Will the Spaniards be noted in history books as the ones who falsified neo-Darwinism? Not likely; no one experiment would bring down a biological paradigm with such international and historical momentum behind it. Nevertheless, looking at the results and conclusions of experiments by three evolutionary biologists at the Institut Cavanilles de Biodiversitat i Biologia Evolutiva, Universitat de Valencia in Spain, published in PNAS this week,1 it would be hard to find any support for the central tenets of neo-Darwinian theory: namely, that evolutionary adaptations arise by natural selection acting on beneficial mutations. Instead, this paper shows experimental evidence that it doesn’t work. Neo-Darwinism, also termed the modern synthesis of evolutionary biology, was formulated in the 1940s to rescue Darwin’s views on natural selection from growing theoretical problems (see 07/02/2004 headline). It incorporated the necessity of genetic mutations to provide the raw material for variation on which natural selection acts. This revision was necessary when the rediscovery of Mendel’s laws of inheritance ruled out ideas of blending inheritance, showing instead that inherited characters were based on discrete entities (genes) that were passed on unaltered to the offspring. To test neo-Darwinian evolution in a microcosm, Rafael Sanjuán, Andrés Moya, and Santiago F. Elena worked with RNA viruses: organisms with a small, compact genomes that should respond quickly and noticeably to mutations. The team was looking for epistatic interactions: i.e., the effects of multiple independent (non-allelic) mutations on each other, rather than the effects of single mutations alone. These interactions can be antagonistic or synergistic: they can work against one another or with one another. Epistasis is defined as “any interaction of nonallelic genes, especially the suppression by one gene of the effect of a nonallelic gene.” Of note in this paper are the opening lines in the abstract that tell how rarely this important concept has been studied before (read: never):The tendency for genetic architectures to exhibit epistasis among mutations plays a central role in the modern synthesis of evolutionary biology and in theoretical descriptions of many evolutionary processes. Nevertheless, few studies unquestionably show whether, and how, mutations typically interact. Beneficial mutations are especially difficult to identify because of their scarcity. Consequently, epistasis among pairs of this important class of mutations has, to our knowledge, never before been explored.Let’s picture a 2×2 grid. On the left side, label the rows “beneficial” and “deleterious.” On the top, label the columns “synergistic” and “antagonistic.” Now put two dots in each box, with the dots representing mutations that will interact with one another. Quiz question: which box represents the only hope for evolutionary advancement? Well, the bottom and right boxes are clearly not any help. If the mutations are both deleterious and both antagonistic, at least they might turn each other off to stop the damage, like two criminals fighting each other instead of you. If the mutations are both deleterious but synergistic, they will multiply each other’s damage, like two criminals ganging up on you. If they are both beneficial but antagonistic, that won’t help, either, because it would be like two guardian angels having a squabble instead of helping you. In short, neo-Darwinism’s only hope is to find mutations in the top left box: two good mutations that work synergistically, increasing your “fitness” in the evolutionary world of competition. So how did the experiments go in the lab? They performed two classes of experiments to measure the effects of epistasis on mutations. Continuing with the abstract, here is what they found:Interactions among genome components should be of special relevance in compacted genomes such as those of RNA viruses. To tackle these issues, we first generated 47 genotypes of vesicular stomatitis virus carrying pairs of nucleotide substitution mutations whose separated and combined deleterious effects on fitness were determined. Several pairs exhibited significant interactions for fitness, including antagonistic and synergistic epistasis. Synthetic lethals represented 50% of the latter. In a second set of experiments, 15 genotypes carrying pairs of beneficial mutations were also created. In this case, all significant interactions were antagonistic. Our results show that the architecture of the fitness depends on complex interactions among genome components.In other words, none of their pairs of mutations occupied the necessary box labeled “beneficial and synergistic.” Half of the synergistic (working-together) actions they measured were “synthetic lethals” – which is like the two criminals both shooting the victim simultaneously. The other 50% maybe didn’t kill the organisms but still decreased fitness overall. The second experiment was all the more depressing: given two beneficial mutations in the same organism, all significant interactions were antagonistic. This means the guardian angels were preventing each other from helping. It recalls another paper in PNAS in March 2003 (see 03/17/2003 headline) that took into account indirect genetic effects, noting that increases in fitness do not act in isolation; they often counteract one another, creating “slippage on the treadmill.” In the current paper, the researchers found that beneficial mutations do not add up, even in the best of circumstances. Neo-Darwinian theory assumes that beneficial mutations act independently, but the team found that of the eight actual best-case scenarios (two beneficial mutations working antagonistically, since none worked synergistically) over half decreased the total fitness of the result from what would be expected if the beneficial mutations acted alone. They called this “decompensatory epistasis” if you need a new phrase to impress your friends at the water cooler. What does this mean to neo-Darwinian theory? “Indeed, when epistasis is decompensatory, both beneficial alleles involved in the interaction cannot spread to fixation in the population, because the double mutant is less fit than each single mutant.” This drastically undercuts any hope for evolutionary progress. Beneficial mutations are “scarce” to begin with, but more is not better – it’s worse. Like adding hot sauce to ice cream, the benefits of each counteract one another when combined. “As a consequence,” they continue, describing the only hope left, “lineages bearing alternative beneficial mutations should compete with each other on their way to fixation and, as a consequence of asexuality and clonal interference, only the best competitor will eventually become fixed in the population.” That is, only one beneficial mutation can become fixed at a time, even in the best case scenario. The discussion of results in the paper by Sanjuán et al. hammers neo-Darwinian theory with additional gentle, but effective, blows. First, they restate the basic finding: “Among pairs of deleterious mutations, although both synergistic and antagonistic epistases have been detected, interactions were predominantly antagonistic, such that their combined effect is significantly smaller than expected under a multiplicative model.” And in the best-case scenario of artificially-induced beneficial mutations, “antagonistic epistasis represents the most abundant type of interaction among beneficial mutations, with several cases showing decompensatory epistasis.” How should these experiments impact evolutionary theory, including the “queen of evolutionary problems,” the origin of sex? (see 04/14/2003 headline). Neo-Darwinists may well wish to run and hide:The results reported here have two important implications for theories seeking explanations for the evolutionary advantage of recombination and sexual reproduction. First, according to the Fisher�Muller argument, sex and recombination are advantageous because they combine into a common genotype beneficial mutations that arose in different ones, speeding up the rate of adaptation. However, if the genetic architecture of RNA viruses determines that, in general, antagonistic epistasis and, in particular, decompensatory epistasis among beneficial mutations is the norm, then recombination would not necessarily imply a benefit in terms of adaptive evolution. Second, sex might still be beneficial for RNA viruses as an efficient mechanism for purging deleterious mutations. However, according with the Mutational Deterministic Hypothesis [i.e., the suggestion that sex enables a population to purge deleterious mutations from the genome], if this is the case, an excess of synergistic epistasis among deleterious mutations is required to compensate the 2-fold advantage of clonal reproduction [i.e., asexual reproduction]. Our first data set shows that synergistic interactions among random mutations are neither stronger nor more common than antagonistic interactions. Indeed, the existence of variability among loci in the sign and strength of epistasis, and especially the dominance of antagonistic epistasis, decreases the parameter space over which sex may evolve.Since the parameter space was small to begin with, their words sound euphemistic, as if to cheer up a prisoner facing a hanging at dawn that maybe someone will find an alibi: “Like who? Like what?” the prisoner asks. “I dunno; just supposin’,” the friend replies. How sex may evolve: that’s somebody else’s problem. Also, they note, their results “impose a strong burden” on the “often invoked limitless adaptability of RNA viruses.” Citing another paper, they quote, “RNA viruses might be more at the mercy of their mutation rates than we think.” If decompensatory epistasis and antagonistic interactions are the general rules for mutations in all organisms, any hope for variability and adaptability due to mutation and selection has been severely limited, if not falsified, by these experiments. On the contrary, they say their experiments demonstrate a mechanism for stability of the genome: “In this sense, because it involves masking the interaction among deleterious alleles, antagonistic epistasis might be seen as a sort of genetic mutational robustness.” (See 09/22/2004 headline on robustness as a design constraint in the living cell.) In conclusion, they caution evolutionary modelers to realize that they can no longer merely assume fitness gains (if any) add up. Mercifully, they use the words hint and suggest: “Finally, we would like to hint that the above findings prompt the necessity of considering nonmultiplicative fitness effects in mathematical descriptions of viral evolution.” Indeed, “the results we present here suggest that more realistic models must incorporate variance in the type and strength of epistasis among mutations.” But did they themselves find any synergistic, beneficial epistatic effects by experiment? None. Maybe neo-Darwinism is like the businessman who lost money on every sale but thought he could make it up in volume.1Rafael Sanjuán, Andrés Moya, and Santiago F. Elena, “Evolution: The contribution of epistasis to the architecture of fitness in an RNA virus,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA, 10.1073/pnas.0404125101, Published online before print October 18, 2004.Any scientific hypothesis must be testable and subject to falsification by experiment. It is not enough to tell just-so stories, and describe things in glittering generalities with armchair scenarios. Neo-Darwinian theory, the idea that natural selection acting on “scarce” beneficial mutations can produce all the diversity of life, from diving cormorants to catapulting chameleon tongues to sponge fiber optics to high-tech fruit fly aircraft to supersonic high-jumping froghoppers to efficient penguin, whale and dolphin flippers to fish physics students to glass-sculpturing diatoms to self-propelled motors, must be testable if it is to be declared scientific. So there. These scientists finally put neo-Darwinism to the test in a microcosm that should have shown, if the principles were correct, a clear case of fitness increasing as a result of natural selection acting on beneficial mutations. It failed. It failed miserably. Not only were no instances of synergistic beneficial mutations detected, the beneficial mutations that were artificially inserted worked against each other! Neo-Darwinism is falsified! And it was falsified not by creationists, but by evolutionary biologists working in the lab at an institute for the study of biological evolution! Now all we need to do is get the word out. Stop the propaganda machine, stop the NCSE and ACLU threats at the school boards, stop the PBS NOVA programs and the media spin doctors. Rearrange the museums, gather up the pro-Darwin displays and national park signs and toss them, along with neo-Darwinian theory itself, and by implication all of Charlie’s baggage that was already obsolete before 1940, onto the dumpster of discredited ideas. Darwin’s Century is now a mere footnote of history, an unfortunate detour that killed 100 million people, but at least now we know better.(Visited 100 times, 1 visits today)FacebookTwitterPinterestSave分享0
Share Facebook Twitter Google + LinkedIn Pinterest In this week’s DuPont Pioneer Field Report, Territory Manager Troy Putnam talks about why farmers shouldn’t be worried if planting hasn’t begun yet.
In the past decade, wind energy production has soared in Spain, rising from 6% of the country’s electricity generation in 2004 to about 20% today. While that is certainly good news for boosters of clean energy, the surge in renewables has come with the challenge of ensuring that electric power is available when customers want it, not just when the wind blows.To help accommodate the increased supply of wind, Spain’s utilities have turned not to high-tech, 21st-century batteries, but rather to a time-tested 19th-century technology — pumped storage hydroelectricity. Pumped storage facilities are typically equipped with pumps and generators that move water between upper and lower reservoirs. A basic setup uses excess electricity — generated, say, from wind turbines during a blustery night — to pump water from a lower reservoir, such as behind a dam, to a reservoir at a higher elevation. Then, when the wind ceases to blow or electricity demand spikes, the water from on high is released to spin hydroelectric turbines. Total capacity is now 142 gigawattsCurrently, 292 pumped storage hydro facilities are in operation worldwide, with a total capacity of 142 gigawatts. Another 46 projects, with a total capacity of 34 gigawatts, are being developed, according to the U.S. Department of Energy’s Global Energy Storage Database.Chemical batteries are typically installed at the electricity distribution level, where in addition to storage they provide other services, such as closing the gap between supply and demand in increments measured in milliseconds, notes Ruud Kempener, an analyst with the International Renewable Energy Agency in Bonn, Germany. The capacity of batteries is typically in the single to tens of megawatts.In contrast, the capacity of pumped storage hydro systems ranges from the hundreds to thousands of megawatts, providing flexibility to the electric system as a whole, a role that Kempener says will increase in importance in the future. He was lead author of a recent report that found pumped storage hydro would need to increase to 325 gigawatts by 2030 from about 150 gigawatts today in order to double the share of renewable energy in the global mix.Recent energy policy reforms in Spain have halted the hyper growth of renewables there. Still, several new pumped storage projects have recently come online in Spain, with more being developed in Germany, Austria, and Italy. In Italy, Swiss utility Repower is gaining approvals for its planned 572-megawatt Campolattaro pumped storage plant about 55 miles northeast of Naples, which would pump water from a dammed lake to a newly constructed reservoir in nearby hills.Pumped storage hydro is growing fastest in China, according to Chi-Jen Yang, a research scientist at the Center on Global Change at Duke University in Durham, North Carolina. “A new pumped hydro station comes online every several months,” he says, adding that “there are 10 or 15 under construction right now and each one is really huge, like 1 gigawatt or bigger.”China’s 22 gigawatts of installed pumped storage hydro capacity recently surpassed the United States’ 21 gigawatts and will overtake world leader Japan’s 27 gigawatts in 2018, according to Yang. The 3.6-gigawatt Fengning Pumped Storage Power Station under construction in Hebei Province will be the world’s largest when it comes online around 2022. John Roach is a Seattle-based journalist who covers technology, science and the environment. This post originally appeared at Yale Environment 360. Obstacles to new hydro facilitiesBuilding new pumped storage hydro faces numerous obstacles, especially in the United States. Public and private sector support for chemical batteries can outweigh interest in pumped hydro. Other challenges include the hundreds of millions of dollars in upfront capital, long construction times, and market structures that give insufficient value to grid flexibility.These hurdles have hobbled the Klickitat County Public Utility District’s effort to construct the JD Pool Pumped Storage Hydroelectric Project along the Columbia River. Renewed interest is percolating, however, according to Randy Knowles, a commissioner for the utility district who has promoted the project for more than a decade. HydroChina Corp., a major hydropower construction firm based in Beijing, signed a memorandum of understanding with the county this October to discuss collaborating on the project. “They have an interest in entering the U.S. market, and this is a real attractive project given its size,” Knowles says.Since 2000, 47 wind projects have been developed in Washington and Oregon within about 50 miles of the proposed project site. The turbines have a combined capacity of 4,695 megawatts and generate enough electricity to power about 800,000 homes, according to data from the Northwest Power and Conservation Council. Power lines carry the electricity wrung from the wind to high-voltage transmission lines that lead away from the John Day Dam.Most of the time, the dam, and others in the Columbia Basin, work in concert with the wind turbines. When the wind slackens, for example, grid operators send more water through the dams to keep up with demand. When the wind howls, flows through the dams are reduced to save water until it’s needed. In a sense, the dams act as a giant battery that compensates for the intermittency of the wind, ensuring a low-carbon means to keep the lights on from Seattle to Los Angeles.But the capacity of the hydroelectric dams to accommodate wind generation is about maxed out, according to Knowles. In the spring of 2011, for example, the Bonneville Power Administration, the federal agency that operates the dams, ordered many Pacific Northwest wind farms to shut down generation for several hours a day to accommodate water releases (and a resulting surplus of hydroelectric generation) that was legally required to maintain safe passage for migrating fish.The Klickitat County Public Utility District’s proposed 1,200-megawatt project, Knowles says, would reduce the wind sector’s reliance on the dams, allow more wind turbines on the Columbia Plateau, and, in the process, help the United States meet long-term emissions reduction targets.“We are just ahead of the curve, frankly, in recognizing the need,” he says. “So at some point everybody will catch up and the project will get built.” The technology dates from the 1890sPumped storage hydro was first used in the 1890s in the Swiss, Austrian, and Italian Alps to provide greater flexibility for the management of water resources. The technology was widely adopted in the 1960s, ’70s, and ’80s to provide load shifting, which transfers electric generation from peak hours to off-peak hours of the day, according to Koritarov. The technique allows utilities to continually operate large, inflexible assets such as nuclear and coal-fired power plants at their optimal efficiency. Surplus generation from these plants is used to fill storage reservoirs; when demand peaks, the water is released to generate additional electricity. When nuclear and coal plants stopped being built, “the pumped storage also quit being built,” he says.Pumped hydro in Spain: The upper reservoir of the Cortes-La Muela hydroelectric station in the municipality of Valencia, Europe’s largest such facility.Today’s growth in pumped storage hydro is strongest where access is limited to inexpensive natural gas-fired “peaker plants,” which are built to run specifically during times of high demand, such as the late afternoon on hot summer days. Peaker plants are also increasingly used to fill the gap when the wind dies or clouds blot the sun, causing a drop in intermittent renewable generation. Pumped storage hydro can perform the same tasks. An added bonus of pumped storage hydro is the capacity to absorb excess electricity, Koritarov says. Wind generation, for example, is typically highest at night, when demand is lowest and the electricity is often unwanted.Pumped storage hydro requires more energy than it produces, notes Yang, meaning that the technology only makes sense in electric power systems that have surplus generation during certain parts of the day and lulls at others.The technology is not without environmental costs. Their operation leads to rapid fluctuations in reservoir water levels as the systems switch between pumping water from dam reservoirs to elevated storage reservoirs, and then lowering those upper reservoirs during electricity generation. “You may have an artificial flood for four hours, and then a drought for 20 hours, and then another artificial flood,” Peter Bosshard, the interim executive director for International Rivers, an environmental advocacy based in Berkeley, California, says. Such fluctuations wreak havoc on the ecologically rich areas where terrestrial and freshwater ecosystems overlap.“We are seeing that there are other, more interesting ways of storing electricity coming up on the horizon, in particular battery storage through distributed systems,” Bosshard says. New projects in the U.S.In the United States, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission issued licenses for two projects in 2014, both in California. The Sacramento Municipal Utility District’s $800 million, 400-megawatt Iowa Hill Pumped-Storage Project involves construction of a reservoir 1,200 feet above Slab Creek Reservoir, along with an underground powerhouse and tunnels to connect the water bodies. Eagle Crest Energy Company’s $1.4 billion 1,300-megawatt Eagle Mountain Pumped Storage Project involves construction of upper and lower reservoirs at an old iron mine near Joshua Tree National Park.Several dozen other U.S. projects are in the early planning and preliminary study stages. These include the $2.5 billion, 1,200-megawatt JD Pool Pumped Storage Hydroelectric Project in Washington State, which would site a pair of upper reservoirs between strings of wind turbines on the Columbia Plateau and a lower reservoir, located 2,400 feet down the wall of the Columbia River Gorge at an abandoned aluminum smelter near the John Day Dam. Planners envision close coordination among Columbia River dams, large arrays of wind turbines, and the proposed pumped storage facilities, which would hold water in reserve during steady winds and unleash it during calm periods. That’s precisely what the giant Spanish utility Iberdrola has done with the expansion to its $1.3 billion Cortes-La Muela hydroelectric scheme, completed in 2013. The company uses surplus electricity to pump water from the JÃºcar River to a large reservoir on a bluff 1,700 feet above the river. When demand rises, the water is released to generate electricity. The 1,762-megawatt pumped storage generating capacity is Europe’s largest and is part of a hydroelectric complex capable of powering about 500,000 homes a year.While much of the buzz around energy storage today centers on the development of innovative battery technologies, more than 98% of installed storage capacity globally is, in fact, pumped hydro, according to Vladimir Koritarov, an energy systems engineer at the Department of Energy’s Argonne National Laboratory in Illinois. And today, fueled by the world’s embrace of solar and wind power to help combat global warming, pumped storage hydro is in the midst of a surge, with power generators and utilities building new facilities from Italy to China as a way of balancing supply and demand across electric power grids.“Among all energy storage technologies,” Koritarov notes, “pumped storage hydropower is still the only one that is mature, reliable, proven, and commercially available to provide large utility-scale energy storage.” RELATED ARTICLES Spanish Island Kicks the Oil HabitA Novel Way to Store Energy Surge in Renewables Remakes California’s Energy LandscapeUndamming Rivers Could Make Room for PV
The fate of Indian Premier League (IPL) team Deccan Chargers — currently owned by Deccan Chronicle Holdings Limited (DCHL ) — could be decided on Thursday with the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) opening the bids made by potential buyers and announcing the new buyer if all the criteria set are met.The cash strapped owners of the troubled franchise have put the team up for sale and auction bids would be tabled in Chennai. DCHL has been in a major financial crisis so it put the team up for sale after breaching IPL rules by mortgaging Deccan Chargers to various banks against borrowed funds.Failing to resolve the matter with the BCCI, the owners were left with no option but to put the 2009 champions up for sale. Reports claimed the expected base price for the bid could be around Rs 750 crore.Sources claimed that the likes of RPG Group, Jaypee Group, Peepul Capital and Adani Group were in the fray to procure the franchise. Deccan Chargers was originally bought by DCHL ahead of the inaugural season in 2008 for a price of Rs 428 crore.For a side that is one of only the four IPL teams to have won the prestigious title, Deccan Chargers’ fall from champions to the auction comes as a shock. The fortunes of the 2009 IPL champions’ parent company took an unexpected dip, affecting the team’s operations.To add to their woes, the on-field fortunes of the team too have been on the downswing since the dizzy heights of 2009. Following the poor on-field displays major sponsors too reportedly withdrew their association with the team. An overhaul of the management team too seemed to backfire leading to further crisis in the Deccan Chargers camp.advertisement
Durant didn’t practice with the Warriors on Tuesday, and he has yet to get on the court for a structured session since getting injured May 8 in Game 5 against the Houston Rockets. Durant was set to some work on the court later Tuesday at the practice facility.Guard Klay Thompson practiced two days after sustaining a mild strain to his left hamstring that forced him out of Game 2. He is listed as questionable for Game 3.FEATURED STORIESSPORTSPrivate companies step in to help SEA Games hostingSPORTSPalace wants Cayetano’s PHISGOC Foundation probed over corruption chargesSPORTSSingapore latest to raise issue on SEA Games food, logisticsThe best-of-seven series with the Toronto Raptors is tied at 1-all.Thompson said his discomfort Tuesday was bearable — “the pain level wasn’t too crazy at all.” Revengeful Pasig Chooks, Balanga to go all out in Moscow Challenger Duterte wants probe of SEA Games mess Golden State Warriors Kevin Durant watches during basketball practice at the NBA Finals in Toronto, Saturday, June 1, 2019. (Nathan Denette/The Canadian Press via AP)OAKLAND, Calif. (AP) — The Golden State Warriors will take the floor once more without two-time reigning NBA Finals MVP Kevin Durant, counting on their depth and home court to carry them as they try to inch closer to a three-peat.Durant is out for Game 3 of the finals on Wednesday night, still not ready to return for the two-time defending champions as he works back from a strained right calf suffered during the Western Conference semifinals.ADVERTISEMENT All that after he had been out with a torn left quadriceps muscle sustained in Game 2 of the first round against the Clippers. Cousins didn’t even make his season debut until Jan. 18 at the Clippers following a nearly yearlong absence while recovering from surgery for a torn left Achilles tendon.RAPTORS SHOOTINGToronto went just 35 for 94 (37.2 in Game 2, compared to 50.6% while winning the series opener, including 11 of 38 from 3-point range. The Raptors’ missed shots and defensive stops are exactly what the Warriors count on to get out into their push-the-pace transition game.“It’s always a game of rhythm a little bit and you have to watch what’s happening. As you know, we talk a lot about our shot spectrum, the shots we’re trying to get,” Nurse said. “We have to get a certain amount of paint touches. We have to get the ball side to side. Those are things you just have to keep an eye on. I think we just had some lulls in those three areas in Game 2.”The Raptors were outscored 18-0 to start the third — “the quarter from hell” as Nurse called it — and that all but did them in before a late rally that fell short.GOLDEN DEPTHKerr prepares his role players all season to be ready for moments on the big stage — because Kerr was one of the backups in his day. At home, Quinn Cook, who scored nine points with three 3-pointers in the fourth quarter, regularly resumes his shooting routine moments after the final buzzer sounds.With all the injuries, all the Warriors must be ready to contribute.“The way that we play, everybody feels involved on both ends of the floor and has an opportunity to impact the game, not necessarily scoring every possession but just playing within the flow and sharing the ball, moving, playing unselfishly,” Stephen Curry said. “Just a style where everybody is going to get touches and you just have to be confident and aggressive. So again, day to day it’s just whoever is healthy. Be ready to go, compete, have fun doing it. Whoever is out there on the floor, just feel like you can help us win the game.” Don’t mind Kawhi Leonard’s limp. Like Thompson, little will keep Toronto’s star guard off the court on the NBA’s biggest stage. Not with no more than five games left.“A hundred percent,” Leonard said of his health. “I’m on the floor. There are no excuses. Everybody knows everyone’s banged up, bruised up at this moment.”Leonard is averaging 30.9 points this postseason.BOX-AND-ONE?Raptors coach Nick Nurse was still hearing about his move to use an old school box-and-one with Fred VanVleet on Curry.“In ninth grade a team played one against me,” Kerr joked. “Very proud to announce that. I had a box-and-one, just like Steph.”“Yeah, I know, everybody’s making fun of me for it, right?” Nurse quipped.COUSINS’ IMPACTDeMarcus Cousins shined during his first NBA Finals start and just the fourth postseason game of his career.The big man had 11 points, 10 rebounds, six assists and two blocked shots over 28 minutes while playing in foul trouble in the 109-104 Game 2 win Sunday. Two-day strike in Bicol fails to cripple transport Private companies step in to help SEA Games hosting “It will be a game-time decision. But for me personally, it would be hard to see me not playing. Hopefully, I’ll feel much better tomorrow and be a go for tipoff,” Thompson said.Along with Durant, Golden State is also down backup big man Kevon Looney. He suffered a non-displaced cartilage fracture on the right side of his collarbone area and will miss the remainder of the finals.“He’s had such a great season, such a great postseason run,” coach Steve Kerr said. “Fortunately it won’t affect his future, but it’s a big loss for us.”Here are some things to watch for going into Game 3:KAWHI SORE? NAHADVERTISEMENT LATEST STORIES Kevin Durant out with Achilles injury; to undergo MRI on Tuesday PLAY LIST 03:12Kevin Durant out with Achilles injury; to undergo MRI on Tuesday01:43Who are Filipinos rooting for in the NBA Finals?01:08Huge Toronto crowd celebrates Raptors’ historic win02:42PH underwater hockey team aims to make waves in SEA Games01:44Philippines marks anniversary of massacre with calls for justice01:19Fire erupts in Barangay Tatalon in Quezon City01:07Trump talks impeachment while meeting NCAA athletes02:49World-class track facilities installed at NCC for SEA Games02:11Trump awards medals to Jon Voight, Alison Krauss Don’t miss out on the latest news and information. DA eyes importing ‘galunggong’ anew Ethel Booba twits Mocha over 2 toilets in one cubicle at SEA Games venue ‘Rebel attack’ no cause for concern-PNP, AFP Sports Related Videospowered by AdSparcRead Next MOST READ Catholic schools seek legislated pay hike, too Cayetano: Senate, Drilon to be blamed for SEA Games mess View comments
Related posts:Envision Festival announces 2016 music and arts lineup Envision Festival, Paula Rock, and other happenings around Costa Rica Beerfest to pour into La Sabana Park Artist Justin Griffin-Zúñiga receives first solo show in Costa Rica Since 2010, Envision has beenone of the most anticipated events of the year: The massive festival in the Pacific town of Uvita celebrates sustainable permaculture, music, yoga and spiritual openness, attracting thousands of people.But as of 5:40 p.m. on Tuesday, the festival hit its limit: Envision is officially sold out.“There are no longer any general admission tickets available for Envision,” read a message on the festival’s website. “If you have not purchased your ticket at this time, please do not come to the venue as you will be turned around to find somewhere else to go.”Popularity has long been a conundrum for festival organizers, as throngs of Costa Ricans, expats, and international travelers cram into a small patch of rain forest and beach. While a large percentage of attendees prefer to camp on the premises, area hotels struggle to accommodate the influx.All this despite the price: Admission cost as much as $300; the least-expensive option (a ticket good only for Sunday) cost $80 and could only have been purchased if there was room available. But now that the festival has reached capacity, no such tickets will be sold.In related news, 40,000 individual tickets for Burning Man were made available since Feb. 11 and have not yet sold out. Facebook Comments