The New York Times published on article titled “Think You’re Smarter Than Animals? Maybe Not” in the Sunday Review section on August 21, 2011.  In addition to offering insights on chimp and bird cognition, the authors, Alexandra Horowitz and Ammon Shea recap an article, “Do sheep (Ovis aries) categorize plant species according to botanical family?” by researchers Cecile Ginane and Bertrand Dumont, which appeared in the journal Animal Cognition (2011).  The researchers fed 12 lambs a legume (followed by an adulterant, lithium chloride) and a grass (with no such adulterant).  To quote the Times:

“After learning that eating sainfoin [Onobrychis vicifolia, the legume], but not fescue [Festuca arundinacea, the grass], was followed by a stomachache, the lambs knew to pick cocksfoot [another grass] over alfalfa [another legume] when given the choice in the future.  Have no idea what this means?  In non-lamb terms, if a pasture legume caused indigestion… but a grass found in pastures did not, the lambs, when facing a later choice between a different legume and a different grass, opted for the grass over the legume.  In other words, the lambs demonstrated an ability to form a generalization about the relative digestibility of families of plants.”

Wow.

Pavlov’s dog taught us that animals (at least canids) learn to modify their behavior (well, maybe not my dogs…) as a result of the positive or negative results of that behavior.  In other words, push the lever with your nose and get a treat?  Keep pushing!  Or, press the lever and get an electric shock?  Well, shoot, let’s not do that again!  But this lamb result is much more interesting.  Here, a bad outcome resulting from a particular behavior is learned and generalized:  that plant gave me a stomachache; therefore, I will not eat that plant or plants like it.  How do they know that plant species B (alfalfa) is “like” that disgusting plant species A (sainfoin)?  What does “like” mean to a lamb, anyway?

Well, Ginane and Dumont do pose thusly this very question in the abstract of their paper:  “…the question now is to identify which specific plant characteristics or functional traits the animals rely on in order to form categories.”

A little historical perspective…

Human beings excel at naming things.  For thousands of years, people have named stars and constellations and wild edible plants and prey species and the types of rocks good for arrow and spear-tip making and who knows what else.  This is about the thing.  We also discriminate.  This prey species tastes better or is more nutritious than that prey species.  This is a comparison between or among things.  We also bucketize or classify.  This prey species and that prey species are pretty much the same in some way that is important to us.  Let’s call these two species and others like them “antelope”.  This is about groups of things.

In our never-ending quest to intellectually organize our natural world in ways that are useful to us, we ask ourselves, “How do we place newly seen or discovered species in the right buckets?”  This is the question that led to the development of modern taxonomic science.  I offer that the broad application and refinement of binomial nomenclature (i.e. Genus species) and dichotomous keys (“if it has heart-shaped leaves, then it is a so-and-so and, if not, then it is not a so-and-so” and so on until a unique species is revealed by the key in a process called identification) was propelled vastly forward by the discovery of thousands upon thousands of new species in the 16th through 18th centuries by expeditions under sovereign sponsorship.  This rapid evolution in the tools we employed to assist us in categorizing the avalanche of newly discovered living things culminated in a veritable orgy of taxonomic classification in the mid-18th century by Carl Linnaeus (1707 – 1778) and others.

SIDEBAR:  Linnaeus, in fact, was so prolific in his taxonomic assignations that his full name is rarely used after a scientific binomial.  A simple “L” suffices to let us know that Linnaeus named it.  Indeed, several species of the alfalfa genus, Medicago, were originally described by Linnaeus, including Medicago sativa, which is the very species avoided in the Ginane-Dumont study by lambs upset by their prior encounter with “tainted” sainfoin.

OK.  But how did Linnaeus – or anyone else — know what name to give a plant or animal?

At first, taxonomists looked at gross morphological characteristics.  In a pre-Mendelian (see below) world where genes were unknown, the number of petals and flower symmetry and type of leaf and a very long list of other factors were used to differentiate plant species on the basis of their expressed physical traits.

SIDEBAR:  At the end of the day, this phenotypic approach proved a not-too-shabby way to classify plants and animals:  a remarkably high degree of correlation exists between the organization of taxa 250 years ago and the organization of taxa today, the latter based on inexpressably more sophisticated biochemical and genetic analyses.  After all, an oak is observably a member of the genus Quercus — however much various oak species may hybridize — and a larkspur species is, by and large, observably a member of the genus Delphinium.  This was true in 1750 and is true today.

Then, with improvements in the microscope, invented and first used to study single-celled organisms by Antonie Philips van Leeuwenhoek (1632 – 1723), cyto-morphological factors were added to the list of traits used to differentiate and classify living things.

A number of analytical techniques important to taxonomy were first developed in the mid- to late-19th century and refined in the early 20th.  These included chromatography techniques used to separate various biochemicals, thus aiding the identification of compounds specific to or in concentrations indicative of particular taxa, and karyotyping, or the creation and examination of photomicrographs which show an organism’s complement of chromosomes and display differences in length, banding patterns and other morphological characteristics which are useful in distinguishing taxa.  The application of these tools helped us change, refine or confirm our prior assessments of biological “closeness”.

Although the field of genetics began with the classic inheritance experiments conducted by Gregor Johann Mendel (1822 – 1884) on his celebrated pea plants (nota bene:  peas are legumes), it was not until Watson and Crick published their seminal paper elucidating the structure of DNA (in the journal Nature on April 25th, 1953) that the stage was set for the development over the next several decades of an arsenal of very powerful analytical technologies, including gene sequencing.  At this point, phylogeneticists were able to get to the crux of the matter and evaluate the core material of heredity — even down to a level of base pair by base pair precision.  Scientists found that mitochondrial DNA, in particular, was useful in assessing evolutionary relationships.  Taxonomy, or the classification of living things from Kingdom to species, became much less speculative; scientists could reproducibly demonstrate evolutionary relationships and estimate the time of evolutionary divergence based on genetic isolation.

Back to our lambs…

Did they know that alfalfa is in the same family as sainfoin because of morphological similarity?  Was it that the two plants “look” similar and therefore this new one is likely to be as upsetting to me as that last one?  This would imply some ability to recognize patterns such as leaf shape.  Well, both have purplish flowers, although the morphology of the flowering heads is different.  Sainfoin has pinnate leaves with many leaflets on each side of the leaf’s rachis or stem.  Alfalfa’s leaves have but three leaflets.  Nevertheless, these two members of the Fabaceae or pea family are morphologically more similar to each other than either is to the grasses used in the study.

Is it possible, however, that the lambs were able to throw the two leguminous species into the same bucket on the basis of some ability to assess biochemical similarity?  Did the species taste similar?  Taste and smell of course are biochemical and neurological phenomena.  Or were they able to discern higher protein concentrations in these nitrogen-fixing species, both of which are used as high-quality forage for livestock?  And if the latter, how was this protein “assay” accomplished?

SIDEBAR:  Sheep love alfalfa.  Indeed, at Lava Lake, we have to be careful not to allow too much consumption of lush alfalfa in our pastures to avoid bloat which can be fatal.  Even alfalfa aftermath, dry and yellow-brown in the fields in October, has the potential to induce pregnancy toxemia in bred ewes, which is a serious matter.  Sheep also like the new tender leaves of native browse species.  In a wide-ranging conversation with Kurt Pregitzer, Dean of the College of Natural Resources and Thomas L. Reveley Professor of Forest Ecology at the University of Idaho last month at Lava lake Ranch, we discussed the propensity of wild ungulates to eat these young leaves preferentially in season.  Scientists have shown that young leaves have higher nitrogen concentrations; that they would makes sense, of course, since these leaves are growing and need nitrogen to synthesize proteins to build out the cellular infrastructure required for photosynthesis.  Lambs need nitrogen, too.  At the end of six or eight months of life they can weigh in excess of 150 pounds.  In a lean, grass-fed lamb, that’s a lot of protein.

Are the study lambs members of the Linnaean school of morphological classification or are they biochemical taxonomists that assess the chemical products of gene expression by taste or other biological assay?  Or is their ability to classify plants, at the family level, due to some other unknown capability?

I do not know the answers to these questions.  I do know that my appreciation of our ovine friends is enhanced by the results of this most interesting study.  The list of possible follow-on investigations is long and intriguing.  I’d really like to know, for example, if elk, subjected to the same experimental protocol, would behave in the same manner.  Perhaps our wild ungulate friends are similarly endowed with what I had thought until I read the article was a peculiarly human ability.

Thanks to Kelly Cash for calling my attention to the article in the New York Times and to Pete Cenarrusa for another engaging discussion of sheep herbivory.

Brian Bean

POSTSCRIPT:

Avoiding toxic browse species…

Sheep will typically but not unerringly avoid toxic browse species in a rangeland environment.

On the range, one species of concern is California false hellebore (Veratrum californicum var. californicum).  I note that the ubiquitous Linnaeus is credited with naming the Veratrum genus.  This species and its congener, green false hellebore (Veratrum viride), with which it appears to hybridize, are known by a number of other common names such as skunk cabbage, cow cabbage, Indian poke, corn lily and wild corn (by Basques in Idaho).  The genus Veratrum, which until recently was comfortably ensconced in the Lily (Liliaceae) family, was recently re-assigned to the Melanthiaceae, suggesting that lambs may not doubt their own taxonomic determinations, but we doubt ours.

If ingested in sufficient quantity by a pregnant ewe at precisely the right point in gestation (14 days), California false hellebore, at least, may cause developmental defects in the lamb fetus resulting in a condition known as Monkey Faced Lamb Syndrome.  I note that the principal consequences of ingestion are borne by the offspring, not the mother.  I also note that one of the more potent teratogenic alkaloids present in false hellebore, the aptly named cyclopamine, is under consideration as a cancer-fighting agent for humans.  This is indeed interesting, as one of the many, many uses to which the plant was put by First Nations peoples was to commit suicide.

Monkey Faced Lamb Syndrome is very rare at Lava Lake – even though false hellebore is found in some of our riparian areas, the ewes appear to avoid it.

Finally, although both California false hellebore and green false hellebore occur in Idaho, the latter in the northern part of the Gem State and the former in the south, the distribution map for California false hellebore published by the Natural Resources Conservation Service of the U.S. Department of Agriculture does not show the plant to exist in Blaine or Butte counties in the heart of Lava Lake’s operating area.  This despite the fact that I and two dozen others saw it at Old Pete’s Corral in upper Fish Creek on the Idaho Wool Growers Association Range Tour hosted by Lava Lake in July.  I must send a note to amend the database.

Gustatory preferences…

Sheep exhibit distinct gustatory preferences.  They will preferentially consume “ice cream” species like yellow lupine, filaree and certain species of sunflowers.

Indeed, years of overgrazing will first affect the percentage representation of preferred species in the mix of species comprising a vegetation type and then, with significant continuing pressure, eradicate one or more of these preferred browse species in a grazing area or nearly so.

Healthy rangelands require not only representation but mix.

Clearly, sheep possess discriminating palates.

SIDEBAR:  Sheep and mule deer are browsers, focusing their attention on forbs and shrubs, while elk and cattle share a similar regard for grasses – although elk are quite delighted to eat alfalfa, doubtless due to the protein concentration, and will certainly hedge willows and eat aspen leaves.

At Lava Lake, we are very focused on water availability, both for irrigation and for natural forage production. The more we study water, the more complex water becomes. Variables of interest include:

Phase:

Water or snow?

If snow, what is the temperature of the ground beneath? Percolation is impeded in the early spring if the ground is frozen; groundwater recharge is adversely affected; and the risk of erosive flows in stream channels is increased along with out-of-bank flooding. With less water in the top 8 – 12 inches of soil, perennials and, particularly, annuals may start the season well only to flag in time, resulting in less consumable forage and, in extreme cases, poor seed production, which likely negatively impacts annuals the next year as the in-soil seed bank is depleted.

What is the temporal temperature profile each spring? Two weeks of hot weather can send enormous quantities of snow-melt water down-system, plus suspended solids that adversely affect water quality and the native fishery. Heavy spring flows overwhelm the ability of our small in-stream reservoirs to capture the target percentage of such flows and the balance is “lost” — in our case, into the lava, to be expelled hundreds of years later from huge springs on the Snake River. You say, “Lost? Surely downstream use is important!” and I agree, but massive flows can overwhelm the downstream system as well in a typical stream and all of the water that rushes through is then not available for riparian vegetative growth or other natural processes for the remainder of the season.

Concentrating runoff in high peak flows can damage beaver dams, potentially mobilizing the sediments impounded behind these amazing structures and sending plumes of suspended solids downstream. Worse, the beneficial effects of soil building behind beaver dams — filling erosion channels and raising the water table, creating areas of natural sub-irrigation that extend further laterally from the stream course — can be undone in a season. This is particularly true in our landscape where beavers seem to come and go, sometimes with a few years intervening before recolonization. No engineers, no engineering marvels! Or at least no “emergency services” available from our energetic friends to repair a breached dam. If a beaver dam has been in place for a long time and a mature plant community has grown up on it and in and around the pond, a sudden de-watering spells doom. We’re left with a silty mess — at least until the system re-stabilizes.

Timing:

The timing of snowfall is much less important than the quantity (in liquid water-equivalent inches to normalize for moisture content). The timing of rainfall, however, is quite critical, particularly in the late spring and early summer. Everything is soggy in March and April from the winter snows; rain is less critical during this period. Rainfall in May and June — and, if we’re extremely lucky, July — is very important. Once the plant communities start to crank out biomass, we’d like to see them continue to do so. Only well-spaced rains of consequence assure this.

In the spirit that nothing is as simple as it seems (or, I sometimes think, should be!), I hasten to add that torrential rains (and associated winds) can also produce the adverse effects described above, can destroy crops, particularly barley (which we seldom grow but which is an important crop in our area) by beating it down or blowing it over when the seed heads are nearing maturity and alfalfa hay (certainly if mown hay is sufficiently drenched before baling). Spring rains (as opposed to summer thundershowers) are typically brought by storm systems. These storm systems are typically associated with cooler air. Cooler temperatures retard photosynthesis. The storms themselves of course involve clouds which diminish the incidence of solar photonic energy, thus also retarding photosynthesis and therefore plant growth and forage availability.

photo by Nancy Farese

A Good Year:

A great year involves an end-of-winter 120% snow pack, controlled melt with percolation and recharge, short periods (five to 10 days) of warmth interspersed among two-day light-to-moderate rains in the late spring and early summer (covering most of our operating area as opposed to thunderstorms which may drench a few square miles but leave surrounding areas parched).

This year, in contrast, we had an approximately 140% snowpack, a late spring, cold weather, many rains and a late start to plant growth which was followed, finally, by an epic, spectacular, I-hope-to-see-it-again-in-my-lifetime plant growth blitz that produced grasses more than five and six and seven feet tall across countless acres. And yet, our lamb weights were down slightly from last year. Why? Well, the forage wasn’t as well developed early in the season because of the cool temperatures and relative lack of sunlight and the moisture content of the myriad forbs — which are preferred by sheep — and the native grasses was higher than optimal, resulting in lower protein content as a percentage of wet forage weight. It’s also true that lambs in cold weather (when they’re typically smaller and rely more on mothers’ milk) spend a greater portion of their metabolic energy budget keeping warm and less on growing. At the other end of the spectrum, really hot weather causes lambs to “go off their feed” in the same way that you and I wouldn’t want to eat a huge pot roast when it’s 110 degrees outside. Plus hot weather brings gnats which lambs find irritating.

Risk:

Ah, risk! Water, if all goes well, promotes and maintains our healthy ecosystems. Lava Lake’s stocking density is set well below the sustainable level in a draught year. This year there is a fantastic surplus of consumable biomass. We leave it in place with a smile and a tip of the hat to Mother Nature. That biomass, however, drying now in the heart of summer, constitutes a real fire hazard come late August and September, two months that see scores of thunderstorms in South-Central Idaho. Well, thunderstorms mean lightning and lightning means fire. One thunderstorm can ignite several. And fires require fuel. This year, we have fuel in abundance.

The Real Deal:

I’m reminded of a comment my good friend Jim Bennetts made when we were discussing the water rights pertinent to an acquisition Lava Lake made many years ago. Jim, the king of sagebrush lawyers in my critical estimation and a man I greatly admire, sized up the water situation on the subject property and said to me, in his customary unhurried drawl, “Brian, you have excellent water rights. You just don’t have excellent water.” And you know, he was right! Believe me, I kept Jim’s words in mind as we expanded the operation over the next several years.

And On it Goes:

Water. Fire. Risk. A complex landscape with dramatic and unpredictable weather. Fascinating and occasionally terrifying. As every farmer knows, the crop isn’t harvested and delivered until it is.

Every year is different. We do something right. We misjudge. We learn something new. I wouldn’t give it up for the world!

photo by Glenn Oakley

Idaho’s Bounty’s second annual locavore fest is about to wrap up. A number of Wood River Valley restaurants have been serving up fabulous local food, and some have been featuring Lava Lake Lamb.

Tonight is the final night of Ketchum Grill’s Locavore Week. All of their entrees are $16.91 or less, in honor of their 19th anniversary (Congratulations!). In addition to braised goat and grilled steak, they are offering braised Lava Lake Lamb shanks.

CK’s will wrap up the festival from May 7 – May 13th. They are featuring beef brisket braised in Bellevue  root beer,  and Lava Lake rack of lamb.

Support local producers and our wonderful local restaurants! This is your chance to fill up your punchcard and be entered into a drawing for a gift certificate to Idaho’s Bounty (see the Idaho’s Bounty site for details). Happy Eating!

In honor of (almost) Earth Day, the PBS program POV will be screening the documentary Food Inc on Wednesday night at 9 p.m. This must see film probes deep into industrial agriculture and the many emerging problems with our nation’s food culture. Check out the trailer below:

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OqzjC-ENrl8&hl=en_US&fs=1&]

To celebrate, PBS is encouraging its viewers to invite over friends and host a potluck for the viewing. They’ve compiled a guide to hosting, which includes ideas on everything from discussion to recipes. The show is even giving away free gifts to participants, so sign up.

If you miss tomorrow’s event, Food Inc will be available to watch online from the 22nd  to the 29th, so encourage everyone to watch this important film and follow up by supporting sustainable agriculture!

Signs of spring are popping up all over the Wood River Valley; it’s 65 degrees, shoots are emerging from the ground, and Idaho’s Bounty is selling more than squash and potatoes – greens are here!

In celebration of local food, Idaho’s Bounty is hosting its second annual locavore festival. Each week, an area restaurant that prioritizes local food will be featured. Restaurants will offer a special local menu for the week made with fresh, sustainably produced food from Idaho’s Bounty Co-op.

Up first, chef Tyler Stokes of Globus will be serving  Idaho black beluga lentil salad and braised organic Lave Lake Lamb massaman curry. Both sound delicious and we hope to try them. We’ll keep you updated on the festival as different restaurants are featured.

Ciro, Globus, Glow, Ketchum Grill, and CKs will all be featured over the next few weeks. Punchcards will be available at each restaurant, and with three punches you can be entered into a drawing for a $35 gift certificate good at Idaho’s Bounty Co-op. If you get punches from all 5 restaurants,  you’ll be entered to win a $55 gift certificate. Happy locavore dining!

Some cooks wish that lambs came with one leg and four racks. As it turns out, this is not currently a possibility (although give scientists some time, and they may come up with some new solutions) and would probably hinder the lamb’s ability to walk. Lambs are so much more than the rack, and this becomes clear when you butcher a whole lamb, as we did a couple of weeks ago. When you talk to your rancher, you see how much work goes into producing each animal, and when you see the whole animal, you understand the value in each ounce of meat. Luckily, there’s more and more talk about using the animal. Check out this video on a restaurant going through a whole cow once a week…

and read this article in Meatpaper. There’s even a book on the topic, The Whole Beast: Nose to Tail Eating. In an interview with Atlantic Food Editor, Corby Kummer, chef and owner of Blue Hill said,

I like the idea that when people order something, like a pork dish, or lamb dish, or chicken dish, that you aren’t just getting a chicken breast or a lamb tenderloin or a pork loin. That you’re getting all parts from the animal when you order it and that you really have no choice in that, because the farm gives us no choice in it. It’s a good way to look at the future of food. How do we take what our farm can provide and create a menu off of that, instead of the way most chefs think about creating a menu, which is, what do I want to cook with, what do I want to serve?

Using the whole animal is better for both the environment and your rancher. It also allows chefs to be more creative in their cooking. So consider buying a whole lamb next time you’re on our site. If you do, you’ll have plenty of resources to use, because as a follow up to our butchery class, we’ll work on a new blog segment, following us as we cook our way through a whole lamb. Check back soon for some new recipes.