Becoming Bird: A Novel (and Modest) Approach
to Avian Influenza
A. Temporini et al, 2013
Introduction:
Since its appearance in Asia in 2003,
H5N1, the most pathogenic strain of avian influenza, has devastated bird and
human populations around the globe (10). As a pandemic of vast proportions, avian
influenza has had an important economic and cultural impact (3). In addition to its high virulence and
mortality rates in birds, because of its high zoonotic potential, avian
influenza is a constant threat to humans. H5N1 has a high mortality rate in humans:
approximately 60% of avian influenza cases from the period between 2005 and
2007 led to fatalities (6). There is
evidence that that the Spanish flu, one of the most deadly natural disasters in
human history, which wiped out nearly 5% of the world’s population in 1918,
originated from a strain of avian influenza that mutated to infect humans (7). Because of its high mutation rate, and the
generally high proximity of birds to humans, avian influenza has an incredibly
high chance of becoming infective to humans. Areas that are at high risk for infection with
avian influenza and for increased transmission are areas that are predominantly
rural and impoverished. These areas are
normally comprised of households or farms that have high densities of people
living alongside many species of bird, including the most conducive to avian
influenza infection: poultry. Rural
populations such as these, which typically lack many of the hygiene practices
and habits that are common of more urbanized areas, are the most heavily
affected by highly virulent pandemic diseases such as this. Additionally, these populations are often
afflicted with many other diseases of high morbidity and mortality, such as
parasitic disease, tuberculosis, and HIV/AIDS (9, 10). A wave of avian influenza can easily wipe out
populations such as these, and ravage high-density urban populations. In addition to the direct threat to human
health, avian influenza also has a large negative impact on bird
populations. This can lead to changes in
the biodiversity of ecosystems, which can drastic consequences on ecosystem
functionality, and stability (1, 5).
This is important because agriculture can be greatly impacted by
surrounding ecosystems (11).
Currently, the state of control for
avian influenza is in its primary stages (10).
While vaccines can be developed for particular strains, predicting which
strains will be most likely to jump from bird to human is nearly
impossible. So in this sense preventive
measures for avian influenza are much less efficient than they are for human
influenza. Because of this, the main
control strategy currently employed is vector control, which aims to reduce
transmission and prevalence in the primary vector of avian influenza: birds,
particularly poultry. However,
strategies for vector control have been largely ineffective.
There
are many obstacles to efficient and effective control of avian influenza, and
the most difficult to overcome is the fact that we cannot manage bird
populations to prevent transmission (9).
Unfortunately, we lack the technology and capacity to effectively
perceive the world as a bird does or to control all birds enough to micromanage
transmission of avian influenza. As Thomas Nagel reminds us, we must resist the
urge to “assume that tools of the kind we now have are in principle sufficient
to understand the universe as a whole” (8).
However, according to scholars such as Agamben, Deleuze, and Nagel,
humans are perhaps not so distinctly different from birds, “everything, living
or not, is constituted from elements having a nature that is both physical and
nonphysical--that is, capable of combining into mental wholes” (8). Clearly, humans share similar properties to
birds on the most fundamental levels of existence, which creates the
possibility for some sort of meaningful connection to animals that may be of
use. Furthermore, Deleuze points out, “the
self is only a threshold, a door, a becoming between two multiplicities,” and
that this threshold can certainly be traversed (2). It is this line of thinking that has led to
the notable advances in the beginnings of a novel control strategy for avian
influenza presented in this study. Following
this line of thought, and noting that “instrumentation and orchestration are
permeated by becomings-animal, and above all becomings-bird,” we turned to
Deleuze’s most insightful question, “is it not first through the voice that one
becomes animal?” (2).
Methods:
This study was designed to test the outer
limits of the anthropological machine and the boundaries between human and
animal. By devising a method to
essentially transform human to bird, we have developed a vehicle for the meaningful
trans-species transfer of information. The
aim of this study was to delineate a preliminary technique utilizing the
threshold between human and animal that is the voice. Sound, an inherent character of force and
vibration, can be readily manipulated. By slowing down the songs of several birds, we
have discovered a template for communicating with birds. To test this hypothesis, we slowed down the
songs of birds, had humans imitate the slowed down recordings, and then sped up
the human imitations, effectively generating a bird song from human voice.
Several species of birds were
selected for recording based on the distinct patterns discernible by the human
ear in their songs. Several individuals
within each species were then recorded singing in their natural habitats. The clearest audio samples were then selected
for the audio modification process. The
chosen species were the Wood-Thrush, Pine-Warbler, and Canyon-Wren.
The audio modification process
consisted primarily of cleaning up the audio (removing background noise and
amplifying desired song), and greatly slowing down the audio. Selected songs were slowed down to 30% of the
original speed. Additionally, the pitch
of the slowed down recordings was lowered, to make it easier for the human ear
to interpret, and for the human voice to imitate. Human imitations were recorded. In order to do this, the slowed down bird
audio was transferred to a portable device so that participants could listen to
the bird recording in one headphone while imitating the sound into the
recording device. The human recordings
were then modified by increasing the pitch to the original bird levels and by
speeding up the sound to 16 times the original speed. All audio modifications were performed using
GarageBand and VideoLan Client (VLC) media player.
To ensure that the newly created
human bird songs were indeed of any use, recordings were played for birds in
their natural habitats, and their responses were recorded. An assigned-value-response-index (AVRI) was
used to categorize and quantify bird response to human bird songs. Responses were observed for a total of three
minutes (one minute before recording played, one minute during recording play,
and one minute after recording was played).
Points were assigned to various responses (fly away, tweet back, nod, do
nothing, flap wings) and then tallied and averaged for a linearized response
value, which was then situated in the AVRI.
Statistical analysis was performed to
determine variance in response and significance of response using a one-way
univariate analysis of bird-variance test (TweETest). As is standard,
significance was determined with tweet-values less than or equal to 0.05.
Results:
Bird responses to human bird song
recordings were objectively measured and recorded. As shown in Figure 1, birds had a clear,
significant (tweet-value < 0.05, R2 = 17.81), and recognizable
response to human recordings. No
negative responses were observed. Responses
post-exposure to human recording were significantly different from those pre-exposure,
demonstrating a noticeable recognition and response to human voice recordings.
Figure 1. Average response value on the
assigned-value-response-index. Responses were measured pre-exposure to
recording, during exposure to recording, and post-exposure to recording. Clear
significant differences were observed in response after birds listened to
recordings.
Discussion:
The results indicate a significant
recognition and response behavior to human generated bird songs. These results provide hope that perhaps this
novel technique can be incorporated into existing control strategies in the
near future. As this method if further
developed and studied, we can begin to encode meaningful information into human
generated bird songs. This will allow us
to at once warn birds of the dangers of avian influenza, record symptoms,
control and prevent transmission of current and future strains of the virus, and
to learn much more about our fellow winged brothers and sisters. As communication with birds becomes
increasingly possible and relevant to human heath, we hope that other means of
connecting with birds and other species will be further explored so as to
expand the reaches of the human condition.
With this novel approach to a devastating problem, we welcome birds into
the protective folds of the anthropological machine.
References
1. David Tilman, Peter B. Reich, Johannes M. H. Knops. (2006) Biodiversity and ecosystem stability in a decade-long grassland experiment. Nature 441:7093, 629-632.
2. Deleuze, G. Thousand Plateaus, 1980.
3. Djunaidi, H., and C.M. Djunaidi. ‘‘The Economic Impacts of Avian Influenza on World Poultry Trade and the U.S. Poultry Industry: A Spatial Equilibrium Analysis.’’ Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics 39,2(2007):313–323.
4. Dugan VG, Chen R, Spiro DJ, et al. The evolutionary genetics and emergence of avian influenza viruses in wild birds. PLoS Pathog, 2008.
5. Giller, P.S., Hillebrand, H., Berninger, U.G., Gessner, M.O., Hawkins, S., Inchausti, P. et al. (2004). Biodiversity effects on ecosystem functioning: emerging issues and their experimental test in aquatic environments. Oikos, 104, 423–436.
6. J. H. Beigel et al., Avian Influenza A (H5N1) Infection in Humans, N. Engl. J. Med. 353, 1374 (2005).
7. Morens DM, Taubenberger JK, Fauci AS. The persistent legacy of the 1918 influenza virus. N Engl J Med 2009; 361: 225-229
8. Nagel, T. Mind and Cosmos, 2012.
9. Olsen B., Munster V.J., Wallensten A., Waldenström J., Osterhaus A.D.M.E., Fouchier R.A.M., Global patterns of influenza A virus in wild birds, Science (2006) 312:384-388
10. Peiris JSM, de Jong MD, Guan Y (2007) Avian Influenza Virus (H5N1): a Threat to Human Health. Clin Microbiol Rev 20: 243–267.
11. Sandra Díaz, Joseph Fargione, F. Stuart Chapin, David Tilman. (2006) Biodiversity Loss Threatens Human Well-Being. PLoS Biology 4:8, e277.
Recordings:
Original Bird, Slow Bird, Human Sped Up
No comments:
Post a Comment