Sri Lanka is one of four countries in the world, selected by the International Olympic Committee to give financial support the forest regeneration. 

“In order to face the future generations with various environmental impacts, forests and plantations should be created as much as possible, and wastelands should be turned into forests,” Pavithra Wanniyarachi, Minister of Wildlife and Forest Resources Conservation said. 

To help future generations facing environmental impacts as much bare lands as possible should be turned into forested areas, Wildlife Forest Resources Minister Pavithra Wanniarachchi said in a statement.

Sri Lanka’s Department of Forest Conservation has agreed to provide 100 pr 200 acres of bare lands to grow forests.

The IOC would provide financial support for the program. Sri Lanka Olympic Committee Chairman Suresh Subramanium and General Secretary Maxwell de Silva had helped bring the program to th island, the statement said. (Colombo/July04/2023)

Several business associations in Sri Lanka have announced price rises or falls by media conference, after apparently fixing them among the membership.

“The rupee appreciation was in the 20 percent levels (visi gar-nuck’). So we decided to bring down the prices of phones and accessories by 20 percent,” President of the Sri Lanka Phone Importers and Dealers Association, Samith Senarath told reporters. 

“We have a considerable membership from Jaffna to Matara. We all unanimously decided to cut prices by about 20 percent. “

“When the dollar went up we put the burden on the people, and when it falls we will also reduce it to be fair.”

He said the price of an I-phone Pro Max 14 was about 475,000-480,000 rupees. Now it is 375,000 to 380,000.

“The I-phone Pro Max had fallen about 30 percent. In  small phones, like feature phones, if the price has fallen by a big margin, you may not feel it.”

If market prices of some phones had fallen as much as 30 percent by market forces it is not clear why the association is trying to fix a 20 percent price fall..

In  many countries competitors getting together to set prices is considered collusion, or price fixing and it is a punishable offense.

Several business associations in Sri Lanka including bakers and three wheelers have called press conferences to announce prices apparently fixed among their members.

After the last fall in petrol prices a three wheeler association called a press conference to announce that their members have decided not to cut prices below 80 rupee a kilometre. 

 (Colombo/June12/2023)

Hallmarks of social learning include imitation and teaching. Socially learned behaviour, neither genetically wired nor acquired through individual experience alone, prevails in environments and niches that vary continually but not too wildly or quickly. In highly stable environments and niches, social learning goes unneeded: behaviour genetically encoded through natural selection suffices for survival. In highly fluctuating environments and niches, on the other hand, social learning can gain no foothold: any potentially helpful culture offers no real advantage if circumstances change radically over the lifespan of a single animal.

The cetacean hunting and foraging lifestyle seem to hit the intermediate culture-favouring sweet spot, in world oceans fluctuating constantly but in discernible patterns. Meaningful and useful knowledge can propagate horizontally among peers and vertically between generations. Cetacean culture capitalizes also on mammalian big brains and social bonding, along with energy levels fueled by breathing oxygen-rich air, unlike fish.

Cetaceans originated some 50 million years ago (mya) in Sri Lanka’s general neighbourhood, diverging from even-toed ungulates (mammals with hooves), an order comprising present-day pigs, camels, sheep, cattle, giraffe and deer. Tell-tale early fossils lie in the high Himalayas, lifted there as India slammed into Asia, beginning also around 50 mya and continuing since then. The earliest known cetacean was a smallish deer-like creature spending some of its time in freshwater streams that flooded seasonally.

By and by, cetaceans learned to swim, at first in fresh water, spending more and more time chasing fish while returning to land for sleep, mating, birthing and nursing, like today’s seals and walrus. At 40 mya, some renounced land entirely and began dispersing through global seas. Their forelimbs became flippers while their hind legs shrank into vestiges. At around 35 mya, odontocetes (toothed whales and dolphins) began their voyage toward ocean’s top predatorship. Among these odontocetes, early sperm whales emerged maybe 20 mya and the notorious monster Livyatan around 10 mya. About the size of modern sperm whales, preying on whales and seals, it sported bigger biting teeth than any other animal ever. It fell extinct around 5 mya, possibly because of prey scarcity linked to global cooling, the same fate that may have met its contemporary giant shark, Megalodon. Except in size, today’s sperm whale lies closer to early odontocete forms than do other modern odontocetes like orca and bottlenose.

At 17 to 20 pounds, the sperm whale brain is the largest of any creature ever: evidence of high intelligence though her brain/ body weight ratio does not match ours. She scores high in sociability as well. We understand more and more that high intelligence in vertebrates correlates with high sociability. Nimbleness in navigating complex social spaces requires, rewards and nurtures braininess. One observer contends that sperm whales “have the most complex social structure of any animal other than man.”

Like elephants, sperm whales typically move in clusters of juveniles and mature females who share in care for the young. When mommy dives for food, she leaves her calf with babysitting female relatives. Aunties suckle one another’s babies. Such ‘alloparenting’ (caregiving to youngsters by aunties, assisting mothers) fosters sociability and intelligence by exposing juveniles to a variety of key relationships. Among nurturing females as well, networks of trust, communication and exchange of favours grow dense. Neuronal connections likewise.

Sperm whales dine mainly on squid, which they find at incredible depths. Routinely diving 500 meters, she can reach as deep as three kilometres, perhaps more, attaining dive speed up to 175 meters per minute. Abrasive squid beaks in her digestive system may be what triggers her to produce an intestinal lubricant called ambergris, a gummy, buoyant, pungently aromatic substance prized for perfumes. She excretes it in faeces and vomits. In contrast with Livyatan’s massive meat-shredding choppers, the modern cousin sports rudimentary teeth only on her bottom jaw. Scientists think she does not even use them for killing. Instead, she stuns prey with shatteringly loud buzzes, squeaks and clicks before swallowing them whole, dead or alive.

As she dives, her blood and muscles favour her with stupendous oxygen-carrying and -storage capacity, enabling her to stay down for as long as two hours without surfacing. She feeds in the deepest darkness and crushing pressure from the water above. Sound is her only useful sense in the deep she prowls. She gulps down maybe 600 squids daily, finding her prey by echolocation, like bats. Emitting recurring sonar clicks, she ‘sees’ other creatures from rippling wrinkles in the rebounding sound. Hers is probably the loudest animal sound on earth (blue whale song is its only possible rival), amplified and focused somehow through those huge spermaceti chambers in her ‘forehead’ and then echoed back through those chambers, transmitted to the brain and deciphered as imagery. (Some experts contend that spermaceti also helps regulate buoyancy.) It was of course spermaceti, prized for lubricants, lamp oil and candles, that drove humans to hunt her to the brink of extinction.

Sri Lanka is one of the best places in the world to see sperm whales because they come in close to shore here within range of whale-watching boats, and it may be the best place to see sperm whale ‘superpods’—dozens to hundreds assembled and visible at the same time. A gathering off Trincomalee in March 2012 may have numbered up to 250. Since then, superpods of up to 350 animals have appeared several times offshore in the Gulf of Mannar, mostly during March and April. Lanka may in fact be the only place on earth to witness these gatherings regularly. They may happen every year.

The likeliest explanation is mating. The whales prefer warm water for mating and maybe Lanka is especially easy for everyone to find. Calm (inter monsoonal) seas, plenty of space: Gulf of Mannar. The Gulf’s shallow waters, averaging only six meters, maybe a feature, not a bug. They obviously preclude deep-dive hunting. But I strongly suspect that the creatures go without food during the mating season anyway, though I have found no supporting sources. (Other cetacean species do fast during mating season.) The surface is where the action lies.

Because they spend so much time beneath the surface of the open ocean far from land, we know very little about sperm whales. Their first-ever underwater footage, taken in Lankan waters as it happens, came only in 1984. Once a day or so, they like to lie at the surface, amiably socializing: lying quietly side by side and nuzzling one another or ‘vocalizing (they actually lack vocal chords) back and forth. If mating is indeed the key, we may begin to grasp wild behaviors during superpods: jaw clapping, tail elevation, tail slapping, belly-ups, roll-overs, head raises, spy hopping (head up, tail down) and breaching—flinging themselves clear of the water. Flirt much?

YouTube video from Lankan waters a few years back murkily captures a savage attack by a pack of orca (killer whales) upon a grouping of sperm whales. Though the prey appears to escape after a few minutes, observers smell blood from their boat. When orcas threaten, sperm whales encircle their young or vulnerable in cooperative formation. They may face inward, presenting a firing line of powerful tail flukes outward against assailants, or they may face outward with their dangerous-toothed jaws. They protect each other and each other’s young even at high peril to themselves. Entire families will strand themselves on a beach so as to solace a stricken relative. Behavior like this leads some to call sperm whales ‘elephants of the sea.’ Their intense social bonding came to the aid of their human hunters. Where you find one sperm whale you’ll probably find several and they’ll hang with each other even in the face of obvious danger. Slaughter made easy.

As indicated, sperm whale juveniles and adult females spend bulks of their time in matrilineal pods, numbering 10-20 animals or so, all related to one another. Aside from echolocation clicks, they communicate among themselves with variable code-like click sequences called codas, each sequence lasting about a second in total. They toss these sequences back and forth in duets and join them together in choruses. This undoubtedly deepens their bonding. Youngsters learn these codas from grown-ups, along with movement and migration strategies, habitat knowledge and hunting techniques. As they mature females pass these learned behaviors along to upcoming generations of young.

Males of a certain age will depart the pod and take up with other males, often in clusters. They migrate toward the poles, leaving warm waters to aunties and juveniles, but return to the tropics for mating. Among companionate male groupings, fads of novel behaviour arise and sometimes fade away to be supplanted by others. Reminds me of my son and his buddies. Males in the Gulf of Alaska have taught one another to nibble yummy black cod off fishing longline hooks, leaving less tasty fish behind.

Aside from smallish kin-based pods and possibly non-kin-based male groups, juveniles and grown females adhere to particular multi-pod ‘clans’ numbering thousands of animals spread across huge swathes of sea. These communities share among themselves the same repertoire of codas, distinct from those of other clans. These dialects are precisely what define the boundaries between clans. Clan ‘membership’ turns not on kinship, except that within participating pods, but also not on geographical proximity. Clan members range in their smaller groupings over thousands of kilometres. They recognise and greet fellow clan members but seldom or never socialize outside their own clan. They inhabit patches of the sea alongside other clans, ignoring and avoiding those others perpetually. It’s Hogwarts without inter-house quidditch. We don’t seem to know much about whether males stick tightly with clan fellows or roam with chums from other clans.

Concomitant with their separate dialects, clans differ in their movement patterns, feeding success and likelihood of offspring. If it precludes interbreeding, such cultural separation could conceivably drive the evolution of distinct species. Separation into clans might be nature’s way of seeking Darwinian ‘fitness’ among sperm whales. Some might speculate that sperm whale clans already represent distinct sub-species. We don’t know yet and probably won’t for a long time. Speciation gets retarded to the extent that males mate outside their natal clans. They sometimes do but we don’t know how much.

Cultural differentiation seems most markedly true of Pacific sperm whales and probably applies to those clustering in Lankan superpods, given the ease of travel between the Pacific and Indian Oceans. This raises the question of how much inter-clan mating takes place in our offshore gatherings. Avoidance of interbreeding might at first glance suggest a benefit to inter-clan mating, but clans are not primarily kin-based in the first place. Mutual incomprehension among dialects might preclude mixed mating, but then again as we’ve seen, the creatures seem to have other ways of conveying erotic interest and attractiveness.

It will be a while before we can answer this question one way or the other, but I’ll venture a guess that females and juveniles populating any given superpod hail from the same clan. Whether they seek or shun males from other clans will govern any possible transition from clan to subspecies to separate species. Males compete and fight for mating opportunities. Do they gang up on males from other clans? Move along, pal, you can find your own peeps down the coast there a bit.

Braininess, sociability, cooperation and communication in distinct dialects: all seem inevitable to raise the question of language. Do sperm whales possess it? A well-funded five-year study currently endeavours to answer that question and to decipher sperm whale ‘language.’ The Cetacean Translation Initiative (CETI: a pun on both ‘cetacean’ and ‘SETI,’ Search for ExtraTerrestrial Intelligence) combines extensive recordings of communications; computer-aided pattern-seeking in those recordings; and notations on related situations and behaviour. The website coyly toggles between referring to ‘communication’ and to ‘language.’ CETI’s ultimate dream is conversing with the whales. CETI’s chief, marine biologist David Gruber, looks forward with wide eyes in a TED talk to a day when we discover sperm whales discussing something that happened ‘yesterday.’ Feel like sending money?

Understanding more about sperm whale communication seems eminently worthwhile. But the idea of learning their ‘language’ will likely end up a nothing burger. Among many theories of human language evolution, a key one posits toolmaking and tool use as the driver: the ability to transmit tool knowledge across populations and down through generations. Such would be a crucial advantage for our upright-walking, vulnerable, savannah predator ancestors. Scientists point to substantial overlap between human brain sectors governing language and tool manipulation. That whales could be substantial tool users seems vanishingly unlikely. Sperm whales can hold their breath a long time but we should not hold ours hoping to swap stories with them.

Further Reading

• Whitehead & Rendell, The Cultural Lives of Whales and Dolphins
• Hoare, Leviathan or the Whale
• Beale, The Natural History of the Sperm Whale
• Mann, Deep Thinkers
• Pyenson, Spying on Whales
• Melville, Moby Dick

Organizations and Resources

• Centre for Research on Indian Ocean Marine Mammals (CRIOMM)(Sri Lanka)
• Sri Lanka’s Amazing Maritime (SLAM)(Sri Lanka) NOAA Fisheries, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (USA)
• Whale and Dolphin Conservation (WDC)(UK) Marine Mammal Institute, Oregon State University (USA)

Whale Watching

• Borderlands, Weligama
• Mirissa Water Sports, Mirissa
• Raja and the Whales, Mirissa
• Royal Tours, Mirissa

Lawyer, writer and former law professor, Mark Hager lives in Pelawatte with his family.

mark.hager@gmail.com

It looked a ton of fun and quite competitive among maybe a couple dozen bottlenoses. The big prize is to seize and hold position at wave’s apex, hurtling straight forward for a chill-and-thrill moment before some jostle or watery flux pushes left or right, forcing fall-off down the backward-flowing wake, followed by effortful struggle to maintain and improve placement among wriggling peers.

Bottlenoses frolic all around Sri Lanka, loving the continental shelf stretching out from beach to deep ocean slope. Organic nutrients flowing seaside from Lankan streams and swept in on favourable currents support a marine food chain second to none. Bottlenoses hold their breath and dive right down to the shelf floor when hungry enough for the buffet. In depths too murky for eyesight, they find their fishy prey through echolocation, akin to what bats do in the air.

Sound carries fast and far in water, with bottlenoses taking full advantage. From nasal cavities, they send rapid bursts of high-frequency clicks through a fluid, fatty ‘melon’ in their foreheads, which acts like a lens, focusing the sound into a directed beam. Echoes reverberate back from underwater features and objects, including fish. Echoed sound flows in through their lower jaws, also filled with fatty fluid, to their inner ears and thence to their brains, where wiring converts information into imagery comparable to sonogram. They see their surroundings with sound, using much the same brain matter devoted to vision in terrestrial animals. They may even use echoed clicks from their hunting partners to sharpen their ‘sight.’ They can pick out a ping-pong ball at 100 meters, roughly equal to human eyesight (verified by experiment on the lane with my son, Nate). With echolocation, bottlenoses can detect bones, muscle and organs, even fetuses, inside other creatures.

Their clicks rise in frequency as they close on their quarry, facilitating pinpoint accuracy as they strike.

Bottlenoses emerged 2-5 million years ago (mya). They fall into two recognized species: ‘common’ and ‘Indo-Pacific,’ the former inclined toward deep sea, the latter toward shore. Other distinct species may exist as well, with breaks between shore and deep sea populations prevailing widely. They belong to the Cetacean (whales and dolphins) sub-order, which originated some 50 mya in Sri Lanka’s general neighbourhood, diverging from even-toed ungulates (mammals with hooves), an order comprising present-day pigs, camels, sheep, cattle, giraffe and deer. Cetaceans claim hippos as their closest living relative. Bottlenoses fall into the odontocete branch (echolocating cetaceans with teeth), as opposed to mysticetes (filter-feeding cetaceans with baleen instead of teeth).

Tell-tale early fossils lie in the high Himalaya, lifted there as India slammed into Asia, beginning also around 50 mya and continuing since then. The earliest known cetacean, Pakicetus, was a smallish deer-like creature spending some of its time in freshwater streams that flooded seasonally. Heavy bone marrow provided ballast for ensuing forms of non-swimming freshwater waders and bottom-walkers.

By and by, of course, cetaceans learned to swim, spending more and more time chasing fish while returning to land for sleep, mating, birthing and nursing, like today’s seals and walrus. They moved downstream to deeper waters, bringing forth species adapted to diverse riverine habitats as the rising Himalaya created variegated terrain. As early as 49 mya, Ambulocetus, a slow-swimming ambush hunter sized like a sea lion, spilled into shallow seas while continuing to move ably on land, like crocodiles.

At 45 mya, Remingtonocetus improved sharply on previously-developing underwater hearing as it prowled muddy bays disfavoring eyesight. At 40 mya, some cetaceans renounced land entirely and began dispersing through global seas. Their forelimbs became flippers while their hind legs shrank into vestiges. Those who clung to land or fresh water disappeared. At around 35 mya, odontocetes split from mysticetes, beginning their deep-dive journey into echolocation. They eventually came to compete in apex predatorship with sharks dominant since when the dinosaur extinction (65 mya) swept marine reptiles into oblivion. Sometime along the way, today’s echolocating river dolphins migrated back into fresh water from the sea.

Numerous anecdotes of bottlenose intelligence require no recital here. Their brain-to-body ratio, an indicator of high intelligence, ranks among the top in the animal kingdom. Their cortical neurons may outnumber those of chimps and perhaps even rival humans. Even more fascinating is emergent science on how and why they got so brainy. As with other super-smart mammals, their story turns on social complexity, cooperativity and sensitivity. Young bottlenoses bond with and learn richly from an array of cooperating ‘aunties’ who share parental tasks, assisting actual mothers. This ‘alloparenting’ (caregiving by others than mothers) breeds emotional sensitivity among juveniles across a range of relationships, requiring and rewarding neuronal proliferation.

Meanwhile among aunties, cultivating trust relationships requires vast neuronal investment in capacities like memory, game theory, skill evaluation, situational assessment and social sanctioning. In a rare feature, females commonly live long past their reproductive years. Their long-life wisdom confers auntie benefits on juveniles and pods. That bottlenose pods fluctuate on a fission/fusion spectrum—separating and joining as circumstances vary—only intensifies pressure toward complex social judgement. Bottlenoses analyze not only how individual fellows may behave but also how different groupings may perform. Who will hunt and babysit well together under these particular conditions? Pod formation revolves largely though not exclusively around kinship. Pods coalesce around charismatic ‘socialites,’ who nurture links with other pods.

Cooperative hunting merits recognition as a bottlenose trademark. Coordinate fishing tactics include herding prey into tight balls, roundups through crescent formations, trapping against natural barriers and attack from multiple sides. In Florida, ‘driver’ bottlenoses terrify prey toward multi-dolphin ‘barriers.’ Remarkably enough, certain experts play ‘driver’ time and time again, excluding other candidates. To our knowledge, no other marine hunters anoint ‘designated drivers’ this way. Bottlenoses often assist and profit from human fishing. In Brazil they drive mullet shoals toward fishermen holding nets and eat fish that break formation.

Bottlenoses analyze not only how individual fellows may behave but also how different groupings may perform

Bottlenoses count among the few species who pass the ‘Mirror Self-Recognition’ (MSR) test. In a mirror, terrestrial mammals like chimps and orangutans can see and touch spots placed on body parts they cannot normally see (e.g. foreheads), convincingly demonstrating awareness that they are viewing their own images. Bottlenoses cannot touch spots with their flippers but they do manifest intense fascination with their mirror images. They watch themselves open their mouths, stick their tongues out, twirl, roll, blow bubbles and look at body parts. They inspect their markings closely. MSR capacity appears in species with large complex brains, high sociality and emotional empathy. Bottlenoses pass the mirror test as early as five months of age, while humans do so only at about 16 months. While this does not mean they are smarter or more empathic than humans, it does indicate high marks. They frequently offer assistance and rescue toward their own kind and toward other animals, including humans.[UH1].

Bottlenoses wield an array of whistle noises to coordinate activity, exchange information and socialize. Some experts believe this communication to be quite complex. Each individual acquires a unique ‘signature whistle’ that works as a nametag, as a locator and possibly as a signal of emotional state. Pregnant females step up their whistling as birth approaches, a behaviour called ‘fetus whispering,’ imprinting her ‘voice’ into her offspring’s memory. Intensified whistling continues for a few weeks after the birth before tapering off.

The internet lit up five years ago when a Russian scientist, no dolphin expert, claimed that bottlenoses utilize outright language, based on his whistle recordings purporting to reveal phonemes, words and sentences. Captive bottlenoses grasp at least elementary syntax, understanding the difference between ‘bring the frisbee to the ball’ and ‘bring the ball to the frisbee.’ Scepticism is in order, however. Experts on bottlenose communication quickly challenged the Russian study’s methodology and assumptions. One emerging theory of human language evolution precludes any likelihood of dolphin acquisition. Language may have emerged to facilitate transmission of toolmaking technique across generations. Language and complex manipulation draw upon much the same human brain regions as each other. No toolmaking or manipulation? No language.

Reports indicate a high incidence of illegal bottlenose hunting in Lankan waters: enforcement appears inadequate. Bottlenose meat goes to human consumption and longline fishing bait. Thriving in warm and temperate seas the world over, bottlenoses stand in no danger of extinction. If we wish them better protection, we must entertain other reasons.

Reports indicate a high incidence of illegal bottlenose hunting in Lankan waters: enforcement appears inadequate

A graduate of Harvard Law School, Mark Hager lives with his family in Pelawatte. mark.hager@gmail.com

My eight year old Nate and I, along with his school chum and his chum’s daddy, launched into the waves, kicking furiously. A newly-wed couple jumped in behind. With the other daddy babysitting the strong-swimming schoolboys, I got slightly ahead.

Maddeningly at first, as I looked up for the drone every few seconds, I kept noting that we were not getting any closer. The drone and presumably the manta were moving slowly away. Back on the boat, they were watching and filming all this through the bird’s-eye drone camera. I heard someone yell my name. Looking up, I spied the drone straight overhead. Putting my face back in the water, I immediately saw the ray on my right-hand side, close enough to touch, swimming alongside. I got an eerie feeling that ‘she’ (as I like to think) was curious about me. Those who scuba dive amongst mantas often report an aura of fellow-feeling emanating from the rays.

Soon the others caught up. After a short while, the manta descended slowly and gracefully. Maybe the sudden celebrity made her a bit bashful. But she remained clearly in view for long minutes. We swam down for closer looks but could not reach her depth. Manifesting no alarm, she nevertheless grew bored with our company, dropped deeper, picked up speed and disappeared. Despite the earlier thrill, I felt sad.

Mantas swim around with perhaps the most remarkable fish brains in the sea, manifesting extraordinary talents. They are first of all the largest fish brains to be found. Brain volume often corresponds with high intelligence and this certainly seems confirmed with mantas, though large animals need large brains also for non-mental bodily functions. Equally significant, mantas boast exceptionally high ‘brain to body ratio’ (BBR), the proportion of brain weight to overall body weight, higher than any other fish except some exceedingly unusual warm-blooded species recently discovered. Though ocean mantas are roughly half the size of whale sharks, their brains are ten times larger. This puts mantas in a smart-learner class alongside bottlenose dolphins, chimpanzees and parrots, not to mention humans.

To be sure, the relationship of BBR to intelligence is complex, contested and controversial. Nevertheless, high manta BBR gives us an important clue. Another possible clue is that some manta brain cells resemble those of birds and mammals more than they resemble those of other fish. Mantas are unusual fish in another fascinating respect: they copulate for reproduction and give birth to live babies, without aid of placentas and umbilical cords.

Mantas seem to score especially high in inquisitiveness, learning, memory, problem solving, playfulness, coordination and communication. They have superb eyesight. They copy one another’s movements. They like to congregate and show repeat patterns of fraternization, indicating choosiness as to their ‘friends.’ Much of what they need to know, like when and where to find rich troves of food, must be learned from other mantas.

Though their behavior suggests rich mutual communication, the pathways of signaling and understanding remain a substantial puzzle. Two apparently promising theories drill down quite plausibly on visual signaling. One focuses on the fact that mantas change patterns of skin coloration, most intensely when congregating. A more recent theory focuses on appendages called ‘cephalic lobes’ located either side of their mouths. These ‘horns,’ which give mantas their popular name ‘devil fish,” help channel food inward. But a curious intricate waggling of these lobes emerges when mantas are in close company. Still a third possible communication channel may lie with electrical pulses through water at a distance.

Mantas graze-and filter feed, swimming open mouthed so as to pass plankton, krill (tiny shrimp-like crustaceans) and small fish through plates in their gills that trap their catch. They often hunt and feed cooperatively. In one typical tactic, they move forward in a kind of staggered diagonal where a ray behind and to the side of another catches prey in the bow wave of the one in front. They take turns in positions. In another tactic, they swim behind one another in a circle, sometimes in clusters of fifty or more. They draw the circle tighter and tighter, trapping prey in a densening noose.

Equally impressive, mantas seem to recognize themselves in mirrors. If so, cognizant that they exist as things in the perceived world, they may be called ‘self-aware.’ In what’s called the ‘mirror self-recognition’ (MSR) test, scientists place animals in front of a mirror. In a typical first reaction, the animal thinks it is encountering another animal of its species. It may squawk with aggression or manifest other social behaviors. Most species never move beyond this.

Across the world’s oceans, manta populations have been plummeting, with an estimated 80 percent drop-off in some regions over recent decades

In some species, however, animals launch a sequence of choreographed repetitive motions, intently observed. Scientists call this behavior ‘contingency checking’ or ‘preening.’ (This apparition does whatever I do at exactly the same time.) The animal seems to grasp that it is watching itself and may be aware of itself as a self in understanding this. Mantas placed before mirrors soon embark upon this preening behavior. They swim back and forth for long periods and position themselves to look at body parts they cannot normally see. They roll and unroll their cephalic lobes rapidly. They blow bubbles at the mirror and watch. They abstain from the coloration changes that normally go with encountering another real-life manta.

Self-awareness may go with recognition that other animals are also selves with minds of their own. In a celebrated Australian incident, an imperiled manta requested help from a diver it knew quite well. It sought attention to its problem, then lay quite still while he painstakingly removed fishing hooks lodged dangerously close to its eye.

Across the world’s oceans, manta populations have been plummeting, with an estimated 80 percent drop-off in some regions over recent decades. The most plausible explanation is that they are being heavily massacred in both purposeful hunting and in by-catch from fishing. Their extracted gill plates command high over-the-counter prices in Chinese markets for their purported medicinal and health promoting properties. There is no scientific support for the idea that gill plate consumption confers health benefits. They may in fact concentrate toxins filtered from seawater.

Manta gill plates do not even appear in the lexicon of ‘traditional Chinese medicine’ (TCM). TCM practitioners do not recommend their consumption. Consumption has proliferated only in the past few decades, promoted commercially like a patent medicine.

In addition to showing up as by-catch on fishing long lines and in nets, mantas are hunted deliberately, sometimes harpooned and sliced into pieces while still alive in order to haul them onto small boats.

Sri Lanka holds the dubious distinction of being a world leader—perhaps THE world leader—in exporting harvested manta gills. In doing so it intersects with a contraband underworld of illicit activity. Blame should not fall unduly on marginal fishermen trying to feed families. The big money lies elsewhere. As recently as this past October, Hong Kong authorities seized some 330 kilos of gill plates sourced from Sri Lanka. At, say, three kilos per animal, this comes to over 100 slain mantas. Estimates have it that Sri Lanka’s annual export averages upward of 1000 rays.

Since Sri Lanka does not boast massive manta habitat, it seems probable that much of its harvest comes from international waters and from Maldives, where ray poaching is prohibited by law. In 2012, Sri Lanka was estimated second in the world for manta gill provision, with only Indonesia ranked slightly ahead. In 2014, Indonesia banned ray hunting and gill export within its entire 2.3 million square mile exclusive economic zone. This means that Sri Lanka may now occupy the top harvest and export rung.

Depleted manta populations confront difficulty replenishing themselves. Females reach reproductive maturity slowly and gestation takes roughly a year. Pregnancy generally produces but a single offspring. Hence the average female produces one pup every three to six years in a reproductive career of perhaps twenty-five years.

In 2014, the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES) strengthened protections, requiring special permits to trade in mantas or their body parts. This protection binds Sri Lanka as a CITES member. Permits require certification that a species offered for trade is not threatened. Sri Lanka apparently issues such permits. Any certification that mantas are not threatened provokes only puzzlement, since the entire premise of the CITES rule is precisely that rays are indeed under threat. A Sri Lankan permit for the seized Hong Kong gills was reportedly lost in transit. If it gets submitted properly, the shipment can proceed out to market.

Though some manta export may be smuggled, the bulk may well be officially licensed. Aside from CITES, Sri Lanka’s Fauna and Flora Protection Ordinance forbids non-licensed export of all indigenous ‘fish.’ Legitimate licensing applies only for exports promoting ‘scientific knowledge.’ Mantas should perhaps get listed specifically for protection under the Ordinance. Sri Lanka lists mantas as protected under the Convention on Migratory Species but has enacted no legislation prohibiting harvest. Peru, Mexico, the Philippines and Ecuador are among countries already offering rays proactive protection.

Sri Lanka should do more to curb this sinister and cynical trade.

Below is a short list of pertinent organizational resources:

• Manta Trust
• Manta Ray of Hope
• Blue Resources Trust: Sri Lanka Manta and Mobula Ray Project

A graduate of Harvard Law School, Mark Hager lives with his family in Pelawatte.

It haunts me, that photo. Though a trifle blurry, it’s a serendipitous snapshot: I didn’t even realize as I took it that it seemed to confirm what I suspected was happening.

We’re lucky at our house. A screen of trees rises beyond our little garden, mainly rooted in the compound of a mansion with a private pond just across the lane. The trees dance a lovely ballet when the breeze blows and we get sightings of cool birds like Green Imperial Pigeon and Crested Goshawk.

And every few days come the langurs. We generally hear them before seeing them as they shout their ooh-oohs while chasing each other through the branches. They scamper over the house roofs all around us but seldom come onto our property. We have a large-ish Labrador and also a fierce and fearless Golden Retriever, charming sweetheart of a girl, who chews the fur off wriggling chipmunk pups found fallen on the driveway, goes eyeball-to-eyeball with cobras, and one night killed an intruding civet cat in a fight that destroyed our vegetable patch, then left the corpse on our doorstep to enjoy when we woke up after having heard nothing of the dark struggle. How did she manage to get out of the dog house?

But a certain day back in November was different. A handful of langurs came to perch on our garden wall, reaching into our lemon tree, then peeling and munching the sour fruit. Maybe the dogs were asleep. I got the camera out and started snapping pics from our rear balcony. Then I began to notice something even more curious. There’s a house-and garden between our garden and the lane mentioned above. That little garden hosts six good-sized trees in which the primates frequently congregate, nibbling snacks and gazing at us as we gaze back. One of those trees provides easy access to the top of an air conditioning unit, placed on a shelf just below some windows on that house.

That day, one, two or sometimes three simians spent lingering interludes sitting atop the AC unit, appearing to look through the windows into the room there. What could be holding their interest? The house–owned by a gentlemanly, elderly national cricketer with grown children–has been uninhabited for quite some time now. There would be nothing to see in an upstairs room except motionless furniture and whatnot. How could that be so fascinating? 

As I shifted station to snap more pics, I noticed reflections of trees and sky in the windows. It hit me that the monkeys were gazing at mirror images of themselves. I began to glimpse those ghostly reflections. Snapping away as they leaned in and fidgeted, I had no idea until reviewing the pics later that I had caught a langur licking its own reflection.

For some five decades now, scientists have been experimenting with the Mirror Self-Recognition (MSR) test. What they are looking for is whether an animal is capable of grasping that it is seeing itself in a mirror. If so, we may perhaps infer that it is aware of itself as a self. 

You put one or more animals of a particular species in front of a mirror and watch what happens. In a typical first reaction, an animal thinks it is encountering another animal of its species. It may squawk with aggression or manifest other social behaviors. Most species never move beyond this. But some begin trying to puzzle out what is going on.

MSR literature describes phases that may follow this first social response phase. A second phase involves physical investigation such as looking behind the mirror. A third phase entails repetitive motions intently observed. As in that mirror scene in the Marx Brothers film ‘Duck Soup,’ this apparition does whatever I do at exactly the same time. This behavior gets characterized as Level One in what’s called ‘passing’ the mirror test. The animal seems aware of itself as a self because it understands that it is watching itself.

Maybe. For animals that reach this phase three, scientists introduce a confirmational phase four, typically embodied in the ‘spot’ exercise. They place a visible spot on a part of the animal’s body that it cannot normally see–its forehead, for example–and place it in front of the mirror. If the animal, upon seeing the spot in the mirror, then touches that spot on its own body, it must be grasping that the image in the mirror is itself. This could be called Level Two in passing the mirror test. Scientists reason that an animal capable of understanding its own image in a mirror possesses self-awareness: “ability to become the object of your own attention.”

Licking your own reflected tongue looks possibly like passing a self-administered version of the spot test. On the other hand, it could be consistent with the lower Level One (behavioral phase three) of the four-phase MSR progression. (This ghostly animal of my species does precisely what I do exactly when I do it. What if…?) For that matter it could even align with progression phase one, where the animal behaves as if interacting with another animal, albeit a weird one. I have found no discussion of rigorous mirror testing with langurs.

Scientist Gordon Gallup conceived the test one day while shaving in a mirror. Before long he was observing chimpanzees using mirrors to groom themselves—cleaning teeth, for example–and to scrutinize their genitals. To date, consensus has it that chimpanzees, bonobos, orangutans, bottlenose dolphins and Asian elephants like those found in Sri Lanka clearly pass the mirror test. Scientists link success on the test to high intelligence and social sophistication. Eurasian magpies represent the first non-mammals to pass. They try to remove colored stickers from their feathers while viewing them in a mirror. It’s not that they can feel the stickers. They do not try to remove invisible ones. Magpies are highly intelligent, of course, especially for an animal without a neocortex.

As interesting as those that pass the test are those that do not. Gorillas: not so much. Macaques and several other varieties of monkey do not pass, nor do lesser apes: gibbons and siamangs. So if langurs pass the test, they are punching way above their weight. In a great documentary about Polonnaruwa macaques, actress Tina Fey narrates a confrontation between a troupe of them and a gang of langurs. She disparages langur intelligence compared with her macaques. In this, she may be a trifle hasty. At least five documentaries so far have focused on Polonnaruwa macaques. Macaques are amazing and colorful to be sure, but could someone please aim a film cam at a few langurs for a while? 

If the animal, upon seeing the spot in the mirror, then touches that spot on its own body, it must be grasping that the image in the mirror is itself. This could be called Level Two in passing the mirror test

Self-awareness may go with recognition that other animals are also selves of their own. It may foster ‘theory of mind’: comprehension that other animals have desires and intentions of their own, along with accurate grasp of what those might be. This may correlate with generosity: sharing of benefits and assistance in peril.

If langurs can indeed ‘pass the test,’ such considerations seemingly oblige us toward enhanced concern for their well-being. Due to urbanization and habitat loss, Colombo’s endemic sub-species, our very own purple-faced langur, is listed ‘critically endangered.’

A graduate of Harvard Law School, Mark Hager lives in Pelawatte with his family.

Blues emit extremely loud moans so low in frequency as to be near or below the lowest edge of unaided human hearing, comparable to the deepest pipes of large cathedral organs. They could pop your eardrums were you to be swimming nearby even if you couldn’t ‘hear’ them. These songs probably come only from males and likely play a role in locating or attracting mates. It appears plausible that blues hear each other calling for hundreds if not thousands of miles, perhaps across entire ocean basins. This means they could be ‘in touch’ with one another far more intensively than would seem to be the case from the fact that they do not seem to cluster that much.

Blues subsist in perhaps a dozen relatively distinct population groups spread across the world’s oceans. Though there is overlap, there is also a fair degree of geographic separation. Each population (some would say ‘subspecies’) has a singing style common to all members but slightly different from that of other populations. A previously undetected song population has recently been identified in the western Indian Ocean from recordings near Madagascar, Oman and the mid-ocean Chagos Archipelago. If it gets as far as the Chagos, this population might reach Sri Lanka as well. Someone should be listening.

Recordings reveal the startling fact that the sound pitch of blue songs across all populations has dropped just a bit every year for the past several decades, as long as we have been recording. Since the 1960s, this pitch drop adds up to the equivalent of three white piano keys. Populations must be following one another’s songs so that they all move in the same direction: slightly lower year by year.

In previously posted pieces, I speculated that this rapid pitch change represents ‘fashion’ among the blues. (For example, see: Sri Lanka’s Blue Whale is a Superb Athlete. Is She Also a Scholar?, EconomyNext, Jan. 9, 2021.) By ‘fashion’ I meant arbitrarily shifting aesthetic preferences linked to novelty and interest, akin to flared trousers, rising and falling hemlines or oscillations on suit jacket lapels. If female blues favor low-pitch mating calls year in and year out, male blues will learn what they need to do.

Skepticism toward my ‘fashion’ hypothesis is certainly warranted. It piggybacks on, but differs from, an evolutionary process called ‘sexual selection.’ Biologists understand ‘sexual selection’ as a process whereby females mysteriously find certain male displays sexy. Masters of such display mate more successfully and pass genes producing those displays (e.g., peacock feathers) on to their sons, who themselves mate successfully in turn. In The Descent of Man and Selection in Relation to Sex, Darwin himself wrote extensively about sexual selection, distinguishing it from ‘natural selection’ as described in The Origin of Species. Through natural selection, animals compete and gene pools shift on the basis of comparative success in surviving. Through sexual selection, it is comparative success in siring offspring. Darwin hints that he stumbled into his theory of sexual selection upon torturing himself as to how outlandish peacock feathers could possibly confer survival value.

Even though it may be a mating display, the blue whale pitch shift cannot be an example of genetically-propagated sexual selection. It affects entire populations—indeed the entire species—year by year: far too fast to be genetic and generational. So if we have males all changing their song display year by year in uniform ways to keep up with what females for some reason deem sexy, we have something I called ‘fashion.

Marvelous as it surely would be if female blues were selecting mates on the basis of fashion, other possible explanations require consideration. Recent studies have explored the question.

One hypothesis that quickly comes to mind is that the whales are struggling to make themselves heard over the roar of big ships and other oceanic noise pollution such as sonar and seismic surveys. This hypothesis fails on perhaps three counts. One is that the pitch shift is heard even in southern oceans, where ship traffic is slight now that whaling is over, and in other non-noisy places. Another objection is that blues pause their calling when ships are close, as if acknowledging that outscreaming them will not work. Thirdly, a struggle to outshout ship noise would likely produce an upward shift in pitch rather than a downward one. In southerly seas, pitch rises somewhat in southern-hemisphere summertime (northern hemisphere winter), quite likely so as to be heard over the far-resounding racket of cracking Antarctic sea ice. The ice booms fall in roughly the same frequency (pitch) range as blue song.

It is not that the blues go higher in pitch in order to be more audible. Rather, the upward shift in pitch results from calling more loudly, due to imperfectly-understood mechanics of sound production. (Blues have no vocal chords.) So, a clue to the pitch-shift mystery may lie in that the blues are singing less loudly year on year. Why on earth should this be?

One theory links the lower-volume singing to global warming. Rising quantities of greenhouse carbon dioxide dissolving into the world’s oceans causes them to grow more acidic. High-acid water carries sound more efficiently than does less-acidic water. Blues can hear one another at distance more easily and therefore lower their sound volume so as to conserve energy. Though this theory dovetails with climate concern, some scientists strongly question its plausibility. They doubt that the rise in ocean acidity yields a big enough difference in sound propagation to account for the downshift in whale song volume.

Another theory pivots on good news rather than bad news. Under the worldwide whaling ban over the past few decades, blue whale population numbers have rebounded nicely, from a low of perhaps four thousand to maybe 20,000 today. (Even with this pleasing rebound, blues are classified as ‘endangered.’) During the twentieth century’s first half, blues endured merciless hunting, with whalers taking an estimated three to four hundred thousand animals as steamships and explosive-tipped harpoons overcame blue whale swim speed. Meat found its way onto tables and blubber went into lamp oil, soap, perfume, candles, cosmetics, cooking oil and margarine. Baleen, with which blues strain sea food from mouthfuls of brine, became struts for corsets and parasols.

With today’s increased numbers, blues find themselves closer to one another on average as they swim the seas than they were back in the 1960s when numbers were low just as the whaling ban went into effect. This increased proximity makes it easier for blues to hear each other without shouting so loudly. Hence again, they drop their volume and thereby lower their pitch. We have been recording their pitches only since around the same time as the whaling ban came into effect. Before that, maybe their volume/pitch had been going up as they found themselves at greater average distance from potential mates.

Now the pitch is dropping back toward ‘normal’: so goes the theory. Again there are sceptics, however, who note that the downward pitch shift has been happening recently even in places where blue whale populations have not been rising significantly.

A third family of theories returns us to the theme of mate selection. What could be driving a female preference for lower-pitch calls? My earlier suggestion was that it’s purely aesthetic and ‘cultural’ so I called it ‘fashion.’ One proposed version of this hypothesis is that low-pitch singing, perhaps with longer song duration, is more challenging to perform than merely loud high-pitch singing, which is why it is more intriguing to females. This would be like dancing male birds of paradise, who earn mating privileges by displaying skills utterly devoid of survival advantage.

An alternative theory is that larger males are for whatever reason more capable of low-pitch song so the females are using low pitch as a proxy for bigness, which is a survival advantage: faster swimming, more endurance and lung capacity perhaps. Natural selection would have it that bigger males are more likely to survive until sexual maturity. But could males quickly be getting bigger year by year so as to generate the pitch drop? Maybe. Some scientists suggest that such a quick growth in size could be linked with population rebound, but the supposed mechanism for this is not exactly clear. Could it be that larger males were more heavily targeted in the days of whaling?

Still another hypothesis piggybacks on the idea that larger animals naturally produce lower pitch songs, but suggests that smaller males might also attract mates by sounding big through low-pitch serenading. Would anyone care to classify such an imitational phenomenon as ‘fashion,’ sort of like padded shoulders in men’s suit coats to mimic athletic build?

The pitch shift may stem from multiple combining causes. Conceivably, more than one mate selection theory could be true along with others and the same may go for the acid-ocean and population-rebound theories. Any mate-selection theory must seemingly confront a skeptical challenge: why now? Unless we suppose that pitch has been growing flatter ever since blue’s emergence as a species 4.5 million years ago, mate selection based on pitch (if it exists) must be more recent. Will the pitch (a thousand or a million years from now?) reach a point where it can go no lower in blue audibility, then start back upward? Oohooh, FASHION.

*With apologies for reminding you of Neil Diamond

A graduate of Harvard Law School, Mark Hager lives with his family in Pelawatte.

mark.hager@gmail.com

HEC sharpens as marginal farmers encroach on elephant habitat like forest edges. Hungry and sometimes angry elephants consume or trample valuable crops, raid stored harvests and destroy dwellings. They kill some 70 Sri Lankans every year, while enraged Sri Lankans kill some 200 elephants annually-mostly by gunshot-from a total population of around 6000. This is depressing in a land where admiration for elephants has long been a cultural polestar. For decades, the Department of Wildlife Conservation (DWC) has purported to manage HEC through a single simple strategy: fence the elephants into reserves and national parks, separate from human livelihood pursuits.

There are two problems. First, getting most elephants into protected zones is unrealistic. Some 70 % currently live outside of reserves. New transports to reserves doggedly seek escape. One bull, trucked from his home in a Hambantota city dump to Yala national park, escaped cleverly and bee-lined fifty kilometers through paddy field and village back to his dumpy home within days. He happened to be wearing a tracking device, as scientists watched in wonder. A dozen of his trans-located companions soon rejoined him in scrounging the dump’s veggie leftovers.

Second, reserve boundaries do not—and probably could never—correspond with elephant feeding and socializing ranges.

Fences cut family members off from one another- a serious if unintended cruelty-plus they crowd protected zones beyond carrying capacity and restrict access to vegetation elephants need to consume prodigiously on a daily basis in order to maintain health. Hungry elephants gaze across electric fences at yummy food they cannot reach. At Yala, elephants have been trending skinny for a decade or so after major fencing, while evidence suggests rising illness and death among malnourished elderly and young. With the elderly, this means premature loss of valuable learning. With the young, it means a looming threat of dwindling populations due to breeding shortfalls: this within a premier and picturesque elephant ‘sanctuary.’

Focus groups with affected farmers reveal that they would feel far less stressed if they could get compensated for lost crops. It seems unlikely, however, that private insurance can provide a solution. Farmers in elephant zones face such high risk of loss that premiums charged would be nearly as high as the losses themselves. Farmers would never buy insurance costing as much as the losses against which they are insuring. Any compensation system would therefore have to come from government. Issues surface there too, however. Proper proof of loss requires tedious investigation: was it really crows that ate the crop, followed by human trampling to finger elephants as the culprits?

More, insurance always raises the spectre of ‘moral hazard’: carelessness because losses will be compensated. Insured farmers may fail to take available steps against jumbo incursion and may even encroach recklessly on habitats.Having examined the pros and cons of numerous approaches, elephant scientist Dr. Pruthu Fernando of the Centre for Conservation and Research concludes that the best solution by far is fences. But he wants to fence elephants out, not in. Electric fences around paddy fields and villages, he contends, will exclude most depredations at acceptable (though hardly negligible) cost.

Elephants get an unpleasant but non-dangerous shock when they nudge such fences. Fences can be taken down after harvest, so elephant range is preserved, at least in the off-season. Elephants thrive on vegetation that sprouts in paddy fields post-harvest.

Community difficulties may lie, however, in deciding how much fencing should be bought, where it should be sited, who should pay how much for it and who should spend how much time maintaining it. Fencing has aspects of a ‘collective good’: everyone benefits once it is installed and more benefit to one does not mean reduced benefit to others.

Classically, collective goods should be paid for by the entire collective-all benefit so all should share costs-but in this case some may benefit more than others depending on how much land they own and where, how much fence protection they get, how much money they are required to chip in and how much time they are required to spend on maintenance. Sorting out these distributional issues could paralyze communities into inaction on something clearly beneficial to all.

Distributional issues within elephant-affected communities lose their edge if the cost of fencing is subsidized from outside, lowering the stakes for everyone directly affected. DWC has taken some preliminary steps into government-subsidized fencing in select locations. Total subsidy is unwise because villagers will probably fail to maintain fences that cost them nothing to install. Of course, government- subsidized fencing on a large scale would impose costs on all tax-paying Sri Lankans.

Why should town-dwellers-not all of them rich-pay to insure the livelihoods of forest-edge farmers? Because an elephant-filled island is a ‘collective good,’ benefitting all Sri Lankans spiritually, if not materially? How do we judge the truth of that?

From the Echelon Archives.

A graduate of Harvard Law School, Mark Hager lives in Pelawatte with his Sri Lankan/American family. Aside from his studies in wildlife and political economy, he consults on legal and technical writing challenges

Thirty meters long. Up to 200 tons in weight. The biggest creature ever to live abounds on Sri Lanka’s porches. The elusive blue whale, twice the weight of the hugest known dinosaur, seems to like Lanka as much as anyone would.

This past decade has established Sri Lanka as one of the world’s premier locales for seeing and studying blues. Beneath shallow waters outward from Lankan shores lies continental shelf: a gently sloping sea floor stretching to an edge where the bottom drops steeply into the deep. Blues enjoy cruising deepening waters at shelf edges.

They find lots to eat there and they may use the shelf edges in navigating. The southernmost wedge of the Indian (sub)continental shelf happens to ‘pinch in’ close to the Lankan shore at Mirissa in the south, precisely where blues migrating back and forth between the Arabian Sea and the Bay of Bengal find their shortest route.

Blues feed almost exclusively on krill, thumbnail-size crustaceans which swarm in huge orange clouds. Krill feed on microscopic plants (phytoplankton) or on microscopic animals (zooplankton) grazing on those phytoplankton.

The richest krill blooms arise in chilly northern and southern waters where phytoplankton and zooplankton thrive best because cold seas hold more nutrients needed for phytoplankton photosynthesis than tropical seas do. Sri Lanka sits in tropical seas of course, so if blues are finding krill here, something quite unusual might be happening.

One explanation could be a tropically-rare abundance of nutrients in Lankan waters, due to its steep topography and monsoon rainfall. Some one hundred rivers and streams flush from Sri Lanka’s land surface into its surrounding ocean. Nutrients gush downward and outward into the nearby seas. Teensy plants synthesize the organic slurry with sunlight so that krill can eat their fill and blues dine in style.

Why is blue so huge? Earth’s largest animal must necessarily be aquatic and must eat low on the food chain. The heaviest animals need to be aquatic because water provides buoyancy helping hold up weight. The largest terrestrial dinosaur was roughly the same length as blue whales but only half their weight.

Animals as heavy as blues would collapse as land-dwellers or be too sluggish to move. The demand on legs to hold up and move land animals constrains their maximum weight. At sea, water’s buoyant force presses upward to counteract gravity, keeping aquatic creatures from simply falling to the bottom of the sea. No legs required.

The next point is that on land the largest plant-eaters are invariably bigger than the largest carnivores. This was true in the age of dinosaurs—veggie Dreadnoughtus shrani outweighed meat-shredding Spinosaurus eightfold–and it remains true today: elephants are way heftier than grizzly bears.

Why don’t carnivores ever reach the size of the largest herbivores? Top predators face constraints on size that herbivores avoid in accord with what’s called the Second Law of Thermodynamics as it operates in food chains (what eats what).

Sunlight furnishes essentially all energy available to life on earth for biomass construction and metabolism. Plants convert solar energy into plant stuff, which herbivores eat and convert into herbivore stuff.

Primary carnivores convert herbivore stuff into carnivore stuff and top predators do likewise with both large herbivores and lower-level carnivores. Food chains are therefore sequences of converting energy to mass, mass to energy again, energy again back to mass and so on.

The Second Law tells us that with each such conversion or transformation, much of the input energy will be lost or dissipated into what could be considered non-usable waste (actually heat). This means that at successively higher food chain levels (‘trophic levels’ biologists call them) the total energy available to support biomass and metabolism progressively dwindles.

Estimates hold that only 10% of the energy biologically embodied at any trophic level makes it through to get embodied at the next level upward. This means that the total energy available to species at the top of a typical food chain may be only 1/10,000th of that for herbivores grazing on plants at the base of the chain.

This in turn means that top predator species operate within far tighter energy budgets than herbivores do. Their constricted energy budget effectively limits carnivore size. If they grew larger, they would have to shrink their population numbers to stay within their available energy budget.

With shrinking numbers, finding mates for reproducing becomes increasingly difficult. The blue whale is a carnivore, to be sure, but not a top predator in the sense of hunting and eating large animals.

Blues are grazers–honorary herbivores–rather than hunters like typical large carnivores. They are only two steps up the food chain, as opposed to five or so for top predators. Fueled by massive ingestions of krill, blue whale energy budgets can sustain gigantic size without undue curtailment in population numbers or activity levels.

A typical blue feeding dive is a marvel. Strokes from powerful flukes power her downward against her own buoyancy through the first 25 meters. As she descends, pressure from the water above forces her flexible rib cage inward, decreasing her volume and increasing her density so that her buoyancy dissipates and she begins to fall rapidly with gravity toward the sea bed. She turns and heaves herself upward in a strenuous ‘lunge’ through krill blooms, fighting not only gravity but also the huge hydrodynamic drag created by her own gaping jaws.

After a few seconds, she shudders to a halt, having gulped maybe sixty tons of seawater into her ventral pouch. With a gelatinous tongue the weight of an elephant, she spews the water out through her baleen—cartilegenous venetian-blind-like sieves that line her mouth instead of teeth—retaining thousands upon thousands of krill then to swallow.

She does this all again and then again in a handful of successive lunges back toward the surface, holding her breath all the while of course. Her enormous krill binges furnish massive energy but also require huge energy outlays. Some marine biologists suggest that increasing blue size would actually decrease her energy yield per kilogram of body weight from lunging. Pushing the extra weight around would not yield enough extra krill to match the extra energy expenditure.

This means that blue is not only the largest animal ever to live on our beautiful planet but probably the largest that ever could. OK, but how smart is she? Certain items suggest she may not be at the top of her class among cetaceans.

A stepdown in smarts may go with the same factor that enables blue’s huge size: her grazing lifestyle. High-IQ cetaceans like orcas (killer whales), sperm whales and bottlenose dolphins all live by the hunt.

Bottlenoses and orcas collaborate amongst themselves in intricate prey-snatching tactics, while sperm whales team up for either joint or sequential hunting dives and also maintain complex networks of reciprocity in cooperative calf care and raising, requiring feats of memory and social maneuver.

Unlike these highly convivial hunters, blues do not seem to spend much time socializing in clusters. Many studies of animal intelligence emphasize congregation, communication and cooperation: bottlenoses, orcas and sperm whales all rank high on these metrics. Social learning appears to thrive where life circumstances fluctuate just enough so that conveyance of knowledge and experience is useful.

Oceanic predation seems to fit this bill nicely. Blues, by contrast, appear far less social, with simple mother-and-calf duos as their most common social formation. Lunge feeding through balls of krill does not at first glance seem to require much cooperation or brainpower. All these considerations suggest that blues may be a bit IQ-challenged, at least compared with the brainiest whales and dolphins.

Lest we be too hasty in attributing low wattage to blues’ brains, however, recall that elephants exhibit remarkable intelligence, despite their grazing lifestyle. Several items suggest that blues may not be as dumb as they look, even among cetaceans. First, blue brains are large, very large indeed.

A dominant school of thought is that species intelligence correlates mainly with brain-to-body size ratio (BBR). Humans have a higher BBR than any other animal except one: voila, we are super smart! Blues pack big brains to be sure, but with immense body size their BBR drops down, with their smarts perhaps dwindling in turn.

Another school of thought, however, is that intelligence corresponds also with absolute brain size, not just BBR. A tiny shrew exceeds humans in BBR but no one is nominating her for valedictorian. Sheer brain size means more neurons, more pathways, more flexibility, more capacity.

From this viewpoint, blues stand to rank high in intelligence, with the second biggest brain on the planet, exceeded only by sperm whales. And there may be more social learning in lunge feeding than there seems to be. First, there is being in the right place at the right time for krill blooms.

Blooms arise now and then, here and there, due to complex fluctuations in water temperature, nutrient supply, ocean topography, waves, currents, tides, competitive predation and so on. Blues need to know this stuff and they can learn it only from other blues: complex social transmission of knowledge may be needed.

Social learning may also apply to avoiding orcas, the only predators blues normally need to worry about. Moreover, because lunge feeding tends to scatter krill balls temporarily, blues at a krill ball site may need to coordinate so that all may feed: either lunge in unison or lunge sequentially so that feeding chances get shared.

Such complex social consideration and coordination could both require and reward sophisticated intelligence. Then there is this. Blues emit extremely loud moans so low in frequency as to be largely inaudible to the unaided human ear. These songs probably come only from males and likely play a role in locating or attracting mates. It appears plausible that blues hear each other calling for hundreds if not thousands of miles, perhaps across entire ocean basins.

This means they could be ‘in touch’ with one another far more intensively than would seem to be the case from the fact that they do not seem to ‘cluster’ that much. Blues subsist in eleven relatively distinct population groups spread across the world’s oceans. Each has a singing style common to all members but slightly different from that of other populations.

Recordings reveal the startling fact that the sound pitch of blue songs across all populations has dropped just a bit every year for the past thirty years, as long as we have been listening. Populations must be following one another’s songs so that they all move in the same direction: slightly lower year by year.

Biologists understand ‘sexual selection’ as a process whereby females mysteriously and almost arbitrarily find certain male displays sexy. Masters of such display mate more successfully and pass genes producing those displays (e.g., peacock feathers) on to their sons, who themselves mate successfully in turn.

But the blue whale pitch shift cannot be an example of genetically-propagated sexual selection. It affects entire populations—indeed the entire species—year by year: far too fast to be genetic and generational. So we have males all changing their song display in uniform ways to keep up with what females for some reason deem sexy. I’m not sure whether this counts as a sign of high intelligence but I think I know what to call it: fashion.

(From the archives of Echelon magazine; published in September 2016)

Gamini Keerawella, a former Peradeniya University Professor, will deliver the October 2020 monthly lecture on ‘Colonial knowledge formation under British rule and modern Sri Lanka historiography.

“Knowledge formation constitutes an important aspect of British colonialism in Asia,” the National Trust said in introducing the lecture.

“Acquiring knowledge of the past of colonial territories and their subjects remained an integral element of the colonial knowledge formation.

“The modern Sri Lankan historiography took its current shape in this process. Sri Lanka lays claim to one of the ancient and continuous historical traditions in Asia.”

The presentation will be made online on Thursday October 29 at 1830 hours.

Participants could pre-register at this link for more information.

The lectures will be broadcast on the following links and platforms.

Zoom: https://bit.ly/3dGqJNm

Website: https://thenationaltrust.lk/news/

Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/The-National-Trust-Sri-Lanka

Co-Cabinet Spokesman Bandula Gunawardena told reporters today that this was a major step towards the development of a new medical faculty as a national or teaching hospital for the clinical training needs of the students is needed to develop another medical school.

The development, agreed to by the Cabinet of Ministers yesterday is the culmination of a proposal made to Parliament in 2018 by former JVP Kalutara District MP Dr Nalinda Jayatissa as a private member.

At the time Jayatissa argued that Sri Lanka has only 50 per cent of the required number of medical doctors and medical faculties.

Currently the State Universities can only accommodate 1,200 to 1,300 medical undergraduates each year, therefore, the need to establish two more medical faculties to increase the number of student intake is paramount.

Jayatissa moved two private member motions to establish medical faculties at the Uva-Wellassa and Moratuwa Universities, with Badulla and Nagoda Hospitals proposed as “Teaching Hospitals.”

“So in order to that, it was decided to take over the Kalutara General Hospital and Homagama Base Hospital and start the development process to convert them as national or teaching hospitals,” Gunawardena said.

The Homagama base hospital is being used as a treatment hospital for COVID-19 patients.

Later the same year the then government included the proposal of establishing a medical faculty at Moratuwa University in their annual budget proposal. (Colombo, July 23, 2020)

Reported by Imesh Ranasinghe

The grant is part of Microsoft’s Artificial Intelligence for Accessibility program which has pledged 25 million dollars over the five years for people developing AI tools that serve those with disabilities.

Fortude is a subsidiary of the Brandix group in Sri Lanka. It is formerly known as Brandixi3.

It is Sri Lanka’s first grant recipient of AI for the Accessibility program.

“What stands out the most about Fortude is how they are taking standard AI capabilities and truly revolutionizing the value of technology,” Hasitha Abeywardena, Country Manager, Microsoft Sri Lanka & Maldives said.

“The work they have done is an important step in scaling accessible technology and building on our recent advancements in Microsoft Cognitive Services and Machine Learning to develop accessible and intelligent AI solutions for all”.

This grant provides access to Microsoft’s Azure cloud computing service and provides training and resources to organizations looking to tackle problems relating to work, life, and human connections.

According to Microsoft, the grant would allow Fortude to develop and launch its Dysphagia identification app.
Dyspagia app identifies swallowing difficulties in infants and children.

“We are honored to be Sri Lanka’s first recipient of Microsoft’s AI for Accessibility grant,” said Gaurika Wijeratne, Associate Vice President, Business Intelligence, Fortude.

“It is amazing when a corporation such as Microsoft focuses on scaling the reach of new technologies, like Cognitive Services and Machine Learning, to empower people with disabilities. Microsoft’s investment in projects that are uniquely solving complex issues like Dysphagia identification in youth and children is essential to creating accessible technology for all.”

Fortude’s identification app was recognized at an event organized by Microsoft in partnership with Sri Lanka’s MJF Charitable Foundation in Sri Lanka to develop AI prototypes for people with disabilities at the AI for Accessibility Hackathon last year.

(Colombo/June23/2020)

Sri Lanka north would see 24 percent of the Sun shaded by the moon while about 15 percent will be shaded in Colombo and the suburbs, Director of the Planetarium K. Arunu Prabha Perera said.

The eclipse will be visible from around 10.24 am in Sri Lanka.

The climax of the eclipse in the Jaffna region will be at about 11.54 while it will be around 11.51 am. in Colombo, Perera said.

“It is requested not to observe the solar eclipse using sun glasses, glasses darkened with ashes or X – ray sheets but recommended to use only the No. 14 welding glasses and glasses used especially for observing solar eclipse,” Perera said.

“The public is herewith strictly advised not to observe this partial solar eclipse with naked eyes.”

America’s National Aeronautical and Space Administration has released the following animation of how the eclipse occurs over North American.

NASA gives the following advice on how to watch the eclipse.

1) Projection: The safest and most inexpensive way to watch a partial solar eclipse is by projection. Place a pinhole or small opening in a card, and hold it between the sun and a screen – giant sheet of white paper works – a few feet away. An image of the sun will be seen on the screen. Projected images of the sun’s crescent during an eclipse may even be seen on the ground in the small openings created by interlacing fingers, or in the dappled sunlight beneath a leafy tree. You can also use binoculars to project a magnified image of the sun on a white card. However, you must never look through the binoculars at the sun.

2) Filters: The sun can be viewed directly only when using filters specifically designed for this purpose. Such filters usually have a thin layer of aluminum, chromium or silver deposited on their surfaces. One of the most widely available filters for safe eclipse viewing is a #14 (or darker) welder’s glass. A welding glass that permits you to see the landscape is not safe. Aluminized mylar manufactured specifically for solar observation can also be used. Mylar can easily be cut with scissors and adapted to any kind of box or viewing device. Only use filters that you know have been approved for solar viewing.

Unsafe filters include color film, some non-silver black and white film, medical x-ray films with images on them, smoked glass, photographic neutral density filters and polarizing filters. Solar filters designed to thread into eyepieces, which are often sold with inexpensive telescopes are also dangerous.

3) Telescopes with solar filters: There are sun-specific telescopes available for sale — or perhaps through a local astronomy club — that are also safe for viewing a partial eclipse.

“The impact of structural change in the labour market on women due to the 4IR will be particularly appalling,” the State of the Economy report by the Institute of Policy Studies (IPS), a semi-government think-tank said.

“Given that women are already underrepresented in tech jobs, they are more vulnerable to job losses due to the 4IR.”

According to predictions and estimations, some existing sectors as well as job categories will become obsolete due to automation.

“Job losses for women are predicted to be more than for men,” IPS said, noting the need for more girls to study STEM or Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics subjects on which 4IR is based.

The report said there were both opportunities and threats to women’s employment in the technological changes under way.

“Entrenched inequalities and discriminatory social norms that keep women restricted to low-paid, poor-quality jobs are likely to further deepen by the 4IR,” the report said.

Studies on transformation of occupational structures due to the 4IR have seen job losses in both male-dominated occupations such as construction, and female-dominated occupations such as clerical work.

Evidence indicates major gains in some male-dominated occupations like information technology (IT) professionals, and some female-dominated occupations such as cleaners and helpers.

IPS said that given that women are more likely to be involved in repetitive work throughout the labour market, an average improvement of the content of women’s job might be expected if automation occurs mainly in relation to repetitive or routine tasks.

“It is predicted that this could thus raise the quality of women’s jobs, while reducing their number.”

The fourth industrial revolution is also expected to bring in some critical changes to existing gendered norms and roles in the labour market.

“It will reverse the gender stereotypes created by the first, by placing an emphasis back on human talent such as ingenuity and creativity, and not on traditional masculine skillsets,” the IPS report said.

“On-demand production of customised products and talent will be the most valuable asset in the 4IR. In an economy which is based more on talent and less on capital, there is a higher prospect of women being treated more equally. Further, there will be fewer obstacles for women to talent acquisition and retention.”

The IPS study noted that the platform economy will allow women to work remotely, where flexibility allows them to access the labour market and remain in it.

“A comprehensive restructuring of the education system will be needed to fulfill the requirements of the 4IR.

“STEM-based education can play an important role as a stepping stone to the era of the 4IR. New STEM-based subjects such as genomics, data science, AI, and robotics will be in demand that need to be taught.

“Existing gender imbalances in STEM education, where girls are at a more disadvantaged position, suggest that extra efforts are needed to enhance girls’ participation in STEM education.

IPS suggests increasing the number of subject qualified teachers and schools offering such classes are key steps which should be taken in order to enhance STEM education in Sri Lanka.
(COLOMBO, 26 November 2019)

“According to the World Health Organization, dengue represents one of the ten biggest global health threats, and it is critical that we have access to a safe and effective vaccine candidate that can reduce the devastating impact dengue fever has in endemic regions,” International Vaccine Institute Senior Advisor In-Kyu Yoon said in a Takeda statement.

“Historically, vaccine development against dengue has been challenging, especially for people who haven’t previously been exposed to dengue, and these results demonstrate protection from dengue fever, including among many participants without prior dengue,” he said.

The vaccine efficacy was 80.2 percent in the 12-month period after receiving the second dose, which was administered three months after the first, Takeda said. Between the doses, the vaccine efficacy was 81 percent.

The study showed a 95 percent fall in hospitalization rates for dengue. The vaccine is effective against all four dengue types spread by the Aedes aegypti, and to a lesser extent, the Aedes albopictus mosquitos.

Takeda’s Tetravalent Immunization against Dengue Efficacy Study was conducted among children between the ages 4-16 in eight countries in Latin America and Asia, including Sri Lanka.

Results of the study were published on the New England Journal of Medicine.

Dengue is a leading cause of illness and death among children in the countries where the study is being conducted.

The vaccine is well tolerated with no important safety risks observed to date and the trial will continue for four and a half years to observe the safety of the vaccine and efficacy, the statement said.

An 18-month follow-up on the second dose will be presented later this year, Takeda said.

Dengue is the world’s fastest growing mosquito-borne virus, with nearly half the world’s population under threat. The virus causes 390 million infections and 20,000 deaths annually across the globe, across all ages.

The agreement was signed at the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade Australia, by the Chairman of Geological Survey and Mines Bureau of Sri Lanka (GSMB) W.M.A.S. Iddawela, and the Chief Executive Officer, Geoscience Australia (GA) Dr. James Johnson.

The representatives of Sri Lanka were the High Commissioner of Sri Lanka to Australia J.C Weliamuna and Senior Director (GSMB) Udaya De Silva. Chief of Resources Division (GA) Dr. Andrew Heap, Assistant Secretary Ian Biggs and Director Lalita Kaur representated the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade Australia.

Collaboration under this MoU includes, geoscientific investigations, research work on on-shore and off-shore mineral occurrences, geothermal energy potential, geospatial analysis, professional training and capacity building, adoption of latest technology and sharing the technology for value addition of minerals and exchanging scientific and technical information.

This MoU will be in effect for a period of five years with a further extension period of three years. The signing ceremony of the MoU was followed by a discussion focusing on areas of mutual interest for future cooperation. 

Assistant Secretary Biggs stated that “the signing of the MoU is one of the important achievements following the visits of the President and the Prime Minister of Sri Lanka in 2017 which would help to strengthen the cooperation between GSMB and GA and explore opportunities and tangible activities with concrete outcome”. 

Nations Trust Bank has supported multiple long term research projects yielding significant results, the forum by Biodiversity Sri Lanka (BSL), a private sector platform to promote biodiversity and environmental conservation was told.

One of the project led to the re-discovery after an absence of 53 years in a particular locality of Rasboroidesnigromarginata (Fairy “Dandiya”), a point endemic fish that exist only in one geographic region, a statement said.

“It was revealed that on the basis of this unique finding, Nations Trust Bank and several other banks declined to provide funding for a mini-hydro project proposed for this particular stream,” it said.

The forum was Biodiversity Sri Lanka’s annual technical sessions aligning with the Association for Tropical Biology and Conservation – Asia Pacific Chapter Conference, which saw covered over 30 private sector led environmental initiatives from over 20 organizations, mostly BSL member companies.

There were nine symposia on a diversity of topics, namely Indigenous Knowledge, Sustainable Agriculture, Conservation Partnerships, Plastics and Long-term Marine Pollution, Conserving Coastal Biodiversity, Sustaining Mangroves, Species Conservation, Green Tourism, Conservation Communications and Sustainable Banking.

The Sustainable Banking Initiative’s symposium on ‘Sustainable banking – considering biodiversity as a risk in lending’, focused on environment and social risk management systems, biodiversity related risks in lending decision making, sustainable financing models and environmentally sensitive industries and their impacts.

“The bankers who were present at the symposium showed encouragingly high levels of understanding and knowledge on environmental issues and biodiversity which are not traditionally their core areas of expertise,” the statement said.
(COLOMBO, 24 September 2019)

The satellite will be deployed to orbit from the International Space Station (ISS) using the Japanese owned Kibo experiment module at 3.30 pm (Sri Lanka time) today.  

‘Ravana 1’ which falls into the category of Nanosatellites was designed by two Sri Lankans, Tharindu Dayaratne and Dulani Chamika in Japan.  

Resembling a taller, skinnier version of R2D2 from "Star Wars," the robots are operating at three military medical centers and about 250 other American hospitals are using the machines to destroy pathogens.

Sending out 1.5 pulses per second in a 10-foot (three-meter) radius, the robots use xenon, a non-toxic gas, to create the ultraviolet rays that eradicate germs faster and more thoroughly than any human cleaning crew, doctors and officials said.

"The robot is currently part of our Ebola mitigation strategy, but will be used across the hospital to combat a variety of other pathogens known to cause hospital acquired infections," said Alton Dunham, a spokesman for Langley Air Force Base, which acquired one of the robots in October.

Although ultraviolet light has been around for decades as a tool for cleaning, the new robot uses environmentally-friendly xenon instead of mercury-vapor bulbs that are slower-acting and toxic, according to Texas-based Xenex Disinfection Service, which manufactures the machines.

                     – Hauling contaminated waste –

Researchers say the disinfecting bot is just one example of how autonomous devices could play a crucial role in the fight against the Ebola outbreak in West Africa.

At a conference this month organized by the White House linking up universities across the country, scientists and aid workers concluded that robots could help haul contaminated waste or enable health workers to remotely interview patients.

The General Dynamics Land Systems MUTT, a robotic wagon, was cited as a machine already in existence that could be deployed now to help health workers in West Africa, said Robin Murphy, a professor of computer science and engineering at Texas A&M University.

"The major takeaway was that robots do exist that could be immediately repurposed now to protect Ebola health workers," Murphy said in a report on the November 7 brainstorming session.

But any robots sent over would have to fit into the wider medical effort, take the local culture into account and avoid imposing radical new procedures on stressed health workers, she said.
As a virus that spreads through direct human contact, Ebola demands medical equipment and methods that shield a doctor or a nurse from the risk of infection.

Like surgical masks, robots can offer a way for patients to be treated and monitored while reducing the risk of infection for the physician.

"Robots could reduce the number of times humans handle contaminated waste or the number of people needed to carry a litter," Murphy said.

But a clinic in Liberia or Sierra Leone presents challenges to robots designed in more pristine, Western settings, and Wi-Fi access, ample electrical power, batteries and flat floor surfaces may not be readily available in areas where the robots are most needed.

                      – Infections at hospitals –

There are no immediate plans to send the Xenex robot to West Africa but concern over the Ebola outbreak has underscored the wider problem of hospital-associated infections in the United States and other Western countries.

Hundreds of patients in America die every year of infections contracted during a hospital stay, including from Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA), according to government statistics.

Dozens of the hospitals that have used the Xenex robot have reported a reduction in hospital infections, according to Melinda Hart, a spokeswoman for the robot company.

The robot’s ultraviolet light can disinfect surfaces and hidden areas that even the most diligent human cleaner cannot reach.

"The robot is able to eliminate the risk of human error," said Hart.

Given widespread public fears over Ebola, the Xenex robots are a reassuring presence to patients and medical workers, said Colonel Wayne Pritt, commander of the US Air Force 633rd medical group at the Langley base.

"The Xenex device adds a level of surety to the process of disinfection that wasn’t possible before. With Ebola, that translates to increased confidence in staff and patients alike," Pritt said.
 

Ferrari and Red Bull want rule changes to cut costs and improve their competitiveness. But team champions Mercedes are not keen on plans to allow their rivals limited in-season engine development and have indicated they will stubbornly defend their current advantage.

Red Bull team chief Christian Horner told reporters that Formula One had to consider ditching the current turbo powered 1.5 litre V6 engine only introduced this year. And he was backed by Ferrari team principal Marco Mattiacci.

"Definitely we need to look at something different for 2016," said Mattiacci.

"In terms of power unit, and in terms of regulation [for] 2015, it is clear we will have to – at the moment – accept the status quo, but definitely we are not going to accept the status quo for 2016."

Horner whose team won the title every year from 2010 to 2013, said: "Maybe we need to even go as far as looking at a different engine – a new engine. Maybe still a V6, but maybe a more simplified V6 that controls the cost – cost of development, cost of supply to a team and to the privateer teams.

"I think that’s something we need to have a serious discussion about during the next Strategy Group."

The sport’s influential Strategy Group and the F1 Commission are to meet next week.
Red Bull’s Renault engines have not produced a competitive level of power this year letting Mercedes drivers Lewis Hamilton and Nico Rosberg monopolise races.

F1 ‘grave’

Mercedes team chief Toto Wolff was wary of calls for change.

"We are all talking about costs and, if you would open up the regulations in the way it has been described, that clearly means you don’t care about costs.

"That would be like digging a grave for Formula One. We have spent considerable amounts in the development of the power unit," Wolff said.

"I think we need to be sensible and we need to come up with solutions that enable the small teams to survive and which still enable the big teams to showcase the technology.

"Reversing everything, changing the format, changing the engines would just increase costs. It is the opposite for what we need for Formula One at the current stage."

As Hamilton and Rosberg prepare for Sunday’s title deciding Abu Dhabi Grand Prix, half of the F1 paddock has been more concerned by the sport’s cash crisis.

The Caterham and Marussia teams went into administration last month and three others talked of a boycott at the US Grand Prix as they pushed for an overhaul of prize money distribution.

Caterham raised funds to-join the fray in Abu Dhabi and are seeking investment to survive into 2015, but Marussia has folded.

In Brazil, Horner suggested that the sport should consider a return to last year’s engines to save money. Renault and Mercedes said they would quit F1 if that happened.

"It’s unsustainable for any of the manufacturers to keep spending at the level we are," Horner told reports on Friday.

"So we should maybe look at simplifying the engine because if the development costs stay as they are then we won’t attract new manufacturers in. We have to ensure the sport is attractive to new manufacturers."

Wolff argued that Honda is returning to F1 next year as engine suppliers for McLaren, replacing Mercedes.

"I fully agree we need to look at costs," he said. "But you can’t turn time back."