[NatureNS] Barred Owl

Date: Sun, 09 Mar 2008 11:56:11 -0400
From: David & Alison Webster <dwebster@glinx.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:0.9.2) Gecko/20010726 Netscape6/6.1 (CPQCA3C01)
To: naturens@chebucto.ns.ca
References: <47CE5B6B.319.2C651926@heather.drope.ns.sympatico.ca> <cdbbab570803060754y5466e8cl1ae4bc4c674249b0@mail.gmail.com> <47D08A8F.40605@glinx.com> <cdbbab570803070432r29d69c56kfb83141b6c9f18b4@mail.gmail.com>
Precedence: bulk
Return-Path: <naturens-mml-owner@chebucto.ns.ca>
Original-Recipient: rfc822;"| (cd /csuite/info/Environment/FNSN/MList; /csuite/lib/arch2html)"

next message in archive
next message in thread
previous message in archive
previous message in thread
Index of Subjects

Index of Subjects
Hi All,            Mar 9, 2008
    In that, so far as I know, the initial stages of both decay and 
digestion are mediated by extracellular enzymes it would seem logical 
that tissues which decay more rapidly would also by digested more readily.

    In both cases, the initial stages involve the transformation of 
insoluble high molecular weight materials, that can not be absorbed, 
into soluble lower molecular weight materials that can be absorbed.

Yt, DW

Randy Lauff wrote:

> Having looked at a number of dead things in my life, one thing that is 
> certain in my mind is that brain rots much more quickly than muscle. 
> Whether this is the driving force behind the "eat it first" behaviour 
> or not, I don't know.
>
> On 06/03/2008, David & Alison Webster <dwebster@glinx.com 
> <mailto:dwebster@glinx.com> > wrote:
>
>     Hi All,                Mar 6, 2008
>        A pure guess, but I wonder if fresh brain tissue is more readily
>     digested than fresh (as opposed to decayed or cooked) muscle tissue.
>     Yt, DW
>
>
>
> Randy
> _________________________________
> RF Lauff
> Way in the boonies of
> Antigonish County, NS. 



next message in archive
next message in thread
previous message in archive
previous message in thread
Index of Subjects