[Music] Stanford University we push off into new terrain here yet another bucket uh but before doing that various bits of feedback from office hours hearing from Tas getting a sense of where the grand gaping Craters of confusion are so far and apparently an awful lot of them were provided in the last two days lectures with behavior genetics various issues that came up clearly one of the most complicated inaccessible subtle pain of the nck concepts in the whole class which is this heritability business so memorize the following two sentences because it all comes down to the difference between something that is inherited and how heritable a trait is the fact that humans overwhelmingly have five fingers reflects the fact that the number of fingers is an inherited trait the fact that when there are some circumstances if humans have having other than five fingers it is overwhelmingly due to environmental something or others is an indication of the fact that nonetheless variability around the number of five fingers heritability is essentially 0% so get those two sorted out and you have those two concepts all under your belt and very useful why is it useful first off why is this one useful because it is important to know the distinction everybody for one thing out there tends to view these as telling the same thing and in so far as they think it says the same thing they think that both terms are referring to this something that is genetically reg regulated genetically determined whatever two totally different terms so one reason to obsess over this is that when the uh newspapers give us our sound bite of scientists report that it's usually this one that they're reporting with one of those marvelously misleading numbers which then sets people up for thinking they've just been told how much do genes determine some average feature of this tray so important to tell them apart the other reason of getting this sorted out is not only to unlearn the nonsense aspects of misinterpreting this term but because understanding that term gives you a lot of insights into when and how you are getting Gene environment interactions caveat with that saying when and how you are getting Gene you're always getting Gene environment interactions remember the quote from the other day it's like saying which contributes more to the volume of the square or the height or the length or the roundness or whatever yes it's always Gene environment interactions saying in what ways are there some of the more interesting ones dramatic ones in what Realms understand this and you avoid this confusion understand this and it gives you insights into Gene environment interactions okay other issues that are coming up by now we've looked at three different broad approaches to the biology of social behavior The evolutionary stuff broadly stated the molecular the behavior genetics and what should be clear by now is if you were living inside one of those buckets you hate the other two and trash them entirely so we get to the first of our great conflicting points which is does that mean one of these is wrong no one of them is not wrong none of them are wrong some are more right than others and some are a lot better than others but nonetheless these are all again from the very first lecture different levels of description another way to begin to think about this in terms of what we've now been focusing on and this sort of coming up from some questions afterward so by now we've had the term epigenetics that's coming in the last couple of lectures and there are at least three different levels three different buckets with which you can Define the term what is epigenetics epigenetics is the way that culture environment all of that affects biology that's a certain broad way of stating that noce stated that way you were making biology synonymous with genetics which ain't so but nonetheless that's a certain broad level of stating it and another discipline a very sort of first passive molecular stuff what is epigenetics about it's the way in which environment turns genes on and off and at another another level of explanation more reductive what is epigenetics about it is regulation of Chromatin Remodeling and methylation of genes and all of that do not panic if that's not the level you want to know it about that's the business from the other day about changing access of transcription factors to DNA jargony way of doing it don't worry the main point being that this is completely different level of defining this this is the whole point in here we are beginning to see different disciplinary approaches we are beginning to see where one discipline has decided they've answered a question this is how culture affects biology give me a break show me which genes we're talking about we're talking about genes here give me a break show me is this chromatin remodeling what's the mechanism for it how reversible is it one discipline's answers the next one starting point blah blah one discipline's wonderfully satisfying scientific answer is the basis for the next discipline to be totally contemptuous of them you call that science this is sort of the whole point here beginning to see how we could chip our way between these more bits of clarification amid that one of the things that really came through is in the sort of ratio of praising to trashing um I was clearly spending a lot of the last two days trashing the behavior genetics approaches so a little bit of clarification there first off we can broadly divide what came the last two days into classical Behavior genetics and that's the comparing monozygotic and diotic twins that's the adoption studies that's the twins adopted at birth that's the all of those approaches there those are all the ones where you were just inferring really indirectly that there's something genetically going on there the other half and much more sort of the modern behavior genetics is marrying these traditional approaches with molecular biology and that was the business at the end you know the Gene and you kind of have an idea of what it might do how does that map on to behavioral variability in humans you know the behavior and you've got some sense of its variability how does that map on to variability in genes this is the much more powerful contemporary end of it so what is this end good for is all it's good for is pronouncing that something's genetic or it's 73% genetic and then you trash it because that's gibberish what it's good for mainly is okay so you've got an adoption study classical Behavior genetic study where they're adopted right at Birth within seconds and raised in different households oh you haven't ruled out environment don't forget prenatal environment oh you haven't ruled out environment remember the non-random assignment of adoption all of that does this mean this approach is useless know what it's good for is demonstrating nonetheless well we've just ruled out all sorts of Realms of environment that people would guess is consequential it's less consequential than you think we haven't ruled out environment entirely and just because it's all Gene environment interactions we certainly can't come up with a stupid number like that but what this is good for is at least showing here's domains where people a lot of people would have assumed there is Big environmental effects much less than you would think so that's the much more conservative sort of sobrius thing that people can do with that field the fact that far too few of them actually do that is reasons to trash no well nonetheless there's lots of good things in Behavior genetics but that's the limited domain where it's useful okay so just beginning to get a sense here of the various things that are confusing obviously no one on earth in any examine here is going to be asked to choose which field is better and which field gives more you know kbay on all of that but just recognizing the different approaches and the wonderful rainbow diversity of ways to think about you know mating and fruit flies or whatever and just beginning to see by now this is what the whole class is about speaking of that I recall from the first class on that there's somebody in here who I think was an English Lit grad student if you have a chance email me about how it's going in here let's see what else next week know that I'm curious I'm very pleased whoever you are assuming you have fled after the first class um is in here let's see other stuff okay schedule next Monday this coming Monday we will have a lecture on yet another of our disciplines ethology and we will see that's a totally different way of doing it blah blah Wednesday Friday on the following Monday are the catchup lectures in class taught by the Tas two of the lectures introduction to the nervous system the third one introduction to Endocrinology it will be a broad overview it is explicitly designed for people who have no prior background in this but what I think is probably a good idea is even if you believe you have prior background in it may be assume it might be a good thing to get a refresher on it and this will be very useful following that we will have two more lectures more advanced topics and basic features of neuroendocrinology and then staggering into the midterm and then oh then the second half comes just a sense of what's coming okay so that's where we're at so now we transition to the next subject here which is no actually before I forget how many did people see this the article in the New York Times this morning about the study the shoots and lad study did anybody see it it was posted this nobody saw it it was this was you know the game Shoots and Ladders okay we all played Shoots and Ladders this was this massive study funded by the World Health Organization where what they did this this is going to be the definitive study on the subject they showed that people from Nepal are better at playing Shoots and Ladders than are people from Belgium cool study I don't know how you guys missed it you okay you need to know about this this is important what do you want to know about this study this massive study shows that people from Nepal are better at Shoots and Ladders than people from Belgium ask me questions since you were terribly woefully underformed about this what more information do you need to be impressed and tell everybody about in the dorm tonight what else do you want to know about the study better me what does better me okay social relativist and does it mean that you learn more about yourself playing Shoots and Ladders do it means that you make the world a h you win you win win win okay so winning is the end point good question what else do you want to know about the study yeah why why you ask that read Aristotle since humans first pulled out of the mud this has been the thing we have wanted to know and now we do sun the difference between knowledge and wisdom okay so why okay what else do you want to know what are your questions yeah the methods of the the methods very good okay various methods do you want to break it down into more details given some of the critical tools you have by now in terms of methods before deciding how impressed you are or not with the study what sort of questions now in the methodological realm yeah what population are you T ah very good question because we see your first methodological issue are you getting a decent sample size so that you're confident that you can actually say something about the population at large and that's a great question it was done on everybody in Nepal and everybody in Belgium good study okay what else do you want to know what other questions yeah meod they hit people from the against people from Belgium in one game or every well that's an excellent question every single person in the study from both Belgium and Nepal played one game against every single other person in the study that's why you haven't been hearing much about either country in the news lately they've been very busy with this study okay so good methodology large sample size random assignments of games what else do you want to know yeah why is the question research ask worth reading about why they ask why they okay that one again it's self-evident know thyself or know the Nee police and the belgians or something this is a I'm glad I know this now I'm glad they went and did that okay what else do you want to know obviously a matter of subjective taste as to what counts as an important scientific subject this strikes me as critical what else do you want to know in terms of what sort of conclusions they kind of hint they're not positive but they're kind of hinting at a genetic component to it yeah question in the back there yeah um what skills are involved in Shoots and Ladders what skills are involved it involves um what is it they have a whole list there um let's see uh various task involving spatial memory various tasks involving uh reversal performance and telekinesis so it Taps into all of those domains what else do you want to know about the study yeah is it heritable is it heritable great oh is it heritable so which are you asking there okay well they did it I they they are suggesting there's some degree of heritability and they did it right they went after all the issues we've learned about by now specifically what I'm saying is that every single person in Nepal and in Belgium was cross fostered to somebody in Ecuador in fact they did it fetally right after conception so they can the prenatal stuff what else do you want to know in order to decide am I impressed about the fact that people from Nepal are better at Shoots and Ladders than people from Belgium yeah were they all given the exact same amount of shoots and ladds as children oh yes in fact none of them had been exposed to it before they were all raised in hydroponic Gardens without shets and ladders and they were only released in time for doing this okay what else yes what's the amount of variance within each individual group oh good question here we are getting to that all of that everybody got the exact same score from Nepal and everybody from Belgium got the exact same score so that's kind of impressive are you impressed yet are you impressed enough yet to go run out of here screaming with this news what else do you need to know yeah who went first who went first they randomized it they randomized it by the entire populations played um oh what is that Rambo yes they played R Shambo and best of all they had to play Rambo in espiranto yes more what was the environment they okay they were released from a hydroponic garden and then all of them were placed in a completely sterile bubble environment where all they had in there were copies of People magazine in a language they didn't understand so it was well environment was very well controlled for what else do you need to know how much better were they like1 oh ah ah there we have it they had a huge sample size they cross fostered as fetuses they controlled for environment they got everybody in there they did the right techniques they randomized it every possible choice that is so impressive that is so imp how big is the difference is it a big difference and this is a critical thing to start putting there in your armamentarium of critical questions to start having skeptical ones great you've got a whole bunch of tools by now whoa they said genetic did you control for this did you control for that whoa they see a difference there well wait a second did they all have the same exper who did they have a big sample size all of it covered great wonderful perfect science they've got every single bit of it covered there but then the critical thing you better ask is how big is the difference is it impressive or not because we all think we've got the basic tools or hopefully we all have the basic tools for going at these issues okay was a study done in a way that was clearcut and an objective were people blinded to whether or not this person was nepes or Belgian or was there appropriate blinding was it done in a way that you can falsify your finding in a sense the definition of experimental science was it designed in that was it independently replicated by anybody else we all have those tools under our belt by now but far too often we are not trained at that point to say wait a second before I get all excited how big of a difference was it let me give you a real example of this and this was a paper about three years ago in the journal science which you should get a sense by now that the journal science and nature are the two official biggie ones on this planet in terms of credibility and this was a paper having to do with IQ and this was a paper having to do with IQ and birth order and what they showed in this paper with spectacular statistical confidence and as much of like all the controls in place as you can ask for from the hydroponically Garden fetuses in Nepal they did absolutely perfectly what they showed in the definitive study with 250,000 18y olds in Norway was that there is a reliable IQ difference depending on whether you are firstborn or latter born okay how many of you are firstborn who who how many of you are only Childs okay how many of you are number two how many of you are more than number two okay so how many of you think the highest IQ comes from the firstborn okay and we'll assume the converse with the other group did anybody just vote against their own birth order whoa okay well that's impressive We Salute You um okay so they found a difference they found a difference which is firstborns in this very statistically reliable way have higher IQs than latter borns they restricted the analysis just the second borns to keep things clearer and they showed firstborns have higher IQ than second boards 250,000 people as close as you can get to all the people from Nepal and Belgium huge sample size so they report this this was the most thorough study ever done so what sort of questions do you want to ask give me hypothesis for what's going on obviously sort of one is that like the parents pour protein into the ears of first born and the second one just gets fros or something but give me other hypothesis for what could be happening possible explanation for this in terms of biological socio cultural Endo imuno psycho yum I think we already know that firstborns tend to be more like well I mean I mean it's it's like the parents they're more worried about Mak mistakes and they they kind of raise them harder so to speak and then they sort of relax in the second born child first go to college more like that do more okay so great hypothesis it's more parental investment in the firstborn and those are the ones where the parents freak out with everything and by the time there's the third one they're all foraging on their own well they're 6 months old okay so parental investment they went after that one correctly here's what they showed to rule that out which was if you you are an only child you have a lower IQ on the average blah blah than firstborns who have younger siblings so it's not parental investment it's something about being the first born of multiples yeah okay so parent so pressure on the first borns to be first born how would that raise IQ all right okay so that's one of the models out there a variant on that is first borns get pushed into a tutoring position early on and the well-known fact that occasionally now with then teaching something actually causes you to know what you're talking about so the first borns because of this tutoring role oh that would control for the single child versus the firstborn difference there so maybe it's a tutoring phenomenon what else could be happening what other possible Notions yeah it depends whate you're looking kids you're looking at like actual children comping I older children okay great idea up to age 12 latter borns tend to have higher IQs than firstborns by age 18 which is when this was studied was carried out it flips the other way around so any hypothesis for why this difference occurs Why by 12 years of age latter borns tend to have higher IQs than firstborns why does it then flip afterward yeah okay so is it IQ testing some biases with that what would rule against that though is that age controlling for only char s only children versus firstborns so that would definitely be a possibility that was ruled out yeah I think that learned classo of adults in the Environ only adults higher langu good okay so a uh another version of a parental investment model there which is the fewer the children the more parental energy so again that's one of the standard things in the field they rule that out with comparing the only children versus firstborn child so that's been a dominant model in the field so they had good data against that yeah oh okay what's your idea about that okay so we've got an intrauterine effect so we've got egg quality and age of mom and all of that they controlled for that the age of the mother can anybody think of something another intrauterine mechanism though for what's the difference between being the first fetus who hits the uh womb of your mother versus being the second or third or fourth what's one of the biological things that might happen yeah stress levels okay stress levels which is a way of stating something about intrauterine environment the more times you've done this perhaps more rescue are in there what else could biologically that's definitely one of the things what else biologically can happen over time remember progesterone the other day from that lecture of making new if then Clauses and glucocorticoids and this is a bit of a stretch this takes some some sort of fair amount of OB GYN knowledge what's a danger as you have more and more pregnancies in terms of your immune system yeah wait I heard that mumbled sure yeah okay immune suppression so Mom could be getting a lot less healthy which is another version of tapping into that notion there in terms of a quality with age separative age the number of times you've gone through this what could be another possibility immunologically with repeated pregnancies [Music] yeah okay despite that immune suppression on the average with later pregnancies you have a greater likelihood of having formed antibodies against aspects of the fetus they controlled for that they showed if you were second born and there were kids after that if you were second born and the first born died you revert it to the firstborn IQ showing that it was not anything about oh you were the second fetus in there with more antibodies they controlled for that that's actually one of the ideas they brought up in there what else how about that business about up to age 12 the second born does better after that by age 18 the first born does better any theories with that yeah it have to do maybe with like how fast they grow or something and we talked about how like for for fathers it's like better if the child grow F okay so an early advantage and you pay for it later type deal so that's a possibility what else could come in think about back to the idea there about if you're firstborn some of the firstborn responsibility stuff how that plays out in family Dynamics early on why are the second borns doing better in the first dozen years why does it reverse later on more ideas about that yeah um the second born benefits from the tutelage of the first born early in life but later on having the older child having had that experience of being responsible Le um benefits of that exactly that's one of the main theories that's probably the predominant one proposed to explain that age switch you get a young you get the second kid show up and suddenly you have a neotenized dumb down environment where suddenly the 8-year-old kid is watching Tinky Winky again for the first time in six years that it's a environment that's been dominated more by having a younger one around and what the older one is mostly doing is the tutoring and it takes a number of years for the advantages of that to find finally come through that's the main model that's given for that any other ideas how about parental resource stuff the fact that the larger the family on the average in westernized countries the lower the socioeconomic status run with that one where does that fit in what else what else could be happening with that yeah if the social economic status of the family is lower then would that suggest that the children might bear more burden in some respects with with more children have to more quickly exp World good it's the later ones who are out hunting squirrels and not getting the violin lessons that's another version of the parental Resource One one being because there's a smaller ratio of parents to kids the other being because the more kids the more expensive for the same parental income you have got less to spread to each child so they controlled for that looking at within family rather than just between family they covered all of this this is going to be the definitive study for the rest of all of time showing what's going on with IQ by birth order in 18yar olds in Norway in 2007 and what was the magnitude of the difference for this study 2.3 IQ points and thus coming back to what could have been the very first question sitting there when these guys were ready to announce to the world and sort of start you know selling their be like a firstborn IQ self-help books and all of that lost in there and this was picked up all over the press and like no doubt endless snotty comments by David Letterman or what and nobody 2.3 IQ points you sneeze while you're taking an IQ test and have to wipe your nose for 8 seconds afterward and that's going to cost you 2.3 IQ points because you get distracted for a second and amazing example of this whole business of yes impeccable science that these people did phenomenal I don't know who possibly gave them the money to do a study like this and at the end of the day totally cool irrefutable statistically totally reliable which is very different from saying important but what you got at the end of the day was this Mammoth study producing 2.3 difference and this is a great demonstration the difference between how solid the science is how confident you are of the finding which takes in all the variables of sample size and objectivity how confident you are of the finding and how big of a finding it is and those could be two entire differences so as a pro you to all the stuff that's going to come in the second half of the course one of the next tools you have to have in mind in addition to all the ones that were reparent here and the questions you were asking another one is to keep saying well is this a big effect is this a reliable effect is different from is this a big effect is this a consequential one so another tool to have in hand so with that in hand go and tell everybody tonight about Shoots and Ladders okay so what we jump to now is something that's been running through a whole bunch of the lectures already okay we've got all those evolutionary models of individual selection and kin selection and ingroup and outgroup and we've got something about the molecular biology of why it is that you share 50% of your genes with this relative and 25 and 12 and a half and all of that and somewhere in there lurking through all of it as a question which is what we'll focus on now which is how do organisms how do animals how do individuals recognize relatives because you can't do any of that evolutionary biology kin selection Theory stuff where it's all predicated on degree of relatedness unless you know how related am I with this individual so what we're going to be looking at here is why or how sure let's go for how instead of why how how do animals how do social animals recognize kin what's clear is it does not take a very fancy organism and there was a great example of this which I think I stuck in the extended notes last minute a paper published just a couple of weeks ago looking at deer mice deer mice and much like their V cousins if they are cousins some deer M strains are monogamous and some polygamus this appears to be a frequent theme in these little rodent things and with the deer mice what you find is with the polygamous ones one female mates with a bunch of males and as a result one female will have sperm from a number of different males afterward in the vagina and what you get is evolutionarily from all the rules we learn by now perfectly logically you get intrasexual competition between the sperm from the different males we already heard a version of that with the lies back the other week there where the sperm of One releases toxins that kill the other sperm but in the process could damage the female's future all of that this is a theme that runs through a lot of the literature on sexual competition sperm competition and there's even hints that something like that goes on in humans okay so what form does it take in these deer mice as follows I don't begin to understand the the mechanics of this nor do I want to but apparently with deer my sperm if they all Clump together you know many hands on the auras or something if they all Clump together you get this macro sperm thing which swims Upstream faster and the paper had all sorts of diagrams of this which I did not want to look at in much detail but there's this so you've got with the polygamous strains you've got this problem if your sperm want to do things absolutely correctly they only want to form one of these big old you know pleasure boat aggregate crew things with sperm from themselves with sperm from only themselves and following all of our theorizing to a lesser extent with close relatives and not at all with sperm from some other guy and that's precisely what they showed in this paper you take sperm from monogamous strains and you put sperm from different males together and they all happily form this big Cooperative clump of sperm there but you take them from species that have evolved Under The Selective pressure of polygamy and the sperm there know who they're related to and will form these clumps only with the ones from themselves you can immediately design all sorts of lock and key stories for how that's pulled off you could immediately come up with some approximation of what the molecular mechanism would be but for first pass what striking here is ooh how do organ organisms recognize relatives there are out there single cells that can do this under exactly The evolutionary circumstances models that we've got already so as we begin to look now at how whole organisms do it even cells can do it and we're going to see lots of different possible mechanisms in lots of species what you have is some equivalent of what those single sperm are doing which is there is innate recognition of relatives how do you show this we already know the classic ways of doing this which is the cross fostering approach you take a litter newborn litter and your rodents and you cross Foster them to other females and if later on they can behaviorally differentiate between their siblings and non-s siblings there's something innate about it oh wait a second wait a second what about prenatal environment wasn't there something about so now you do the prenatal cross fostering the fetal transplant approach and you get the exact same thing there is innate recognition of relatedness and all sorts of rodent species another way of doing it even cleaner you have two different litters from the same mother and father rodent and then they meet together so there was no shared prenatal environment and you can show recognition there you put the rat later on into the cage where there's the urine of its sibling and there's a urine of a perfect stranger and they will prefer going to that one you could show that it's even more subtle than that they will prefer to go to the urine of a full sibling versus a half sibling a half sibling versus a first cousin all the way on down they could take it out to about third or fourth cousins incredible discrimination there that can go into it and it has to be that way or else all of the theorizing from the other day you can't figure out how to give up your life for two cousins or eight brothers or eight brothers or two cousins or whatever the math is unless you know who's who and in some species where it's done entirely instinctually that would be the way you demonstrate it so what's the mechanism there in those cases the most studied ones are olfactory olfactory signatures pheromones we've already heard that term in here and we're going to hear tons more about it but pheromonal communication what does that begin to require if you have pheromones odorant coming out of say the urine from different individuals telling you your degree of relatedness to them it requires two things it requires qualitative differences in the urine reflecting the genetic makeup of the individual Who provided that urine to the grad student and it requires some mechanisms some olfactory brain processing mechanism to be able to pick up whatever those differences are and both have been shown okay the way you begin to get the differentiation at the end of how the urine smells differently what you've got and referred to back with the transposable stuff is you remember in vertebrates you've got some of your highest rates of transposable events in your immune system your genes devoted to immunity where you juggle them around and that's how with any luck you come up with an antibody that will recognize this completely novel pathogen all of that there's an additional stretch of genes in that neighborhood where what happens with that is it also undergoes huge amounts of splicing and trans position and juggling and all of that and what you do then is you create a completely unique protein you do it in enough of a combinatorial way that it would take you know statistically 400 quadrillion Google Flex whatevers to come up with another organism with the exact same protein signature when you make a protein from that you have made up one that no other organism on Earth has with a V very high statistical reliability this is a stretch of genes called the major hytto compatibility complex mhc's and what you see with those is hysto compatibility that whole business with organ transplants how compatible of a donor is it how closely related how much of this jargon for those of you who know it how much of a shared antigenic determinant how genetically similar is this fingerprint this identifying ID of a protein that determines things like hysto compatibility how well organ transfers work that's the origins of the term so every single one of us every single organism out there has made a arguably unique juggle of these genes and comes up with this signature protein that it sticks on the surface of every single one of its cells what's that good for that's good for your immune system learning if we run into a cell with one of those things it's us don't attack it don't form antibodies against it and if we run into anything else in here that doesn't have one of those it's an invasive pathogen and go attack it this is the basis of the self nonself recognition ability of the immune system and what autoimmune diseases are is when your immune system screws up and begins to mistake one of your signature proteins your major hytto compatibility Gene derived signature protein as in fact being invasive and one of the other things you hear about the other day we heard about this tropical parasite tranos what it does as you heard was it keeps juggling its surface proteins so just as your immune system is all set to attack it because it's got antibodies to recognize it it has changed its signature protein there's another tropical parasite schistosomes where what they do is they steal your major hytto compatibility proteins from the surface of some of your cells and glue it on themselves and they are wolves and sheep major hist compatibility proteins or some such things so that's one major domain where this unique protein derived from a unique Gene unique protein signature lets your immune system work properly so it turns out there's another whole domain with it which is these proteins can become soluble which means they're no longer anchored to a cell they're just floating around and ultimately they're floating around in your saliva in your urine and your armpits exudates or whatever it is and what they begin to do complicated mechanisms which I think I will bypass what they do is give a unique signature to the pheromones coming off of you and as we will see in lectures to come animals of all sorts of species can tell is this individual of my species are they the same gender are they an adult are they sexually mature are they healthy or are they pregnant whatever but thanks to this major hyst compatibility business they can also tell is this a relative now the juggling of vents the splicing and the juggling of the jeans has some degree of statistical relatedness the more closely related you are in other words you smell your own urine if that's your hobby and the major hist compatibility genes in there will obviously exactly match your own you Ma you smell those of a full sibling even more questions to be asked and you do that and there will be a greater degree statistically of similarity of the structure of that protein than with a second cousin than with a Perfect Stranger Than with a NE e if you're from Belgium whatever it is what you find in those cases is that's how you not only get innate old factory recognition of is this a relative or not but how related of a relative so that's half of it that's how you generate the unique signature at the old faction at the pheromone end the other trick is how do you generate factory system that can make that discrimination and all we got to go with at that point is you can guess if you think about it a bit is we got to have some version of factory receptors that do the old lock and key business just as you make a protein which has a certain shape indicating that this is your unique signature what you want to do is have receptors that will have the uniquely complimentary shape for the lock and key so that you you can do a oh this fits perfectly let's transduce this to a signal to the brain saying I'm smelling my armpit and if instead You've Got A protein that fits in there like a lock and key but not quite as well you send the message of oh I'm smelling my siblings armpit and if it fits in there not quite as well and all the way down you could begin to see exactly how you design this if you've got a thousand of these receptors of this shape and every single one of it hasn't fitting in well enough to stay in there for 3 seconds so that all thousand of them send the signal it takes 3 seconds of binding there to cause the signal to happen all thousand of them send the signal it means it's me it doesn't fit quite as well so statistically only 800 of them stay in there for 3 seconds so 800 of the cells are reporting oh that's a full sibling I don't know if that's the mechanism but this would be a way of constructing it that's exactly how it could be along the lines of lock and key genes produce proteins of certain shapes certain functions all of that and that's how you begin to do it what have we just gotten we've gotten a protein a molecular basis of our theorizing the other day of an if then Clause if and only if this is a close relative then send the message to the neurons that do cooperation we already know that's gibberish to say that there's neurons that do cooperation but you could begin to see how this is going to work this is the If part of all the conditional if then Clauses built around degree of relatedness so how does your oral Factory bulb do this very interestingly people are beginning to get a sense of two hormones that are relevant to this one is called oxytocin and the other is called vasopressin and what we will see in lectures to come is particularly in females oxytocin has long been known to play some like Plumbing nuts and bolts job in giving birth and vasopressin and uterine contractions and take your average like off the rack endocrinologist and what these hormones are about is like your uterus Contracting and giving birth but oh that's so little of what they do what they're much more interestingly involved with is what happens next which is now beginning to learn how to recognize the smell of the individual you just gave birth to because it turns out what oxytocin and vas supress do in the old factory bulbs the old factory system the old factory equivalent of your eyes and ears is they tune up the cells that recognize major htic compatibility signals they make them attuned to is this a relative or not and there's an if then Clause if the levels of this hormone have the certain high levels indicating that I just gave gave birth and I smell something who signature odorants fit really well into this receptor then this is someone who I'm going to nurse like crazy unless it turns out to be my mother or grandmother okay let's put in another if they're very little and cutesy and make cute little muing sounds then I will take care of them and nurse them and all that sort of thing and it's turning out that that's what oxytocin and vasopressin are doing in there you generate mice with genetically knocking out oxytocin or vasopressin or their receptors if these are totally new ter ter this will come by the week after next as an introduction you knock out those genes and you get what is called a social as anosmia anosmia is the inability to smell something a social anosmia is your nose is working just fine if you're a rat you could discriminate different food types completely arbitrary odors you just can't distinguish between individuals and there was a paper couple of weeks ago showing for the first time what the model has always been is that circulating oxy toin and vasopressin get into your olfactory system and have those effects what this paper showed for the first time is you're making those hormones right in your nostrils to begin with this is what Tunes it up very interestingly there's also a literature emerging suggesting mutations in genes relevant to oxytocin and vasopressin in families with a high incidence of autism autism a disease where one way of characterizing it is is there are enormous deficits in normal socialization interaction social bonding social affiliation and this suggests that has something to do with it okay so that's a first mechanism that's how it might work in atle very cool study in recent Years also showing one facet of this one of the things you get taught and intro neuro if you've taken it any time in the last 5,000 years is when you've got an adult brain it doesn't make any more neurons you've got all the neurons you're ever going to get by the time you're three years old and all you can do thereafter is squander them away on like stupid weekend binges or whatever and it turns out that nonetheless this is not true and arguably this is the biggest revolution in Neuroscience in the last decade or so adult neurogenesis and it turns out this adult neurogenesis happens in only two areas in the brain the first one is really interesting because it's this part of the brain called the hippoc cathus Hipp Campus Learning memory it's totally cool and a gazillion study now showing stuff like you learn a new fact you stimulate neurogenesis in your hippocampus you get put in an enriched environment you exercise you do all s stuff you make new neurons there you get stressed you make less new neurons there this whole new field and 99% of the studies have been about these populations of neural stem cells in the hippoc this totally ignored has been the second little pocket of these neural stem cells that could make new neurons nobody's interested in it what's this about is totally boring where's the second pocket just behind the old factory bulb and what this study showed and this is one in your reader just at the abstract what it showed was if you have a rat right around the time she gets pregnant she starts making new neurons out the Wazoo not from the exciting hippocampo pocket but from the boring little old factory and what goes on with the onset of pregnancy female rodents do this massive renovation job of all their old factory neurons going on there what it is they showed in the study it is driven by the prolactin levels that rise during pregnancy and what have you got there what they showed was right around the time she gives birth she's got this spanking new completely renovated old factory system just in time to do one of the most important old factory things of her life which is quickly figure out which ones are her babies to quickly do the social bonding to them what hasn't been tested yet but what I guarantee has to be there is that vasopressin and oxytocin has to have some sort of role going on in there really interesting interesting implication of this so think about this if you are pregnant and assuming this works in mammals other than rodents and if you are pregnant so the whole time you are pregnant what's going on you're doing this huge job of ripping out out you know the the walls and the plumbing in your old factory bulb and like putting in new stuff and it's a total mess like you spend your pregnancy with your old factory system totally cockeyed no wonder stuff smells weird and no wonder Foods taste weird and all of that there is a whole adaptationist literature out there on why should it be that you suddenly want pickles and these Foods you can't stand the taste of and it's to avoid inadvertently eating toxins a really unconvincing spandrel filled literature out there it may be an inadvertent spandrel byproduct of you're ripping apart the wholeo factory system so you're all set to recognize the smell of your kids you just got screwy old faction and taste all throughout pregnancy the main point of this though is this is endocrine regulation driving not to make you able to recognize a relative because you've already got the genes in place for that just making sure that your old factory bulb is at the very best at that time time for doing it okay what else does one want to know about that okay one additional thing you could do that information which is okay so why do you want to know who your relatives are it's who you mate with it's who you cooperate with it's who you try to kill it's who you take care of it's who all that sort of thing all of these domains also it's who you pay attention to socially in terms of gossip and such one interesting study that was shown which was with bab runs and and this was those same Folks at University of Pennsylvania what they did was they recorded the voices you notice this business about playing the voices of some animal in the bushes and looking at the response of everybody else is one of these standard tools what they did in this case was the voice of two animals from that group from that troop and what was heard was the voice of the lower ranking animal giving a dominating vocalization and the voice of the lower ranking individual giving this terrified subordinating noise so they obviously were not getting a terrified subordinating noise out of number one but they had to sit around and get recordings of number two and everybody else at some point or other so now they could put them down there and they would play this so everybody else is sitting there and saying what number four is terrified of number 27 what's going on and what they showed was everybody paid a huge attention to this if they were hearing number 27 was trashing number four if they weren't relative but if they were in the same family and there was this dominance reversal nobody paid attention crazy relatives who knows what's going on in that family they're just squabbling they distinguish the social implications of a dominance reversal depending on relatedness or not one additional thing with it before we go to our next way of recognizing relatives after the break stay uh hold on one additional thing is of course telling you who to mate with and is obvious who you're supposed to mate with in species after species someone who is not related to you because if you do you may inadvertently produce babies with two tails and seven fingers and all of that nobody picked up on the fact that actually we have 10 fingers instead of five but we'll let that slide but what you get there is oh avoid inbreeding don't breed with relatives but we've already heard about a counterargument which is breed with relatives because of the Inclusive fitness the kin selection of advantages of doing that and from the first minute people started getting these theoretical models it was clear that in fact there were contradictory P polls between do major outbreeding in your mating and doing inbreeding with your mating and people did all these theoretical models of econometrics of where you optimize the different and they came out with the conclusion that in all sorts of species the optimal balance of avoiding inbreeding disasters with Advan vantages of kin selection would be to mate with something like a third cousin and you go and look at all sorts of species out there and that's precisely what they do that's where it balances out and again you can't do that unless you know relatedness then a couple years ago along came this researcher Martha mclintoch University of Chicago she's the person who discovered the wellsly effect back when and for all of you guys who were gearing up for senior honors thesis this was her Senior Honor H honor thesis discovering the Wellsley effects so this was like one impressive study yeah did Darwin marry a second cousin who did he married a first cousin first cousin first cousin there you go when we all know he would much rather have married a Galapagos tortoise but his parents forced him well interesting ex okay so you thus catapult us here into the human realm what mclintoch did was a study a couple years ago where she took swab she has this whole Paradigm of very Hightech getting cotton balls and rubbing it on people's armpits and putting in a jar there and then getting these volunteers who can smell it and give some assessment of how good it smells or not which in and of itself is pretty wild and you run that with humans at of a curve of relatedness whose odor gets rated as having the most appealing third cousins Yak think about that one later we are just another species in that regard all of this suggesting even in humans you are balancing this disadvantages of inbreeding with the kin selection advantages and again there's no way you can do that without knowing who's related to what extent okay 5 minute break and what we'll then transition to are species that don't do it innately but instead have to imprint early on after encountering them okay let's let get going [Music] again let's see first off thanks to the wonders of Wikipedia never being that far away from us we now know uh here were Charles Darwin's parents who were third cousins and then Charles Darwin M married his first cousin so there you have it something or other but this apparently was rather common at the time and is uh not quite the optimal according to Martha MCL talk okay so pushing on so we've now seen why you would want to recognize your relatives and recognize the degree of relatedness all of our models of who to compete with who to mate with who to nurse who to take care of who to be vois about and we've seen the first domain where you can do that which is to recognize somebody innately and one very confusing aspect of it which I managed to make confusing is so what's up with olfaction with that and oxytocin of Espress and practin okay as follows it is innate that you will have receptors olfactory receptors in your olfactory neurons and your olfactory bulb in your nose it is innate that you will have olfactory receptors that will be able to detect degree of relatedness how close an olfactory signature is to your own that is innate that will be there what appears to be the case is oxytocin and vasopressin make you more likely to make those receptors increase the number of those receptors so this is not oxytocin invasive pressent making you suddenly be able to recognize relatives it's just making you better at doing that more sensitized to it so that you have 100 receptors reporting instead of 10 of them more accurate what prolactin appears to be doing is and this is understudied but the best bet is this is another way of getting more of these olfactory receptors online right around birth to innately recognize your relative in this time instead of making neurons make more copies of the receptors it's making more neurons it's going to be more subtlety than that but broadly those are two different ways of making you better at doing something that is innate in you rather than making you suddenly able to learn how to do this so we now transition to the second way in which relatives are recognized where it's not innate it requires imprinting it requires some sort of learning which leaves a longlasting message of it imprinting so now we got imprinting in yet another use of the word and major use of it come next Monday imprinting how an animal learns who its mother is how a mother learns who babies are how it imprints on the smell on the sound on the whatever of its Offspring or parent how that learning goes on what is clear is that's a case where the learning that the learning occurs at that point is innate what is learned is experiential important sort of Distinction there okay so what goes on with this so in lots of species you learn the sound of your infant's voice in lots of species you learn the odor and lots of species you learn what they look like different species different modalities that dominate what goes into for example learning what your Offspring smells like remember it's not innate in these cases for example a goat a sheep whatever they do not innately have the means of recognizing oh this is somebody whose major histic compatibility proteins are fairly similar to mine in fact they share 50% homology oh this must be my child that's not done that way these are not innate cases so what sort of rules might you have for how to recognize your Offspring here's a simple one okay there's a whole bunch of babies out here and uh which ones are mine and I'm a goat trying to figure out which one I'm going to nurse and what would be a good rule that is not inate instead building on learning something at that point I know I'm going to start taking care of whichever kid there smells like my vaginal fluids that's a a pretty reliable way of figuring out this is somebody you just gave birth to or this is someone who I lick as they're first coming out and for a while afterward I figure out who am I nice to someone who smells like my saliva someone who I scent Mark right after this is someone who smells like my whatever glands I'm using there this is someone who smells like my amniotic fluid this is someone who after I get that learned I then nurse him for the first time this is someone whose mouth smells like my milk you could see now in this case it is learning being built on top of whatever your own recognition system is of smell you can have elaborations on this how do you recognize a sibling and species where it is learned in this imprinting way oh I'm going to imprint as a relative on somebody who smells just like Mom somebody who smells like Mom's vaginal fluid or her saliva or any of that same stuff going on there or I'm going to be nice to someone who smells like someone I made it with back when that's another strategy in various species you could begin to see how all of these are ways of just getting logical information someone who has the voice like someone who I heard peeping when they were still inside the egg oh it's them I'm going to nurse no I'm not going to nurse them I'm going to give them worms or whatever it is birds do but all these ways of using sensory information to say oh that's the one that's the one that's how I know it's them so all sorts of ways in which this could be done how can you prove that this is not hardwired this is not absolutely dominating a technique we've been hearing about already which is that cross fostering business which is you take newborn whatevers and you switch mothers on them and the mothers will take care of them what does that tell you it means other attributes of these pups coming over to them these rat pups override the fact wait these kids don't smell like my vaginal fluid they why wow they're cute though and there's no other moms around and they sure look cuddly and so maybe it takes you 10 seconds to decide this is one of mine instead of 3 seconds you have different things being played out there contrasting sort of signals coming through so that's another domain of doing that so now we move to us and how we do recognizing relatives and initially what the answer seems to be is that we have a different version of it we do not recognize relatives innately nor do we recognize relatives by imprinting we don't do that deal of like we smell our parents right after they're born or we sniff the vaginal fluid and that's how we know who mom is forever after or stuff like that so we don't instead what do we do we do it cognitively we figure it out we think about it we think about it with active conscious cognitive rules of how you know a relative is and of course what we're going to see shortly is that's not really how it works a lot of the time but for a first pass we do it cognitively so now you do it instead of this is someone who smells just like my vaginal fluid the way the goats are doing or this is someone who I innately recognize as my child the way the rats are doing it you're saying well that's the baby I just gave birth to because they haven't taken them out of the room yet so that must be a cognitive strategy how do I know who the father is not because I can smell on the baby 50% sharing their major his compatibility Gene this is the only person I had sex with during the cycle that I conceived a cognitive strategy this is what humans do again and again because we can think we can go through stuff like that we can also do other versions of it which is well this is someone who I saw mom give birth to or at least when they took me out of the room and then they like gave me some stuffed animals to keep me from like getting too upset and they said here's your new baby whatever oh okay which is a variant on this is someone who's been around ever since I saw mom give birth to that individual this is someone who looks like me this is someone who looks like a family member all of these cognitive strategies going into that we think about it we think about it and it turns out we have brain mechanisms that are good for doing that too but we're not the only species that thinks about it in that way for example baboons wonderful study of a few years ago baboons can do this with some sort of statistical thinking okay baboons are polygamous females will mate with a bunch of different males during her cycle and conceive and thus it's not at all clear who the father is but everybody there plays a guessing game and everybody does some statistics the usual rule is baboons being a highly tournament species males do no parental care of Offspring turns out that's not quite the case some males do when they're pretty sure who their kid is and here's how it's done you are a baboon and you are just hitting puberty you're female and what goes on is for like your first half dozen Cycles you're cycling with you're probably not ovulating yet you're not quite fertile this happens in humans as well and none of the big high-ranking guys are terribly interested in you probably because you're not pumping out a whole lot of interesting pheromones yet so who do you wind up with you wind up with some poor like adolescent schnook who has no chance to M with anybody else and nobody's contesting his ability to have a consortship with you so you do all of your mating with him the vast majority of the time they're not fertile because you're not really of every now and then though you get this like Junior High School baboon guy who gets his girlfriend pregnant and he's the only one and what tends to happen then is when she gives birth he gives a fair amount of Parental care to The Offspring so what does he have as a rule there if I'm the only one who made it with her if they're using a cognitive strategy then I'll take care of the kid to some extent and it is a sight to behold at how incredibly inep an adolescent male baboon is when he's trying to be paternal but what you wind up seeing there is well maybe he's imprinted maybe he's doing major hytto compatibility gen and and AG stuff or maybe he's actually thinking hey I was with her 247 so it's got to be me I'll take care of the kid now you see the more complicated circumstance where it's a more desirable female more mature one where there will be a bunch of males contesting and what you will tend to see is 2 days before and after she ovulates she'll be mating with number 10 a day before and after she's mating with number three the day of ovulation she's mating with number one that tends to be the pattern stay tuned it doesn't fit that perfectly because female baboons also have some opinions about who they want to mate with but nonetheless there winds up being this pattern just like that so there winds up being this pattern and thus you're the male afterward when she gives birth and you're trying to decide is this my kid or should I give some male parental investment and what is shown is baboon males do statistics they do probability what they do is if this was a male who was mating during her prime ovulatory day he is more likely to take care of the kid than a male who was mating during this window or this window they are playing probability they're not very good at it no surprise but nonetheless this pattern emerges that's not innate recognition that's not innate recognition of some SM that's just thinking through it was I with her yeah but she sure smelled a lot better the day after and that other guy was with her so I guess I'm in this category okay well I'll smile at the kid now and then and tell them I like their piano playing but I'm not going to like invest anything kind of stuff there here you see a conscious cognitive strategy so okay so Us and other smart beasts like primates here's another version of it occurring in fish in Sunfish and this was research done by that guy David Sloan Wilson that multi-level selection Evolution guy who actually has done research in like so many different fields incredibly creative guy here's a study that he did Sunfish males surprisingly are quite paternal in their taking care of their eventual Offspring they're almost as good as uh Nemo's dad and what you've got there is in in this version he I'm not going to draw fish mating forget that okay so the guy mates with a female and she eventually gives birth to kids and he helps take care of them now instead he mates with a female and you the savagely heartless researcher puts him in the next tank over where he can see what's happening and you fish at that point dropped down a clear plastic box right next to the female with another male in there in reality he's not mating with a fale but he's right there and this guy who's stuck on the other side of the barrier going out of his mind with jealousy and petulance and all of that immature stuff and what happens is after she eventually gives birth she this apparently being the female in this diagram after she gives birth he doesn't take care of the kids as much there is no difference in any of the sensory cues because he in fact is the only one who made it this one is kept inside there's some sort of cognitive stuff even going on in a fish remarkable so it's not just us so we've got this broad realm inate strategies one's on very all or nonone sensory imprinting and then there's the folks who think through it we're in the mainstream of that but we're not the only ones so how do our brains do that there is a part of the human cortex called the fusiform Cort text and what it's good at is recognizing faces which is a remarkable thing it specializes in recognizing faces facial expression degree of relatedness you show someone a good portrait of someone else and you will get that part of the brain to activate as if it was their face you show a good cartoon of somebody it will do the same thing maybe with a little bit less confidence this is the specialized part of the cortex that does facial recognition remarkable you look at people with Autism and this part of the cortex doesn't do a whole lot you show a non-autistic individual a picture of a well-known loved one fusor cortex activates a whole lot you show them a picture of someone they don't know a whole lot it activates somewhat to a lesser degree you show them the picture of an armchair doesn't do anything at all you take someone who is autistic and you show them and you get the same low degree activation for all three you know mother equals stranger equals armchair this in some ways is the core of what autism is about you see that going on as played out in this part of the cortex so that's really interesting and then it turns out we're not the only species that has this specialized fusiform cortex primates have this as well non-human primates sheep have it it turns out pigeons who could recognize pictures of each other and why they would want to do that God knows but pigeons could pigeons have a very Proto version of a fusiform cortex this seems to be part of what goes into this conscious cognitive strategizing of this is a face this is a face I've seen a whole lot more over the years so this activates a lot more this seems to suggest some sort of cortical specialization for recognizing individuals more features of how humans do it something that humans are very good at if they are human mothers is is recognizing the smell of their baby right after birth and this has been shown to have a major histic compatibility component to it in other words that's not a purely cognitive strategy there's some innate instinctual old factory signaling going on there so a first bit of evidence that we are not just purely rational beasts to figure out who we're related to babies very shortly after birth are already spectacularly good at distinguishing the smell of mom versus somebody else how do you tell that with a baby you take a newborn baby and you give them like on this side some armpit smell of mom and there's some armpit smell of you know I don't know Market Thatcher and what you see then is that the baby the newborn is more likely will spend more time turning its head towards Mom's smell that's how you know it newborn babies cannot distinguish between the smell of dad and any other male it's not instinctive ual in that case newborn humans are doing some version of proximity to Mom vaginal fluid smell whatever this should be bringing up a question of is there a difference in bonding in those early stages between vaginal birth Offspring and cesarian I don't know but that suggests that should be happening and maybe I should even find that out okay other features of it newborn kids as we already know from a couple of lectures ago can recognize the voice of mom how from all that resonance there inside the amniotic fluid his mom reads the more in peace and as we also heard they can't recognize the voice of dad not instinctual in this case getting information on the sensory route the amniotic environment as a good resonator for mom's voice so we're now already getting a mixture here of some instinctual old factory stuff major hist compatibility complex stuff some acquired hard wired sensory driven stuff ooh does this sound like the person whose voice I heard for those last n months and then some cognitive stuff trying to figure out who this relative is O who did they come with to the party with who all of that the cognitive stuff so we're ready a suggestion that we're not just such pure cognitive machines so where is that most interesting and this is in a totally fascinating series of studies that were done over the years showing just how little conscious cognition might play out in US humans in some really critical Realms which is who you decide you are interested in mating with okay so how does that work in humans all sorts of different ways but here's one way in which it does something interesting and this was a classic study done by an anthropologist named Joseph Sheffer and this is what he did he studied people who grew up in Israel on kutes kutes these are these traditional socialist sort of communes where one of the none of them are like this anymore but one of the early principles was one parent as good as another parent all the kids are raised in these big communal bathtubs together and it's one big sort of socialist Torah dance of everybody bathing naked together and what Sheffer found was this very interesting thing which is you are brought up in your age group all the kids born this year are raised in the same communal group and they take their baths together and they play together and they've got the same one parent takes all of them for one afternoon every Tuesday afternoon and the next one comes for the next shift and there big communal business there and what Sheffer discovered was if you were raised in the same age group as somebody anywhere up to six years of age you never ever wind up marrying them and this was not with a sample an appropriate sampling this was a study he did of every individual who ever grew up in the kabut system in Israel we appear to have a rule as follows if this is somebody who you spent a whole lot of time with before 6 years of age this is someone who you sure don't want to grow up and marry yuck and you love them they're incred but they feel like my sister they feel like my brother whoa that would be totally grotesque there's never been a case of people brought up during the first grow up in your first six years of life taking a whole lot of baths with someone and you are not going to discover an Amorous passion for them when they're 20 years old they're going to feel like a sibling for you for the rest of your life what is that telling us we have a very non-cognitive strategy in there yes who are relatives who are appropriate people to meet with well if we know that this is the daughter of Mom's sister then this person is not appropriate and this whole cognitive spend a whole lot of time naked with somebody taking baths and playing patty cake and counting their toes the first six years of life they feel like a sibling something very similar was then shown by Arthur wolf here and the anthropology department a different cultural version traditional Taiwanese marriages where there's some equivalent of that and where either you wind up with your future spouse at some insanely early age and basically get brought up with them from infancy or it happens later and if you're brought up from infancy with them you have a disastrous marriage later on because they feel like a sibling for the rest of your life so what this shows us here is yes we are these wonderful rational cognitive machines means we've got all sorts of innate strategies and sensory imprinting stuff going on instead in us we are not a whole lot fancier than hamsters what do this set us up for a topic that's going to be real important when we come to the lectures on aggression and cooperation and competition and all of that which is if we spend a lot of our time figuring out who we are related to cognitively or even more importantly if we are malleable in the way these kids growing up in Taiwan or these kabut if we are malleable in who we feel related to it is possible to manipulate Us in lots of ways to feel more related to individuals than we actually are or to feel less related to individuals and the terms for these are pseudo kinship and pseudo speciation and what we will eventually see is when you make sense of human violence and human cooperation and human aggression and all all of that we are so easily manipulated as to who counts is in us and who counts is in them and one of the brilliant things militaries all the world over do whether you're talking about Clans with Warrior classes all the way up to sort of State militaries what you see in all those cases is a brilliant understanding of how to make non-relatives feel like they're a band of brothers and how to make them seem so different they hardly even count as humans so this ability for us to be manipulated in these subliminal ways as to who counts as a relative will come back to haun's Big Time and making sense of a lot of human social behavior in other words we are not purely rational okay so what we will do on Monday is switch another bucket now to this field of ethology which once again is trying to make sense of what behaviors are hardwired what does environment do you will see a completely different approach for more please visit us at stanford. you