When
Joan and I got married, we were not the only residents of Apartment 3E. We were
the only ones who paid rent. And we were the only ones who had keys. But what
those advertisements in the subway insisted regarding the quaintly-named roach motels
we bought by the dozen--que las cucarachas pueden entrar, pero no pueden
salir—seemed more true of our building on West 111th Street than
it did of the actual devices themselves that we were counting on to rid
ourselves of our unwanted and disgusting roommates. Why I remember that in
Spanish, a language I don’t speak, more easily than in English (and how can
there not have been an English version?), I have no idea. Perhaps it was the
graphic, which I still remember clearly, of a fierce Hispanic-looking woman
wearing a colander on her head and leaning a toilet plunger over her shoulder
as she sallied forth to do battle with the same varmints that were as unwanted
in our home as the ad copy made it crystal clear they were unwelcome in
hers. We were clearly in the same boat,
the three of us. And if her battle cry was in her native Spanish, then so was ours
going to be!
I was
better about it than Joan. (Joan is an outdoors girl from Ontario, but her idea
of living with animals involves sharing the forest with moose and caribou
rather than sharing a kitchen with revolting hexapedes.) But I wasn’t too happy
either. Mind you, it wasn’t us. Our kitchen was, as it still often is, spotless.
We didn’t leave food around, and least of all overnight. We cleaned up our
crumbs! But the entire building was filled with them and no single apartment’s
efforts seemed sufficient to turn the tide.
Eventually, we solved our problem the simple way—by moving to Israel for
a year and never returning to Morningside Heights. But, although I remember our
years on 111th Street fondly (and still respond very favorably to
the smell of Indian cooking that was a permanent feature of life on the third
floor at 600 West and which provided the ongoing olfactory backdrop to our
lives as newlyweds), I never developed the Manhattanite’s native tolerance for
the cockroach. Unlike my father (who for some obscure reason only possibly
related to the dialectics of Brownsville English, added an “a” between the “k”
and the “r” to create a medial third syllable), I pronounced their name in two
syllables. But I never liked them.
Nor have
I come to remember them fondly, even all these years later. But over the years,
they have earned my begrudging respect (if not quite my admiration). For
one thing, they have survived on earth for about 300,000,000 years, which is
about 299,800,000 years, give or take a few millennia, longer than our own
species has wandered the planet. For another, they are apparently close to indestructible.
The oft-repeated claim that they can survive almost anything is apparently at
least mostly true. The Discovery Channel conducted an experiment in which a
mass of cockroaches were exposed to 1000 radon units of cobalt 60, which dose
of radiation would kill any human being in ten minutes, and half the
cockroaches survived. When they upped the ante to 10,000 radon units, about the
amount released at Hiroshima, at least ten percent of the roaches survived. (If
you are reading this electronically, click here
to see the results of the experiment in more detail.) But it is not to discuss
the cockroaches of wartime Japan that I write today. Perhaps some other time!
The
reason I am writing about this topic today, actually, is because of a study
that was published just this last week in the journal Science. Undertaken by Ayako
Wada-Katsumata, Jules Silverman, and Coby Schal, all of them professors at North Carolina State University in
Raleigh, the study effectively demonstrated that cockroaches have the internal
capability to defend themselves against sweet-tasting poisons by self-altering
their own body chemistry to make things taste bitter and unpalatable that under
normal circumstances would taste sweet to them. (To read the abstract, click here.) This is, of course, not the same as an insect
developing a tolerance for some variety of poison that is regularly and repeatedly
used against it. It is far more interesting than that, I think, because this is
not just a case of poison not working well but one about the ability of a
living thing to morph into a new iteration of itself that, instead of merely
mimicking its prior behavior (and dying in the process), is now not
vulnerable to things that just months or weeks earlier could easily have cost
them their lives.
How
exactly this all works remains an unsolved puzzle, but it appears to have
something to do with the way cockroaches taste things. We human beings taste
with our taste buds, which limits us to tasting with our tongues. But
cockroaches taste with something called “taste hairs” that appear in many
different parts of their bodies. How cool would that be, being able to taste
with our elbows or our noses? Or with our big toes! But the reality is interesting enough without
shifting into fantasy. These “taste hairs” work because they contain different
kinds of nerve cells that react to flavors and send messages bearing
decipherable code to the cockroach’s tiny brain, which is how the bug knows if
something is sweet or bitter. Those are the only two options, apparently: sweet
or bitter. (There’s a metaphor in there somewhere.) When something sweet
touches the nerve cell that is programmed to detect sweetness, it sends along a
message that makes the cockroach want to eat the substance in question. When
something bitter touches the bitter receptor cell, the message discourages the
roach from wanting to eat the substance in question. What the scientists in North Carolina
discovered was that the cockroaches—this is, in and of itself, amazing—that the
roaches somehow understood that they were being tricked into eating poison and—and
this, even more so—were able to switch around the receptors’ messaging system
so that the sweet poison would send a message to the cockroach’s brain discouraging
it from eating the substance, thereby avoiding being poisoned to death.
So much
remains unknown. How could cockroaches be savvy enough to understand that
they—not the individual, but the group, the genus, the whole bug nation—is in
danger of being poisoned? How could they possibly be sophisticated enough to
realize that an effective defense against poison would be for the sweet,
seductive flavor of the toxic substance to trigger the “bitter” response rather
than the “sweet” one? How can
evolutionary change—and what is this what an example of if not evolutionary
change?—possibly happen so quickly, in this case in a matter of a few years?
(The behavior studied by the scientists in North Carolina has only been
observed since the 1990s.) Can evolutionary change be willed into existence? Do
cockroaches even possess the will to self-alter? Do they have that level of
insight into the world in which they live? (That hardly seems possible, but what
alternate explanation could there be?) These are all good questions. And none
as yet has a very good answer. Who ever thought cockroaches could be this
interesting?
For me,
all this science prompts a different set of questions entirely. We too, after
all, are evolutionary creatures, we human beings. As the countless millennia
have passed, we too have altered and developed as we morph into versions of our
former selves more suited, or at least ideally more suited, to the world
as it itself has developed along into its latest iteration. But we clearly lack
the cockroaches’ ability to do this in response to stimuli over the course of
decades rather than over the course of eons.
The announcement a few weeks ago, for example, by scientists at the
Mauna Loa Observatory in Hawaii that carbon dioxide had reached an average
daily level over 400 parts per million, a concentration of the most
heat-trapping gas in the atmosphere the earth has not seen in millions of years,
was greeted, as far as I can determine, mostly with yawns by the general
populace. (You can read more about it by
clicking here.) I’m sure environmental scientists all over
the world took the announcement as a great call to arms…but the rest of the
world seems to me to be in desperate need of the cockroaches’ ability to
self-alter in the face of pending disaster. For the roaches, the task was
simple: if sweet equals death, then sweet needs to taste bitter. How they
managed that, who knows? But it’s the lacking human parallel ability that
interests me even more. (I’m a rabbi, after all, not an entomologist.) Will
human beings respond to this news, which Maureen Raymo, a Columbia University
scientist who works at the Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory, characterized now
as part of an “inevitable march towards disaster,” by self-altering, not to
find sweet bitter and bitter sweet, but to find boring riveting, yawn-provoking
stimulating, and ecological-tedious deeply and personally challenging. In that
same article about the carbon dioxide, a Yale University professor was quoted
as saying, not (I thought) bitterly but with resignation, that the time to act
forcefully on our own behalves was probably yesterday.
But, as
Chad and Jeremy already knew decades ago, yesterday’s gone. So the question
isn’t whether we need a time machine to deal with this disaster. That would be
nice, but even if we did possess the ability to go back in time to
address this issue by heading it off at the pass, we would still need the
roaches’ ability to self-alter from complacent beings who find it possible to
be bored by looming environmental disaster on a scale we non-scientists can
barely imagine into the kind of thoughtful creatures (and the sapiens part
of Homo sapiens specifically references intelligence as our species’
most characteristic feature) that have the good sense to be terrified by truly
terrifying things. Tasting sweetened poison and finding it bitter, and then
specifically not ingesting it, is a good model for us to follow. If bugs
can do it, then my sense is that so can we…if we could only summon up the will
to self-alter as productively and as beneficially to our long-term existence as
those unappealing invertebrates my father only called cockaroaches.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.