Category Archives: Anatomy

Now Playing100 Best Shows: The Best Streaming Shows

Summer 2020 is finally behind us, and you know what that means: It's officially time to dig back into fall TV. ABC has already announced plenty of premiere dates forits fall schedule, and the lineup is stacked with non-scripted programming.

WhileDancing With the Starsis officially underway after premiering on Monday, Sept. 14, and you're probably still reeling from the Carole Baskin of it all, there's still more to come throughout the rest of September and into October and November.The Bachelorettehas, to the surprise of no one, sparked a ton of questions and rumors as production on the upcoming season has progressed. Less dramatic is the premiere of theSupermarket Sweeprevival, hosted byLeslie Jones, which also has an official premiere date. These shows all join the previously announced comedy lineup, which includes season premieres forblack-ish,The Goldbergs, andThe Conners.

The lineup doesn't include the recently canceledStumptown, but we do finally have dates for some of our other faves likeThe Good DoctorandGrey's Anatomy.David E. Kelley's new seriesBig Sky also got a fall premiere date, butKyra Sedgwick's comedyCall Your Motheris still to be determined.

Check out ABC's premiere schedule below, andlearn more about the network's 2020-2021 fall lineup here. If you want to see what else is coming back this fall across the other major networks, head here. New shows are in ALL CAPS.

Monday, Sept. 14Dancing with the Stars(8/7c)

Thursday, Sept. 248/7c: Celebrity Family Feud9/8c: Press Your Luck10/9c: Match Game

Tuesday, Oct. 138/7c: The Bachelorette

Friday, Oct. 168/7c: Shark Tank

Sunday, Oct. 187/6c: America's Funniest Home Videos8/7c: SUPERMARKET SWEEP9/8c: Who Wants To Be A Millionaire10/9c: Card Sharks

Wednesday, Oct. 218/7c:The Goldbergs(premiering with two back-to-back episodes)9/8c:The Conners9:30/8:30c:black-ish

Wednesday, Oct. 288:30/7:30c:American Housewife

Monday, Nov. 210/9c: The Good Doctor

Thursday, Nov. 128/7c: Station 199/8c: Grey's Anatomy (two-hour premiere)

Tuesday, Nov. 1710/9c: Big Sky (series premiere)

Wednesday, Nov. 1810/9c: For Life

Thursday, Nov. 1910/9c: A Million Little Things

PHOTOS:Dancing with the Stars: 25 Most Shocking Moments

Read more:
ABC's Fall TV 2020 Premiere Date Schedule: Grey's Anatomy, Good Doctor, A Million Little Things, and More - TV Guide

Welcome back to the Anatomy of a Goal, where each week we dissect one goal (or near goal) from Columbus Crew SCs previous match.

For match 11 of the 2020 MLS Season, we take a look at Djordje Mihailovics 11th minute goal for Chicago Fire that gave the Fire a 1-0 lead against the Crew on Saturday.

Heres a look at the goal from Chicagos young attacker.

Columbus began Saturdays match against a brand-refreshed version of its old foes with a surprising lineup. Designated Player Lucas Zelarayan missed his second straight match with a slight injury while midfield stalwart Darlington Nagbe was a shock exclusion from the lineup with his own injury. The Black & Gold made do by shifting Pedro Santos into the No. 10 role and gave Fatai Alashe his second straight start beside Artur.

The Fires goal begins in the midfield with Alvaro Medran picking up the ball and quickly playing a pass over to Gaston Gimenez.

With Alashe recovering and Santos shifting over to provide pressure, Gimenez pings the ball back out in front of Medran.

Medran has time and space in front of him and heads toward the Crews half of the field. On the other side of the field, Harrison Afful spots the Chicago counter attack and sprints back toward his defensive end.

Medran is able to continue forward and the counter attack is on for the Fire. At this point, Columbus has two defenders providing immediate cover in Milton Valenzuela and Artur, two center backs further back who are split by Chicago striker Robert Beric, and Afful attempting to close down on the free-running Mihailovic. Both of the Black & Golds wingers have pushed up the field, leaving Medran free to carry the ball forward.

Medran crosses midfield without any resistance. Artur shifts away from Ignacio Aliseda in order to provide some pressure on Medran, leaving the Fire midfielder with five options. He can play a quick diagonal pass to Aliseda, play a long ball over the top to Mihailovic, make a through pass to Beric, carry the ball forward or play a diagonal pass in front of Fabian Herbers.

Medran spots Beric running between the Black & Gold center backs and hits a long through ball into space for his striker to run onto. As Medran hits that pass, Josh Williams shifts away from Beric in an attempt to intercept the pass. If he does pick up the ball, this will allow the Crew to clear out of danger. If he is unable to intercept the pass, it will force captain Jonathan Mensah into the difficult position of defending both Berics run as well as any additional runs made to the back post.

On the far side of the field, Mihailovic and Afful are engaged in a foot race down the attacking left flank.

Williams is unable to intercept the pass, leaving Mensah alone to cover both Beric, who is running onto the long through ball, and Mihailovic running back post. Afful is scrambling to recover on the young attacker but is outpaced.

Beric, unpressured, catches up to the ball in the Columbus goal box and immediately has three options before making his first to a quick shot on goal, a cross toward Mihailovic or carry the ball closer to the goal.

Mensah has put himself into the best position he can while knowing that Mihailovic is running free toward the goal. In this no mans land, Mensah will attempt to get in front of a cross or provide further pressure should Beric decide to take an additional touch on the ball.

Beric reaches the ball and hits a first touch cross toward Mihailovic.

On first glance, it appeared that Mihailovic might have been offside, but from the side angle you can see that he is just a few steps behind Mensah as the ball is crossed toward the back post.

Mensah slides toward the ball but is just unable to get a touch as the ball slides past the captain toward the back post.

Afful is unable to catch up to Mihailovic who will have an uncontested chance on the ball.

Eloy Room shifts toward Mihailovic who hits a first-touch shot toward the goal.

Room is unable to get in front of the ball as it travels past him . . .

. . . into the back of the net.

Findings:

The rest is here:
Anatomy of a Goal: Mihailovic gives Fire an early lead vs. the Crew - Massive Report

If you were to take a class on anatomy in med school you would probably be told that the history of anatomy really begins in the Renaissance, when doctors and other luminaries like Leonardo da Vinci first started dissecting human bodies and documenting their findings. You might also learn that prior to this point, doctors worked with the anatomical theories of the ancient Greeks and Romans, whose knowledge was gleaned mostly from the bodies of animals and external observation. The ancient Egyptians, who are well known for cutting up dead bodies, might get a look in, but that would likely be it.

But, now, a new study claims that an ancient manuscript unearthed in a tomb in Southern China may well be the worlds oldest anatomical atlas. The article not only promises to revolutionize our understanding of the history of medicine, it also sheds light on the history and scientific foundations of acupuncture.

In an article inThe Anatomical Record, Vivien Shaw and Isabelle Winder of Bangor University, UK, and Rui Diogo of Howard University published their findings about the Mawangdui manuscripts, a collection of philosophical and medical texts from Changsha in the Hunan province of South Central China. The texts are written on silk and were placed in the tomb of Chancellor Li Cang and his family before it was sealed in 168 BCE. They were rediscovered in the 1970s, but the previously unknown medical texts were somewhat overshadowed by the presence of other important discoveries, like the oldest copy of the I Ching. Because of this, Shaw, Winder, and Diogo are the first to treat these medical texts as evidence of ancient anatomy.

The Mawangduitexts, the authors argue, were written in the second-third century BCE and are roughly contemporaneous with now-lost Greek dissection-based anatomical texts. Of course, the approach taken in these Chinese texts is very different than the one we see in their Greek counterparts. Vivien Shaw said, they looked at the body from the viewpoint of traditional Chinese Medicine, which is based on the philosophical concept of complementary opposites of yin and yang, familiar to those in the west who follow eastern spiritualism.

The Mawangduitexts organize the body into eleven pathways, each of which has particular kinds of disease associated with it. Some of these, Isabel Winder said, map onto later acupuncture meridians, even though acupuncture and acupuncture points are nowhere mentioned. Historians had some evidence for the acupuncture meridians from other ancient Chinese texts, but those texts date to the third century CE and are, thus, roughly four hundred years younger than the ones from Mawangdui.

Their findings, said Shaw, not only re-write a key part of Chinese history and affirm that the Han dynasty was a period of widespread intellectual growth, they also provide medical foundations for acupuncture and change our understanding of how it originally worked.

We believe, she said, that our interpretation of the text challenges the widespread belief that there is no scientific foundation for the anatomy of acupuncture, by showing that the earliest physicians writing about meridians were in fact describing the physical body. Modern acupuncture, Shaw added, is grounded in the belief that it is the function of the meridian points thats important. Originally, however, it seems that Chinese anatomists were interested in mapping the structure of the body. In other words, and regardless of whether or not we think these descriptions of the body are accurate, they are scientific. This means that acupuncture, which is often dismissed as more spiritual than scientific, is grounded in a carefully worked out ancient map of the body that was based on scientific observation.

The reason that the Mawangdui texts have been overlooked as an anatomical resource is because they date from a period when the principles of Confucianism were very much in vogue. Han-era China was governed by Confucian law, which maintained stability and structure through the maintenance of a rigid social structure. One element of this social hierarchy was what is called filial piety, in which children must respect and honor their parents. Venerating ones ancestors did not include cutting up your dead parents. As Isabel Winder, one of the authors of the article, said Confucian cultural practices shunned dissection. However, [the evidence leads us to conclude] that dissection was involved and that the authors [of these texts] would have had access to the bodies of criminals.

This brings us to one of the grizzly secrets of the study of anatomy: to be any good at it you have to be examining actual human bodies. At the time, this was not just a Chinese practice. Herophilus of Chalcedon and his younger contemporary Erasistratus of Ceos, Greek-speaking doctors and medical authors working in Alexandria, Egypt in the first half of the third century BCE, were also dissecting cadavers on a routine basis. As in China (and, later, in 16th 19th century Britain), the bodies used for these experiments were those of criminals. Shortly after Herophilus and Erasistratus died, however, dissection fell into disuse. Though there were some rogue doctors who seem to have been dissecting bodies on the sly it wasnt until the 14th century, when the Italian Mondino de Luzzi publicly performed the first sanctioned dissection in a millennium, that it would begin again in earnest.

While dissection vastly improved medical sciences understanding of the workings of the human body, this doesnt mean that those performing these experiments always accurately described what was in front of them. Leonardo da Vincis scientific drawings of the human body are widely admired for their accuracy, but he sometimes followed tradition rather than the evidence, depicting, as Roy Porter has written in his book The Greatest Benefit to Mankind, a five lobed liver. The human liver only has four lobes; the five-lobe theory was based on the dissection of dogs and pigs and goes back to Hippocrates. We should not assume, therefore, that dissection always deepens and improves medical understanding. It took two hundred years and the creative vision of 16th century anatomist Andreas Vesalius for many ancient medical theories to be questioned and revised.

In between the 3rd century BCE and the rediscovery of dissection in the 14th, European doctors were reliant on the works of famous Greek-speaking doctors Aristotle and Galen, who had only dissected animals. Galen had experience treating gladiators and would have seen the kinds of wounds that would have afforded the opportunity peek inside the body, but there was nothing exhaustive about his exploration of the human body. As a result, all kinds of errorsthe five-lobed liver sketched by Da Vinci, for examplecrept into Western medicine. So, if youre thinking that Chinese medicine sounds unscientific and esoteric, bear in mind that for this 1200-year period of European history you may as well have been seeing a vet.

One of the major contributions of this study is the way that it challenges Eurocentric histories of science and medicine. Rui Diogo, whose lab helped perform the research, told The Daily Beast, that too often textbooks and scientific publications rehearse narratives in which white Europeans (from the Greeks and Romans onwards) make the big discoveries and non-European cultures contribute nothing more than translations of Greek texts or esoteric unscientific knowledge. Discoveries like this one show both that there was a vibrant scientific culture in places like India, China, and Persia and also that medical schemes often dismissed as esoteric have real scientific foundations.

Read the original:
Forget the GreeksIs This the World's Oldest Anatomical Text? - Daily Beast

Photo: Kimberella, by the paleobear from Lontananza, Loreto, Peru / CC BY (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0).

Editors note: We are delighted to present a series of posts by paleontologist Gnter Bechly on the Ediacaran organismKimberella. If identified as an animal, it would predate the Cambrian explosion of bilaterian animal phyla as a kind of advance guard.The question is of interest for debates about evolution and arguments about intelligent design raised by Stephen Meyer, among others.Find the full series aboutKimberellahere.

In my opinion the third phase reconstruction ofKimberella, byFedonkin (2007b)and described here yesterday, is better supported by the fossil evidence than the new reconstruction ofIvantsov (2009). Not only is Fedonkin more likely correct concerning the head and feeding apparatus with a medium sized proboscis armed with two teeth. He also successfully addressed all the arguments that Ivantsov listed against a single shell. You can find a pretty decent life-reconstruction and animation ofKimberellaat thePalaeoZoowebsite.

With their revolutionary new interpretation ofKimberellaas a benthic bilaterian animal,Fedonkin & Waggoner (1997)first recognized the presence of a creeping ventral locomotory organ (foot), which was accepted by most subsequent authors (a notable exception wasDzik 2003).Fedonkin et al. (2007b)explicitly identified this structure as a true foot, possibly comparable in structure with that of monoplacophorans.Fedonkin et al. (2007b)also described fine transverse wrinkles on the sole of the foot, which they interpreted as transverse ventral musculature (compareSeilacher et al. 2003who likewise described the flat foot with a ring of segmental muscles, whose contraction upon death produced equidistant wrinkles). They suggested backward movement by peristaltic waves and also suggested that the foot was contracted in some specimens in a manner similar to modern limpets.

It was againFedonkin et al. (2007b)who first explicitly suggested the presence of a mantle and mantle cavity inKimberella.Ivantsov (2009)agreed, but consistently used the term mantle with quotation marks because he doubted a homology with the molluscanmantleor pallium, which is the technical term for their protruding dorsal body wall.

More recent authors all affirmed the presence of a mantle: For example,Gehling et al. (2014: fig. 9)mentioned that the serrate zone has been interpreted as a corrugated mantle frill overlying a wider central muscular foot.

According toWanninger & Wollensen (2019)Kimberellahas an elongated, slender foot surrounded by a mantle that is separated from the former by a circumpedal mantle cavity (also seeVinther 2015).

In the most recent textbook on invertebrate phylogeny, byGiribet & Edgecombe (2020), the authors say aboutKimberellas anatomy that the softer ventral side has been described as a sole and compared to a molluscan foot. The body is certainly zoned laterally, this zonation viewed as representing the foot and mantle separated by a groove in the mollusc model.

It is safe to say that since the redescription ofKimberellaas a benthic bilaterian animal, the functional interpretation of foot and mantle has met with a broad consensus among the specialists and represents one of the less controversial issues of its anatomy. However, what remains highly disputed is the question of the homology of these structures with the foot and mantle in modern mollusks.

According to esteemed Russian expert Mikhail Fedonkin,Kimberellahad a non-mineralized univalved shell with an elongated oval, shield-like outline (Fedonkin & Waggoner 1997, Fedonkin 2001,2003,Fedonkin et al. 2007b). Likewise, Fedonkin (1998, 2001) andWaggoner (1998)said thatKimberellabore a highly compaction-resistant structure that we interpret as a stiff but un-mineralized shell, andFedonkin (2003)specified that the elongated and high dorsal shell [was] made of flexible and rigid organic material.Fedonkin et al. (2007b)found that the outer surface of the dorsal side of the smaller specimens is covered with numerous round protuberances, uniformly spaced over the major part of the shell, which they interpreted as outgrowths, or bases of mineral spines, or as separate initial nodules of shell formation. This latter hypothesis might explain why these structures are not visible in the larger adult specimens. Finally,Fedonkin et al. (2007b)also recognized that small specimens often are strongly elongated, and suggested that these individuals represent a phase when the formation of the shell had not yet begun or was just incipient. They explained that the taphonomic varieties of the shell imprints clearly demonstrate that the shell was stiff, but thin and flexible, particularly in juveniles, which explains why stretched and laterally bent specimens are generally small.

Based on further new material, the other Russian expert Andrey Ivantsov (2009,2010b) suggested a new reconstruction with hard sclerites, probably of aragonite, rather than a complete consolidated shell. Because of the very different contracted and stretched morphs ofKimberella,Ivantsov (2009: pls I-II,2010b: pl. 1,2013) claimed that a rigid shell was not a possibility, and instead suggested a soft-bodied and extremely flexible organism with multiple dorsal mineralized sclerites. He said that many characters of the imprints contradict the hypothesis of a single shell, including the many stretched and strongly bent specimens. This is somewhat strange, because we have just seen thatFedonkin et al. (2007b)had already explained this phenomenon ontogenetically. Ivantsov also claimed that the absence of any growth lines is very much unlike molluscan shells, even thoughFedonkin et al. (2007b)suggested that the absence of any growth zonation in the shell structure suggests that the shell ofKimberellawas the homologue of the periostracum of later Mollusca. Again and again we find opposite conclusions about the same evidence. Finally, Ivantsov mentioned that the head possessed tubercles similar to the body and claimed that all these considerations leave no doubt thatKimberellahad no single dense shell.Ivantsov (2017)suggested that the dorsal body cover was armored with fine sclerites, apparently mineral, but rapidly dissolving after burial, but this taphonomic hypothesis does not explain why the tubercles are only visible in small specimens.

Most later authors followed the single shell interpretation of Fedonkin:Seilacher et al. (2003)mentioned that the dorsal shield, was soft enough to become deformed during burial.Scheltema & Schander (2006)said thatKimberellahad a single, stiff, unmineralized dorsal exoskeleton, which was formed by the mantle cuticle alone, although there may have been a zone of spines beneath the dorsum.Gehling et al. (2014)featured a reconstruction ofKimberellaas a molluscan grade organism with a single shell and said that this reconstruction ofKimberellaincludes an inferred stiff but flexible unmineralized shield that enclosed internal organs.Vinther (2015)remarked thatKimberellahad a dorsal cuticular shield with tubercular nodes.Finally,Wanninger & Wollesen (2019)claimed that the presence of a single non-mineralized shell inKimberellafits well with the hypothetical ground plan of mollusks, since the discovery of the Ordovician fossilCalvapilosa suggested that the two-shelled state of halkieriids and the multi-shelled state of polyplacophoran mollusks represents a derived condition.

Nevertheless, some later authors rather agreed with Ivantsovs new interpretation. For example,Seilacher & Hagadorn (2010)concurred that Kimberellalacked a rigid shell, while being covered by small sclerodermites (Bengtson 2005,Fedonkin et al. 2007b,Ivantsov, 2009). Even more recently,Parkhaev (2017)concluded that in contrast to the first reconstructions , it was shown thatKimberellahad no firm and solid shell, otherwise it would be difficult to explain the observed variability in the shape and proportions of the body in known specimens.

Lay people must be left quite confused by this controversy and might even conclude that paleontology often seems to boil down to an esoteric exercise in reading tea leaves. Unfortunately, sometimes this is the case indeed. Nevertheless, one should always make an inference to the best explanation. In my view the original interpretation of Fedonkin is better supported and he also sufficiently explained the evidence that allegedly supports the alternative interpretation of Ivantsov. Therefore, I conclude thatKimberellamore likelypossessed a non-mineralized integument, a quasi-leathery shell with a characteristic ornamentation, which was flexible in juvenile specimens but rather stiff in adult ones. But this is just my humble opinion and it is quite clear that this issue is controversial and far from settled.

Fedonkin & Waggoner (1997)speculated that the crenellated structures may have had a respiratory function and even mentioned the possibility that the crenellations may have hosted microbial symbionts.Fedonkin et al. (2007b)said that there is no evidence of gills inKimberella, while the large surface of the multifolded crenulated zone could effectively perform the respiration function. Fedonkin considered these circumpedal respiratorial folds as possible predecessor of the ctenidia (meaning, feathery gills) in aquatic mollusks.

Even though there are indeed no traces of respiratory organs preserved in any of theKimberellafossils, such gills were proposed by Ivantsov (2009,2012) as possibly attached to the scallops along the frilled margin, similar to the serially repeated gills in the Cambrian stem molluskOdontogriphus(Butterfield 2006) and in the circumpedal mantle cavity of primitive living mollusks (Serialia) (Stger et al. 2013). However, Ivantsov also mentioned the alternative possibility that gas exchange occurred across the general body surface. Likewise,Seilacher & Hagadorn (2010)concurred withFedonkin et al. (2007b)andTrusler et al. (2007)that the serial impressions between the foot and the cap probably correspond to flap- or gill-like structures as in modern chitons andNeopilina, and in the CambrianOdontogriphusfrom the Burgess Shale.

However, all this is of course mere speculation in the absence of any conclusive empirical evidence.

Dzik (2003)mentioned that the most prominent aspect ofKimberellafossils is a voluminous depression in their center and proposed that the most likely interpretation is that this was a gut content. This median groove indeed was generally interpreted as simple digestive tract and pharynx (Fedonkin et al. 2007b,Knoll 2011,Vinther 2015). A notable exception wasSeilacher (1999), who thought that the deep cleft along the midline of the foot is clearly a secondary feature related to the burial process and fossilization as ventral death mask (Gehling 1999).Gehling et al. (2014)concurred that the median keel or grove, which is most prominent in smaller specimens, most likely corresponds to a flexible, unmineralized outer integument. Dj-vu, anyone?

Many authors have suggested that the tapered end ofKimberellacorresponded to a kind of proboscis as a feeding apparatus.The alignment between the feeding traces and the tapered open end of the body with the assumed proboscis clearly suggests that this was the anterior (oral) end with the pharynx.

Based on the trace fossil evidence,Ivantsov & Fedonkin (2001b)and Fedonkin (2001,2003) first speculated that the feeding tracks may reflect the work of the proboscis that bears the hook-like organs on its end.Fedonkin (2003)thought that a comparison of the body size ofKimberellaand of the size and pattern of the feeding traces suggests that the hypothetical proboscis could be extended as long as the whole body ofKimberella, and that there were two sharp teeth at its end. Seilacher et al. (2003,2005) also speculated thatKimberellawas a stationary grazer that repeatedly fed with a long proboscis.Dzik (2003)mentioned that in all well preserved specimens ofKimberellathere is a distinctly delimited narrower part of the proposed gut, perhaps representing a muscular oesophagus or even evertible proboscis.

Gehling (1996) andGehling et al. (2005: fig. 12)were the first to clearly document actual fossil evidence for such an extensible head or everted proboscis at the anterior end of theKimberellaanimal. Years later,Gehling et al. (2014: fig. 7)featured more specimens with an everted proboscis, which is never longer than about a fourth of the remaining body length, thus not as long asSeilacher & Hagadorn (2010)and others had speculated.The fact that in most specimens this proboscis is not visible was inferred by these authors to be a result of its retraction within the circumference of the body, but this is completely ad hoc.

This proboscis was described in detail byFedonkin et al. (2007b), who also described a pair of bag-like structures lateral at the base of the proboscis (and thus the assumed pharynx) at the anterior end of the body, which they interpreted as oesophageal pouches or pharyngeal glands (comparable with those found in many extant molluscs) (Fedonkin et al. 2007b: fig. 15; also see: Ivantsov 2009: pl. 1 figs 7-8,Vinther et al. 2012,Vinther 2015: fig. 3E).Fedonkin suggested that the feeding traces were left by a solitary conjugate pair of teeth located at the end of a long proboscis that stretched far forward beyond the main body (Ivantsov & Fedonkin 2001b,Fedonkin 2003,Fedonkin & Vickers-Rich 2007,Fedonkin et al. 2007b).

In the paper byFedonkin et al. (2007b)an alternative interpretation by co-author Ivantsov is mentioned: instead of an elongate proboscis, there could have been a rather wide feeding organ, which could spread like a fan. Equipped with numerous teeth this organ scratched a large surface area of the sea floor in one simultaneous sweep. However, Fedonkin et al. concluded that mechanical constraints and the absence of morphological evidence do not allow us to accept this model.Ivantsov (2009)likewise claimed that the very flexible organism, which must have lacked a hard shell, made a long proboscis unnecessary. Indeed, no such long proboscis is visible in any of the fossil specimens.His alternative view was further elaborated by Ivantsov (2010b,2012,2013), who claimed that: The mobile animal with a long, flexible proboscis freely bending in all directions should leave more chaotic traces. This implies that the animal got deeper into the mat using a larger structure with several teeth and limited ability for lateral bending, rather than separate teeth located at the end of the flexible proboscis. Such a structure was most likely represented by the entire anterior part of theKimberellabody together with a large head, which was able to extend and widen (Ivantsov,2009,2010,2011). He suggested that the tooth battery was folded on both sides of the pharynx, and that the expandable spatulate head was at least partly retracted in the fossil specimens. Nevertheless,Ivantsov (2013)admitted that his hypothesis could not explain the distinct pairs of ridges in the trace fossils. In his most recent paper,Ivantsov et al. (2019)apparently addressed this problem and now says that the head ofKimberellawas wide and spatulate in a straightened state, and it bore two or more sclerotic teeth.

Other authors have added various further speculations about this feeding apparatus.

Trusler et al. (2007)warned that instead of an elongate proboscis bearing only a pair of resistant structures,Kimberellamay have possessed a much more complex radular morphology, again analogous to that present in monoplacophorans , which did not require a lengthy extension of the feeding organ. In fact, it may well be that the feeding structure was entirely beneath the organism or only slightly extended when it farmed the microbial mat and its contents, and only protruded beyond the main body in death when compressed. However, this view is contradicted by the fact that the only known resting trace does not overlap with the surrounding feeding traces (see below).

Seilacher & Hagadorn (2010)suggested that hydrostatics and muscles likely operated this extendable and flexible proboscis. Hypothetically, such a proboscis could have handed food particles to a proximally situated mouth, in the mode of an elephants trunk or the antennae of the amphipodCorophium. Alternatively, and more likely, the mouth was at the very tip of the proboscis, with radular teeth delivering their crop directly into the esophagus.

Grazhdankin (2014)added that the retractable anterior end ofKimberella quadratapossessed a peculiar sagittate structure , which, at least superficially, is remarkably similar to individual representatives of the generaParvancorinaandTemnoxa. which are both problematic Ediacaran organisms of uncertain affinity.

Budd & Jensen (2017)correctly remarked that the production of the fan-shaped scratch marks would have required a very long introvert in order to create the observed pattern, and this has not been seen. Therefore, they concluded that considerable uncertainty remains as to how the scratches were formed and by what type of device. I fear this is a fair characterization.

For those scientists, who believe that the teeth ofKimberellawere really homologous to a molluscan radula (e.g.,Seilacher 1999,Caron et al. 2006,Seilacher & Hagadorn 2010,Vinther et al. 2012,Stger et al. 2013), there is another fundamental problem: the apparatus is postulated at the end of an everted tubular proboscis (Gehling et al. 2005), which is never the case in mollusks and would rather resemble the introvert in scalidophoran nemathelminths (Cephalorhyncha) (Budd & Jensen 2017). However, the worm-like body plan of such nemathelminths like Priapulida does not agree with the morphology seen inKimberella(Gehling et al. 2014).

Finally, another severe problem remains: even though many of the fossil specimens from the White Sea region are quite well-preserved, there is not a single one that clearly shows a toothed radula-like organ. However, in two specimens (figured byFedonkin et al. 2007b: fig. 15j,Ivantsov 2009: figs 2c and pl. 1 fig. 6,2010b: pl. 1 figs 4-5,2013: pl. II figs 1-2, and2017: fig. 2-2) there is a series of deep grooves near the end of the short proboscis, which may or may not correspond to teeth. Actually, in my view their structure does not fit well with the bifid pattern of theKimberichnustraces, andGehling et al. (2014)had similar reservations.Budd & Jensen (2017)mentioned that these grooves look very similar to structures at the posterior end of the body, which were interpreted by Ivantsov as evidence for longitudinal muscles. Ivantsov explained the general absence of imprints of teeth as an artifact of preservation, based on their covering by the muscular part of the head and the dense mantle, but of course this is just another ad hoc hypothesis.

Thus, as in most other structures ofKimberellathe interpretation of the feeding apparatus turns out to be very controversial: Was there a long or a short proboscis, or no proboscis at all but a broad expandable head? Was there a pair of large teeth, or two sets of small teeth, or no teeth at all? Were the paired bag-like structure muscles, or glands, or something else entirely? Fossils often leave much room for very different interpretations of relatively poor evidence, so that paleontologists always should be very careful not to stack elaborate hypotheses like a house of cards, which of course happens anyway and even quite often so.

Next, Kimberella Controversial Scratch Marks.

Read the original here:
Reconstructing Kimberella The Disputed Anatomy in Detail - Discovery Institute

Wall Streets big bank big-wigs will soon have a new executive among them and, unlike the rest of them, she is, well, a she. (Yes, that is lamentably still very remarkable in 2020.) Citigroups Jane Fraser, who has been with the bank for 16 years, will be promoted to CEO in February following the retirement of Michael Corbat.

Fraser will be the first woman to lead a major U.S. bank and will be joining an ultra-rarified rank of executives that includes JPMorgan Chases Jamie Dimon, Goldman Sachs David Solomon, Wells Fargos Charles Scharf and Bank of Americas Brian Moynihan, among others. She will be the only female CEO among the 10 largest U.S. banks. Sachs Solomon welcomed her to the club, posting his congratulations on LinkedIn and calling her a pioneer. Bank of Americas Cathy Bessant, who was rumored to be in the running for the CEO spot at Wells Fargo last year (the post went to Scharf), tweeted that Frasers appointment was Great news for the company and for women everywhere!

Fraser, who was born in Scotland, currently serves as Citis president and CEO of Global Consumer Banking.

So, how did this glass-ceiling smasher get to the very highest echelon of finance? We figured that for all of us aspiring ceiling-breakers it would be helpful to trace the path of her career, so we took a stab at recreating Frasers resum using her LinkedIn profile, additional research and perhaps a wee bit of creative license (with the design, never the facts, and no, we wont be giving up our day jobs for resume design any time soon).

Whats not noted among her staggering accomplishments is the constant challenge of being a working mom: Being a mother of young children and having a career is the toughest thing I have ever had to do, she said in an internal interview at McKinsey, according to Axios.

Alright, without further ado, Boss Bettys re-creation of the resum of Wall Streets first female big bank CEO, Jane Fraser:

The rest is here:
Career anatomy: The resum of Wall Streets first woman CEO, Jane Fraser - Boss Betty

Radical inguinal lymph node dissections (rILND) for penile cancer risk significant postoperative lymphocele and lymphedema. However, reducing the risk of lymphatic complications is limited by our understanding of lymphatic anatomy. Therefore, this study aims to elucidate the lymphatic anatomy within the current surgical borders of a rILND.

To visualize the position of the lymph nodes, tissue packets excised from the inguinal region of five fresh, male cadavers were imaged using microcomputed tomography (CT). To standardize the position, rotation and size between specimens, each lymph node packet was aligned using a Generalized Procrustes analysis.

There was a median of 13.5 lymph nodes (range=8-18) per packet, with the majority (99%) clustered within a 6cm radius of the saphenofemoral junction; a region 39%-41% smaller than current surgical borders. No difference existed between the number of nodes between sides, or distribution around the saphenofemoral junction.

This study provides the first 3D, in situ, standardized characterization of lymph node anatomy in the inguinal region using CT. By using knowledge of the normal lymphatic anatomy, this study can help inform the reduction in borders of rILND to limit disruption and ensure a complete lymphadenectomy.

Journal of surgical oncology. 2020 Sep 10 [Epub ahead of print]

Kait Marshall, Shiva M Nair, Katherine E Willmore, Tyler S Beveridge, Nicholas E Power

Department of Anatomy & Cell Biology, Schulich School of Medicine & Dentistry, Western University, London, Ontorio, Canada., Department of Surgery, Urology Division, Schulich School of Medicine & Dentistry, Western University, London, Ontorio, Canada.

PubMed http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32914446

Read more here:
Anatomical characterization of the inguinal lymph nodes using microcomputed tomography to inform radical inguinal lymph node dissections in penile...