Today World News Online

Importance of Survival Skills

Natural Selection and the Owl Butterfly

Natural Selection and the Owl Butterfly

In the first video on evolution,
I gave the example of the peppered moth during the
Industrial Revolution in England and how, before the
Industrial Revolution, there were a bunch of moths: some were
dark, some were light, some were in between. But then once everything became
soot filled, all of a sudden, the dark moths were less
likely to be caught by predators and so all of the
white moths were less likely to be able to reproduce
successfully, so the black moth trait, or that variant,
dominated. And then if you came a little
bit later and you saw all the moths had turned black,
you’d say all these moths are geniuses. They appear to have somehow
engineered their way to stay camouflaged. And the point I was making
there is that, look, that wasn’t engineered or an explicit
move on the part of the moths or the DNA, that was
just a natural byproduct of them having some variation, and
some of that variation was selected for. So that example, that was pretty
simple: black or white. But what about more complicated
things? So, for example, here I’ve got a
couple of pictures of what’s commonly called the
owl butterfly. And what’s amazing here, and
it’s pretty obvious, as I probably don’t have to point out
to you, is its wing looks like half of an owl’s eye. I can almost draw a beak here
and draw another wing there and you can imagine an owl
staring at us, right? And here, too, I could imagine
a beak here and you would think an owl there, too. And so the question is how does
something this good show up randomly, right? I mean, you could imagine, OK,
little spots or black and white or grey, but how does
something that looks so much like an eye generate randomly? Now the answer is– well,
there’s a couple of answers. One is why does this eye
exist, or this eye-like pattern or this owl-like
eye’s pattern? And there, the jury’s
still out on that. I read a little bit about it on
Wikipedia and all of these images I got from Wikipedia. In Wikipedia, they said,
look, there’s two competing theories here. One theory is that this, even
though to us humans, the way we see things, it looks like
an owl’s eye, that this is actually a decoy. When some predator wants to eat
one of these things, they go for the thing that looks
most substantive. So instead of going for the
butterfly’s body, which doesn’t look that substantive,
they go for the big, black thing. They say, oh, that looks like
it’s protein rich and it’ll be a good meal. So they try to snap and bite at
that, and if they bite at that, sure, the guy’s wing’s
going to be clipped a little bit and it’s going to suck,
but the animal itself, the actual butterfly, would survive,
and maybe it can repair its swings. I don’t know the actual biology
of the owl butterfly. That’s one theory, and then the
argument against it goes, well, no, if that was the case,
then you would want the black spot even further back
along its– you’d want the spot way far away
from the body. You’d want it back here instead
of right here, because there’s still a chance, if
something chomps at this little black spot, that
it’ll still get the abdomen of the butterfly. Now, the other theory as to
why this exists– and, you know, who knows? Maybe it’s a little
bit of both. Maybe both of these are true. Maybe this offers
two advantages. The other theory, and this is
kind of the one that jumps out at us when we see this , is,
hey, this looks like an owl. Maybe this is to scare away the
things that are likely to eat this dude. And it does turn out in my
reading that there are lizards that like to eat these type of
butterflies, and those lizards probably don’t like to be around
birds or owls because those owls eat them, so that
might be a deterrent. And then the other example, they
said is, look, they tend to be eaten by this lizard
right here– this is what Wikipedia told me– and that
this lizard tends to be eaten by this frog right there, and
that the eyes of this butterfly are not too
dissimilar to the eyes of this frog. And, you know, we can debate
whether or not that’s the case, and if this was the
predator we’re trying to mimic, you could make an
argument that maybe we would have had more green on our wing,
but that’s not the point of this video. But it’s a fun discussion to
have as to what is useful about this eye. But let’s have the question: How
did that eye come about? And when I say that eye, I mean
the pattern on that wing. What set of events allowed
this to happen? Because when I described
evolution, and we know that everything in our biological
kingdom is just a set of proteins and then stuff that
maybe the protein– but mainly protein, and that protein’s
all coded for by DNA. I’m going to do future videos
on DNA, but DNA is just a sequence of base pairs. It’s a sequence of
these molecules. And we represent adenine,
and guanine and cytosine and thymine. Then maybe you have a couple of
adenines in a row and some guanine and thymine. I’ll do a lot more on this in
the future, but the idea is it’s just coded for by this
sequence of these molecules. How do you go from a butterfly
that has no eye to all of a sudden an eye that goes there? Obviously, just one change
that happens from a random mutation. Maybe that G turns into an A or
maybe this C and this T get deleted so everything– that
alone isn’t going to develop this beautiful of a pattern or
this useful of a pattern. So how do the random
changes explain something that’s this intricate? And this is my explanation. And obviously, I wasn’t sitting
there watching over the thousands or millions of
years as these owl butterflies emerged, so this is just my
theory of how natural selection does explain this
type of phenomenon. You have a world where in some
environment you have butterflies, and their wings
look like– let’s say you have some butterflies that are
generally like this. That’s their wing, and it’s a
very bad drawing, but I think you get the idea, and there’s
just some general patterns. We’ve seen it before. There’s variation. And the variation does show up
from these little random changes in DNA. I think we can all believe
that, that most of these changes are kind of benign. Maybe they just set up
differently where a little pattern will show up or a little
speck of pigment will show up with a slightly
different color. And we even see amongst
these owl butterflies, there is variation. This dude’s wing is different
than that guy’s wing with the commonality that they do have
these eye-looking shapes. And there’s not just one;
there’s actually multiple. This guy has this other thing
up here that looks interesting, and they have
multiple things, but the one really noticeable feature is
this eye-looking thing. So how do we go from this
to an eye-looking thing? So the idea is you have
some variation. One guy might look like that. Another guy, or gal, might–
just randomly, their dot might be something like that. Another gal or guy– these wings
are really badly drawn, but you get the idea. This is the butterfly. This is its antenna
right there. That’s its body. Another butterfly’s patterns
might look like this, right? And so, they’re just random. But when they go into a certain
environment for whatever reason, maybe one of
its predators– maybe that theory that these are supposed
to look like eyes is true. And so, actually, maybe
this guy just has a random pattern here. And so this guy– and I’m not
saying that it’s like definitely better. They’re both going to be found
and killed by predators, but it’s all probablistic, right? Maybe this guy has a 1% less
chance of getting a predator, because when a predator just
looks at him out of the corner of that eye, that little really
hazy region kind of looks like an eye and the
predator would be better off just not messing with it, and
they’d rather go after the dude that looks like this. So it’s just a slight
probability. Now, you might, say, OK,
what’s 1% going to do? But when you compound that 1%
over thousands and thousands of generations, all of a sudden,
this trait might dominate because he’s just going
to be killed that less frequently, 1% less
frequently. Now, maybe this guy has a
similar trait, but his spot is closer to the abdomen. And here, it’s a tradeoff,
because maybe some predators get scared away by this
concentration of pigment. And once again, I’m not saying
that we’re here yet. We’re not at this very advanced,
sophisticated pattern yet. We’re at this random
concentration of pigment that just shows up. So we see that people who have
this concentration of pigment further away from their
abdomen, they do well. But when it’s too close, maybe
some predators think that that’s actually an insect and
they want to eat it, so that’s actually a bad trait. So what happens is this guy
dominates, and so within this population, you start having a
lot of variation, because he starts representing–
he’s more likely to pass on these traits. And I want to make that
point very clear. This isn’t what happens
over the course of an animal’s lifetime. It’s not like if somehow I
experience something, or at least our current theory if I
experience something, that I could somehow pass on that
knowledge to my child. What it says is if my DNA just
happens to have just some variation that happens to be
more useful or more likely for me to survive to reproduction
and for my children to survive, then that will start to
dominate in the population. So then the population, you’re
going to have variations within that. Maybe some guys, you know, it’s
going to get a little bit to look like that. Maybe another one’s going to
look a little bit like that. Maybe it has some spots there. You can kind of view it as the
variation as “exploring.” But I want to be very clear not to
use any active verbs here because this is all being done
really as almost a common sense process, where
everything changes. The changes that are most suited
are the ones that are going to survive more
frequently. And then the next generation’s
going to have more of that and then you’ll have variation
within that change. And then this one might
be like that, and maybe this is the one. These were good compared to
that, but now when you’re competing amongst themselves,
this one is able to reproduce 1% more than this
guy or this guy. And so this guy becomes– and
maybe it’s some combination of all of the above, and
they mix and match. It’s a hugely complex system. But then this guy represents
most of the population, when I say this guy, I’m saying this
guy’s genetic information, at least as it pertains
to his wings. And then you get variation
amongst that. Maybe some of it, they have a
little small dot and there’s some dots around it. Maybe it’s like this. Maybe one of them digresses and
goes back here, but then he has trouble competing so
he gets knocked out again. And then some other people
have it back here. I think you get the
point that this isn’t happening overnight. These changes can be fairly
incremental, but we’re doing it over thousands
of generations. So when you’re talking about
thousands of generations, or even millions of generations,
even a 1% advantage can be significant, and when you
accumulate those variations over a large period of time,
you can get to fairly intricate patterns like this. So I just wanted to explain
that, because this is often used as, sure, I can believe
the butterfly moth or I can even maybe believe the examples
of the antibiotics and the bacteria or the flu,
because those are kind of real-time examples. But how does something this
intricate show up? And I actually want to
make a point here. We think this is more intricate
because we can relate to it in our
everyday lives. But if you actually look at a
structure of a bacteria and how it operates or what a virus
does to infiltrate an immune system or a cell, that’s
actually on a lot more levels a lot more intricate
than a design. In fact, the whole reason why
I’m using this as an example is because this is a fairly
simple example as opposed to kind of explaining the
metabolism of a certain type of bacteria and how that might
change and how it might become immune to penicillin
or whatever else. But I want to make this very
clear that these very intricate things, they don’t
happen overnight. It’s not like one butterfly
was completely one uniform hot-pink color and then all of
a sudden they have a child whose wings looked
just like this. No! It happens over large periods of
time, although there might be some little weird hormonal
change that does this, but I’m not going to go there,
but that is possible. But I just wanted to make this
point because I think the more examples we see, the more it’ll
kind of hit home that this is a passive process. We’re not talking about these
things happening overnight. And it’s actually really
interesting to look at our world around us and look at
ecosystems as they are today and try to think really hard
about how something came to be, what it’s useful for,
why it might have been selected for. For example, are traits that
occur after reproduction selected for? Well, probably not unless they
affect the reproduction of the next cycle. For example, you might say,
oh, well, the trait to be nurturing after your
reproductive years, that’s after reproductive years. No, but it helps your
offspring reproduce. But we already see a lot of
diseases, especially once we get beyond our reproductive and
our child-rearing years. So once we get into our fifties
and sixties, the incidences of diseases increases
exponentially from when we’re younger and because
they’re no longer being selected for, because it no
longer affects our ability to reproduce, because we’ve
already reproduced. We’ve already raised
our children so that they could reproduce. So the only thing that happens
at that point is now not being selected for. So anyway, hopefully, this video
will give you a little bit more nuance on evolution,
and I want to do a couple of videos like this, because I
really want to make it clear that it’s not making some wild
claim that all of a sudden this appears spontaneously, that
it really is a thing that happens over millennia and
eons and very gradually.

100 thoughts on “Natural Selection and the Owl Butterfly

  • How did you know that in your middle butterfly , the spots were aggregated in this particular place, It looks like you have deliberately chosen to draw the spots concentrated in this particular area to make your point valid, but what you have drawn is one possibility and one possible pattern among hundreds of millions of other random patterns, that the mathematical probability that the predator gets afraid of this one specific model is pretty minimal and approaches the zero. nice theory though!

  • Basically, but it would have taken forever to draw all the possible patterns. Plus, the proof is in the butterfly today, so basically he's on the right track. Haha.

  • thanks. you really helped with my school project.
    do you have anything on types of selection like stabilizing, sexual, disruptive and directional? or even patterns of selection?

  • @ViraIVideos Yes but however without mutations there is nothing for nature to select. Say a giraffe, the giraffe has obviously mutated a gene for a longer neck gradually over millions of years. Nature selected this gene as the best and so only long necked giraffes survived. Natural selection is something that leads to evolution. But in essence they are the same.

  • I've put today on Youtube a small movie regarding that owl eye. I am sure that you will find it more than just interesant 🙂
    Wait for your reaction, and I am very curios how you will see your movie after…

  • its not for the protein they go for the eye because most animals do.
    they know they eye is on the head.
    and if you blind them they r fucked.

  • nice vid, but I have a few questions Sal. Is the owl butterfly self-aware,ie do they slowly discover that this "eye" can be used for protection? And if so, do they have the capability of consciously designing an "eye" for the best effect? no sarcasm here, but there seems to be a very important factor missing in order for this "eye" equation to work. I recall watching a great doc where two children from different families both had the exact same dna anomaly but it was expressed differently…cont

  • ….in each child.In the first child it expressed itself as "the happy spa" disorder (not my term)cannot recall proper name, and in the second child as Pader Willi(incorrect spelling) syndrome in which a person cannot stop eating, suggesting that there was something else at work here. After in-depth tests it was discovered that although these kids had exact same dna anomaly, one child inherited it from its mother, the other child inherited from its father, suggesting some kind of dna "memory".

  • Evolution is a TOTALLY UNAWARE process. There are only two mechanics:
    – random variation of genes (therefore of individuals)
    – environmental stress (basically the ''selection'' part)

    But you had cases where there was an ''aware'' element in the equation: take the example of domesticated plants and animals. In that case the random variation part is the same as above BUT the environment is…the human, because we chose which individuals should mate etc. In that case evolution happens way faster..

  • @Dancetrupa Only if environmental stress (one of the two elements of evolution, along with random mutation) is very high.

    In places where environmental stress is low you have more variation within a species. Humans for example have very different attributes (although that may be a bad example since we are quite a homogeneous species, but that's another discussion)

    I'm not a scientist though, you might wanna double-check that..

  • @Paddyllfixit Hey, I know I'm not Sal, but I think I can help answer your question. It's not that they are self-aware. Rather, it's that a variation in the DNA might produce a butterfly with a little circle that looks vaguely like an eye. Think of it like a heritable birthmark. Because it is helpful in evading predators, this individual will live a little longer and produce more offspring. Since it made more, it's genes form a bigger part of the gene pool. Over time, this process continues…

  • @Paddyllfixit and continues and each generation the individuals where it looks a little more like an eye than the last survive better. Over a long period of time, you end up with something that really looks like an eye. The butterfly and the DNA didn't "know" anything about how to produce the eye. It is from generation to generation that the changes happen. When a trait occurs that makes an animal better at surviving, it can survive longer and produce more offspring. Simple as that.

  • @middleCmusic
    if that's the case, how did the butterfly come to realize that a factor in its survival was the "eye" on its wing and not some other factor. Of course I know evolution over many generations develops and improves whatever traits are necessary for best chance of survival but what "consciousness" begins this process. So if you cared to think a little deeper about it…………'s not just as simple as that.

  • @Paddyllfixit You still don't seem to get it, no offense. The butterfly never realizes anything. There is natural variation in the species. When a butterfly is born with some kind of brown spot on its wing, it survives better than the other butterflies without the spot and has more offspring. That way the next generation more butterflies have those spots. The ones in that generation that most look like eyes survive even better, and eventually the eye ones become a new species.

  • My teacher used servile of the fittest to help explain. take Deer. If one has 5 legs, it might be faster, there for not as easily caught. so it can then reproduce, passing its genetics down to the next generation. Soon all of the 4 legged Deer are gone. and 5 legged ones exist.

  • @adamhihi123456789 If a White couple has a black child, then it's a passed down trait from the former ancestors. It's possible that one or two of the parents have a dark skinned ancestor. But it's a process of variation, so the chances are not really known. The chances depend on if that indiviual has a black ancestor…

    Or, the Mother could have cheated LOL jk

  • Why Owl (Butterfly) when their wings draw show a 3D head of a reptile, rotated to the observer? Search on Youtube (because I can't put links here): "Inteligent… Evolution? – Snake-Butterfly"!

  • This explanation seemed like it was only half the picture (probably because mutation was only very briefly mentioned). I'd be much more interested in a video demonstrating the rate at which a mutation for pigment change (not just lack of pigment) would occur, the genetics of that mutation, and the genetics for a mutation allowing for disparate pigmentation, allowing the formation of patterns; once those are in place I see no reason why it should take exceptionally long to any pattern to appear.

  • Yes, all invertebrates, including butterflies, are able to re-grow limbs and repair any non-fatal damage done to them.

  • Evolution is a belief based on scientific hypothesis. But no one was there to see how the world began and progressed and no one will see how it ends either. I accept your evolution theory but you are wrong in my book. I believe in ID but I will sound wrong in your mind. Fine. We move on.. and we both die eventually because everyone dies. Whatever is there after that.. maybe we could gain some wisdom one way or the other.

  • to have an owl like face u need information, to have information u need a memory element, a memory element is the opposite of randomness. So how the fuck can randomness create information and how the hell derived the source of the information.

  • there is nothing in evolution as we know it that can explain this. Both of the theories are stretched indenial interpretations. When u can give a correct interpretation that is subject to scrutny then we'll talk. To have a certain recognizable pattern u need information holding element. Which protein is a memory, and by what mechanism is this. NO, hell no…i guess with proper stimuli on the wings of the butterfly we can solve switched nonlinear PDEs. get the fuck outta here

  • no in fact, i'm a phd student and engineer by training, and i know what probability is…the interpretation still does not explain how information is preserved by randomness, furthermore, having a certain pattern oright, but not when u have recognizable species of owl. IT's far over stretch as interpretation

  • the argument about survivability depart from the assumption that early random patter did actually survive, in another word how did u conclude that primitve random spot were succeful at surviving.

  • Well explained, but just another "Darwin of the gaps" argument. No real examples of gradual pigment shifts presented which would obviously increase fitness….

  • Can you do a video that explains the metamorphosis process of the butterfly and how this process came about from a evolutionary point of view please.

  • Although I (an atheist) personally don't believe in intelligent design, I respect those who do but also acknowledge the very strong evidence behind evolution. Many forget that spiritual faiths such as Christianity continually evolve, if I may say, to change their beliefs and accept new ideas. At one point, most Christians believed that the Earth was flat, obviously that notion changed. Imo, Christians should treat the bible as a guide for life rather than for all the answers to the universe.

  • You idiot u still believe in the black moth and white moth. That was disproven ages ago. Actually moths never go on trees.

  • Just a quick heads up. Those butterflies are actually smarter that you might first think, they use this pattern in a very defensive way often waiting until a potential threat is close then they open BOTH wings very rapidly, and the image formed by both wings together scares the intruder away due to its likeness to their predator (an owl in this case) If you look for it you can find video footage of this being done to scare a way a mouse that got the close.. I think the bbc has some great…

  • …footage of animals that display mimicry. But I think in the case of the butter fly its not a confusion based defense but more or a scare tactic. More to the point the butterfly is fully aware of this or else it would not be able to exploit it on command. Now I doubt they know they look like an owl but they know for sure that a quick flash of that pattern scare away intruders:
    here is a better pic – bit.lyYdEetu
    nice video btw. Gotta say however that thing got, its wings it's pretty cool

  • I enjoy all your videos, but I think it would provide more clarity on the subject of evolution if you wouldn't just reduce it to "random processes." Winning the Lotto is a random process, adaptation is not

  • evolution is a random process and the more random it is the greater the adaptation, but obviosly there is more to it

  • It's an interesting thought experiment to think if we turned back the hands of time and let evolution run it's course would we end up with the same organisms? Probably not, because the novelties that evolution works with, the mutations, are themselves random. But that doesn't mean that evolution as a whole process is random. Things evolved the way they did because of the cumulative sum of traits that leaned more towards survival fitness that natural selection favored in a very nonrandom fashion

  • Moths aren't scary though :/ I'm sorry you have a fear of moths, that must suck. Are you afraid of butterflies too?

  • you realize that wikipedia has more reliable information than encyclopedia britannica right? research before you post and expose your ignorance.

  • I find it so amazing that the butterfly was able to replicate the shape of the owl over a considereably long time…. Yet the Owl itself was alomst like "posing" the whole time waiting for this mimmicing to happen.

    Why are we assuming the owl did not evolve throughout the prosses of this?

    All life is evolving at the same time, how can anything adapt? how can a prey adapt or develop to counter an ever evolving predator? and vice versa.

  • I know this is a little off track, but can the frequency of points in 'species timelines' be plotted where a species evolves to a critical point (like h.sapiens) when natural selection is abandoned, and self-breeding starts, (selection due to abstract, long term planning; a higher level of sense of self/peer interest)
    Would these events offer a window into iterations of time/chapters in the genome

  • I know this vid is coming from a passive point of veiw where it may be said we are a product of will-driven autonomous units which form increasingly complex components..and so on, (where on a concious level we only think we have free will).
    Im not trying to pose a philosophical question (ive removed the touchy-feely side of it), there's pattern to this

  • sorry to go on, but i dont mean just regular spikes in populations ect, but a woven function where the spike/curve frequency of other species traits such as camoflage or mimicry affect other species

  • Thank you for this video. It is an excellent response to the video posted by another user here: v=F2i4mUpmbdU. Wish he would've allowed comments so that I could link this to him.

  • So I'm not a religious person at all never was forced to go to church or anything. Don't believe any of the stories in "holy" or "divine" books (though may have some decent philosophical undertones). I am however a very spiritual person. Anyway I understand your point, that over time the eye looking thing evolved into what it is today after going through many variations.

  • That still doesn't explain the creative and downright beautiful work that natures generates. I just don't think science can explain everything but gives new ground for philosophical debate

  • Especially considering how technologies seem to replicate nature. Its just so mysterious. Someone who thinks that science explains all (which it doesn't, esp WHY questions) is IMO just as arrogant as a religious fanatic nut-job. Btw Khan I'm not calling you arrogant as you have clearly stayed away from your personal beliefs in these vids. Science just seems to make the mystery of life even greater in complexity.

  • you can't seperate id., science and evolution. although i'll give you this , you've done a pretty good job of convincing people who can only repeat what atheist's say and won't dig it out for themselves.

  • no he didn't stay away from his personal beliefs. he couldn't have stated any clearer that he's an atheist and that id is not science. when in face you can't seperate id, science and evolution !

  • nature creates what it's intended to create. science can't explain anything, people do ! if you're going to make a stab at technical thinking then get with it and quit running around saying science says this and physics says that !

  • If the Theory of Evolution was true, inbreeding would not be as much of a problem. This is because it relies on species GAINING information over time, not losing it. Species never recover information after a bottleneck.
    Intelligent Design is the only way this world is possible, judging that even one error in an amino acid chain will render it useless.

  • Woops: I meant that because inbreeding is a problem, we know that there is NO GAIN of alleles.
    Mutations cause a loss of information almost all the time, and unless thousands or millions of mutations occur at the exact same time, in perfect order and the correct ones, no new specie can be created that is "a different kind".

  • WOW where ya get this? Never recover? Exclude mutations or SNPs Gene/Chromosomal duplication is one of many mechanism where NEW genetic material is generated abnormally from the duplicated segment/s. There are many sources of gene duplications including ectopic homologous recombination, jumping genes/transposons.. literally tons of well documented events that alter genome size. Have you no idea how Inbreeding depression works? You perhaps are homozygous for a recessive deleterious brain allele.

  • But would not their predators have evolved too…maybe better picking on the particular pattern…so the butterflies would be selected away from the pattern?

  • To be fair I never fully understood the principles of evolution to a comfortable level but thanks to you I have now grasped and understood the principles of it. Thank you so much, you are a brilliant teacher.

  • Question: Are there any animals out there with more than two eyes?

    Nevermind 🙂 Google answered it for me.

  • Obviously you're a really nice guy Khan. However, I thinks it's sad how you describe everything clearly, yet you still feel the need to backtrack and give a hundred disclaimers/clarifications.

  • This video does as good a job as any describing how variations among species guided by natual selection causes the species to look the way they do. But what is never really truly explained in any class or video on evolution is how a butterfly and the lizard that eats it descend from a common ancestor.

  • Natural selection does not exist, buddy.
    If natural selection were true you would be selected in your reproduction process because you are strong person. Unfortunately , you just live your predefined life span and give birth to other humans.

    So, evolution by natural selection and evolution itself does not exist.

  • The bit I dont understand is why isn't the eye design closer to the ends of the moths wings. Khan even mentioned my concerns in the Middle about eye being too close to the body of the moth but then didn't come back to it, so why now when the design by means of natural selection has stabilised/formed, why isnt it closer to the edge. Surely that would be the best survival tactic to gain thru natural selection?

  • hey man, surely evolution happens over generations rather than periods of time, which is why bacterias and viruses evolve much faster as they reproduce far more quickly

  • So… how does this variation and natural selection affect… per say chameleons? I know this is 10 years later but I'm interested!

  • anyone else saw the snake in the butterfly top wing corner? this is no owl this is snake head butterfly. everybody is afraid of the snake

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Proudly powered by WordPress