1 . We Need to Think about Conservation on a Different Timescale
Time, perceived by humans in days, months, and years, contrasts with nature’s grander scales of centuries and millennia, referred to as “deep time.” While paleontologists (古生物学者) are trained to think in deep time, conservationists are realizing the challenges it poses. Shortsightedness about time limits modern conservation, with efforts often overlooking past healthy conditions of ecosystems in the context of climate and biodiversity crises.
The shifting baseline syndrome (综合症), where standards in a place change gradually, makes conservation more complex. It involves evaluating ecosystems primarily on their recent past, often with negative consequences.
Recent shifts in California’s forest management practices, from stopping fires to embracing Indigenous knowledge of controlled burns, exemplify the importance of understanding historical ecosystem dynamics. To enhance conservation, adopting a deep-time approach is crucial.
Modern mathematical modeling, combined with long-term data, offers a pathway for preserving ecosystems. In California’s kelp (海带、海藻) forest, researchers identified an overlooked keystone species — the extinct Seller’s Sea Cow (大海牛). By examining past kelp forests, a deeper story impacting regeneration was revealed. The sea cow, a massive plant-cater, contributed to a diverse, vital undergrowth by trimming kelp and letting light reach the area.
The researchers put forward a novel approach to kelp forest restoration: selectively harvesting kelp, imitating the sea cow’s impact. This strategy, considering historical dynamics, challenges assumptions about recent ecosystems and offers new conservation methods.
Rather than only focusing on removing urchins (海胆) or reintroducing sea otters, the researchers suggest employing teams of humans to selectively harvest kelp, as the Steller’s sea cow once did, to encourage fresh growth. This sustainable harvest could benefit both the ecosystem and human consumption.
In short, assumptions based on the recent past may impede the understanding and protection of ecosystems. On the other hand, the application of controlled burns, similar modeling studies, and a deep-time perspective (视角) could significantly transform conservation efforts. Recognizing our role in an ongoing narrative spanning millions of years is essential, urging a comprehensive understanding of ecosystems through time. Embracing this role is crucial for shaping the future and establishing vital connections from the past to the future.
1. What is the “shifting baseline syndrome,” mentioned in the passage?| A．A syndrome that affects human beings’ perception of time. |
| B．A phenomenon where ecological standards shift in a place. |
| C．A psychological disorder common among conservationists. |
| D．A condition where ecosystems change gradually over time. |
| A．It promotes the prevention of wildfires. | B．It aids in mathematical modeling efforts. |
| C．It helps reveal historical ecosystem dynamics. | D．It enhances human consumption of ecosystems. |
| A．Reform. | B．Disrupt. | C．Quicken. | D．Deepen. |
| A．Shifting baseline syndrome has positive ecological changes. |
| B．Mathematical modeling with the latest data can be effective. |
| C．Deep-time perspective and historical dynamics are crucial. |
| D．Recent history is more preferred in ecosystem restoration. |
2 . Art has always been a polarizing(分化的)subject.Some people like realism,others like abstract.But do you know why some people value art in the millions,while others see the same piece as little more than a child’s finger painting?
Many consider art to be quite random in terms of our likes and dislikes.But according to new research,there may actually be a scientific reason behind our fondness for certain works.The answer lies in how a person’s brain breaks down the visuals(视觉效果)of a painting combined with their judgment.
To prove their theory,neuroscientist(神经科学家)Kiyohito Iigaya and his team from the California Institute of Technology(Caltech)gathered more than 1,300 volunteers and asked them to rate 825 different paintings from four different art genres(类型).
After analyzing the data,scientists found that the same groups of people tended to prefer similar aspects of the same paintings.These characteristics were then grouped into“low-level”features like color and blending,and“high-level”features like the emotion behind the painting.
From this experiment,Caltech’s system was then able to predict an individual’s specific taste in art and organize different works into one group,according to the paintings’features and volunteers’preferences.
In a second test,researchers repeated the experiment on six volunteers,showing each 1,000 paintings while inside an MRI—a machine that scans a person’s brain activity.The test revealed(揭示)that the different features of a painting are sent to the part of the brain that deals with valuing items,allowing someone to form their overall opinion.
Finally,the team repeated the first test on new volunteers.Again,the algorithm(算法)was able to accurately predict individuals’art preferences.According to Iigaya,this shows that the factors that contribute to whether a person likes an image are universal,not random.
Lesley Fellows,a neurologist at McGill University who studies value judgments,stated,“We know a lot about‘how’the brain carries out actions,but‘why’is far less well understood.”
1. What did the Caltech team try to discover?| A．What kinds of artwork appeal to people. |
| B．Why only some people value art. |
| C．Whether an individual’s preference for art is predictable. |
| D．Whether one’s mood influences their opinion of artwork. |
| A．Some features of paintings were categorized（分类）. |
| B．It helped decide the types of paintings to be used. |
| C．Part of the brain to process paintings was identified. |
| D．Volunteers were grouped based on their response. |
| A．The brain reacted differently to different paintings. |
| B．MRIs influence people’s opinion of paintings. |
| C．Individuals have different valuing systems in their brain. |
| D．A certain part of the brain helps people judge paintings. |
| A．To question the Caltech team’s research. |
| B．To approve of the research on why we make value judgments. |
| C．To show there is still a lot left to learn about the brain. |
| D．To point out the focus of the future brain research. |
