Archive for the 'Uncategorized' category

The scent of a kitten: Fear may smell like cats, if you're a mouse

May 22 2013 Published by under Behavioral Neuro, Uncategorized

What does terror smell like? Well, if you're a mouse, terror smells like something that's going to eat you. Maybe a cat, a fox, or a large bird. As prey animals, mice need all the help they can get in avoiding potential predators. And they get a lot of help from smell. Most predators produce pheromones that mice can sense, and these are often the only warning the mouse has that it's about to become dinner.

But not all dangers produce pheromones, and mice still have to let each other know that something is coming. So, as these authors show, mice may produce pheromones of their own that can communicate alarm to other mice.

If you need to keep the mice away, be prepared to wear...ear d'terror.

Brechbuhl et al. "Mouse alarm pheromone shares structural similarity
with predator scents" PNAS, 2013.

scicat1

(Or get a cat. That works too. Behold, Scicat).

Continue Reading »

Share

No responses yet

Friday Weird Science: What's your Farting Frequency?

May 17 2013 Published by under Friday Weird Science, Uncategorized

Have you ever wondered how much you fart? Or rather, not how much you fart (presumably you notice most of the time and have a general idea), but instead, how you rate against other people. After all, we humans tend to be competitive little snots. And if we're going to fart, we're probably going to wonder how much other people do. Do you fart more than others? Are you a "superfarter"? Are you magically gassless?

And are you willing to wear a tube inserted right up your butt to find out?

hA6756351

(For this, I maded a LOL. Source)

Beazell and Ivy. "The Quantity of Colonic Flatus Excreted by the "Normal" Individual" American Journal of Digestive Diseases, 1941.

Continue Reading »

Share

8 responses so far

Book Review: Gulp: Adventures on the Alimentary Canal

Apr 17 2013 Published by under Book Reviews, Uncategorized

Did you know that hydrogen sulfide, molecule for molecule, is as lethal as cyanide? The only difference is, one of them's in your farts (at far too low of a concentration to harm you, except psychologically).

Did you ever wonder if you could eat (or do drugs) with your butt?

Did you ever wonder what cat food tastes like? And why that should matter to humans? And why dogs (and rats, and others) eat their own poop?

And have you ever thought, really THOUGHT, about your own saliva?

I bet you're thinking about it now.

It's weird, isn't it.

But no saliva, no rectal storage, and no potentially lethal levels of hydrogen sulfide will stop the intrepid Mary Roach, as she embarks upon her latest book, Gulp: Adventures on the Alimentary Canal.

Gulp-cover-350
(Source)

Continue Reading »

Share

2 responses so far

Friday Weird Science: The big deal on penis size

Apr 12 2013 Published by under Friday Weird Science, Uncategorized

Sigh. The penis story is now 5 days old, and I'm only just now getting to it. Sci is sad and behind the times, but that's because I don't get the awesome press releases that so many journalists are heir to. The joys of academia, I'm the last to hear about the penis study!

The coverage was so...BIG...that Knight Science Journalism Tracker has a whole pile of links. Science News, NBC (complete with the quote of the day "The human male possesses the Italian designer faucet of penises"), National Geographic. Gawker.

So after all this coverage, I went eagerly to read the paper. I mean, this must be a big deal, right?

But really...I'm not sure why all the penis coverage. I admit it's tough to give up a penis in PNAS joke, but I'm not sure what makes this study...so meaty, shall we say. I think what they did is fine and well controlled, met all the standards of scientific rigidity, but I'm not sure they...went all the way. The conclusions were, well, kind of expected, and a little limp.

You see where I'm going here.

Mautz et al. "Penis size interacts with body shape and height to influence male attractiveness" PNAS, 2013.

NCI_06

Continue Reading »

Share

22 responses so far

Salt: From "mmm" to "eww"

Apr 10 2013 Published by under Behavioral Neuro, Uncategorized

I love salt. It's just delicious. I wrote this post while noshing on deliciously salty popcorn, after a dinner which I put salt on. I crave salt so much that my parents used to joke about getting me a salt lick.

And I'm not alone. Sodium is an incredibly important part of life, which means it's also an important part of what we eat. To make sure we get enough salt, animals have evolved salt-sensing systems, and low levels (below 100 mM of NaCl) of salt are very attractive.

deer-at-salt-lick
(A deer at a "salt lick" which is actually a mineral lick made up of various salts and minerals. Yum)

But there IS such a thing as too much salt. High levels of salt (>300 mM NaCl) are really aversive (from personal experience, I wonder if Carrabba's restaurant has concentrations of salt in their food over 300 mM). Most animals will quickly turn up their noses at a high salt concentration.

You probably know that you have classes of receptors on your tongue for taste (though they are not clustered into areas of your mouth, like front for sweetness, as previously thought). You have sweet, umami (savory), bitter, sour, and salt. In most animals, sweet and umami are always attractive, while bitter and sour are nasty (except where we have overcome the aversion to enjoy things like coffee and beer). Salt, though, is the only one that goes two ways, with low levels being attractive and high levels being aversive.

Now we know how low salt works. The salt receptors that are currently known are good for detecting low salt. But high salt, that's more difficult. First of all, our aversion to high salt concentrations is not very selective. While low salt detection is limited to good old NaCl, high salt detection is non-specific, working for many salts including NaCl, but others as well (like KCl).

Not only that, but if you block the low salt pathway (you can block the sodium channels involved by using a diuretic), the high salt pathway still functions, which means that there are other receptors involved. But what other receptors?

Well, it turns out that high salt is not just...salty. It's BITTER. and SOUR. Or at least, your receptors think so.

Oka et al. "High salt recruits aversive taste pathways" Nature, 2013.

Continue Reading »

Share

2 responses so far

Book Thoughts: My Beloved Brontosaurus

Apr 03 2013 Published by under Book Reviews, Uncategorized

Disclaimer: Brian Switek and I are good friends (I have impersonated a squid for him on occasion). In fact we are such good friends that his latest book, My Beloved Brontosaurus, is dedicated to me (I am SO SO flattered and honored. I cried when I saw it, cause BRONTY IS THE BEST). So I don't feel that I can really give a REVIEW of the book, as I'm by default a little biased here (spoiler: you should read it). But I loved the book, and I want to talk about why I liked it (even aside from the dedication!). So this isn't a review, per se. It's my thoughts on the book. Take that as you will. :)

belovedbronty1

As Brian noted in his dedication to his new book "My Beloved Brontosaurs: on the road with old bones, new science, and our favorite dinosaurs" (Due out April 16th!), I really loved old Brontosaurus. I still do. I know it doesn't exist, Brontosaurus is actually Apatosaurus, but Brontosaurus remains as a fondness in my memory from my childhood.

But then again, so do ALL the dinosaurs I remember. I love them, in all their cold-blooded slow reptile-ness. I love the idea of the prehistoric world being full of warm swamps with the reverberating stomping of slow giants. I liked the Jurassic Park version, fast, wily, but still ultimately strange and reptilian.

And I really didn't want to believe otherwise. I saw all the changes going on to dinosaurs. Warm blooded. Then feathered (I begin to suspect that dinosaurs tasted like chicken), then brightly colored and social and good moms. The whole deal. And I just didn't really identify with it. Those weren't MY dinosaurs. Those were some other dinosaurs. I couldn't really reconcile the two in my mind, and I didn't really WANT to.

So I have to say that I picked up Brian's book excited about new dino science, but pretty unwilling to be convinced. New science about dinosaurs could not possibly make dinosaurs as cool as the old ones I remembered.

...but I was wrong.

Brian's book (I guess I should say "Switek's book", but these are my thoughts, not a proper review, and I'll dang call him Brian if I want to) reminds us all of those dinosaur days. That dinosaur phase many of us went through, our wide-eyed wonder. He taps in to that old wonder, the amazement at these giants that once walked the planet, and he makes it BETTER.

These aren't your childhood dinosaurs, but their new complexity and the many things we still don't know about them make them an enticing subject. We often think of dinosaurs as the kind of thing you grow out of. Yeah, I was into that when I was five, but now I'm in to new, adult things like accounting and optogenetics. But by seeing these new aspects of dinosaurs, from how they may have communicated to how the heck they could have mated (big spiky tails get in the WAY), you get that sense of wonder all over again. Dinosaurs are for children and adults alike.

Yes, we used to think dinosaurs were slow and cold...but isn't it that much more AMAZING to think of them as fast, bright, and potentially fluffy? We used to think that hadrosaurs used the huge crests on their heads to maybe breathe underwater, but isn't it even cooler to imagine them used for sound, a huge, deep bass chorus honking across prehistoric plains? And while reptilian, lizard-like dinosaurs are nice and threatening on the movie screen, doesn't it make them that much more exciting to imagine them moving fast, cocking their head at you, birdlike, at the top of a set of hollow and perforated bones as light as air?

To show us these new dinosaurs made from old bones, Brian takes us on a tour of some of his favorite dinosaur haunts, from the hills of Montana (where the paleontologist runs up against one of his more implacable nemeses...the cow), to the beautiful arid deserts of Arches National Park. The more I read, the more desperate I was to get out there myself, to see the dinosaur tracks stomped forever in stone, to see bones that crumble right out of the hills. I know that digging bones can be hot, sweaty, and tedious work, but when it culminates in even something as small as a dinosaur tooth, I feel like my life at the bench pales in comparison.

Brian covers many aspects of dinosaur life, from how they may have stood and moved (T. Rex was a clapper, not a slapper!), to how they may have mated. He talks about paleontology with humor (his wife's comment about how dinosaur mating would have been easier if the vagina was on the side "like a gas tank", is my absolute favorite) and with an amused eye at some of the foibles of the scientists involved (the race to find the biggest dino just got absurd), but you can also feel his deep love of his subject, and the places where his precious dinosaurs are found. From what we used to think, to what we think now, dinosaurs get more complex, and more fascinating, as you see them through the eyes of someone truly obsessed.

And in the end: I was convinced. As much as I used to want to see a Brontosaurus, sloshing slow, majestic, and somewhat bovinely through the mud, I think I want even more to see a light, speedy, group of Allosauruses (Allosaurae?), racing like birds over the hills. They aren't the dinosaurs we remember, but thanks to writers like Brian, they are more fascinating than ever.

brontosaurus-cover
(Source)

Share

One response so far

In search of bench friendly hair

Mar 31 2013 Published by under Uncategorized

I got a haircut the other day. I'm tying to grow it longer, and it's currently in what cannot be helped...the awkward phase. No matter how you cut it, it's going to look awkward, and probably bad, or at least require far more trouble to make it look good than what I am willing to give it in the morning.

My hairstylist knows this. She knows that I want nothing to do with my hair on most days (sometimes, I admit, I forget to brush it). She also knows that, when I am forced to leave my hair down (which I have to when it's too short to stay UP), I almost uniformly tuck it behind my ears or under a headband or something else so I don't have to think about it.

She's well meaning. She wants my hair to look decent without much effort. She doesn't want me to be a walking advertisement of when a haircut goes bad!

So she gave me little bangs. Attractive little side swept bangs. Bangs that, when they fall into my face, are JUST under my eyes. JUST too short to put behind my ears. And therefore, bangs which constantly fall in my face.

8639809-pretty-woman-smiling-with-hair-in-her-face
(Kind of like that)

I'm ready to shave my head. Sure, it makes the hair look much less awkward than it might otherwise. I know she's doing her best for me.

...but this hair is NOT BENCH FRIENDLY. Here I am, trying to work under the hood in glove-covered hands which are in turn covered in noxious substances, and my HAIR IS IN MY FACE. It's too short to be held back by headbands, at times I have resorted to paperclips. It being chunky and layered makes it worse, all barrette efforts are in vain.

cousin it
(How I feel)

And I have noticed that much of the hair I have seen recently is not bench friendly. Long side swept side parted hair that, while getting attractively in your face constantly, also makes you look kind of like one of those dogs that can't possibly see through their hair. Lots of hair that is scooped carefully forward, short in the back and longer in the front, so that despite your best efforts it gets in your face. Lots of long little wisps of hair, meant to look ethereal, that do their best ethereal impressions in front of your face. Even the guys aren't unaffected! I see lots of longer guy hair, brushed charmingly over the eyes.

Why do I keep seeing the vast number of hairstyles that are artfully swept over one eye? I guess hair is more important than vision.

Has anyone else had bench unfriendly hair? Advice on how to deal with it? Currently I'm pinning it back all over the place, but the net result is that I often have to walk directly into a meeting with my hair in full on nutty professor. While the Professor Trewlawney look might suit me to some degree, it's not exactly preferable. Anyone?

Share

29 responses so far

Oh, thank you! You know I always prefer compliments!

Mar 13 2013 Published by under Behavioral Neuro, Uncategorized

Sci is at SciAm Blogs today for the launch of the new SciAm MIND section! Make sure to head over and check out all things brain! And I'm there today talking about a study looking at positive bias in processing social feedback. Because it's true, we all really go prefer compliments! Head over and check it out.

Share

No responses yet

Friday Weird Science: Why eat tongue when you can eat testes? The castrating trematode

Mar 01 2013 Published by under Friday Weird Science, Uncategorized

Carl Zimmer over at Phenomena posted another great post about the tongue-eating parasite! Don't worry, it's not coming for YOUR tongue, it prefers fish. The parasites get in the fish's mouth, one turns female (they start out all male) and eats the fish's tongue, and then takes its place! She hang outs there while the surrounding males also hang around in the fish's mouth, and mate with her. So not only does this poor fish have his tongue replaced by a parasite, he's got a freakin' orgy going on in his MOUTH that he can't do anything about.

So, pretty embarrassing for the fish.

But if you think that's a humiliating parasite, wait til you see this one! It not only takes over your body, it'll castrate you and shrink your penis in the bargain.

Good thing it only likes whelks.

Tetreault et al. "Impact of a Castrating Trematode, Neophasis sp., on the Common Whelk, Buccinum undatum, in the Northern Gulf of St. Lawrence" Biological Bulletin, 2000

castrating trematode 1

Continue Reading »

Share

6 responses so far

Friday Weird Science: Need more caffeine? Rub it in.

Feb 22 2013 Published by under Friday Weird Science, Uncategorized

Today's Friday Weird Science was inspired by @TruffledSquirrel, Who sent me the following tweet.

The link listed is to this product:

shower-shock

This is Shower Shock, caffeinated soap. And in fact, I have personal experience with it! Someone gave it to me as a gift, figuring that anything caffeine-themed would go over well. They were correct, but unfortunately, I have extremely sensitive skin and couldn't use the soap. :(

But I, like @trufflesquirrel, have always wondered if it worked. I have to admit I basically assumed that it was a gimmick. I mean, caffeine absorption through the skin? The claims are as follows:

Shower Shock is an all vegetable based glycerine soap which does *not* contain any harsh ingredients like ethanol, diethanolamine, polyethylene glycol or cocyl isethionate. So it's a gently invigorating soap ;) Scented with peppermint oil and infused with caffeine anhydrous, each bar of Shower shock contains approximately 12 servings/showers per 4 ounce bar with 200 milligrams of caffeine per serving. No, we're not kidding and no you don't eat it. Caffeine can be absorbed through the skin. For maximum effect, ThinkGeek recommends that you build up a good Shower Shock lather across your entire body before rinsing!

(Emphasis mice)

Well, can it? The question got me looking. And lo and behold, shower shock is not necessarily a far fetched idea!

Feldman and Maibach. "Absorption of some organic compounds through the skin in man" The Journal of Investigative Dermatology, 1970.

Continue Reading »

Share

12 responses so far

Older posts »