Search This Blog

Friday, May 8, 2020

Spindle apparatus

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Micrograph showing condensed chromosomes in blue, kinetochores in pink, and microtubules in green during metaphase of mitosis
 
In cell biology, the spindle apparatus (or mitotic spindle) refers to the cytoskeletal structure of eukaryotic cells that forms during cell division to separate sister chromatids between daughter cells. It is referred to as the mitotic spindle during mitosis, a process that produces genetically identical daughter cells, or the meiotic spindle during meiosis, a process that produces gametes with half the number of chromosomes of the parent cell.

Besides chromosomes, the spindle apparatus is composed of hundreds of proteins. Microtubules comprise the most abundant components of the machinery.

Spindle structure

This diagram depicts the organization of a typical mitotic spindle found in animal cells. Chromosomes are attached to kinetochore microtubules via a multiprotein complex called the kinetochore. Polar microtubules interdigitate at the spindle midzone and push the spindle poles apart via motor proteins. Astral microtubules anchor the spindle poles to the cell membrane. Microtubule polymerization is nucleated at the microtubule organizing center.
 
Attachment of microtubules to chromosomes is mediated by kinetochores, which actively monitor spindle formation and prevent premature anaphase onset. Microtubule polymerization and depolymerization dynamic drive chromosome congression. Depolymerization of microtubules generates tension at kinetochores; bipolar attachment of sister kinetochores to microtubules emanating from opposite cell poles couples opposing tension forces, aligning chromosomes at the cell equator and poising them for segregation to daughter cells. Once every chromosome is bi-oriented, anaphase commences and cohesin, which couples sister chromatids, is severed, permitting the transit of the sister chromatids to opposite poles.

The cellular spindle apparatus includes the spindle microtubules, associated proteins, which include kinesin and dynein molecular motors, condensed chromosomes, and any centrosomes or asters that may be present at the spindle poles depending on the cell type. The spindle apparatus is vaguely ellipsoid in cross section and tapers at the ends. In the wide middle portion, known as the spindle midzone, antiparallel microtubules are bundled by kinesins. At the pointed ends, known as spindle poles, microtubules are nucleated by the centrosomes in most animal cells. Acentrosomal or anastral spindles lack centrosomes or asters at the spindle poles, respectively, and occur for example during female meiosis in most animals. In this instance, a Ran GTP gradient is the main regulator of spindle microtubule organization and assembly. In fungi, spindles form between spindle pole bodies embedded in the nuclear envelope, which does not break down during mitosis.

Microtubule-associated proteins and spindle dynamics

The dynamic lengthening and shortening of spindle microtubules, through a process known as dynamic instability determines to a large extent the shape of the mitotic spindle and promotes the proper alignment of chromosomes at the spindle midzone. Microtubule-associated proteins (MAPs) associate with microtubules at the midzone and the spindle poles to regulate their dynamics. γ-tubulin is a specialized tubulin variant that assembles into a ring complex called γ-TuRC which nucleates polymerization of α/β tubulin heterodimers into microtubules. Recruitment of γ-TuRC to the pericentrosomal region stabilizes microtubule minus-ends and anchors them near the microtubule-organizing center. The microtubule-associated protein Augmin acts in conjunction with γ-TURC to nucleate new microtubules off of existing microtubules.

The growing ends of microtubules are protected against catastrophe by the action of plus-end microtubule tracking proteins (+TIPs) to promote their association with kinetochores at the midzone. CLIP170 was shown to localize near microtubule plus-ends in HeLa cells  and to accumulate in kinetochores during prometaphase. Although how CLIP170 recognizes plus-ends remains unclear, it has been shown that its homologues protect against catastrophe and promote rescue, suggesting a role for CLIP170 in stabilizing plus-ends and possibly mediating their direct attachment to kinetochores. CLIP-associated proteins like CLASP1 in humans have also been shown to localize to plus-ends and the outer kinetochore as well as to modulate the dynamics of kinetochore microtubules (Maiato 2003). CLASP homologues in Drosophila, Xenopus, and yeast are required for proper spindle assembly; in mammals, CLASP1 and CLASP2 both contribute to proper spindle assembly and microtubule dynamics in anaphase. Plus-end polymerization may be further moderated by the EB1 protein, which directly binds the growing ends of microtubules and coordinates the binding of other +TIPs.

Opposing the action of these microtubule-stabilizing proteins are a number of microtubule-depolymerizing factors which permit the dynamic remodeling of the mitotic spindle to promote chromosome congression and attainment of bipolarity. The kinesin-13 superfamily of MAPs contains a class of plus-end-directed motor proteins with associated microtubule depolymerization activity including the well-studied mammalian MCAK and Xenopus XKCM1. MCAK localizes to the growing tips of microtubules at kinetochores where it can trigger catastrophe in direct competition with stabilizing +TIP activity. These proteins harness the energy of ATP hydrolysis to induce destabilizing conformational changes in protofilament structure that cause kinesin release and microtubule depolymerization. Loss of their activity results in numerous mitotic defects. Additional microtubule destabilizing proteins include Op18/stathmin and katanin which have roles in remodeling the mitotic spindle as well as promoting chromosome segregation during anaphase.

The activities of these MAPs are carefully regulated to maintain proper microtubule dynamics during spindle assembly, with many of these proteins serving as Aurora and Polo-like kinase substrates.

Organizing the spindle apparatus

In the centrosome-mediated “search and capture” model (left), microtubules nucleated from centrosomes contact chromosomes by chance and become stabilized at kinetochores to form the spindle. In the chromatin-mediated “self-organization” model (right), microtubules are nucleated around the vicinity of mitotic chromatin and organized into a bipolar array by motor proteins.
 
In a properly formed mitotic spindle, bi-oriented chromosomes are aligned along the equator of the cell with spindle microtubules oriented roughly perpendicular to the chromosomes, their plus-ends embedded in kinetochores and their minus-ends anchored at the cell poles. The precise orientation of this complex is required to ensure accurate chromosome segregation and to specify the cell division plane. However, it remains unclear how the spindle becomes organized. Two models predominate the field, which are synergistic and not mutually exclusive. In the search-and-capture model, the spindle is predominantly organized by the poleward separation of centrosomal microtubule organizing centers (MTOCs). Spindle microtubules emanate from centrosomes and 'seek' out kinetochores; when they bind a kinetochore they become stabilized and exert tension on the chromosomes. In an alternative self assembly model, microtubules undergo acentrosomal nucleation among the condensed chromosomes. Constrained by cellular dimensions, lateral associations with antiparallel microtubules via motor proteins, and end-on attachments to kinetochores, microtubules naturally adopt a spindle-like structure with chromosomes aligned along the cell equator.

Centrosome-mediated "search-and-capture" model

In this model, microtubules are nucleated at microtubule organizing centers and undergo rapid growth and catastrophe to 'search' the cytoplasm for kinetochores. Once they bind a kinetochore, they are stabilized and their dynamics are reduced. The newly mono-oriented chromosome oscillates in space near the pole to which it is attached until a microtubule from the opposite pole binds the sister kinetochore. This second attachment further stabilizes kinetochore attachment to the mitotic spindle. Gradually, the bi-oriented chromosome is pulled towards the center of the cell until microtubule tension is balanced on both sides of the centromere; the congressed chromosome then oscillates at the metaphase plate until anaphase onset releases cohesion of the sister chromatids.

In this model, microtubule organizing centers are localized to the cell poles, their separation driven by microtubule polymerization and 'sliding' of antiparallel spindle microtubules with respect to one another at the spindle midzone mediated by bipolar, plus-end-directed kinesins.[19][20] Such sliding forces may account not only for spindle pole separation early in mitosis, but also spindle elongation during late anaphase.

Chromatin-mediated self-organization of the mitotic spindle

In contrast to the search-and-capture mechanism in which centrosomes largely dictate the organization of the mitotic spindle, this model proposes that microtubules are nucleated acentrosomally near chromosomes and spontaneously assemble into anti-parallel bundles and adopt a spindle-like structure. Classic experiments by Heald and Karsenti show that functional mitotic spindles and nuclei form around DNA-coated beads incubated in Xenopus egg extracts and that bipolar arrays of microtubules are formed in the absence of centrosomes and kinetochores. Indeed, it has also been shown that laser ablation of centrosomes in vertebrate cells inhibits neither spindle assembly nor chromosome segregation. Under this scheme, the shape and size of the mitotic spindle are a function of the biophysical properties of the cross-linking motor proteins.

Chromatin-mediated microtubule nucleation by the Ran GTP gradient

The guanine nucleotide exchange factor for the small GTPase Ran (Regulator of chromosome condensation 1 or RCC1) is attached to nucleosomes via core histones H2A and H2B. Thus, a gradient of GTP-bound Ran is generated around the vicinity of mitotic chromatin. Glass beads coated with RCC1 induce microtubule nucleation and bipolar spindle formation in Xenopus egg extracts, revealing that the Ran GTP gradient alone is sufficient for spindle assembly. The gradient triggers release of spindle assembly factors (SAFs) from inhibitory interactions via the transport proteins importin β/α. The unbound SAFs then promote microtubule nucleation and stabilization around mitotic chromatin, and spindle bipolarity is organized by microtubule motor proteins.

Regulation of spindle assembly

Spindle assembly is largely regulated by phosphorylation events catalyzed by mitotic kinases. Cyclin dependent kinase complexes (CDKs) are activated by mitotic cyclins, whose translation increases during mitosis. CDK1 (also called CDC2) is considered the main mitotic kinase in mammalian cells and is activated by Cyclin B1. Aurora kinases are required for proper spindle assembly and separation. Aurora A associates with centrosomes and is believed to regulate mitotic entry. Aurora B is a member of the chromosomal passenger complex and mediates chromosome-microtubule attachment and sister chromatid cohesion. Polo-like kinase, also known as PLK, especially PLK1 has important roles in the spindle maintenance by regulating microtubule dynamics.

Mitotic chromosome structure

By the end of DNA replication, sister chromatids are bound together in an amorphous mass of tangled DNA and protein that would be virtually impossible to partition into each daughter cell. To avoid this problem, mitotic entry triggers a dramatic reorganization of the duplicated genome. Sister chromatids are disentangled and resolved from one another. Chromosomes also shorten in length, up to 10,000 fold in animal cells, in a process called condensation. Condensation begins in prophase and chromosomes are maximally compacted into rod-shaped structures by the time they are aligned in the middle of the spindle at metaphase. This gives mitotic chromosomes the classic “X” shape seen in karyotypes, with each condensed sister chromatid linked along their lengths by cohesin proteins and joined, often near the center, at the centromere.

While these dynamic rearrangements are vitally important to ensure accurate and high-fidelity segregation of the genome, our understanding of mitotic chromosome structure remains largely incomplete. A few specific molecular players have been identified, however: Topoisomerase II uses ATP hydrolysis to catalyze decatenation of DNA entanglements, promoting sister chromatid resolution. Condensins are 5-subunit complexes that also use ATP-hydrolysis to promote chromosome condensation. Experiments in Xenopus egg extracts have also implicated linker Histone H1 as an important regulator of mitotic chromosome compaction.

Mitotic spindle assembly checkpoint

The completion of spindle formation is a crucial transition point in the cell cycle called the spindle assembly checkpoint. If chromosomes are not properly attached to the mitotic spindle by the time of this checkpoint, the onset of anaphase will be delayed. Failure of this spindle assembly checkpoint can result in aneuploidy and may be involved in aging and the formation of cancer.

Spindle apparatus orientation

Cartoon of the dividing epithelium cell surrounded by epithelium tissue. Spindle apparatus rotates inside the cell. The rotation is a result of astral microtubules pulling towards tri-cellular-junctions (TCJ), signaling centers localized at the regions where three cells meet.
 
Cell division orientation is of major importance for tissue architecture, cell fates and morphogenesis. Cells tend to divide along their long axis according to the so-called Hertwig rule. The axis of cell division is determined by the orientation of the spindle apparatus. Cells divide along the line connecting two centrosomes of the spindle apparatus. After formation, the spindle apparatus undergoes rotation inside the cell. The astral microtubules originating from centrosomes reach the cell membrane where they are pulled towards specific cortical clues. In vitro, the distribution of cortical clues is set up by the adhesive pattern. In vivo polarity cues are determined by localization of Tricellular junctions localized at cell vertices. The spatial distribution of cortical clues leads to the force field that determine final spindle apparatus orientation and the subsequent orientation of cell division.

UNESCO-CEPES

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
UNESCO-CEPES (Centre Européen pour l’Enseignement Supérieur – CEPES) was established in 1972 at Bucharest, Romania, as a de-centralized office for the European Centre for Higher Education. The Centre was closed in 2011 due to lack of funding. The centre promoted international cooperation in the sphere of higher education among UNESCO’s Member States in Central, Eastern and South-East Europe and also served Canada, the United States and Israel. Higher Education in Europe, a scholarly publication focusing on major problems and trends in higher education, was the official journal of UNESCO-CEPES. The CEPES headquarters was in the Kretzulescu Palace in Bucharest.

The CEPES member countries

Central Europe Eastern Europe South-Eastern Other regions
Austria Estonia Albania Belgium
Czech Republic Latvia Bosnia and Herzegovina Denmark
Croatia Lithuania Bulgaria Finland
France Republic of Moldova Cyprus Holy See
Germany Ukraine Republic of Macedonia Ireland
Hungary
Republic of Montenegro Malta
Italy
Turkey Netherlands
Liechtenstein

Norway
Poland

Portugal
Romania

Spain
Serbia

Sweden
Slovakia

UK
Slovenia

Canada
Switzerland

USA



Israel

History

On 21 September 1972, as the only intergovernmental Centre for Higher Education in Europe region, North America and Israel, UNESCO European Centre for Higher Education (Centre Européen pour l’Enseignement Supérieur – CEPES) was established in Bucharest. The early mission of the CEPES was to encourage cooperation, to disseminate information, and to research modern trends in higher education within the Europe Region. In the early 1990s, with the fall of the communist regimes in Central and Eastern Europe, the role of UNESCO-CEPES extended its round has been broader.

on this endeavour, the UNITWIN/UNESCO Chairs Programme constituted "a major breakthrough with regard to the reinforcement of inter-university co-operation at the sub-regional, regional and interregional levels as a means to improve the quality in higher education as well as to strengthen national capabilities for higher level training and research in the developing countries." 

In April 1997, the joint Council of Europe/UNESCO Convention on the Recognition of Qualifications Concerning Higher Education in the European Region was adopted, and UNESCO-CEPES assumed a Co-Secretariat function to the Convention. From the late 1990s, the Centre gradually more co-worked on European Union projects aimed at the reform of higher education in Eastern and Central Europe and reinforced its cooperation with international organisations such as World Bank, OECD, and others.

In September 2003, UNESCO-CEPES was nominated a consultative member of the Follow-up Group of the Bologna Process (BFUG), charged with the accomplishment of Bologna Process goals, and the actualisation of the European Higher Education Area (EHEA).

On 25 September 2009, according as a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) was signed between UNESCO and the Romanian Government on transitional arrangements for UNESCO-CEPES, The MoU realigns the Centre's mandate with the new education landscape in Europe and provides that during the 2010-2011 period. CEPES will focus on addressing the needs of higher education of UNESCO's Member States in Central, Eastern and South-East Europe.

On 31 December 2011, the Centre was closed as funding was not ensured by the Government of Romania or other countries in the region, which is a requirement for all UNESCO Regional Centres.

Mission

The UNESCO European Centre for Higher Education/Centre européen pour l'enseignement supérieur (CEPES) promotes co-operation and provides technical support in the field of higher education among UNESCO's Member States in Central, Eastern and South-East Europe.

Specifically UNESCO-CEPES:
  • Undertakes projects relevant to the development and reform of higher education, specifically in view of the follow-up to the 2009 UNESCO World Conference on Higher Education, and the Bologna Process aiming at the creation of the European Higher Education Area;
  • Promotes policy development and research on higher education and serves as a forum for the discussion of important topics in higher education;
  • Gathers and disseminates a wide range of information on higher education;
  • Coordinates, within the UNITWIN/UNESCO Chairs Programme, relations with a designated number of UNESCO Chairs relevant to its activities;
  • Provides consultancy services;
  • Participates in the activities of other governmental and non-governmental organizations;
  • Serves as a link between UNESCO Headquarters and Romania.

Recent Events

Date Events
9 March 2010 Reception for Presentation of the Book Collection "Patrimoniul Umanităţii din România".
4–5 March 2010 Romanian Research Assessment Exercise, organized by UEFISCSU
24 February 2010 Programme Planning Meeting, organized by UNICEF
18 February 2010 Mutual Learning Workshop, organized by UEFISCSU
3 December 2009 Stakeholders Engagement Day, organized by Accountability and Aston Eco Management Company
20 November 2009 UN Convention Day for the Right of the Child, organized by ONG Romanian Federation for Children
26–30 October 2009 The Art Exhibition organized by UNESCO-CEPES on the occasion of UN DAY 2009
23 October 2009 Opening Ceremony of the Art exposition "Our World; Our Climate"
27 September 2009 First Forum on Energy Efficiency in Romania
24–25 September 2009 Systems Thinking for Foresight: The case of Romanian Higher Education System

UNESCO Institutes and Centres for Education around the world

Including UNESCO-CEPES, there are many institutes and centres on the world that UNESCO established. following lists work as part of UNESCO's Education Programme to assist countries to tackle challenges in education.

Global

Regional

Africa
  • International Institute for Capacity Building in Africa (IICBA), Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. - Strengthening Africa's educational institutions.
Europe and North America
  • European Centre for Higher Education (CEPES), Bucharest, Romania. - Promoting cooperation and reform in higher education in Central and Eastern Europe.
Latin America and Caribbean
  • International Institute for Higher Education in Latin America and the Caribbean (IESALC), (website in Spanish), Caracas, Venezuela. - Developing and transforming higher education in the region.
Centres under the auspices of UNESCO
The five centres under the auspices of UNESCO (category 2) complement and expand UNESCO's education programme.
  • Asia-Pacific Centre of Education for International Understanding (APCEIU), Icheon, Republic of Korea.
  • International Centre for Girls and Women's Education in Africa (CIEFFA), Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso.
  • Guidance, Counselling and Youth Development Centre for Africa (GCYDCA), Lilongwe, Malawi.
  • International Research and Training Center for Rural Education (INRULED), Beijing, China.
  • Regional Centre for Educational Planning (RCEP), Sharjah, United Arab Emirates.
New centres and institutes to be established
  • The South-East Asian Centre for Lifelong Learning for Sustainable Development (SEACLLSD), Manila, Philippines
  • The Regional Centre for Early Childhood Care and Education in the Arab States Damascus, Syrian Arab Republic

Partner and Support Organisations

Partner International Governmental and Non-governmental Organizations Operating in the Field of (Higher) Education Reform and Policy Development
  • Center for Higher Education Development (CHE)
  • Council of Europe (CE)
  • German Academic Exchange Service (DAAD)
  • Education International (EI)
  • Elias Foundation
  • European Association for Quality Assurance in Higher Education (ENQA)
  • European Quality Assurance Register for Higher Education (EQAR)
  • European Centre for Strategic Management of Universities (ESMU)
  • European Students' Union (ESU)
  • European University Association (EUA)
  • European Union (EU)
  • European Commission - Eurydice
  • International Association of Universities (IAU)
  • Observatory of the Magna Charta Universitatum
  • UNESCO International Bureau of Education (IBE)
  • UNESCO International Institute for Educational Planning (IIEP)
  • The Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education (QAA)
  • Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD)
  • United Nations Development Programme (UNDP)
  • United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO)
  • UNESCO National Commissions
  • University of Cambridge
  • World University Service (WUS)
Support Organizations of UNESCO – CEPES Activities
  • British Council Romania
  • Calouste Gulbenkian Foundation
  • Deutsche Telekom
  • Hertie Foundation
  • Microsoft Romania
  • National Bank of Romania
  • Okian Publishing Romania
  • RAO Publishing
  • Samsung Romania

Intangible cultural heritage

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
Logo of Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage
 
An intangible cultural heritage (ICH) is a practice, representation, expression, knowledge, or skill considered by UNESCO to be part of a place's cultural heritage. Buildings, historic places, monuments, and artifacts are physical intellectual wealth. Intangible heritage is comprised of nonphysical intellectual wealth, such as folklore, customs, beliefs, traditions, knowledge, and language. Intangible cultural heritage is considered by member states of UNESCO in relation to the tangible World Heritage focusing on intangible aspects of culture. In 2001, UNESCO made a survey among States and NGOs to try to agree on a definition, and the Convention for the Safeguarding of Intangible Cultural Heritage was drafted in 2003 for its protection and promotion.

Definition

The Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage defines the intangible cultural heritage as the practices, representations, expressions, as well as the knowledge and skills (including instruments, objects, artifacts, cultural spaces), that communities, groups and, in some cases, individuals recognise as part of their cultural heritage. It is sometimes called living cultural heritage, and is manifested inter alia in the following domains:
  • Oral traditions and expressions, including language as a vehicle of the intangible cultural heritage;
  • Performing arts;
  • Social practices, rituals and festive events;
  • Knowledge and practices concerning nature and the universe;
  • Traditional craftsmanship
Noh mask; Japan was the first country to introduce legislation to protect and promote its intangible heritage
 
Cultural heritage in general consists of the products and processes of a culture that are preserved and passed on through the generations. Some of that heritage takes the form of cultural property, formed by tangible artefacts such as buildings or works of art. Many parts of culture, however are intangible, including song, music, dance, drama, skills, cuisine, crafts and festivals. They are forms of culture that can be recorded but cannot be touched or stored in physical form, like in a museum, but only experienced through a vehicle giving expression to it. These cultural vehicles are called "Human Treasures" by the UN.

According to the 2003 Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage, the intangible cultural heritage (ICH) – or living heritage – is the mainspring of humanity's cultural diversity and its maintenance a guarantee for continuing creativity. It is defined as follows:
Intangible Cultural Heritage means the practices, representations, expressions, knowledge, skills – as well as the instruments, objects, artifacts and cultural spaces associated therewith – that communities, groups and, in some cases, individuals recognize as part of their cultural heritage. This intangible cultural heritage, transmitted from generation to generation, is constantly recreated by communities and groups in response to their environment, their interaction with nature and their history, and provides them with a sense of identity and continuity, thus promoting respect for cultural diversity and human creativity. For the purposes of this Convention, consideration will be given solely to such intangible cultural heritage as is compatible with existing international human rights instruments, as well as with the requirements of mutual respect among communities, groups and individuals, and of sustainable development.

Oral history

Intangible cultural heritage is slightly different from the discipline of oral history, the recording, preservation and interpretation of historical information (specifically, oral tradition), based on the personal experiences and opinions of the speaker. ICH attempts to preserve cultural heritage 'with' the people or community by protecting the processes that allow traditions and shared knowledge to be passed on while oral history seeks to collect and preserve historical information obtained from individuals and groups.

Food heritage

With sustainable development gaining momentum as a priority of UNESCO heritage policies, an increasing number of food-related nominations are being submitted for inscription on the lists of the Convention for the safeguarding of the intangible cultural heritage. The Mediterranean diet, the traditional Mexican cuisine and the Japanese dietary culture of washoku are just some examples of this booming phenomenon.

Dance heritage

The UNESCO lists of intangible cultural heritage also include a variety of dance genres, often associated with singing, music and celebrations, from all over the world. The lists include: celebratory and ritual dances such as Ma'di bowl lyre music and dance from Uganda and Kalbelia folk songs and dances of Rajasthan from India, and social dances such as Cuban rumba. Also, some dances are localised and practised mainly in their country of origin, such as Sankirtana, a performing art that includes drumming and singing, from India. 

Other dance forms, however, even if they are officially recognised as heritage from their country of origin, are practised and enjoyed all over the world. For example, flamenco from Spain and tango, from Argentina and Uruguay, have a very international dimension. Dance is a very complex phenomenon, which involves culture, traditions, the use of human bodies, artefacts (such as costumes and props), as well as a specific use of music, space and sometimes light. As a result, a lot of tangible and intangible elements are combined within dance, making it a challenging but extremely interesting type of heritage to safeguard.

Digital heritage

Digital heritage is a representation of heritage in the digital realm.

Digital intangible heritage

Digital intangible heritage is a sub-category of Intangible Cultural Heritage.

Oral continuity

Albanian polyphonic folk group wearing qeleshe and fustanella in Skrapar

Intangible cultural heritage is passed orally within a community, and while there may be individuals who are known tradition bearers, ICH is often broader than one individual's own skills or knowledge. A 2006 report by the government of Newfoundland and Labrador said, regarding oral culture in their area, "The processes involved in the continuation of this traditional knowledge constitute one of the most interesting aspects of our living heritage. Each member of the community possesses a piece of the shared knowledge. Crucial knowledge is passed on during community activities, frequently without any conscious attention to the process."

Preservation

Prior to the UNESCO Convention, efforts had already been made by a number of states to safeguard their intangible heritage. Japan, with its 1950 Law for the Protection of Cultural Properties, was the first to introduce legislation to preserve and promote intangible as well as tangible culture: Important Intangible Cultural Properties are designated and "holders" recognized of these craft and performance traditions, known informally as Living National Treasures. Other countries, including South Korea (Important Intangible Cultural Properties of Korea), the Philippines, the United States, Thailand, France, Romania, the Czech Republic, and Poland, have since created similar programs.

In 2003 UNESCO adopted the Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage. This went into effect on 20 April 2006. The Convention recommends that countries and scholars develop inventories of ICH in their territory, as well as work with the groups who maintain these ICH to ensure their continued existences; it also provides for funds to be voluntarily collected among UNESCO members and then disbursed to support the maintenance of recognized ICH. UNESCO has also created other intangible culture programs, such as a list called Proclamation of Masterpieces of the Oral and Intangible Heritage of Humanity. This list began in 2001 with 19 items and a further 28 were listed in 2003 and another 43 in 2005. In part, the original list was seen as a way to correct the imbalance in the World Heritage List, since it excluded many Southern Hemisphere cultures which did not produce monuments or other physical cultural manifestations. It was superseded in 2008 by the UNESCO Intangible Cultural Heritage Lists

Recently there has been much debate over protecting intangible cultural heritage through intellectual property rights, as well as the desirability to do so through this legal framework and the risks of commodification derived from this possibility. The issue still remains open in legal scholarship.

By country


Rank Country Number of Intangible Cultural Heritage elements inscribed by UNESCO
1  China 40
2  Japan 21
3  South Korea 20
4  Spain 18
5  Croatia,  France,  Turkey 17
6  Mongolia 14
7  Azerbaijan,  Belgium,  India,  Iran 13
8  Vietnam 12
9  Peru 11
10  Colombia,  Indonesia,  Kazakhstan 10
11  Italy,  Mexico 9
12  Brazil,  Oman,  United Arab Emirates 8
13  Morocco,  Portugal,  Romania 7
14  Saudi Arabia 6

Ethnoscience

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
Ethnoscience has been defined as an attempt "to reconstitute what serves as science for others, their practices of looking after themselves and their bodies, their botanical knowledge, but also their forms of classification, of making connections, etc." (Augé, 1999: 118).

Origins

Ethnoscience has not always focused on ideas distinct from those of "cognitive anthropology", "component analysis", or "the New Ethnography"; it is a specialization of indigenous knowledge-systems, such as ethno-botany, ethno-zoology, ethno-medicine, etc. (Atran, 1991: 595). According to Scott Atran, ethnoscience looks at culture with a scientific perspective (1991: 650), although most anthropologists abhor this definition. Ethnoscience helps to understand how people develop with different forms of knowledge and beliefs, and focuses on the ecological and historical contributions people have been given (Atran, 1991: 650). Tim Ingold describes ethnoscience as a cross-discipline (2000: 160). He writes that ethnoscience is based on increased collaboration between social sciences and the humanities (e.g., anthropology, sociology, psychology, and philosophy) with natural sciences such as biology, ecology, or medicine (Ingold, 2000: 406-7). At the same time, ethnoscience is increasingly transdisciplinary in its nature (Ingold, 2000: 407).

Of course, naturally over time, the ways in which data has been collected and studied has changed and the field has evolved, becoming more detailed and specific (Urry, 1972: 45). The ideas, mechanics, and methods of ethnoscience evolved from something else - a combination of several things. This pretext amalgamation of theories, processes, and –isms led to the evolution of today's ethnoscience.

Early approaches

Early on, Franz Boas established cultural relativism as an approach to understanding indigenous scientific practices (Uddin, 2005: 980). Cultural relativism identifies people's differences and shows how they are a result of the social, historical, and geographical conditions (Uddin, 2005: 980). Boas is known for his work in Northern Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada, working with the Kwakwaka'wakw Indians, which is where he established the importance of culture (Uddin, 2005: 980). Lévi-Strauss' structuralism was a strong contributor to the ideas of ethnoscience (Uddin, 2005: 980). It, itself, was the leading idea of providing structure to the research and a guide to organizing and relating different cultures. "Ethnoscience refers to a 'reduction of chaos' achieved by a particular culture, rather than to the 'highest possible and conscious degree' to which such chaos may be reduced;" basically, the ethnoscience of a society creates its culture (Sturtevant, 1964: 100). Much of the influence of anthropology, e.g., geographical determinism, was through the contributions of Jean Bodin (Harris, 1968: 42). In his text, he tried to explain why "northern people were faithful, loyal to the government, cruel, and sexually uninterested, compared to why southern people were malicious, craft, wise, expert in science but ill-adapted to political activity (Harris, 1968: 52)." The Greek historian, Polybius, asserted "we mortals have an irresistible tendency to yield to climatic influences; and to this cause, and no other, may be traced the great distinctions that prevail among us in character, physical formation, complexion, as well as in most of our habits…" (quoted in Harris, 1968: 41).

Another aspect of anthropology prior to ethnoscience is enculturation. Newton and Newton described enculturation as a process whereby the novice, or "outsider", learns what is important to the "insider" (1998). Marvin Harris writes, "One of [enculturation's] most important technical expressions is the doctrine of 'psychic unity,' the belief that in the study of sociocultural differences, hereditary (genetic) differences cancel each other out, leaving 'experience' as the most significant variable" (Harris, 1968: 15). This is one of the many starts of people opening up to the idea that just because people are different, doesn't mean they are wrong in their thinking. Harris describes how religious beliefs hinder and affect the progress of anthropology and ethnography. The moral beliefs and restrictions of religion fought against anthropological ideas, possibly due to (especially at the time) to the newly hyped idea of evolutionism and Darwinism (Harris, 1968). 

Bronislaw Malinowski was one of many who contributed heavily to the precursor of ethnoscience. His earlier work brought attention to sociological studies; his earliest publication focused on a family in Australia, using a sociological study perspective (Harris, 1968: 547). After the First World War, anthropological work was at a stand still; nothing had evolved, if not regressed (Urry, 1972: 54). This allowed him to start from scratch, and rebuild his ideas and methods (Harris, 1968: 547).

Later, however, Malinowski branched out to political evolution during World War II. The period after World War II is what led to ethnoscience; anthropologists learned their skills could be applied to problems that were affecting modern societies (Mead, 1973: 1). Malinowski said "… with his tables of kinship terms, genealogies, maps, plans and diagrams, proves an extensive and big organization, shows the contribution of the tribe, of the clan, of the family, and he gives a picture of the natives subjected to a strict code of behavior and good manners, to which in comparison the life at the Court of Versailles or Escurial was free and easy" (1922: 10). After World War II, there was an extreme amount of growth in the anthropological field, not only with research opportunities but academically, as well (Mead, 1973: 2). 

The anthropologist Robin Horton, who taught at several Nigerian universities, considered the traditional knowledge of indigenous peoples as incorporated within conceptual world views that bear certain similarities to, and differences from, the modern scientific worldview. Like modern science, traditional thought provides a theoretical structure that "places things in a causal order wider than that provided by common sense" (Horton, 1967, p. 53). In contrast to modern science, he saw traditional thought as having a limited awareness of theoretical alternatives and, consequently, displaying "an absolute acceptance of the established theoretical tenets" (Horton, 1967, pp. 155–6).

There are dozens, if not hundreds, of related methods and processes that preceded ethnoscience. Ethnoscience is just another way to study the human culture and the way people interact in society. Taking a look at the ideas and analyses prior to ethnoscience can help understand why it was developed in the first place. Although, it is not widely used and there is criticism on both ends, ethnoscience allows for a more comprehensive way to collect data and patterns of a people. This is not to say the process is its best or that there will be nothing better. That is the best part: everything evolves, even thought. Just as the ideas did in the past, they can improve over time and regress over time but change is inevitable.

Development

Ethnoscience is a new term and study that came into anthropological theory in the 1960s. Often referred to as "indigenous knowledge", ethnoscience introduces a perspective based on native perceptions. It is based on a complete emic perspective, which excludes all observations, interpretations and or any personal notions belonging to the ethnographer. The taxonomy and classification of indigenous systems, to name a few, used to categorize plants, animals, religion and life is adapted from a linguistic analysis. The concept of "Native Science" is also related to the understanding the role of the environment intertwined with the meaning humans place upon their lives. Understanding the language and the native people's linguistic system is one method to understand a native people's system of knowledge of organization. Not only is there categorization for things pertaining to nature and culture thought language, but more importantly and complex is the relationship between environment and culture. Ethnoscience looks at the intricacies of the connection between culture and its surrounding environment. There are also potential limitations and shortcomings in interpreting these systems of knowledge as a dictation of culture and behavior. 

Since an ethnographer is not able to physically enter inside an indigenous person's mind, it is essential to not only create a setting or question-answer format to understand perspective but to analyze semantics and word order of given answer to derive an emic understanding. The main focus on a particular component of the languages is placed on its lexicon. The terms "etic" and "emic" are derived from the linguistic terms of "phonetic" and "phonemic". 

As introduced by Gregory Cajete, some limitations the concept of indigenous knowledge, is the potential to bypass non-indigenous knowledge as pertinent and valuable. The labels of "indigenous" are overly accepted by those who seek more support by outsiders to further their cause. There might also be an unequal distribution of knowledge amongst a tribe or peoples. There is also the idea that culture is bound by environment. Some theorists conclude that indigenous people's culture is not operated by mental concentrations but solely by the earth that surrounds them. Some theorists go the extent to state that biological processes are based upon the availability, of lack thereof, environmental resources. The methods for sustainability are founded through the workings of the land. These techniques are exercised from the basis of tradition. The importance of the combination of ecological process, social structures, environmental ethics and spiritual ecology are crucial to the expression of the true connection between the natural world and "ecological consciousness".

The origin of Ethnoscience began between the years 1960 to 1965; deriving from the concept of "ethno- + science". Ethno- a combining form meaning "race", "culture", "people", used in the formation of compound words: ethnography. The two concepts later emerged into "ethno-science". The origin of the word 'science' involves the empiric observation of measurable quantities and the testing of hypotheses to falsify or support them. "Ethnoscience refers to the system of knowledge and cognition typical of a given culture...to put it another way a culture itself amounts to the sum of a given society's folk classifications, all of that society's ethnoscience, its particular ways of classifying its material and social universe" (Sturtevant 1964: 99–100). The aim of ethnoscience is to gain a more complete description of cultural knowledge. Ethnoscience has been successfully used on several studies of given cultures relating to their linguistics, folk taxonomy, and how they classify their foods, animals and plants.

Ethnolinguistics

Ethnoscience is the examination of the perceptions, knowledge, and classifications of the world as reflected in their use of language, which can help anthropologists understand a given culture. By using an ethnographic approach to studying a culture and learning their lexicon and syntax they are able to gain more knowledge in understanding how a particular culture classifies its material and social universe. In addition, this approach "adopted provides simultaneously a point at which the discipline of linguistics, or at least some of its general attitudes, may sensibly be used in anthropology and as a means of gaining insight not only into the nature of man but also into the nature of culture" (Videbeck and Pia, 1966).

Researchers can use linguistics to study what a given culture considers important in a given situation or unforeseen event, and can rank those potential situations in terms of their likelihood to recur. In addition, "understanding the contingencies is helpful in the task of comprehending folk taxonomies on the one hand, and, on the other, an understanding of the taxonomy is required for a full scale appreciation of criteria considered relevant in a given culture (Videbeck and Pia, 1966). 

Taxonomy and classification

Ethnoscience can be used to analyze the kinship terminology of a given culture, using their language and according to how they view members of their society. Taxonomies "are models of analysis whose purpose is the description of particular types of hierarchical relationships between members of a given set of elements" (Perchonock and Werner, 1969). For example, in our society we classify family groups by giving members the title of father, mother, sister, daughter, brother, son, grandfather, grandmother, etc.

System of classification – among cultures

Ethnoscience deals with how a given culture classifies certain principles in addition to how it is express through their language. By understanding a given culture through how they view the world, anthropologists attempt to eliminate any bias through translation as well as categorized their principles in their own ways. "The new methods, which focus on the discovery and description of folk systems, have come to be known as Ethnoscience. Ethnoscience analysis has thus far concentrated on systems of classification within such cultural and linguistic domains as colors, plants, and medicines" (Perchonock and Werner, 1969). An ethnoscientific approach can be used to better understand a given culture and their knowledge of their culture. Using an ethnographic approach can help anthropologists understand how that given culture views and categorizes their own foods, animal kingdom, medicines, as well as plants.

Contemporary research

Ethnoscience can be effectively summed up as a classification system for a particular culture in the same way that a botanist would use a taxonomic system for the classification of plant species. Everything from class levels, food consumption, clothing, and material culture objects would be subjected to a taxonomic classification system. In essence, ethnoscience is a way of classifying cultural systems in a structured order to better understand the culture. The roots of ethnoscience can be traced back to influential anthropologists such as Franz Boas, Bronislaw Malinowski, and Benjamin Whorf who attempted to understand other cultures from an insider's perspective. Ward Goodenough is accredited for bringing ethnoscience to the stage when he define cultural systems of knowledge by stating:
"A societies culture consists of whatever it is one has to know or believe in order to operate in a manner acceptable to its members. Culture is not a material phenomenon; it does not consist of things, behavior, or emotions. It is rather an organization of these things. It is the form of things that people have in mind, their models for perceiving, relating, and otherwise interpreting them."
(Goodenough 1957:167)
In order to properly put ethnoscience in context we must first understand the definition of ethnoscience. it is defined as "an attempt at cultural description from a totally emic perspective (a perspective in ethnography that uses the concepts and categories that are relevant and meaningful to the culture that is insider analysis) standpoint, this eliminating all of the ethnographer's own categories" (Morey and Luthans 27). Ethnoscience is also a way of learning and understanding how an individual or group perceive their environment and how they fit in with their environment as reflected in their own words and actions.

Ethnoscience has many techniques when applied to an emic perspective. Ethnosemantics, ethnographic semantics, ethnographic ethnoscience, formal analysis, and componential analysis are the terms that apply to the practice of ethnoscience. Ethnosemantics looks at the meaning of words in order to place them in context of the culture being studied. It allows for taxonomy of a certain part of the culture being looked at so that there is a clear breakdown which in turn leads to a deeper understanding of the subject at hand. Ethnographic semantics are very similar to cognitive anthropology in that its primary focus is the intellectual and rational perspectives of the culture being studied. Ethnographic semantics specifically looks at how language is used throughout the culture. Lastly, ethnographic ethnoscience is related to ethnosemantics such that, it uses a taxonomic system to understand how cultural knowledge is accessible through language. Ethnographic ethnoscience uses similar classification systems for cultural domains like ethnobotany and ethnoanatomy. Again, ethnoscience is a way of understanding a how a culture sees itself through its own language. Understanding the cultural language allows the ethnographer to have a deeper and more intimate understanding of the culture.

Butane

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia ...