News

Society

Science

Health

Culture

Subscribe

There’s a surprisingly spicy reason for ‘Groundhog Day.’ And yes, it’s all about sex.

We think it’s Groundhog’s Day, but the groundhogs think it’s Valentine’s Day.

By

Stam Zervanos

By  Stam Zervanos
Add to Google News
Mating strategy, Biology, Wildlife, Predictions, Mating, Hibernation, Groundhogs, Torpor, Wildlife biology
Photo credit: Jason Cohn / Reuters – Guys, I’m just trying to hibernate over here.

According to legend, if the groundhog sees his shadow on February 2nd, there will be six more weeks of winter; if not, an early spring is predicted.

Of course groundhogs – also known as woodchucks – don’t emerge at this time just to be furry weather predictors. So what’s the real reason? Research into groundhog biology shows they have other priorities in early February than mingling with the people of Punxsutawney, Pennsylvania.

It’s Groundhog Day!

Groundhog Day appears to have European roots. Early February is midway between the winter solstice and the spring equinox, and throughout history this seasonal crossroads has been celebrated. The ancient Greeks and Romans observed a mid-season festival on February 5th in anticipation of spring. In the Celtic tradition, this period was celebrated as the festival of Imbolog to mark the beginning of spring. Early Christians in Europe embraced this tradition and celebrated Candlemas Day on February 2nd, to commemorate the purification of the Virgin Mary. Customarily on this day, clergy would bless candles and distribute them to the people in the dark of winter in anticipation of spring.

In northern Europe, farmers needed some indication when to start spring planting. They looked for the emergence of hibernators, such as the hedgehog or badger, to signal the coming of spring. Since their emergence occurred in early February, it was believed that if Candlemas Day was sunny, and the hibernator saw its shadow, more wintry weather was ahead. But if it rained or snowed on Candlemas Day, the rest of the winter would be mild.

This tradition was brought to America by the Germans who migrated to eastern Pennsylvania. They found groundhogs in profusion in many parts of the state and decided this mammal was a perfect replacement for the hibernators they’d left behind in Europe. Thus, the tradition continued in America.

Mating strategy, Biology, Wildlife, Predictions, Mating, Hibernation, Groundhogs, Torpor, Wildlife biology
Female groundhog emerging from her burrow in late January. Stam Zervanos, Author provided

Hibernation helps survival

In my study area in southeastern Pennsylvania, the average date groundhogs emerge from their burrows is February 4. This fits the folklore and the timing of Groundhog Day. However, predicting the weather is not their objective.

The real reason is related to Darwinian fitness – a measure of an organism’s ability to contribute its genes to the next generation. The process defines natural selection and is based on an organism’s ability to survive and to reproduce successfully. High Darwinian fitness suggests an individual will pass on its genes to many healthy offspring.

Hibernation contributes to Darwinian fitness value. It enhances survival by saving energy during times of limited food availability. The ability to hibernate is found in several mammalian groups, including all marmots, many species of ground squirrels, chipmunks, hamsters, badgers, lemurs, bats and even some marsupials and echidnas. Curled up in their burrows, they pass the winter months, when food would be hard to come by.

Hibernation: alternating torpor and arousal

Hibernation is characterized by a significant drop in body temperature and metabolic function. This process is commonly called torpor. During torpor, body functions including heart rate, breathing rate, and brain activity are reduced. The overall benefit for the animal is saving metabolic energy at a time when it isn’t eating.

Mating strategy, Biology, Wildlife, Predictions, Mating, Hibernation, Groundhogs, Torpor, Wildlife biology
This Maine groundhog had 17 torpor bouts where body temperature went up and down. Stam Zervanos, Author provided

However, for some still unexplained reason, hibernators arouse periodically during their hibernating season. These arousals come at a great energy cost. Therefore, arousing must be critical to survival in some way or animals wouldn’t waste the energy on it. Some possibilities include maintaining cellular functions or disposing of bodily wastes.

In Pennsylvania, these bouts of torpor and arousal continue throughout the hibernation season, starting on average in mid-November and ending by the beginning of March; a total of about 110 days. In one study, an average of 15 bouts of torpor occurred during this period, with arousals in between. Groundhogs aroused for about 41 hours and then returned to torpor for about 128 hours for males and 153 hours for females.

In a 2010 study, we determined that the hibernation periods for groundhogs increase in length with increasing latitude. The hibernation period matches winter’s duration. The celebration of Groundhog Day would need to change by latitude in order to perfectly match groundhog emergence.

Mating strategy, Biology, Wildlife, Predictions, Mating, Hibernation, Groundhogs, Torpor, Wildlife biology
Male groundhog (on the right) greeting a female groundhog for the first time after they emerge from their separate burrows. Stam Zervanos, Author provided

It all boils down to sex

One of the drawbacks of hibernation is the reduced time available for reproduction. Thus, hibernators have developed mating strategies to maximize reproductive success. Groundhog mating strategies involve temporary emergence in early February, mating in early March during during their final arousal, and giving birth in early April. This behavior enhances reproductive success because young are born as early as possible (but not too early) and are able to start feeding in May when lots of food is available. That way they have enough time to gain sufficient weight to survive their first winter hibernation.

But why do groundhogs emerge in February, when mating won’t occur until next month? The answer lies in their social structure. Most of the year, male and female groundhogs are solitary and antagonistic against each other. They aggressively maintain a feeding territory around their burrows and rarely have any contact with each other. February is used to reestablish the bonds necessary for mating and ensures that mating can then proceed without delay in early March.

So for the animals themselves, Groundhog Day is more like Valentine’s Day. On February 2nd, groundhogs don’t emerge to predict the weather, but to predict whether their own mating season will be a success!

This article originally appeared on The Conversation. You can read it here.

Add to Google News

Tags

advertisement

More for You

  • Despite all the likes, literallys and dropped g’s, English isn’t decaying before our eyes
    Photo credit: LisaStrachan/iStock via Getty Images – Fear not: There isn’t anything that needs saving.
    ,

    Despite all the likes, literallys and dropped g’s, English isn’t decaying before our eyes

    Why “bad” English is nothing new.

    Good Partner

    Valerie M. Fridland

    Valerie M. Fridland

    As a linguistics professor, I’m often asked why English is decaying before our eyes, whether it’s “like” being used promiscuously, t’s being dropped deleteriously or “literally” being deployed nonliterally.

    While these common gripes point to eccentric speech patterns, they don’t point to grammatical annihilation. English has weathered far worse.

    Let’s start with something we can all agree on: Old English, spoken from approximately A.D. 450 to 1100, is pretty unintelligible to us today. Anyone who’s had the pleasure of reading “Beowulf” in high school knows how different English back then used to sound. Word endings did a lot more grammatical work, and verbs followed more complicated patterns. Remnants of those rules fuel lingering debates today, such as when to use “whom” over “who,” and whether the past tense of “sneak” is “snuck” or “sneaked.”

    The language went on to experience centuries of tumult: Viking invasions, which introduced Old Norse influence; Anglo-Norman French rule, which shifted the language of the elite to French; and 18th-Century grammarians, who dictated norms with their elocution and grammar guides.

    In that time, English has lost almost all of the more complex linguistic trappings it was born with to become the language we know and – at least, sometimes – love today. And as I explain in my new book, “Why We Talk Funny: The Real Story Behind Our Accents,” it was all thanks to the way that language naturally evolves to meet the social needs of its speakers.

    From dropping the ‘l’ to dropping the ‘g’

    The things we tend to label as “bad” or sloppy English – for instance, the “g” that gets lost from our -ing endings or the deletion of a “t” when we say a word like “innernet” – actually reflect speech habits that are centuries old.

    Take, for example, “often.” Originally spoken with the “t,” that pronunciation gradually became less favored around the 15th century, alongside that “l” in “talk” and the “k” in know. Meanwhile, the “s” now stuck on the back of verbs like “does” and “makes” began as a dialectal variant that only became popular in 16th-century London. It gradually replaced “th” whenever third persons were involved, as in “The lady doth protest too much.”

    While dropping the “l” in talk may have been initially frowned upon, today it would be strange if you pronounced the letter. And the shift makes sense: It smoothed out some linguistic awkwardness for the sake of efficiency.

    If people learned to look at language more like linguists, they might come around to seeing that there is more than one perspective on what good speech consists of.

    And yes, that absolutely is a sentence ending with a preposition – something many modern grammar guides discourage, even though the idea only took hold after 18th-century grammarian Robert Lowth intimated it was a less elegant choice based on the model of Latin.

    Though Lowth voiced no hard and fast rule against it, many a grammar maven later misconstrued his advice as an admonition. Just like that, a mere suggestion became grammatical law.

    The rise of the grammar sticklers

    Many of today’s ideas about what constitutes correct English are based on a singular – often mistaken – 19th-century view of the forces that govern our language.

    In the late 18th century, the English-speaking world began experiencing class restructuring and higher literacy rates. As greater class mobility became possible, accent differences became class markers that separated new money from old money.

    Emulation of upper-crust speech norms became popular among the nouveau riche. With literacy also on the rise, grammarians and elocutionists raced to dictate the terms of “proper” English on and off the page, which led to the rise of usage guides and dictionaries that were eager to sell a certain brand of speech.

    Another example of grammarian angst reconfiguring the view of an otherwise perfectly fine form is the droppin’ of the “g.” It became so tied to slovenly speech that it was branded with an apostrophe in the 19th century to make sure no one missed its lackadaisical and nonstandard nature.

    Up until the 19th century, however, no one seemed to care whether one pronounced it as “-in” or “-ing.”

    Evidence suggests that -ing wasn’t even heard as the correct form. Many elocution guides from the 18th century provide rhyming word pairs like “herring/heron,” “coughing/coffin” and “jerking/jerkin,” which suggest that “-in” may have been the preferred pronunciation of words ending with “-ing.” Even writer and satirist Jonathan Swift – a frequent lobbyist for “proper” English – rhymes “brewing” with “ruin” in his 1731 poem “Verses on the Death of Dr. Swift, D.S.P.D..”

    Embrace the change

    Language has always shifted and evolved. People often bristle at changes from what they’ve known to what is new. And maybe that’s because this process often begins with speakers that society usually looks less favorably on: the young, the female, the poor, the nonwhite.

    But it’s important to remember that being disliked and bad are not the same thing – that today’s speech pariahs are driven by the same linguistic and social needs as the Londoners who started going with “does” instead of “doth” or dropped the “t” in often.

    So if you think the speech that comes from your lips is the “correct” version, think again. Thou, like every other English speaker, art literally the product of centuries of linguistic reinvention.

    This article originally appeared on The Conversation. You can read it here.

    Keep Reading →
  • 10 boys and 10 girls were left alone in separate houses and the different results are just wild
    Photo credit: Canva – (L) Kids wrestling in the yard; (R) young children playing chess
    ,

    10 boys and 10 girls were left alone in separate houses and the different results are just wild

    The premise was simple but high stakes.

    Adam Albright Hanna

    GOOD Staff

    It sounds like the plot of William Golding’s Lord of the Flies. However, in the mid-2000s, it was a very real and very controversial reality television experiment.

    Footage from the UK Channel 4 documentary Boys and Girls Alone is captivating audiences all over again. It offers a fascinating and chaotic look at what happens when you remove parents from the equation.

    The premise was simple but high stakes. Twenty children, aged 11 and 12, were split into two groups by gender. Ten boys and ten girls were placed in separate houses and told to live without adult supervision for five days.

    The Setup

    While there were safety nets in place, the day-to-day living was entirely up to the kids. A camera crew was present but instructed not to intervene unless safety was at risk. The children could also ring a bell to speak to a nurse or psychiatrist.

    The houses were fully stocked with food, cleaning supplies, toys, and paints. Everything they needed to survive was there. They just had to figure out how to use it.

    The Boys: Instant Chaos

    In the boys’ house, the unraveling was almost immediate. The newfound freedom triggered a rapid descent into high-energy anarchy.

    They engaged in water pistol fights and threw cushions. In one memorable instance, a boy named Michael covered the carpet in sticky popcorn kernels just because he could.

    The destruction eventually escalated to the walls. The boys covered the house in writing, drawing, and paint. But the euphoria of freedom eventually crashed into the reality of consequences.

    “We never expected to be like this, but I’m really upset that we trashed it so badly,” one boy admitted in the footage. “We were trying to explore everything at once and got too carried away in ourselves.”

    Their attempts to clean up were frantic and largely ineffective. Nutrition also took a hit. Despite having completed a cooking course, the boys survived mostly on cereal, sugar, and the occasional frozen pizza. By the end of the week, the house was trashed, and the group had fractured into opposing factions.

    The Girls: Organized Society

    The girls’ house looked like a different planet.

    In stark contrast to the mayhem next door, the girls immediately established a functioning society. They organized a cooking roster, with a girl named Sherry preparing their first meal. They baked cakes. They put on a fashion show. They even drew up a scrupulous chores list to ensure the house stayed livable.

    While their stay wasn’t devoid of interpersonal drama, the experiment highlighted a fascinating divergence in socialization. Left to their own devices, the girls prioritized community and maintenance. The boys tested the absolute limits of their environment until it broke.

    The documentary was controversial when it aired, with critics questioning the ethics of placing children in unsupervised situations for entertainment. But what made it so enduring, and why footage keeps resurfacing years later, is what it reveals about how kids are socialized long before anyone puts them in a house together. The boys weren’t born anarchists and the girls weren’t born organizers. They arrived at those houses already shaped by years of being told, implicitly and explicitly, what boys do and what girls do. Whether that’s a nature story or a nurture story is the question the documentary keeps asking without quite answering, which is probably why people are still watching and arguing about it nearly two decades later.

    This article originally appeared two years ago. It has been updated.

    Keep Reading →
  • 9-year-old girl asks Steph Curry why his shoes aren’t in girls’ sizes. The response was perfect.
    Photo credit: Wikicommons – (L) A young girl's letter to Steph Curry asking about women's shoe sizes; (R) Steph Curry.
    ,

    9-year-old girl asks Steph Curry why his shoes aren’t in girls’ sizes. The response was perfect.

    “… it seems unfair that the shoes are only in the boys,” Riley Morrison wrote, starting a chain reaction of positive change.

    GOOD Staff

    Adam Albright-Hanna

    Nine-year-old Riley Morrison from Napa, California is a huge basketball fan. She roots for the Golden State Warriors and her favorite player is four-time NBA champion Steph Curry. Morrison loves to play basketball so she went online to pick up a pair of Curry’s Under Armour Curry 5 shoes, but there weren’t any available in the girls’ section of the site.

    But instead of resigning herself to the fact she wouldn’t be able to drive the lane in a sweet pair of Curry 5’s, she wrote a letter to the man himself. Her father posted it on social media:

    “My name is Riley (just like your daughter), I’m 9 years old from Napa, California. I am a big fan of yours. I enjoy going to Warriors games with my dad. I asked my dad to buy me the new Curry 5’s because I’m starting a new basketball season. My dad and I visited the Under Armour website and were disappointed to see that there were no Curry 5’s for sale under the girls section. However, they did have them for sale under the boy’s section, even to customize. I know you support girl athletes because you have two daughters and you host an all girls basketball camp. I hope you can work with Under Armour to change this because girls want to rock the Curry 5’s too.”

    “I wanted to write the letter because it seems unfair that the shoes are only in the boys’ section and not in the girls’ section,” Riley told Teen Vogue. “I wanted to help make things equal for all girls, because girls play basketball, too.”

    The letter got to Curry and he gave an amazing response on X (formerly Twitter).

    Many might be surprised that a megastar like Curry took a nine-year-old’s letter seriously, but he’s long been a vocal supporter of women’s issues.

    That August, Curry wrote an empowering letter that was published in The Player’s Tribune where he discussed closing the gender pay gap, hosting his first all-girls basketball camp, and what he’s learned from raising two daughters.

    In the essay he shared a powerful lesson his mother taught him. “Always stay listening to women to always stay believing in women, and — when it comes to anyone’s expectations for women — to always stay challenging the idea of what’s right,” he wrote.

    Curry clearly practices what he preaches because when a nine-year-old girl spoke up, he was all ears.

    Steph Curry and Under Armour didn’t just fix the girls’ sizing issue, they launched a special edition Curry 6 “United We Win” co-designed by Riley, created a $30K annual scholarship for girls, and shifted to unisex sizing across Curry Brand shoes.

    Since then, Curry has stayed active in promoting gender equity: he’s hosted girls’ camps, added girls to his elite training programs, mentored players like Azzi Fudd, and launched the Curry Family Women’s Athletics Initiative to fund 200+ scholarships at Davidson College.

    Riley and Steph bumped into each other at an event where they caught up and took photos. She is now a high school athlete at Vintage High School in Napa, still playing basketball. And yes, still rocking Currys.

    This article originally appeared seven years ago. It has been updated.

    Keep Reading →

advertisement

Bank of America, housing, justice, foreclosure, viral
Money

Bank of America foreclosed on a couple’s home by mistake. So they got a court order and showed up to foreclose on the bank.

evolution, genes, history, generations, biology, humans, family tree
Science

Humans nearly vanished 800,000 years ago, revealing a quiet truth: most family lines disappear

wealth inequality, poverty, social experiment, class, viral video
Money

A millionaire swapped lives with a struggling family for a week on a $230 budget. The money wasn’t what broke him.

Air pollution can negatively affect the brain.
Health

HEPA air purifiers may boost brain power in adults over 40 – new research

A long-running experiment is testing tree mixes to develop the healthiest forests.
Science

Don’t just plant trees, plant forests to restore biodiversity for the future

Sign Up for the Daily Good!

Advertisement

Explore More Culture Stories

See All
Fear not: There isn’t anything that needs saving.
Culture

Despite all the likes, literallys and dropped g’s, English isn’t decaying before our eyes

Good Partner
Boys and Girls Alone, child psychology, gender differences, social experiment, reality TV
Culture

10 boys and 10 girls were left alone in separate houses and the different results are just wild

Adam Albright Hanna & GOOD Staff
Steph Curry, girls in sports, gender equity, Under Armour, youth advocacy
Media

9-year-old girl asks Steph Curry why his shoes aren’t in girls’ sizes. The response was perfect.

GOOD Staff & Adam Albright-Hanna
Michelangelo’s 16th-century fresco ‘The Last Judgment.’
Art

Why Michelangelo’s ‘Last Judgment’ endures

Good Partner