Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Previous Archive
15 February 2021 | Story Supplied | Photo Supplied
Dr João Vidal is a research fellow at the Department of Plant Sciences and the Afromontane Research Unit (ARU) at the University of the Free State (UFS).

According to United Nations data projections for 2100, sub-Saharan Africa is set to experience a demographic explosion. The most rapid population growth zones in Africa are in or around mountains and the importance of managing these mountain ecosystems sustainably in order to maintain the benefits to such a growing population is critical, says Dr João Vidal, a research fellow at the Department of Plant Sciences and the Afromontane Research Unit (ARU) at the University of the Free State (UFS). 

The link between human population growth and the demand for water will impact these mountain grasslands. All of Africa’s important rivers originate in mountainous areas. The sustainable management of African mountain landscapes is thus vital for the sustained provision of quality water in suitable quantities. “Water is already limited in some places. This year we are facing another drought in South Africa, and if it was not for the mountains, it could have been much worse. The long-term resilience of Southern Africa’s mountains and their ecosystem services should be an absolute priority for both research and conservation,” says Dr Vidal.

Human population growth has several implications

As a mountain ecologist, his recent research is centred on developing indicators for monitoring biodiversity change in Southern Africa’s mountains. This is a collaborative research project with the South African Environmental Observation Network (SAEON), Ezemvelo KZN Wildlife, and the University of Pretoria.

Human population growth, as predicted for Southern Africa, has several implications for natural-resource management and biodiversity conservation. “Southern Africa has one of the highest proportions of grassland-dominated mountains in the world, comparable only to Central Asia,” says Dr Vidal. 

In December, UN Secretary-General António Guterres said during the launch of the 2021 Global Humanitarian Overview: “Conflict, climate change and COVID-19 have created the greatest humanitarian challenge since the Second World War. The number of people at risk of starvation has doubled. Hundreds of millions of children are out of school. Levels of extreme poverty have risen for the first time in 22 years.”

According to Dr Vidal this new scenario significantly increases the pressure on mountain environments and their biota, since people will have to find alternative ways of feeding their families, their animals, while the economy struggles to recover globally.

Through his research, Dr Vidal – together with a growing community of practices for Southern Africa’s mountains – aims to understand the socio-ecological functioning of these montane grasslands in order to encourage a science-policy-action interface for their sustainable management in a changing world. 


Alternative ways for measuring environmental change in mountains

Since much global mountain research is focused on forest-dominated mountains, Dr Vidal and his collaborators are developing specific tools to track climate change in grassy mountains.
He explains: “When you look at the available tools for tracking climate change in mountains, you have a tree line for many mountains in the world. However, with the Southern African grassy mountains, it is impossible to use such a tool. We are working on alternative ways for measuring environmental change in our mountains.

“As it gets warmer, certain communities of grasses may retract towards higher elevations because they need a certain minimum temperature to survive. The problem seems to be that current climate change is occurring at a much faster rate than most species might be able to retract. This means that higher temperatures may lead to habitat losses for temperature-vulnerable groups.

“Climate change is also making mountains increasingly vulnerable to ecological invasion by non-native species. The severe temperatures in mountains are a good barrier for many problematic lowland species. But with warmer temperatures in the mountains, these barriers are being weakened, increasing the number of potentially invasive plants in our mountains. With higher temperatures there is potential for a large guild of invasive trees to overrun grassland mountains affecting waterflow into dams and rivers. Examples are pines, willows, gums, and wattles, to name a few.

“The presence of invasive trees, especially along rivers, has long-term negative impacts on the functioning of mountain catchments. These trees destabilise riverbanks, extract large amounts of water, and cause local extinction of endemic montane biodiversity. In drier environments such as grasslands, this exacerbates the fragile water productivity,” he adds.

Global policymakers to recognise the value of grassy mountains 

It is important to draw attention to the value of natural grassy mountain systems around the world and to how threatened they are. The world’s grassy mountains need to be better studied and better placed on the global stage. This will encourage policy makers to recognise these systems and implement appropriate measures to facilitate their sustainable management. 

For the first time in 20 years, the recent International Panel of Climate Change (IPCC) report to the United Nations included a chapter focusing solely on mountains. “Policymakers are finally realising how disproportionately important mountain environments are and how dramatically they are affected by climate change,” says Dr Vidal. 

However, African mountains are underrepresented in research literature; it is the only continent for which there is no data included in the IPCC report. There is an urgent need to represent African mountains – especially Southern Africa’s mountains – on the global stage when it comes to climate change,” states Dr Vidal.

Dr Vidal is conducting this study in partnership with Dr Ralph Clark, Director of the ARU on the UFS Qwaqwa Campus

News Archive

Stem cell research and human cloning: legal and ethical focal points
2004-07-29

   

(Summary of the inaugural lecture of Prof Hennie Oosthuizen, from the Department of Criminal and Medical Law at the Faculty of Law of the University of the Free State.)

 

In the light of stem cell research, research on embryo’s and human cloning it will be fatal for legal advisors and researchers in South Africa to ignore the benefits that new bio-medical development, through research, contain for this country.

Legal advisors across the world have various views on stem cell research and human cloning. In the USA there is no legislation that regulates stem cell research but a number of States adopted legislation that approves stem cell research. The British Parlement gave permission for research on embryonic stem cells, but determined that it must be monitored closely and the European Union is of the opinion that it will open a door for race purification and commercial exploitation of human beings.

In South Africa the Bill on National Health makes provision for therapeutical and non therapeutical research. It also makes provision for therapeutical embryonical stem cell research on fetuses, which is not older than 14 days, as well as for therapeutical cloning under certain circumstances subject to the approval of the Minister. The Bill prohibits reproductive cloning.

Research on human embrio’s is a very controversial issue, here and in the rest of the world.

Researchers believe that the use of stem cell therapy could help to side-step the rejection of newly transplanted organs and tissue and if a bank for stem cell could be built, the shortage of organs for transplants would become something of the past. Stem cells could also be used for healing of Alzheimer’s, Parkinson’s and spinal injuries.

Sources from which stem cells are obtained could also lead to further ethical issues. Stem cells are harvested from mature human cells and embryonic stem cells. Another source to be utilised is to take egg cells from the ovaries of aborted fetuses. This will be morally unacceptable for those against abortions. Linking a financial incentive to that could become more of a controversial issue because the woman’s decision to abort could be influenced. The ideal would be to rather use human fetus tissue from spontaneous abortions or extra-uterine pregnancies than induced abortions.

The potential to obtain stem cells from the blood of the umbilical cord, bone-marrow and fetus tissue and for these cells to arrange themselves is known for quite some time. Blood from the umbilical cord contains many stem cells, which is the origin of the body’s immune and blood system. It is beneficial to bank the blood of a newborn baby’s umbilical cord. Through stem cell transplants the baby or another family member’s life could be saved from future illnesses such as anemia, leukemia and metabolic storing disabilities as well as certain generic immuno disabilities.

The possibility to withdraw stem cells from human embrio’s and to grow them is more useable because it has more treatment possibilities.

With the birth of Dolly the sheep, communities strongly expressed their concern about the possibility that a new cloning technique such as the replacement of the core of a cell will be used in human reproduction. Embryonic splitting and core replacement are two well known techniques that are associated with the cloning process.

I differentiate between reproductive cloning – to create a cloned human embryo with the aim to bring about a pregnancy of a child that is identical to another individual – and therapeutically cloning – to create a cloned human embryo for research purposes and for healing human illnesses.

Worldwide people are debating whether to proceed with therapeutical cloning. There are people for and against it. The biggest ethical objection against therapeutical cloning is the termination of the development of a potential human being.

Children born from cloning will differ from each other. Factors such as the uterus environment and the environment in which the child is growing up will play a role. Cloning create unique children that will grow up to be unique individuals, just like me and you that will develop into a person, just like you and me. If we understand this scientific fact, most arguments against human cloning will disappear.

Infertility can be treated through in vitro conception. This process does not work for everyone. For some cloning is a revolutionary treatment method because it is the only method that does not require patients to produce sperm and egg cells. The same arguments that were used against in vitro conception in the past are now being used against cloning. It is years later and in vitro cloning is generally applied and accepted by society. I am of the opinion that the same will happen with regard to human cloning.

There is an argument that cloning must be prohibited because it is unsafe. Distorted ideas in this regard were proven wrong. Are these distorted ideas justified to question the safety of cloning and the cloning process you may ask. The answer, according to me, is a definite no. Human cloning does have many advantages. That includes assistance with infertility, prevention of Down Syndrome and recovery from leukemia.

 

We use cookies to make interactions with our websites and services easy and meaningful. To better understand how they are used, read more about the UFS cookie policy. By continuing to use this site you are giving us your consent to do this.

Accept