Historical biogeography of the North American glacier ice worm, Mesenchytraeus solifugus (Annelida: Oligochaeta: Enchytraeidae)

2012 ◽  
Vol 63 (3) ◽  
pp. 577-584 ◽  
Author(s):  
C. Roman Dial ◽  
Roman J. Dial ◽  
Ralph Saunders ◽  
Shirley A. Lang ◽  
Ben Lee ◽  
...  
Author(s):  
William deBuys

Mapmakers typically depict the aridlands of the world in colors like buff and buckskin, in contrast to the greens of wetter regions. Their choice is true to reality, for dry places usually produce scant vegetation, and the bare ground, baked by unobstructed sun, tends to wear a washed-out shade of dun, or one of its cousins. In the North American Southwest, you might add a touch of rust to reflect the widespread iron-rich geology. In many areas, oxides of iron produce the pinkish flesh tones that make it easy to think the landscape is alive. If you also brush in some piney greens and spruce black for upland woods and forests, and dab smaller areas white to represent high-country snowcaps, you have a fair start toward capturing the palette of the region. But you would still be missing the most definitive color of the Southwest, which is found not beneath the feet, but overhead. You can look up, straight up, almost any day of the year, and there it is: an intense, infinite blue, miles deep and beyond reach. It is not merely bluish, not the watery blue of Scandinavian eyes, not the black-mixed blue of dark seas or bachelor buttons, not the hazy blue of glacier ice or distant mountains, but an Ur-blue, an über-blue, a defining quintessence. It is to other blues as brandy is to wine: a distillation, pure and heady. It can be a little deflating to reflect that the ethereal blue of southwestern skies results from mundane forces, that it is the product of solar radiation and atmospheric gases interacting in an environment shaped by climate. If the air held more water vapor, the sky would whiten overhead, as it does at the horizons, where the light that reaches our eyes has more atmosphere and diffusing vapor to travel through.


2006 ◽  
Vol 175 (4S) ◽  
pp. 511-512
Author(s):  
David G. McLeod ◽  
Ira Klimberg ◽  
Donald Gleason ◽  
Gerald Chodak ◽  
Thomas Morris ◽  
...  

2013 ◽  
Vol 74 (S 01) ◽  
Author(s):  
Pete Batra ◽  
Jivianne Lee ◽  
Samuel Barnett ◽  
Brent Senior ◽  
Michael Setzen ◽  
...  

2018 ◽  
pp. 52-69
Author(s):  
A. N. Oleinik

The article develops a transactional approach to studying science. Two concepts play a particularly important role: the institutional environment of science and scientific transaction. As an example, the North-American and Russian institutional environments of science are compared. It is shown that structures of scientific transactions (between peers, between the scholar and the academic administrator, between the professor and the student), transaction costs and the scope of academic freedom differ in these two cases. Transaction costs are non-zero in both cases, however. At the same time, it is hypothesized that a greater scope of academic freedom in the North American case may be a factor contributing to a higher scientific productivity.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document