Amelia Earhart to Her Former Flight Instructor Neta Snook 1929 … · Philadelphia Museum of Art:...

Amelia Earhart to Her Former Flight Instructor, Neta Snook, 1929

1

Amelia Earhart to Her Former Flight Instructor Neta Snook, 1929

This text is provided courtesy of the Gilder Lehrman Institute of American History.

The first decades of the twentieth century brought a golden age of aviation. During this exciting period, many pioneering women defied traditional female roles to become pilots. Amelia Earhart is the most famous of this group of aviatrixes, but Neta Snook, the woman who taught Earhart how to fly, is often overlooked.

Snook had been flying for four years, having made a living as a test pilot and a barnstormer, when she met Earhart in December 1920 at California’s Kinner Field, where Snook was a flight instructor. Snook later described her first impression of Earhart: “I’ll never forget the day she and her father came to the field. I liked her on sight.”1 On January 3, 1921, Earhart took her first flying lesson with Snook. Already equipped with an impressive knowledge of aviation and an eagerness to fly, Earhart became Snook’s most famous student.

The two women grew close and discussed not only aviation but also philosophical matters. In her autobiography, I Taught Amelia to

Fly (1974), Snook recounted an instance when Earhart, who was interested in world religions and cultures, had asked her to read the Koran. Snook refused, declaring that there was no mention of Mohammed in the Bible.2 The two women remembered their disagreements fondly rather than bitterly, however, and nearly a decade after they first flew together, Earhart sent this friendly letter to her former instructor remembering their time together. On January 26, 1929, Earhart wrote, “My dear Neta: It is long ago that we flew together at Kinner Field, California. Yes, I do remember discussions of the Koran, and cold boiled potatoes.”

1 [1] Neta Snook Southern. I Taught Amelia to Fly. (New York: Vantage Press, 1974), 101.

2 [2] Snook Southern, 105.

Neta Snook with plane, ca. 1920 (Gilder Lehrman Collection)

Amelia Earhart to Her Former Flight Instructor, Neta Snook, 1929

2

At the time this letter was written, Earhart was aviation editor at Cosmopolitan and was responsible for writing about the popularity and trends of aviation. She was involved in co‐founding the Ninety‐Nines, an organization of woman pilots still active today. Her career was full of “firsts”; she was the first woman passenger on a transatlantic flight, the first woman to fly solo across the Atlantic, and the first woman recipient of the flying cross. What would have been her greatest feat became her last adventure, however, as she set out to become the first person to fly around the world at the equator in 1937. Having completed 22,000 miles of the 27,000‐mile trip, Earhart and her navigator, Frederick Noonan, disappeared over the Pacific on July 2, 1937.

By the time of Earhart’s disappearance, Neta Snook Southern had been retired from flying for fifteen years. (She had left aviation in 1922 after her marriage to William Southern.) The two women never had the chance, as Earhart wrote in 1929, to “have a few words about the old days.” In 1977, forty years after Earhart’s disappearance and fifty‐five years after her own last flight, Snook Southern took to the air again when she was invited to pilot a replica of Charles Lindbergh’s Spirit of St. Louis.

TRANSCRIPT

January twenty‐sixth 1 9 2 9

My dear Neta:

It is long ago that we flew together at Kinner Field, California. Yes, I do remember discussions of the Koran, and cold boiled potatoes.

Flying has meant much to me, and I am happy in being associated with aviation in any capacity. Sometime our paths may cross again, and we may be able to have a few words about the old days.

Sincerely yours, Amelia Earhart

Blueprint of the Curtiss Jenny airplane, the type flown by Snook and Earhart during their lessons. (Gilder Lehrman Collection)

Amelia Earhart to Neta Snook Southern, January 6, 1929. (Gilder Lehrman Collection)

Celebration of the Wedding of Manohar and Madhumalati

Page From an Illustrated Manuscript of the Gulshan-i ‘Ishq (Rose Garden of Love)

This text and image are provided courtesy of the Philadelphia Museum of Art.

1743

Opaque watercolor, gold, and ink on paper

14 x 10 inches (35.6 x 25.4 cm)

INDIA (ANDHRA PRADESH, PROBABLY HYDERABAD)

This painting comes from a manuscript of the Gulshan-i ‘Ishq (GOOL-shan-ee-ayshq) (Rose Garden of Love), a romantic tale composed by the poet Nusrati in 1657–58. Although written

for a Muslim ruler, the Gulshan-i ‘Ishq was actually inspired by a Hindu folk story. The manuscript, which boasts ninety-seven exquisite illustrations, was made in 1743 for a royal patron.

The main story of this long poem is the meeting, separation, longing, and marriage of Prince Manohar and Princess Madhumalati (mad-who-MAL-ah-tee). This section of the poem describes the couple’s wedding celebration, an event that traditionally lasts several days in India. The illustration shows some of the festivities leading up to the wedding ceremony. In the lower left, several men play horns and drums. Women dance to the music, their hands and feet painted with henna. Facing them, a group of people carry a colorful silk canopy and balance gifts on their heads. Many people wear bright, festive clothing for the occasion. In the background, men on elephants and horses march in procession, playing musical instruments and carrying red banners. Fireworks explode around them, lighting up the night sky.

The lines of text at the top are written in Deccani Urdu, the language of the Muslim elite in this part of India, and are read from right to left. Here, the poet uses the imagery of light, in particular the sun and moon, to refer to Manohar and Madhumalati. Just as the light of the day meets the light of the night, the bride and groom will soon meet on their wedding day to join as husband and wife.

Philadelphia Museum of Art: The Philip S. Collins Collection, gift of Mrs. Philip S. Collins in memory of her husband, 1945-65-22 (page 410)

Dancing Ganesha

1

Dancing Ganesha


c. 750

Sandstone

Height: 50 inches (127 cm)

Indian Purchased with the New Members Fund,

1971, 1971‐154‐1

Dancing Ganesha

2

This is a sculpture of Ganesha (Guh‐NESH‐uh), a beloved Hindu god who is believed to bring good fortune and success in all daily activities. In India, people who visit temples often pray to Ganesha before they worship the main temple god or goddess. Ganesha is easy to recognize because he has an elephant’s head, a round belly, several arms, and is often depicted as having something sweet to eat. Although he is often shown sitting or standing, here he is dancing, which shows his joyful side. In some parts of India he has an adult’s body, in other parts, a child’s body. This image of him was carved from sandstone over a thousand years ago and was probably placed in the south exterior wall of a temple, which still exists in the city of Gwalior in north‐central India. Some parts of the sculpture surrounding the figure of Dancing Ganesha were broken a long time ago when it fell off of the temple. Have you noticed that both his tusks are missing? Ganesha is believed to have broken one of them off and thrown it at the moon because the moon laughed at his potbelly! In another story, his broken tusk is thought to be the pen used to help write the Mahabharata. This ancient Indian poem, about a war between cousins, describes every aspect of Hindu life and thought. Why does Ganesha have more than two arms? Hindu gods are often represented with multiple arms as a sign of their supernatural powers. Here, two of Ganesha’s arms accent the “S” curves of his dancing body: his upper‐right arm extends out from his shoulder as the hand points to his swaying trunk, echoing its graceful bend; his lower‐left arm leads our eyes down to the hip that juts out to the right. The hand of his lower‐right arm holds a large battle‐ax to protect his worshippers from trouble and to cut away bad thoughts. In his upper‐left hand Ganesha grasps a cone‐shaped object that has been interpreted in several different ways: it might be his broken tusk, or a daikon (large white radish)—a great treat for elephants! Like his father, Shiva, he wears a snake around his large belly. Have you noticed that Ganesha holds a round sweet cake (called a modaka) in the end of his trunk? Because he is dancing, his crown has shifted slightly to one side. On his feet are ankle bells, also worn by dancers and elephants in India. He dances on top of a flat pedestal decorated with petals of a lotus flower, a type of water lily. The lotus symbolizes the purity and divine energy of life because, although rooted in the mud of ponds and rivers, its flower rises up out of the water and opens, completely clean, each morning. Every aspect of Ganesha’s round, rhythmically swaying figure is full of such contrasts: he is both heavy and graceful, mischievous and serious, and he seems to embody deep wisdom as well as the joy of a young child.

Dancing Ganesha

3

ABOUT THE GOD GANESHA Ganesha is a Hindu god who loves to dance. His name means “Lord of the Ganas” (GAH‐nahz)—small, mischievous dwarfs with round bellies who serve Ganesha and his famous father, Shiva (SHE‐vah or SHIH‐vah). Shiva is one of the three great male gods of Hinduism (HIN‐doo‐ism). Today, Ganesha is worshipped widely by people of different faiths throughout India, Southeast Asia, and around the world. Also called the Lord of Beginnings and the Lord of Obstacles, Ganesha can create challenges, but even more, he can remove them or help people overcome them. People pray to Ganesha to bring them good luck, especially when starting something—such as a journey, a business, a marriage, or a new year—or when facing something difficult, like taking an exam or performing a dance. Ganesha is also known both as the Lord of the Harvest and the Lord of Learning and the Arts. His large elephant’s head symbolizes strength and wisdom. Indian rulers used elephants to win wars, build palaces, and show off their wealth in royal ceremonies. Ancient Indian poets compared elephants spraying water from their trunks to rumbling rain clouds. People today value elephants for their cooperative nature. In the wild they live in family groups headed by females and help one another when calves are born or when a group member is in danger. They also work hard for people to remove trees and do other construction work. There are many stories about why Ganesha has an elephant’s head. One explains how Ganesha’s mother, the goddess Parvati (PARH‐vah‐tee), created him to keep her company while her husband, Education | Shiva, was away from home. She formed Ganesha using clay from the riverbank or, some stories say, a skin softener made of tumeric (a yellow spice) that she scraped off her body. Parvati used her goddess powers to bring her son to life and was so delighted with him that she kept him always by her side. One day before her bath, she asked Ganesha to guard the doorway. When Shiva arrived home unexpectedly, he heard his wife in her bath and found a young stranger who would not let him in. Shiva became so angry that he cut off Ganesha’s head in a fit of rage! When Parvati heard all the commotion, she ran out to find that her son was dead. She explained to Shiva who Ganesha was, and Shiva promised that he would bring the boy back to life with the head of the next creature that came along—which happened to be an elephant! Parvati was happy and Shiva rewarded Ganesha by making him the leader of his army of ganas. Images of Ganesha have been placed above doorways ever since.

Dancing Ganesha

4

THE FESTIVAL OF GANESHA CHATURTHI There is a special festival in India dedicated to Ganesha during August and September called Ganesha Chaturthi (chah‐TOUR‐tee). Over one hundred years ago when the country was still under British colonial rule, an Indian freedom fighter promoted the festival to unite the Indian people through pride in their own culture. Today, millions of people celebrate for as many as ten days at home and in the streets. Families buy brightly painted clay sculptures of Ganesha for temporary shrines, which they create in the kitchen or living room. The sculptures are bathed with sacred oils and rubbed with vermilion (a red powder, called kumkum in India), then dressed and presented with rice, fruits, flowers, and lamps that provide sacred light. After these rituals, Ganesha is believed to inhabit the statues, and he is treated as an honored guest and worshipped each morning and evening. Communities in India also create public shrines with statues of Ganesha—some as tall as thirty feet—made of unfired clay by local sculptors. They may include his parents, or even feature Elvis and Madonna! The statues are paraded with music to public spaces where pujas (worship ceremonies) are held for crowds of devotees. On the last day of the festival, all the statues of Ganesha are brought to the sea (or nearby body of water), stripped of their flowers, and carried into the waves, where they dissolve and return to nature.

This sculpture is included in The Arts of Asia, a set of teaching posters and resource book produced by the Division of Education and made possible by a generous grant the from Delphi Financial Group and Reliance Standard Life Insurance Company.

Expedition to a Modern Pompeii

Expedition to a Modern Pompeii Museum Geologist on the Scene of a 1902 Disaster

This article is provided courtesy of the American Museum of Natural History.

On May 14, 1902, Museum geologist Edmund Otis Hovey boarded the U.S. cruiser Dixie, bound for the Caribbean. He had been sent by Museum President Morris K. Jesup to investigate volcanic eruptions that had killed nearly 30,000 people in less than 24 hours the previous week. The first came on the afternoon of May 7, when Mt. Soufrière, on the island of St. Vincent, erupted in a boiling mudflow of steam and ash, killing 1,565 people. The next morning, 75 miles to the north on Martinique, Mt. Pelée exploded in a cloud of hot gases, volcanic ash, and rocks. Traveling at a speed of 300 miles an hour, the searing mass rushed down the mountainside, incinerating everything in its path, including the picturesque seaside town of Saint‐Pierre and nearly all the ships in the harbor. Within two minutes, some 27,000 people were dead. On May 20, the day before Hovey’s arrival in Martinique, a second equally powerful eruption covered the now uninhabited town of Saint‐Pierre again. The scene he encountered defied words. “The devastation wrought by the eruption cannot be appreciated from a verbal description,” Hovey wrote in The American Museum Journal of 1902, “and even photographs do not convey an adequate idea of what has happened” to a city that had enjoyed a reputation as the Paris of the Caribbean. Once a hub of trade in rum, sugar, cocoa, and coffee, its boulevards lined with handsome homes and showy shops, Saint‐Pierre, as Hovey found it, was now a smoldering ruin with barely a brick left standing. Lying as the city did in a cul‐de‐sac in the path of incandescent volcanic discharge, Hovey wrote, Saint‐Pierre and its residents had been “as helpless as an animal in a trap.”

Left: Rubble covers a side street in northern Saint‐Pierre in 1902. Right: Museum geologist Edmund Hovey, second from right, at Mt. Soufrière volcano in 1902.


The eruptions were of a type called nuée ardente, French for “glowing cloud.” Magma or molten rock, supercharged with gases, is less dense than rock and so rises to the surface through cracks and crevices. If the gases can boil off gradually at the surface, the potential force is diffused, sometimes creating the effusive flow of lava we tend to associate with volcano eruptions. But in a nuée ardente, the gaseous magma is blocked and pressure builds until it is eventually released as a dense, swirling mass of hot gas, incandescent dust, and rock fragments known as a pyroclastic flow. The explosive cloud can first rise high into the air and then collapse downward, as Pliny the Younger observed in what is thought to be the earliest recorded description of a volcanic eruption. In letters written years after the AD 79 eruption of Vesuvius, the Roman magistrate gave a remarkably detailed description of what he had seen as an 18‐year‐old across the bay. Vesuvius is sited east of what is now Naples, Italy, and the AD 79 nuée ardente killed some 20,000 people in the towns of Pompeii and Herculaneum. Add water to the mix—as at Mt. Soufrière, which was known for its beautiful crater lake—and the result is the addition of a mudflow, or lahar. The mass of gaseous magma also can create chemical changes that eat away at rocks, weakening them, until the cloud of ash and gas blows out the mountainside before rushing fast and furiously downward. This was documented firsthand at Mount St. Helens in 1980 and is believed to have happened at Mt. Pelée in 1902. “This type of volcano is the most explosive, literally analogous to twisting off the top of a soda bottle,” explains geologist James Webster, curator in the Department of Earth and Planetary Sciences. “When the mountain is ripped open, the volcanic blast is faster and potentially more deadly because it has less distance to travel to reach the surface… What Hovey observed about trees at Mont Pelée is consistent with Mount St. Helens.” Hovey described an odd sight. “The line between scorched and unscorched areas was strikingly sharp,” he wrote. “In many places the line of demarcation passed through single trees, leaving one side scorched and brown while the other side remained as green as if no eruption had occurred.” During his Martinique expedition, Hovey also collected and sent back to the Museum invaluable specimens, molten household objects, pulverized street signs, and lumps of half‐melted lava—called “bread‐crust bombs” for their cracked tops— which had been thrown out of the volcano during the eruption. [A number of these artifacts are on view in the Museum’s special exhibition Nature’s Fury: The Science of Natural Disasters.]


Left: A stack of café glasses were fused together by the heat of the deadly volcanic cloud. Right: This “bread‐crust bomb” was formed when a partly molten mass of lava cooled and contracted causing the solid exterior to crack.

Left: Heat and pressure softened and twisted this champagne bottle. Right: A glass doorknob melted on one side, just as trees observed by Hovey were scorched on one side and, on the other, “green as if no eruption had occurred.”


At the time, volcanology was still in its infancy. A crude seismometer was first introduced in 1840, but even with that technology, scientists simply lacked a clear understanding of how volcanoes erupt. “Since that time we have learned much more about gases, the relationship between seismic activity and magma movement, even about gas opening the rock and providing a pathway for magma to follow,” says Dr. Webster. Hovey’s research was part of that long, steady progression toward a better understanding of volcanoes, of which better prediction is the goal and in which the Museum continues to play an important role. Webster, for example, has explored Vesuvius eight times and teaches a course in Naples every fall. The Museum’s collection of samples from Vesuvius is among the best in the world, after the University of Naples Federico II and the University of Pisa. With little knowledge of how volcanic eruptions occurred, the residents of Mt. Pelée woefully underestimated the risks of living in its vicinity and ignored signals that it was still active. Occasional spewings of steam and ash were taken less as a warning than an occasion for picnics near the mouth of the volcano. As J. Chatenay of Seaboard National Bank, who had lived in Saint‐Pierre until shortly before the 1902 eruption, told The World newspaper on May 10, 1902: “No one ever thought of fearing the volcano, which all thought to be extinct…The people wandered about by thousands, never dreaming that there was any danger.” Even ominous signs in the months and weeks before the May 8 eruption failed to raise adequate alarm. On April 23, earthquakes dislodged dishes from shelves in Saint‐Pierre. The next day, fine ash fell for two hours on a town nearby. On May 2, a lightning‐lit column of ash and fumes rose nearly two miles high above the mountain, and an inch of ash covered Saint‐Pierre. On May 5, a mudflow from the volcano killed 23 people north of the city, and a tsunami reached the harbor 15 minutes later. On May 6, the mountain flung huge molten rocks in the air. Given the state of the science in the 1900s, the people of Saint‐Pierre couldn’t possibly have foreseen what was to befall them. But even today, with better science to back up predictions, an estimated half a billion people live within range of an active volcano, including more than 4,000 townspeople of the rebuilt Saint‐Pierre and, perhaps more strikingly, roughly 4 million people who live in and around Naples. In fact, Naples recently built an emergency response hospital on the slopes of Vesuvius. “It’s a strange concept,” says Webster. “The first place you’d go is the first place that would be destroyed.” Bear in mind that as natural disasters go, the risks worldwide associated with earthquakes and hurricanes are orders of magnitude greater in loss of life and property damage than those


associated with volcanic eruptions. Earthquakes alone affect the lives of some five million people a year. And where volcanoes are being monitored, scientists can generally predict eruptions in advance. Still, the prospect of evacuating a population as dense as that around Vesuvius is daunting. In modern history, Vesuvius had relatively large eruptions in 1631 and 1944, with smaller ones in between—so it is by no means dead. But complicating the assessment of actual risk is the difficulty humans have appreciating geological timescales in which patterns are measured not in decades but in thousands and tens of thousands of years. In addition, even scientists disagree. Vesuvius operates on a very long cycle of major eruptions every 500 to 1,000 years, says Webster, and there is one camp that theorizes a large eruption is not imminent and another that believes Vesuvius could erupt catastrophically soon. Asked which side he falls on, he says, “I don’t know enough. But it definitely warrants heavy monitoring.” ThisreadingwasadaptedfromRotunda,themembermagazineoftheAmericanMuseumofNaturalHistory.Fall2014.

Questions: Expedition to a Modern Pompeii

© 2014 ReadWorks®, Inc. All rights reserved.

1

Name: Date: 1. Why did geologist Edmund Hovey travel to the Caribbean in May 1902?

A to investigate recent volcanic eruptions on the islands of St. Vincent and Martinique B to investigate the historic volcanic eruption of Mount Vesuvius C to try and predict when the next eruption of Mt. Pelée would occur D to try and help any survivors of the volcanic eruptions of Mt. Pelée and Mt. Soufrière

2. Towards the end of the article, the author draws comparisons between the risks of which two volcanoes?

A Mount St. Helens and Mount Vesuvius B Mt. Pelée and Mt. Soufrière C Mt. Pelée and Mount Vesuvius D Mt. Soufrière and Mount St. Helens

3. Mt. Pelee and Vesuvius both had nuée ardente eruptions, the most explosive and deadly type of volcanic eruption. In this type of eruption, a cloud of hot ash and gas blows out of the volcano, then rushes very quickly down the volcano’s side. What conclusion can be drawn from this evidence?

A People living near Mt. Pelée and Vesuvius should have known that these volcanoes were active and likely to erupt.

B The nuée ardente type of volcanic eruption is less dangerous to humans than other types of volcanic eruptions.

C The nuée ardente type of volcanic eruption is incredibly dangerous to humans living near a volcano.

D The areas surrounding Mt. Pelée and Vesuvius are unlikely to be damaged by future nuée ardente eruptions.

4. Based on the text, why might predicting volcanic eruptions be an important goal of scientists studying volcanoes?

A because knowing when volcanoes might erupt will allow scientists to help warn people to leave the area in time to save their lives

B because knowing when volcanoes might erupt will allow scientists to gain more information about how volcanoes work

C because knowing when volcanoes might erupt will allow scientists to better understand past eruptions

D because knowing when volcanoes might erupt will allow scientists to collect helpful samples for museums



2

5. What is a main idea of this article?

A The eruption of Mt. Pelée in 1902 was similar to the eruption of Mount Vesuvius in AD 79, and should have been better predicted.

B The eruption of Mt. Pelée in 1902 caused massive destruction and death, partly because people at the time did not know much about volcanoes.

C It can be very exciting to live near an active volcano, which is why people currently live near volcanoes that may erupt in the near future.

D A geologist went to study volcanic eruptions in the Caribbean in 1902 to see how they compared to the eruption of Mount Vesuvius.

6. Read the following sentence from the text.

“With little knowledge of how volcanic eruptions occurred, the residents of Mt. Pelée woefully underestimated the risks of living in its vicinity and ignored signals that it was still active.”

Based on this sentence, what does the word underestimate mean?

A to predict correctly B to analyze completely C to take something too seriously D to not take something seriously enough

7. Choose the answer that best completes the sentence below. Thousands of people lived near Mt. Pelée in 1902 _______ the volcano’s signals that it was still active.

A in spite of B because of C as a result of D resulting in

8. Describe three warning signs of the 1902 eruption in Saint-Pierre that people ignored at the time. Use details from the text to support your description.

______________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________



3

9. Scientists today hope that their knowledge of volcanoes can help save human lives from future volcanic eruptions. What is one problem that might make it difficult to save lives from a future eruption?

______________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________ 10. Can scientists’ current understanding of how volcanoes work prevent another terrible loss of human life like the ones in Pompeii and Saint-Pierre? Why or why not? Use evidence from the text to support your argument.

______________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________

Horse and Man Armors

1



HORSE ARMOR OF DUKE ULRICH OF WṺRTTEMBERG

1507

[Armor] embossed, etched, and

partially blued and gilded steel;

brass; leather [saddle] birch bark;


2

steel; leather and textiles

Weight (with saddle): 89 lb. (40.37 kg);

weight (without saddle): 63.2 lb. (28.67 kg)

WILHELM VON WORMS

THE ELDER

German (active Nuremberg),

master in 1499, died 1538

MAN ARMOR

c. 1505

Etched and partially blued and

gilded steel; leather; textiles

Weight: 58.5 lb. (26.53 kg)

MATTHES DEUTSCH

German (active Landshut),

first recorded 1485,

last documented c. 1505

These armors, one for a horse and one for a man, were made over five hundred years ago in Germany. Constructed of steel plates that fit tightly together, they were designed to provide protection in battle. The horse armor was made for Duke Ulrich (OOL‐reesh) of Württemberg, Germany, when he was just twenty years old. It was made for a special journey he planned to take with Maximilian I of Austria to Rome, where Maximilian was to be crowned Holy Roman Emperor. The armor protected the horse and showed the duke’s wealth and status, since only high‐ranking noblemen could afford armors as fine as this one. Its decoration conveys important ideas as well: a golden‐winged dragon on the chanfron (horse’s headpiece) shows fierceness, and elegantly dressed women hold banners with the duke’s personal motto. A literal translation of the motto is, “I have it in mind.” Duke Ulrich’s contemporaries would have understood this phrase to mean, “I can accomplish what I set out to do.” This horse armor is extremely rare because it is one of the earliest complete examples in the world and its pieces have remained together for centuries. Its gold decoration also adds to its uniqueness. It was made by a famous master armorer, a person who specialized in making armor. The man armor was not made for Duke Ulrich, but it is from the same region and time period. Made by another master armorer, it was beautifully decorated with designs in gold. Philadelphia Museum of Art: Gift of Athena and Nicholas Karabots and The Karabots Foundation, 2009‐117‐1,2

Notes on the Program – Cuban Overture

New York Philharmonic program notes used by permission © 2015. http://archives.nyphil.org

1


This text is provided courtesy of the New York Philharmonic.

Cuban Overture GEORGE GERSHWIN BORN: September 26, 1898, in Brooklyn, New York DIED: July 11, 1937, in Hollywood, California WORK COMPOSED: July and early August 1932

WORLD PREMIERE: August 16, 1932, under the title Rumba, with Albert Coates conducting the New York Philharmonic at Lewisohn Stadium

The island nation of Cuba was a hot destination for

Americans of the smart set in the early 1930s, and had

been for a decade. Cuba was closely connected to the

United States back then, before the dictatorships

Fulgencio Batista and Fidel Castro. During World War I

it had its troops to the side of the Allies (as it would

again in World War II), and it allowed the United

States to dominate its economy, industry, and finances

during the 1920s.

Americans were enthralled by Cuba as a travel

destination, and not just because of the tropical

breezes and beckoning palms. Between 1920 and

1933, Cuba offered something the United States did

not: booze. Prohibition certainly didn’t keep

Americans from imbibing, but the allure of doing so in the open proved a boon to the travel

industry. Already in 1920—practically before the ink on the Volstead Act was dry—Irving Berlin

let loose with a prescient commentary in his song “I’ll See You in C‐U‐B‐A”:

Not so far from here

There’s a very lively atmosphere

Ev’rybody’s going there this year

And there’s a reason.

The season opened last July

Ever since the U.S.A. went dry

George Gershwin at the piano



2

Ev’rybody’s going there and I’m going. . .

Cuba where win is flowing

And where dark‐eyed stellas

Light their fellers’ panatelas. . .

In February 1932 George Gershwin was among a bunch of “fellers” who went south for

two or three weeks of playing golf, betting at the racetracks, and partying with “dark‐eyed

Stellas”. It was a formidable crowd that included the financier Everett Jacobs (whose checks

helped underwrite a number of Broadway musicals), Adam Gimbel (of the department‐store

Gibmels), the stockbroker Emil Mosbacher, and the publisher Bennett Cerf. “In Havana,” Cerf

recalled about Gershwin,

a 16‐piece rhumba band serenaded him en masse at four in the morning outside his

room at the old Almendares Hotel. Several outraged patrons left the hotel the next

morning. George was so flattered that he promised to write a rhumba of his own.

When Gershwin returned to the States he included among his souvenirs several

authentic Cuban percussion instruments: a bongo drum, claves, maracas, and a gourd shaker.

Within a few months, he made good on his promise to recapture the sounds that he had

entranced him in Havana, and in July (mostly at Mosbacher’s home in Westchester) he

produced his Rumba for piano four‐hands. He began orchestrating his new piece on August 1

and finished the symphonic version on August 9—just in time to include it on an all‐Gershwin

program the New York Philharmonic was scheduled to play at New York’s Lewisohn eight

nights later. It was a greatly anticipated event: the stadium’s 18,000 seats were sold out and

several thousand more hopeful listeners were reportedly turned away. Gershwin added to the

visual effect by having the four percussionists play his Cuban instruments at the front of the

orchestra—rather than at the percussion section’s usual location at the back—so the audience

could see their exotic instruments. Three months later the piece got its second airing, which

the composer himself conducted at a benefit concert in The New Metropolitan opera House,

now under the new titled Cuban Overture.

When George Gershwin composed his Cuban Overture he had just embarked on a

course of study with the composer and music theorist Joseph Schillinger. Gershwin was an

immensely successful composer by that time, but he felt trapped in the small structures of

Broadway tunes and hoped to stretch his technique through Schillinger’s coaching. Gershwin’s

work with Schillinger is surely reflected in some of the more sophisticated features of the



3

Cuban Overture, such as the prevalence of five‐

measure phrases (as opposed to the four‐

measure blocks of most popular tunes), a

generally polytonal flavor, and what the

composer proudly pointed out, in a brief program

note, as a “three‐part contrapuntal episode,” a

“developing canon in a contrapuntal manner, and

a climax based on an ostinato.” Such hifalutin

learnedness notwithstanding, the Cuban Overture

does not come across as a pretentious work.

Instead, it seems the perfect evocation of a

vacation in Cuba—or, as Gershwin put it, it is “a

symphonic overture which embodies the essence

of Cuban dance.”

INSTRUMENTATION: three flutes (one doubling

piccolo), two oboes and English horn, two

clarinets and bass clarinet, two bassoons and

contrabassoon, four horns, three trumpets, three

trombones, tuba, bongo, claves, maracas, gourd,

timpani, and strings.

—James M. Keller, Program Annotator

The program for the world premiere of Gershwin’s Rumbaby the New York Philharmonic on an all‐Gershwin concert; An American in Paris was also on the program.

People Who Built America: Vanderbilt

1


People Who Built America: Vanderbilt By Noah Remnick

Cornelius Vanderbilt was a man of vast wealth and power who began life as the son of a poor seaman living on Staten Island, in New York City. When Cornelius was born in 1794, fewer than 20 years after the American Revolution, people moved from place to place by walking, riding horses and donkeys, or sailing waterways on vessels powered by the wind. By the time he died in 1877, Cornelius Vanderbilt had made a fortune on the transportation revolution, owning and operating railroads and steamboats that changed the face of America.

When Cornelius was a mere 11 years old, one of his eight siblings died and he dropped out of school to help his father with his modest boat business. At age 16, Cornelius bought his first sailboat by using money he earned from landscaping. He began a ferry business, conveying people and goods between Staten Island and Manhattan. He expanded his business by charging less than his competitors, even if that meant he earned less of a profit.

His reputation as a businessman and seaman grew. In 1812, when the United States and Britain went to war over maritime and trade rights, Vanderbilt procured the contract to supply the forts stationed in New York Harbor. His small fleet of ships ferried food, munitions, and soldiers to the American forts. His activities during the war earned him the nickname “The Commodore,” a moniker that stuck throughout his life.

With the money he earned during the war, Vanderbilt bought more sailing ships and expanded his business. Soon he recognized that the days of sailing ships as the heart of commercial and personal travel were waning. Steamships were becoming the cutting‐edge force in transportation. In 1818, Vanderbilt went to work for Thomas Gibbons, who ran a steamboat ferry service between New York City and New Brunswick, New Jersey.

In 1829, Vanderbilt decided the time was right to strike out on his own. He bought his own fleet of steamboats and began plying the Hudson River. As with his first sailboat, Vanderbilt’s main tactic for making money was to charge extremely low fares to attract customers, driving his competition out of business. Soon he was running steamship ferry services between New York City and other towns in New England and along the Long Island coast.

The industrial revolution brought increased commercial activity to the United States in the 1830s, and Vanderbilt once again seized the opportunity to expand his own business. He owned more than 100 steamships and used them to connect New England factories with the emerging railroad system in the United States. Soon, he was managing some of the railroads, and, in short order, he began buying the railroads. By the 1860s, Vanderbilt was a major force in the railroad industry. Once again, he used low fares to lure customers from his competitors, increasing his power in the industry.

The railroads and steamboats Vanderbilt owned enriched his own coffers, making him one of the richest men in America, and indeed the world, but they also allowed for personal travel and commercial transport that built businesses across the country.

People Who Built America: Vanderbilt

2


Cornelius Vanderbilt had come a long way from his modest roots on Staten Island. And yet, unlike many of the industrialists to follow him, Vanderbilt was not a particularly philanthropic man. While he did not live extravagantly, he also did not donate much money to charitable causes. He did not see his wealth as a means of improving the lives of others.

There were two notable exceptions to Vanderbilt’s stinginess. When the American Civil War began in 1861, Vanderbilt donated his namesake steamship, the Vanderbilt, to the Union Navy. He spent more than $1 million outfitting the ship to be battleworthy. And indeed, the ship was a critical force in helping to neutralize the Alabama, a Confederate ship.

After the war, Vanderbilt donated $1 million to endow a university in the South, an attempt to repair relations between North and South and to help the ravaged former confederacy to recover from the Civil War. The university was eventually named for Vanderbilt, and today it is one of the nation’s academic gems.

Vanderbilt spent most of his life in New York, although he resented the fact that the wealthiest and most prominent members of New York society never fully accepted him, as they considered him rough and ill‐mannered socially. He helped to fund the building of Grand Central Depot in New York City, a hub of train transportation for the region, but he never demonstrated the philanthropic generosity of many of his peers.

Vanderbilt died in 1877 and left behind an estate then valued at $100 million. Today that would be worth well over $100 billion. He was buried in a cemetery not far from his childhood home. After 82 years, the Commodore returned to the shore from which he first set sail.

Questions: People Who Built America: Vanderbilt


1

Name: Date: _______________________ 1. Cornelius Vanderbilt owned and operated railroads. What else did he own and operate?

A automobiles B airplanes C elevators D steamboats

2. The text describes how Vanderbilt was able to get customers. If you think of Vanderbilt getting customers as an effect, what was the cause?

A the low fares Vanderbilt charged B the goods Vanderbilt conveyed between Staten Island and Manhattan C people who rode horses and donkeys D the trade rights that the U.S. and Britain went to war over

3. Vanderbilt was a skillful businessman. What evidence in the text supports this conclusion?

A "In 1829, Vanderbilt decided the time was right to strike out on his own. He bought his own fleet of steamboats and began plying the Hudson River. As with his first sailboat, Vanderbilt’s main tactic for making money was to charge extremely low fares to attract customers, driving his competition out of business. Soon he was running steamship ferry services between New York City and other towns in New England and along the Long Island coast."

B "...unlike many of the industrialists to follow him, Vanderbilt was not a particularly philanthropic man. While he did not live extravagantly, he also did not donate much money to charitable causes. He did not see his wealth as a means of improving the lives of others."

C "There were two notable exceptions to Vanderbilt’s stinginess. When the American Civil War began in 1861, Vanderbilt donated his namesake steamship, the Vanderbilt, to the Union Navy. He spent more than $1 million outfitting the ship to be battleworthy. And indeed, the ship was a critical force in helping to neutralize the Alabama, a Confederate ship."

D "After the war, Vanderbilt donated $1 million to endow a university in the South, an attempt to repair relations between North and South and to help the ravaged former confederacy to recover from the Civil War. The university was eventually named for Vanderbilt, and today it is one of the nation’s academic gems."



2

4. "Revolution" can mean a big change in the way people do things. Based on the evidence in the text, what might the "transportation revolution" have been?

A the change from transportation on horses and donkeys to transportation on ships powered by the wind

B the change from transportation on horses and sailboats to transportation by railroad and steamboat

C the change from transportation on horses and sailboats to transportation on donkeys and rafts

D the change from transportation on ships powered by the wind to transportation on horses and donkeys

5. What is the main idea of this text?

A In 1861, Cornelius Vanderbilt donated his namesake steamship, the Vanderbilt, to the Union Navy.

B Unlike many of the industrialists who followed him, Cornelius Vanderbilt was not a particularly philanthropic man.

C Cornelius Vanderbilt made a lot of money by owning and operating railroads and steamboats.

D Cornelius Vanderbilt resented the fact that the wealthiest members of New York society never fully accepted him.

6. Read these sentences from the text. “Cornelius Vanderbilt had come a long way from his modest roots on Staten Island. And yet, unlike many of the industrialists to follow him, Vanderbilt was not a particularly philanthropic man. While he did not live extravagantly, he also did not donate much money to charitable causes. He did not see his wealth as a means of improving the lives of others.” Based on these sentences, what does the word "philanthropic" mean?

A healthy B violent C generous D talkative

7. Read this sentence from the text. “Vanderbilt spent most of his life in New York, although he resented the fact that the wealthiest and most prominent members of New York society never fully accepted him, as they considered him rough and ill-mannered socially.”



3

What word could replace "as" in this sentence without changing its meaning?

A because B meanwhile C otherwise D obviously

8. Vanderbilt’s railroads and steamboats allowed for personal travel and commercial transport. What did this travel and transport help build across the country? ______________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________ 9. What did Vanderbilt donate $1 million to endow, or fund? ______________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________



4

10. The title of this text is “Men Who Built America: Vanderbilt.” Explain how Cornelius Vanderbilt helped build America. ______________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________

Why Do Cave Fish Lose Their Eyes?

Why Do Cave Fish Lose Their Eyes? How evolution can lead to losing abilities as well as gaining them

This article is provided courtesy of the American Museum of Natural History. Deep underground there are caves where the sun never shines. The only light that enters these subterranean spaces is from the headlamps of occasional cave explorers. If you found yourself in one of these caverns and turned off your headlamp, you would see nothing at all; no shadows, no shapes, just total blackness. In some of these underground caves, there are fishes, crustaceans, salamanders and other organisms that have evolved to live without light. For example, more than one hundred species of cave fishes live their lives in perpetual darkness. They depend on senses other than sight to hunt, eat and reproduce. Many of these species of fishes are blind or nearly blind—some don’t even have eyes. Yet they all evolved from fishes that could see. Somehow, over millions of years, these fishes not only acquired the ability to live without sight—they lost the ability to see altogether. How did that happen? How can evolution cause a species to lose a trait? It’s a mystery that evolutionary scientists have been struggling to unravel, and the search for an answer gives us a fascinating look at how evolution works. Regressive Evolution We usually think of evolution in a positive sense, that is, as a process in which species acquire new traits. But in cave fishes we have an example of regressive evolution, a process in which species lose a trait —in this case, the ability to see.

Carlsbad Caverns National Park

Blind cave fish, Mammoth Cave National Park, Kentucky


A common assumption is that the ancestors of cave fishes went blind in their evolution because they didn’t use their eyes. Though at first this idea might seem to make sense, it actually has no basis in science. Genes determine the inheritance of traits. For example, the fact that you have five fingers on each hand is because of the genes you inherited from your parents. However, if you have an accident and lose a finger, your children will still be born with five fingers on each hand. If you lift weights and become a body builder, it doesn’t mean your children will be born with bulging biceps. In each case, your genes haven’t changed—even though your body has. Darwin Is Stumped The fact that cave fishes’ ancestors didn’t use their eyes had absolutely no effect on the DNA in their chromosomes. Yet clearly, at some point in the past something happened to their genes that stopped the development of their eyes. This new condition passed on from parent to offspring. How can this sort of regressive evolution be explained? Charles Darwin himself, the scientist who first established a modern understanding of evolution, had trouble answering this question. Darwin lived in the 19th century when DNA hadn’t been discovered and so he didn’t know about genes or their role in heredity. But he understood that traits were inherited and that differences within a species give some individuals an advantage over others. Animals with traits that make them more successful at having offspring will pass on those traits to succeeding generations. He called this process evolution by natural selection. However, Darwin had trouble applying his theory of natural selection to the problem of why some cave fishes are blind. He could not explain how being blind gave those cave fishes an advantage. And if being blind is not an advantage, then how did natural selection lead to a species of blind cave fish? Surprisingly, Darwin was convinced that the loss of eyes could be explained entirely to disuse, which is in fact a Lamarckian explanation. Today, scientists know that this explanation is unfounded.

Lamarck’s Mistake Jean‐Baptiste Lamarck was a French naturalist who lived from 1744 to 1829. He was a pioneer developing theories of evolution at a time when the very idea of evolution was not accepted. Lamarck tried to explain how species evolved but came to an incorrect conclusion—that traits acquired during an organism’s lifetime could be passed down to its offspring. For example, he suggested that giraffes stretched their necks to reach higher leaves, and as a result their offspring were born with longer necks. The idea that cave fishes lost their eyesight because generations of fish didn’t use their eyes is a Lamarckian mistake.


Two Hypotheses Most of what we know now is based on the study of the blind Mexican tetra (Astyanax mexicanus). Scientists have two competing explanations for blindness in the Mexican tetra, which likely apply in other cave fishes as well. The first hypothesis assumes that blindness gives the fish some sort of evolutionary advantage. For example, it’s possible that changes in the gene or genes that cause blindness are also responsible for some other seemingly unrelated change in the fish that is beneficial. Scientists call this pleiotropy—when multiple effects are caused by the same mutation in one gene. To support this hypothesis, scientists would have to look for some advantage to the cave fish that is linked to the same mutation that causes blindness. The second hypothesis that could explain blindness in the cave fish is based on the fact that natural selection does not just reward success, it also weeds out failures. In a lake, where there is sunlight, a fish born blind would have trouble competing with other fish that can see. It probably would not survive to have offspring. But a fish born blind in a dark cave would not be at a disadvantage, since in the darkness eyes are useless. In those conditions, natural selection will not work to weed out the mutation for blindness. Over one to two million years, many more mutations disrupting the development of the eyes will accumulate and eventually the entire population of fish will be blind. This is called the neutral mutation hypothesis, based on the idea that the mutations for causing blindness have no effect (or have a neutral effect) on the survival of the fish living in a dark cave. An Eye‐Opening Experiment A group of scientists at the University of Maryland set out to investigate the developmental causes of blindness in the cave fish. They carried out an experiment with two varieties of the same species of Mexican tetras. One variety lives in bodies of water near the surface where there is sunlight and can see. The other variety of tetras lives in dark caves and is blind. The scientists transplanted a lens from the eye of a surface tetra embryo into the eye of a cave tetra embryo. The result was striking—the surface tetra lens transplanted into the cave tetra caused all of the surrounding tissues to develop into a healthy eye. This experiment demonstrated that despite the degeneration of the eye in the tetra, the genes involved in eye

Mexican tetra (Astyanax mexicanus).


development were still totally functional. This would seem to rule out the neutral mutation theory because, if blindness were caused by an accumulation of many neutral mutations over time, the transplant would not have resulted in the development of a healthy eye. The scientists knew that there are many genes responsible for the development of each part of an eye (for example, the retina, iris, cornea and lens), which develops independently. However, the results of the experiment showed that blindness in the Mexican tetra was not due to mutations in all those genes. Instead, it suggested a small number of mutations in genetic “master switches.” These master switches are genes that control the function of many other genes, including, in this case, those responsible for eye development. These “master switches” have the ability to disable the eye genes so that these remain intact, but inactive. Putting a healthy lens into the cave tetra embryo seems to trigger master switches to send a signal to the inactive eye genes, allowing cave tetras to develop eyes.

If scientists could find the genetic “master switches” that made cave tetras blind, they could discover if the same switches had effects on other traits of the fish that do give it an evolutionary advantage for surviving in caves.


The researchers did indeed find one of those genes. It is nicknamed Hedgehog or the Hh gene. They discovered that the Hedgehog gene does more than cause blindness in cave tetras—when the fish develops without eyes, the skull bones move into the empty eye socket, which at the same time enlarges the nose. Unlike other vertebrates, fishes use their nose only for smelling. It could be that the same control gene (Hh) that stops eye development in the fish also is responsible for enhancing its sense of smell. An enhanced sense of smell would be a definite advantage for a fish that lives in darkness. As a result of these and other experiments, it now seems highly likely that blindness in cave tetras is in part the result of pleiotropy—one mutation that causes blindness in the fish and at the same time, gives them an enhanced sense of smell. Evolution Works Scientists are still studying cave fishes, and new discoveries are sure to be found. But one thing is already clear—the answer lies in the basic processes of evolution that are already well understood. With new tools that give scientists the ability to map genes, find specific mutations, and understand the development of embryos, we are increasing our understanding of how evolution works.

Questions: Why Do Cave Fish Lose Their Eyes?


1

Name: Date: 1. What ability have many cave fishes lost?

A the ability to swim B the ability to smell C the ability to see D the ability to hear

2. To organize this text, the author divides it into sections with subheadings. What is described in the section with the subheading "Darwin Is Stumped"?

A Darwin's understanding of evolution and his explanation of blindness in cave fishes

B Darwin's daily life in the 19th century and the places where he studied blindness in cave fishes

C the animals Darwin studied as a young man that led him to develop his theory of evolution

D the objections that have been raised to the theory of evolution developed by Darwin

3. An organism's genes determine which traits it inherits. What evidence in the article supports this statement?

A "In some of these underground caves, there are fishes, crustaceans, salamanders and other organisms that have evolved to live without light. For example, more than one hundred species of cave fishes live their lives in perpetual darkness. They depend on senses other than sight to hunt, eat and reproduce."

B "We usually think of evolution in a positive sense, that is, as a process in which species acquire new traits. But in cave fishes we have an example of regressive evolution, a process in which species lose a trait—in this case, the ability to see."

C "...if you have an accident and lose a finger, your children will still be born with five fingers on each hand. If you lift weights and become a body builder, it doesn’t mean your children will be born with bulging biceps. In each case, your genes haven’t changed—even though your body has."

D "Jean-Baptiste Lamarck... suggested that giraffes stretched their necks to reach higher leaves, and as a result their offspring were born with longer necks. The idea that cave fishes lost their eyesight because generations of fish didn’t use their eyes is a Lamarckian mistake."



2

4. Based on the information about evolution in this text, what effect does the trait of blindness have on a fish living in a dark cave?

A The trait of blindness has a positive effect; it gives the fish an evolutionary advantage.

B The trait of blindness has a negative effect; it puts the fish at an evolutionary disadvantage.

C The trait of blindness has a neutral effect; it is neither an advantage nor a disadvantage.

D The trait of blindness has a mixed effect; it is an advantage for the fish at certain times and a disadvantage at other times.


A There are caves deep underground where the sun never shines, and in some of these underground caves, there are fishes, crustaceans, salamanders, and other organisms that have evolved over many years to live without light.

B Charles Darwin was a scientist living in the 19th century who was convinced that cave fishes lost their eyesight because they did not use their eyes.

C The neutral mutation hypothesis about the blindness of cave fishes is based on the idea that the mutations that cause blindness have no effect (or a neutral effect) on the survival of a fish living in a dark cave.

D Many cave fishes are blind, and an experiment carried out by scientists suggests that blindness in these fishes is the result of a mutation that also improves their sense of smell.

6. The title of this text is "Why Do Cave Fish Lose Their Eyes?" Why might the author have written the title as a question?

A to encourage readers to answer the question on their own before they read the article

B to prepare readers for a discussion of possible answers to this question in the article C to criticize scientists for not having reached a definite answer about why cave fishes

lose their eyes D to praise scientists for the effort they have put into understanding the cause of

blindness in cave fishes 7. Choose the answer that best completes the sentence. Many species of cave fishes are blind or nearly blind. _______, they all evolved from fishes that could see.

A Consequently B Primarily C However D For instance



3

8. Describe the first hypothesis that scientists have about blindness in the Mexican tetra. Be sure to discuss pleiotropy in your answer. ______________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________ 9. One effect of the Hedgehog gene is to make cave tetras go blind. What is another effect it might have?

______________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________ 10. As a result of the experiment scientists did with Mexican tetras, it seems likely that their first hypothesis about blindness in the tetras is right. Explain how the result of the experiment supports their first hypothesis. Support your answer with evidence from the text. ______________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________

An Unwelcome Newcomer

AnUnwelcomeNewcomer

ThisarticleisprovidedcourtesyoftheAmericanMuseumofNaturalHistory.InvasionoftheZebraMussels

Thezebramusselisasmallaquaticanimalwithtwo

shellslikeaclam,namedforitsstripedshell.Thistiny

creaturemaylookharmless,butitcancausebig

problems.Thezebramusselisaninvasivespecies,a

speciesthat’sbroughtfromitsnativeareatoanewplace

whereitthrivesandcauseschangesinthelocalhabitats

andcommunities.

Zebramusselsoncelivedonlyinfreshwaterlakesand

riversofEuropeandAsia.Butinthe1980s,they

appearedintheGreatLakesbetweentheUnitedStates

andCanada.Scientiststhinkthetinyanimalswere

carriedacrosstheoceaninsideofcargoships.Withina

fewyears,themusselswerefoundalongwaterways

fromWisconsintoArkansas.

Howdothesemusselsspreadsoquickly?Asingle

femalecanlayuptoonemillioneggseachyear.Then

theyoungmusselsfloateasilyalongwatercurrents.

Whenthey’reolder,theyattachthemselvestohard

surfaceslikerocksontheriverbedsandthebottomof

boats.Theyformdensecolonies,withasmanyas

10,000musselsinasinglesquarefoot.Eachmussel

clingswithamassofthread‐likestrands,makingthese

coloniesnearlyimpossibletoremove.

ZOOMINZebramusselspumpwaterthroughtheirgillstofilteroutparticlesoffood(primarilyphytoplankton).

AshippassingunderabridgeontheHudson.


Zebramusselscanclingtoanyhardsurface—

includingnativemusselsandothershelledanimals.

Theseanimalsdiebecausetheycan’tfeed.Zebra

musselscanupsetfoodwebsinotherways,too.

Thesefilterfeederspumpwaterthroughtheirgills

andstrainoutmicroscopicorganismscalled

plankton.Zebramusselscanquicklyclearouthuge

bodiesofwater,removingfoodforthenative

invertebratesandsmallfish.

Zebramusselscanalsoaffecthumans—andcause

millionsofdollarsindamage.Themusselsclog

waterpipestobusinessesandpowerplants.They

damageboats,docks,buoys,andotherstructures.

Andtheirshellswashupinhugenumberson

beaches.

TheHudsonRiverInvasion

TheHudsonRiverflowssouththroughNewYork

State,fromthemountainstoNewYorkCity.The

scientistsdescribedinthisstudybeganmonitoring

theriver’secosystemin1986.Atthattime,nozebra

musselslivedintheriver.Butaseriesofwaterways

andcanalsconnecttherivertotheGreatLakes,so

scientistspredicteditwasjustamatteroftime

beforethezebramusselwouldarriveintheHudson.

TheHudsonRiver’secosystemisverydifferent

fromtheGreatLakes.Lakewatersettlesintolayers,

withcoolwaternearthebottomandwarm,clear

STICKTOIT

JUSTTHEFACTS…

Zebramusselsusuallygrowtoaboutthesizeofyourthumbnail.

Cargoshipscarryextrawater(calledballast)tohelpbalancetheboatinoceansandrivers.Zebramusselscanbetransportedinthisballastwater.Zebramusselscantypicallylivefor2‐5yearsandstartreproducingbytheirsecondyear.Zebramusselslovetoeatplankton(microscopicorganisms)andsurviveinbothcoldandwarmwater.

Zebramusselshavetinytentacle‐likeappendagescalled“byssalthreads”thatarecoatedinastickyfoamthathelpthemusselsticktoalmostanyhardsurface!


waterabove.ButwaterintheHudsonisaffectedbytidesfromtheAtlanticOcean.Thesetidalcurrents

mixthewaterfromtoptobottom.Tidesalsostirupsiltfromtheriverbed,makingthewaterturbidor

cloudy.Littlesunlightcanpassthroughthemurkywater.Lesssunlightmeansfewerplantsand

phytoplankton.

ScientistswonderedhowzebramusselsmightaffecttheHudsonRiverecosystem.Soontheywouldfind

out.

UPTHERIVERTheHudsonRiverconnectstheAtlanticOceantotheGreatLakesthroughaseriesofartificialwaterways,includingtheErieCanal.Hundredsofcargoshipsusethis“waterhighway”totransportimportantmaterials,likegasoline,metal,andwood.

Questions: An Unwelcome Newcomer


1

Name: Date: 1. What is a zebra mussel?

A a small striped fish found in rivers and lakes B a small animal with two shells that lives in water C a large animal with one shell that lives in water D a large plant with striped leaves that lives in water

2. How can zebra mussels cause native mussels and other shelled animals to die?

A The zebra mussels feed on the native mussels and other shelled animals. B The zebra mussels rest on top of native mussels and shelled animals and crush

them. C The zebra mussels force native mussels and shelled animals to move out of the

habitat. D The zebra mussels cling to native mussels and shelled animals and prevent

them from eating. 3. Scientists predicted that the zebra mussel would arrive in the Hudson River. What evidence supported their prediction?

A Zebra mussels cling to hard surfaces, forming colonies that are almost impossible to remove.

B Zebra mussels came to the Great Lakes from the freshwater lakes of Europe and Asia.

C Zebra mussels are able to survive in cold and warm water, and the Hudson River has both.

D Zebra mussels were in the Great Lakes, and waterways connect the Great Lakes to the Hudson River.

4. The scientists wondered how zebra mussels might impact the Hudson River ecosystem. What is one example of information that might help them understand the zebra mussels’ impact?

A the amount of plankton in the river before and after zebra mussels arrive B the number of boats traveling on the river before and after zebra mussels

arrive C the amount of time it takes for zebra mussels to travel to the Hudson River D the strength of the tides that come from the Atlantic Ocean after zebra mussels

arrive



2

5. What is the main idea of this article?

A Zebra mussels are the most dangerous invasive species because of the effects they can have on humans.

B Zebra mussels are an invasive species that can affect food webs and new habitats, and were expected to arrive in the Hudson River.

C Zebra mussels can upset food webs by clinging to shelled animals and removing food from large bodies of water.

D Scientists started monitoring the Hudson River’s ecosystem in 1986, even though the river had no zebra mussels at the time.

6. Read the following sentence from the text. “The zebra mussel is an invasive species, a species that’s brought from its native area to a new place where it thrives and causes changes in the local habitats and communities.” What does the phrase “native area” mean in this sentence?

A the food source of a species B the animals or plants related to a species C the new habitat to which a species moves D the place where a species is naturally found

7. Choose the answer that best completes the sentence. Zebra mussels can affect humans and cause millions of dollars in damage. _____, the mussels clog water pipes to businesses and power plants.

A For example B Consequently C However D Therefore

8. What do zebra mussels feed on? ______________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________



3

9. The Hudson River has murky water, which means that only a little sunlight can pass through. How does this affect the things that live in the river? ______________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________ 10. How might the number of fish in the Hudson River be impacted by the arrival of zebra mussels? Use evidence from the text to support your answer. ______________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________

The Short-Term Impact of the Zebra Mussel Invasion

TheShort‐TermImpactoftheZebraMusselInvasion

ThisarticleisprovidedcourtesyoftheAmericanMuseumofNaturalHistory.ZebramusselsfirstappearedintheHudsonRiverinMay1991.

Withinayear,scientistsestimatedtheirnumbershadreached

500billion,anenormousamount!Infact,ifyouhadahuge

balanceandputzebramusselsononeside,theywould

outweighalltheotherconsumersintheecosystemcombined:

allthefish,zooplankton,worms,shellfish,andbacteria.

Phytoplanktonandzooplanktonpopulationsdropsharply

Beforetheinvasion,scientistsdevelopedcomputermodelsto

predicttheeffectofthezebramussels.Buttheywerestill

surprisedbywhathappened.By

1992,thereweresomanyzebra

mussels,scientistsestimate

theywerefilteringavolumeof

waterequaltoallofthewater

intheestuaryevery1–4days

duringthesummer.Intheyears

rightaftertheinvasion,

phytoplanktonfellby80

percent.Zooplankton(which

eatphytoplankton)declinedby

half.Andthesmallest

zooplankton(calledmicro‐

zooplankton),fellbyabout90

percent.

Anestuaryisadynamicbodyofwaterwherefreshwaterandsaltwatermeet.TheHudsonRiverismorethanariver:it’satidalestuary,wherethesaltwaterfromtheAtlanticOceanmeetsthefreshwaterrunningofftheland.

WATCHWHATHAPPENSThisgraphshowsthechangeintheamountofphytoplankton(representedbytheblueline)over18yearsintheHudsonRiver.(Theamountofphytoplanktonismeasuredbytheamountofchlorophylltheycontain.)Lookatthegraylineabove:there’sabigchangeinthebluelinewhenthezebramusselsfirstarrivedintheriver.Whatdoyouthinkhappened?


By1994,scientistshypothesized

thatzebramusselswere

responsibleforthesechanges.

Themusselswerefilteringhuge

amountsofphytoplanktonfrom

thewater.Lessphytoplankton

meantlessfoodforzooplankton,

sotheirnumberswereshrinking

too.Competitionwastaking

placeandthezebramussels

seemedtobewinning.

Thefoodwebchanges

Inthenextfewyears,thedatasupportedtheirhypothesis.Scientistsmadeotherfindingstoo.They

observedthatthedecreaseinphytoplanktonandzooplanktonhadeffectsthatrippledthroughoutthe

foodweb.Withlessfoodavailable,therewerefewer—andsmaller—fishintheopenriver.The

populationofnativemussels,whichalsoeatplankton,shrankfrommorethanonebilliontoalmostnone.

Butsomepopulationsincreased—likelyduetothechangeintheriver’sturbidity,orcloudiness.Withfar

lessphytoplankton,thewatergotclearer.Duringthesummertime,visibilitywentfrom3–4to4–8feet.

Sincesunlightreacheddeeperintothewater,rootedaquaticplantssuchaswaterceleryincreasedbyup

to40percent.Populationsoffishlivingintheseshallowweedsincreased.Anothersurprisingresultwas

thatdissolvedoxygenintheriverfellbyabout15percent.Thedropwasn’tenoughtoendangerany

ABIGCHANGEThisbargraphshowsthechangeintheaveragenumberofrotifers(atypeofzooplankton)intheHudsonRiverbeforeandafterthezebramusselsbecameestablishedin1992.

ALONGTHERIVERTheHudsonRiverflows315miles(507km)throughNewYorkwithover1,000cubicfeetofwaterpassingbyeverysecond(or600cubicmeterspersecond).Scientistswanttounderstandhowtheriverchangesovertimeandspace.


aquaticanimals,butitwasstillahugeamountofoxygen.Scientiststhinktheenormouszebramussel

populationswereconsumingalotofoxygenveryquickly.Atthesametime,themusselswereremoving

thephytoplanktonthatproduceoxygen.

Questionsaboutthelong‐termimpact

Whathappensonceaninvasivespeciesbecomesestablishedinanecosystem?Theinvader’spopulation

mightevolvetoadapttoitsnewhome.Ornativespeciesmightevolvetobettertolerateorevenfeedon

theinvader.Orotherspeciesmightarrivethataremoreresistanttotheeffectsoftheinvasion.Once

scientistshadaclearpictureoftheinvasion’simmediateimpact,theystartedtowonderaboutlong‐term

consequenceslikethese.

Questions: The Short-Term Impact of the Zebra Mussel Invasion


1

Name: Date: 1. How many zebra mussels were there in the Hudson River within a year of their first appearance?

A 500 billion B 500 million C 500 thousand D 500

2. This text explains a cause-and-effect pattern in the Hudson River ecosystem that began with the zebra mussel invasion. What effect did the zebra mussels have on the phytoplankton in the Hudson River?

A The number of phytoplankton in the river rose by a little. B The number of phytoplankton in the river fell by a little. C The number of phytoplankton in the river rose by a lot. D The number of phytoplankton in the river fell by a lot.

3. Phytoplankton are one of the most important parts of the food web in the Hudson River. What evidence supports this conclusion?

A The population of phytoplankton dropped sharply soon after zebra mussels invaded the river.

B The decrease in phytoplankton caused a decrease in the river’s zooplankton, fish, and native mussel populations.

C The decrease in phytoplankton meant that the river’s turbidity, or cloudiness, decreased.

D Zebra mussels caused oxygen levels in the river to drop, partly by removing the phytoplankton that produce oxygen.

4. Which population was helped by the invasion of the zebra mussels?

A phytoplankton B zooplankton C water celery D native mussels


A In the years right after the invasion, zebra mussels evolved and adapted to the Hudson River ecosystem.

B In the years right after the invasion, zebra mussels caused a number of changes in the Hudson River ecosystem and food web.

C In the years right after the invasion, zebra mussels did not have a major impact on the Hudson River ecosystem or food web.

D At first, zebra mussels did not have any impact on the Hudson River ecosystem, but their impact increased over time.



2

6. Read these sentences from the text. “In the years right after the invasion, phytoplankton fell by 80 percent. Zooplankton (which eat phytoplankton) declined by half. And the smallest zooplankton (called micro-zooplankton), fell by about 90 percent.” Based on these sentences, what does the word “decline” most nearly mean?

A to drop in number B to fall over C to increase D to stay the same

7. Choose the answer that best completes the sentence. With far less phytoplankton, the water got clearer. ______, rooted aquatic plants such as water celery increased by up to 40 percent.

A In contrast B However C As a result D Similarly

8. What are two populations that decreased as an immediate result of the zebra mussel invasion? ______________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________



3

9. One direct effect of the zebra mussel invasion was a decrease in the cloudiness of the water. How did this affect species in the Hudson River ecosystem? ______________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________ 10. Once scientists understood the short-term impact of the zebra mussel invasion, they started to wonder about the invasion’s long-term impact on the ecosystem. Why might the Hudson River ecosystem look different many years after the zebra mussel invasion than it did just a few years after the invasion? Use evidence from the text to support your answer. ______________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________

Amelia Earhart to Her Former Flight Instructor Neta Snook 1929 … · Philadelphia Museum of Art:...

Documents

Transcript of Amelia Earhart to Her Former Flight Instructor Neta Snook 1929 … · Philadelphia Museum of Art:...