inkycircus

The greater of two weevils

HOW CAN IT BE A WEED WHEN IT'S SO PRETTY? THE BUTTERFLY'S NOT BAD EITHER..... (PHOTO: REDSTER)

I spent some of this past summer in Canada with my cousins, helping them to pick apples on their fruit farm, and I came across weevils for the first time. Weevils love apple trees, and can actually do a lot of damage to them, which drives my cousins crazy. However, this plant destroying tendency is about to be put to good use in the forests of New Zealand. A Chinese weevil called Cleopus Japonicus is about to be put to work destroying a noxious weed that costs the NZ forestry industry millions of dollars a year. I should point out here that I'm pretty much only posting this story to be able to write the above headline. It was a toss up between that one and "Axis of weevil"...

PS. The "Noxious weed" is a plant called buddleia. You might know buddleia as a plant that has beautiful purple flowers and is known to attract butterflies...  So this story is an example of not taking things at face value. Scuttly scratchy weevils = A Good Thing. Pretty purple flowers = weeds.

Via NZ Herald.

Anyone for a 10 tonne caesar salad?

ANCHOVIES - ARE THEY FISH OR FOOD? YOU DECIDE. PHOTOS: KTANRIOVER AND SYKICKTB).    A beach in Spain has been deluged by anchovies in an unexplained mass beaching. When I read that headline, I immediately thought of a beach in the Costa del Sol covered in a thick layer of the salty little strips that restaurants persist in putting on caesar salads, which struck me as funny. I'm not a massive fan of anchovies, but there are plenty of people out there who reckon the flavoursome little fish is a bit of a delicacy (case in point my dear friend who likes to mash up anchovies with butter and smear the resulting paste on a cracker - ew). Hence to me, anchovies are food rather than living creatures. Thinking about it for more than two seconds I realise this actually isn't funny, as the anchovies are a protected species, and I am clearly a bad person for sniggering at all those beached fishlets. But, really, how could I not, when Luis Luria, the chief coordinator of the local marine protection unit says this...

"It's a bit of a disaster," said Luria. "We can't fish them because they're so rare, and now they've killed themselves."

Via the Boston Times.

Better (maybe) than worms: a new cure for allergies

If anyone asks, no I am NOT procrastinating writing my feature. I am just SO PASSIONATE about science news that I think it takes precedence..especially when the news carries the hint of something that might cure what really ails me: allergies.

As many of you know, I am allergic to most everything. Dust, mold, pollen, grass, cats, dogs, horses, pretty much anything cute and cuddly with hair or feathers, all nuts, peanuts, eggs and shellfish. I carry a self-injectable syringe full of adrenalin where ever I go and a large stock pile of several different anti-histamines. I am still waiting to develop my allergies to wheat, milk and oxygen. I know they'll show up eventually.

Anyway. So what is up with my immune system, eh? To the best of our knowledge, allergies are the result of some short circuit with the T helper cells, specifically Th2 cells. It is this kind of white blood cell that is normally responsible for fending off parasites - like worms n' stuff. The deeper cause is still a mystery but likely has something to do with the regulatory T cells (Treg) that control the production of both Th1 (which fight viruses and bacteria) and Th2. There are deeper connections still, but I am thinking you want me to stop now.

Basically, immunologists figure that our hyper-clean and generally infection-free environment has left our Tregs/Th1/Th2 with nothing much to do, so they fill their time by attacking perfectly harmless proteins, like those from peanuts, trying to kill me in the process.

Going with this hypothesis, companies around the world have been attempting to mimic infections in order to suppress the allergic response. One of the pioneers is a German company called OvaMed. They having been using the eggs of a pig intestinal worm (which cannot reproduce in human, cutting down on the gross factor) to treat severe autoimmune disorders such as Crohn's Disease. And it seems to work. They are starting to conduct trials on food allergies. Let's all pray. Personally, if am going to swallow worms, I'd at least like it to be a tapeworm, because then I'd get to be thin. Thin and allergy free..these are the stuff of dreams.

Anyway. I am rambling (who said procrastination?..take that back right now!). So this Swiss company is now attempting shut off allergies by stimulating Th1 cells via injections of mycobacteria. Yummy. Upping the Th1 response seems to shut down the Th2 (allergy) response, likely through Tregs. Ha!

Again, if someone could just come up with an allergy fighting tape worm that was easily extractable after the desired weight loss and allergy reversal, they would make a FORTUNE. The obesity epidemic in our great Western nations is really only topped by the massive spread of allergic disease. And they say all the good ideas are taken.

Ecology 201: Food webs

Teacher Lady: Good morning class, I'll be your instructor. Today we'll be discussing food webs. Yes, I said webs not chains. You see ecologists have learned over the years that food chains - simple linear relationships of this eats this, which is eaten by this etc - are vastly too simple for most ecosystems....

Question Boy (violently jerking hand in the air): Mam? Mam? Does that mean that we cannot predict the outcome of removing one species from the web or the impact that an increase population is likely to have on another?

TL: Why, um, yes. We've often been wrong about that. The classic example is fur seals off the coast of Southern Africa. Fisherman in the area were upset that their stocks of hake were going down and blamed the seals. But when ecologists investigated further it turned out the the seals might actually end up increasing fish stocks. See there were two species of hake in the area and the adults of one species fed on the juveniles of the other. When you factor this into mathematical models, the size of the seal population actually had no effect or resulted in a net increase in available fish stocks.

Question Boy (yes, again): Mam. Does this mean that the fisherman whining about seal populations off Cape Cod eating all their stocks are likely complete idiots who have in fact depleted their own stocks and just want a scape goat?

TL: Well, yes. That is one, um, interpretation of the situation. Does anyone else have any...

Question Boy (interrupting): And do those fishermen realize that seals are just one of the cutest animals ever and people literally fly thousands of miles to hang out in Cape Cod and watch them and maybe they should shut up and get into the tourist business? And if they do start killing off the seals maybe the large predatory sharks in the area might have to turn to big fish or even people for food, the easiest of which to catch are probably fishermen?

TL: Um, yes. We should let them know that. Anyone else? Anyone?

Potatoes Potahtoes.

As a science journalist I spend a lot of time on the phone with people, talking about their research that appeared in this or that academic journal. Often, that journal is Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, known to most by its acronym PNAS.

Like most children who read way more than they speak (I read genuine ghen-you-een until grade six), my mind started to pronounce this acronym pee-nas. And my mouth followed suit. As in "Mister/Missus Scientist, with respect to your pee-nas paper..." or "could you please comment on whosy-whatsit's recent findings in pee-nas" or "pee-nas totally rocks Science and Nature's ass!" It wasn't until one week ago that I realized how wrong was when my dear friend was nice enough to laugh at me. Pee-nas? Pee-nas?!? That's insane. And obscene.

My cringing is only slightly tempered by the fact that I'm not alone. I have it on good authority that a distinguished climate change ecologist at the University of Alberta joins me in the pee-nas camp. "Pee.en.ai.ess" be damned; it's a whole two syllables longer. Grow up people. Pee-nas is nothing to be ashamed of.

Finding future science superstars

I was browsing on Kottke earlier this evening, and I happened upon the Popular Science Annual Brilliant Ten, a group of young gun scientists who are on the cusp of glittering careers in the science world... I'd not heard of the Brilliant Ten before, but it's actually a bit fantastic. Here's what it's all about...

By “brilliant,” we don’t mean smart. Or at least not just smart. Brilliance is marked by insight, creativity and tenacity. It’s the confidence to eschew established wisdom in order to develop your own. It’s the foolishness needed to set out for the edge of understanding and sail right past it, ignoring the signs reading “Thar be monsters” (not to mention “Turn back lest ye never be awarded a decent research grant again”). That’s why, when we started the six-month-long process of selecting our Brilliant 10 awardees, we asked hundreds of respected scientists, university department heads and journal editors to name not the most established or well-known scientists in their fields. We asked for the mavericks. The young guns. The individuals who are changing not just what we know but the limits of what we think it’s possible to know. The eventual winners are young (average age: 34), and each is just beginning to be noticed in the world outside their respective fields. But among their peers, our winners’ oft-radical ideas are generating a rare degree of respect and admiration. Among us, as well. And for that, they deserve to be part of our Brilliant 10.

I like this. I feel like many of the schemes that aim to bring scientists to the attention of the public, the media and the wider world are all about the kooky and the confident and the search for new science TV presenters, but this one seems to be dedicated to the actual science. The scientists seem to be really and truly brilliant - one was made a professor at Harvard at the age of 30. It's pretty inspiring stuff. Knowing what these people are up to reminds me why I feel the way I do about science.

Weird Al only gets better with age, like a good cab

WITNESS WEIRD AL'S STATELY PROGRESSION FROM SPELLING BEE CHAMP (AT LEFT) TO THE WHITE & NERDY MAN "FLUENT IN JAVASCRIPT AS WELL AS KLINGON" (AT RIGHT).

Weird Al Yankovic, our saviour from pop tunes, has outdone himself again. The music video to his song "White & Nerdy" satirizing Chamillionaire's' "Ridin' Dirty" is almost too good to be true. Until you realize that in fact it IS true. Here's what Weird Al says on the MTV website about the first single from his new CD Straight Outta Lynwood:

This is the song that I was born to write, basically. I've been doing research on this song my entire life, so it's basically the culmination of a lifetime of work. It's also my first big-budget, live-action video in seven years, and it was a lot of fun to do. We got Donny Osmond to do the Krayzie Bone role, because obviously if you can't get Krayzie Bone, you get Donny Osmond.

Still skeptical? Behold, Weird Al's family pictures. Not only proof that the man has earned himself some hardcore dork merit badges in his lifetime, but that he is also very brave of heart for sharing them.

(Thanks to Lou for flagging this gem)

Mystery solved.

I am writing a feature at the moment. It's due in a very very short amount of time. It's all about birth and MAN has it been interesting (tell you ALL about it later, promise, when the exclusive copy rights expire and I have a chance to drink the 29 shots of tequila I'll need to get over it).

Let's just say I there are MILES to go before I sleep. Which is why I find it particularly amusing that if I type "the" into my Google navigation bar the first address that comes up is http://www.thesuperficial.com followed closely by http://www.thelancet.com. I guess we don't have to wonder why exactly I am so far behind, eh?

And speaking of medical journals, is there any evidence that procrastination is a DSM-IV listed disorder? Any chance that Merck will start marketing a pharmaceutical solution? (I mean if big pharma can test a drug for COMPULSIVE SHOPPING I figured I'd give it a stab...okay so compulsive shopping isn't going to make it into the next edition of the DSM-V, but they were really thinkin' about it)..

Why sure professor. Let me just pull out my uber hot dissection kit for that.

Jack Spade, brother of David Spade, and hubbie of Kate Spade has designed his own Frog Dissection Kit.

That's all. I just thought you'd like to know.

Really, if Jack wants to be more ethical as well as being stylish he ought to package invasive cane toads or bullfrogs. Missed opportunity. 

VIA Cool Hunting (Thanks Kurt)

Dark days for science

THE WEATHER WASN'T THE ONLY THING DIFFERENT BACK THEN. NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE METEOROLOGISTS PREPARE FORECAST 100 YRS BACK (PHOTO: NOAA) 

As if it weren't bad enough that Hwang Woo-suk let us all down by fudging his cloned stem cell lines, scientists left right and center have been duping us all along, as summed up in Environmental Science & Technology recently.

Looks like the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), formed by Nixon in 1970 to serve "for better protection of life and property from natural hazards," got spun too.

Paul D. Thacker over at Salon wields the Freedom of Information Act and gets ahold of emails that further reveal how the Bushites played climate change like a fiddle. The worst came in the wake of Hurrican Katrina. At the time the connection between Katrina and global warming was explored, but mostly dismissed. Now we know in part why:

The e-mails also show that after Hurricane Katrina, NOAA press officers had to get clearance from the Department of Commerce for scientists to discuss global warming and hurricanes with the press. (NOAA is part of Commerce.)

Instead the media were herded towards scientist Chris Landsea. But not without Commerce's deputy director of communications Chuck Fuqua making double sure things would go swell:

"Please make sure Chris is on message and that it is a friendly discussion," Fuqua wrote regarding a request for Landsea to appear on "The NewsHour With Jim Lehrer." On the show, Landsea downplayed research that linked global warming with more-intense hurricanes like Katrina.

In an e-mail the week prior, Fuqua OK'd Landsea for another interview and asked, "Please be careful and make sure Chris is on his toes. Since BLANK went off the menu, I'm a little nervous on this, but trust he'll hold the course."

Rep. Waxman has released the Internal Commerce Dept. emails while also asking Commerce Secretary Carlos Gutierrez to explain why his office denied a media request to interview a NOAA scientist who concluded that global warming may lead to more Katrinas. The honest answer won't come as a surprise. And neither should the suggestion that Katrina was part and parcel of a trend whereby hurricanes are getting meaner. Such abuse of scientific rhetoric ruins the gig for everbody. For that crime Fuqua can go do exactly that to himself. If there is debate out there air it. Don't censor it. I don't care what the answer is but we need to trust it and you screwed that up. If only Nixon, the corrupt prez that he was, had the foresight to ensure his fledgling agency's own protection against, of all things, politics. 

(Thanks Kevin & Paul)