survivors of dino-killing asteroids'' was very well written. This made the article more enjoyable to read and furthered the reader's understanding of the topic. The second positive aspect of the review was its length. While many articles are often long and repetitive this review was concise, however still informative. The third well accomplished aspect of Amelia’s review was her ability to use quotes and explain them powerfully to help further the reader's understanding of the article. For example in the middle of the article she quotes her article and says: ““The patterns seen in snakes hint at a key role for catastrophes -- severe, rapid, and global environmental disruptions -- in driving evolutionary change” (University of Bath). This shows a connection to society today and how this can become a growing concern.” This quote shows how she was able to use a quote to positively impact her review. While Amelia’s review was very well written there were some aspects that could’ve been improved.
The first aspect that could’ve been was the transitions. The transitions between paragraphs did not feel seamless but rather abrupt. In order to solve this problem I would suggest adding a transition sentence between paragraphs in order to prepare the reader for the next paragraph. The second aspect that could’ve been improved was her final paragraph. Her closing was weak in comparison to the rest of her review. She only included one summarizing sentence. To solve this problem and leave the readers feeling empowered she could’ve elaborated more on the importance of the article and what can be done to solve this problem. Overall Amelia had a well written and concise review of an interesting topic that left her readers satisfied.
Isabel Haller
ReplyDeleteCore Chemistry 9
Current Events Comment
October 21st, 2021
I had the pleasure of reading a great review of the article, “Here’s What We Know About Booster Shots for Modena’s and J&J’s Covid 19 Vaccines” by Erin Garcia de Jesus and Tina Hesman Saey. It was very well-written overall and was very engaging and interesting for a multitude of reasons. Firstly, the author’s very good at getting the point across in their writing. There aren’t any sentences in there for the sole reason of making the review longer or seem more well-worded; it’s concise. They say what they’d like to say, and that’s it. In addition, the writer is very clear with how they felt about the article, stating in the last paragraph that they really enjoyed reading it. This motivates the reader to do some research in that area of their own. Lastly, the review was very informative and shared many things with the reader that they wouldn’t have known before, fulfilling its purpose as an educational piece of writing.
While the review was very informative, there were some things that the author could improve on. Firstly, the piece was written in such a casual tone that I believe it took away some of the initial credibility of the author. It felt more like someone having a conversation with their friend than a formal review of a science article. For example, the author referred to the vaccine wearing off on the immune system as “dying out”, when they could have said that the vaccine had a declining protective effect. Also, they used multiple exclamation points at the end of the review which, while it makes the writing a little more playful, isn’t as professional. Their contentedness with the article definitely could have been conveyed through words instead of exciting punctuation. Lastly, if the author used more variety in word choice, the review as a whole would have been more interesting. For example, the word “overall” was used three times in one paragraph, when it could have been switched out for words or phrases such as “as a whole”, or “all in all”, or “altogether”, to transition to final ideas.
All in all, this review was pretty interesting, and the author is clearly well-informed on the topic of vaccines. Personally, I learned a lot about vaccines, their distribution, and their availability to different groups of people. This changes my perception of the vaccine and how everyone can get it. As long as the public has access to pieces of writing such as this article, more people are being informed, more people are being vaccinated, and, with that, more lives are being saved.
Jesús, Erin Garcia de, and Tina Hesman Saey. “Here's What We Know about Booster Shots for Moderna's and J&J's Covid-19 Vaccines.” Science News, 21 Oct. 2021, https://www.sciencenews.org/article/covid-coronavirus-booster-shots-vaccines-moderna-johnson-fda-cdc.
Bruno Kahraman
ReplyDeleteOct 21, 2021
Chemistry C even
Current Event Comment
https://bhscorechem.blogspot.com/2021/10/modern-snakes-evolved-from-few.html#comment-form
University of Bath. "Modern snakes evolved from a few survivors of dino-killing asteroid." ScienceDaily. ScienceDaily, 14 September 2021, .
Did not separate paragraphs -2
I read Amelia Orth's review of "Modern snakes evolved from a few survivors of dino-killing asteroid" written by the University of Bath, and I think Amelia did a good job writing her review. One thing that I found interesting was how the review explains that the evolution of snakes after the asteroid collision was found through snake fossils. Another thing I found interesting that the review brought up was how the shapes of snakes evolved. It says, "'Fossils also show a change in the shape of snake vertebrae in the aftermath, resulting from the extinction of Cretaceous lineages and the appearance of new groups, including giant sea snakes up to 10 meters long' (University of Bath)." I found it interesting how the snakes also existed in the water and could grow up to 10 meters long! A third thing I found interesting in the review was what kinds of species the snakes broke off into. It says, "The article goes into detail of what kind of species these snakes started to diversify into. They were producing lineages such as cobras, vipers, pythons, garter snakes and boas." I found it interesting how many different species of snakes evolved since the prehistoric asteroid collision and that list was only scratching the surface of different species of snakes.
While Amelia's review kept me interested throughout my reading, it had a few spots that left me confused or could've used improvements. On of these spots was the review's continuation after the prehistoric asteroid crash. This felt like a lackluster continuation and leaves me with questions like how did the snakes move across continents, did climate impact their movement, and are they still diversifying to new habitats? Another spot in the review that left me confused was the existence of snakes before the prehistoric asteroid crash. This leaves me confused as to how snakes operated before the prehistoric asteroid collision. It makes me question what these early snakes looked like, and how they operated in the same ecosystem as dinosaurs.
While Amelia's review had a few spots that could've used improvements, one aspect of her review is the cycles of creation and destruction our planet constantly goes through. It says, "The studies show that this is a form of creative destruction, wiping out old species and allowing survivors to fill the gaps and explore new habitats. The study also showed a shift in the world. Going from a green earth to the formation of an Ice Age. This constant pattern seen in snakes is concerning for the world today." Our planet has gone through so many life and death events from the prehistoric asteroid collision, to the ice age. Today we are faced with the event of climate change, which threatens the existence of our ecosystems and dozens of species. Unlike with the prehistoric asteroid collision, where the snakes and species of the planet had no way of preventing the collision, we are able to minimize the impact and recover better. However, we have to all address the problem and come together as soon as possible.
Matthew McSherry
ReplyDelete10/22/21
Chem: Period:C
Current event comment
Did not separate paragraphs -2
Modern snakes evolved from a few survivors of dino-killing asteroid
I'm commenting on Amelia's review of the Science Daily article “Modern snakes evolved from a few survivors of dino-killing asteroids”. The article details how scientists used genomes in snakes and traced them back to about 250 million years ago, at the same time the asteroid hit and killed lots of animals in our world; So the hypothesis is that because of the asteroid, many other species of snakes became so because of the asteroid. One thing I liked about her review was that she used evidence from the article that helped explain what she was saying, she also used an article from Science Daily which is a reputable source and did an article from Bath university which is a public research university. I also liked how concise the article was because even though it was kinda short it had good information in it and it all made sense. Lastly I liked how she explained the article because I read it myself because I do that for all the comments and it was a pretty hard article so she explained it well.
One thing I would say to do next time is have more details, the one you used was good but you only had one in your paragraph. I also think she could have explained more on how they evolved because of the meteorite. This was a really interesting review, it initially caught my attention because of the article but I kept on reading because it was written well.
It's very interesting how snakes were basically forced into creating new species and adapting to their environment.