Science Articles about Animals | Popular Science

Check out some of the past year’s best close-up photography

Andrew Paul — Mon, 15 Jan 2024 18:00:00 +0000

A female fairy shrimp displays the colorful eggs inside her. © René Krekels | cupoty.com

There’s always a reason to stop and appreciate the smaller stuff in life. Since 2018, Tracy and Dan Calder have drawn attention to documenting daily minutiae with the Close-up Photographer of the Year competition, highlighting the past 12 months’ best images capturing nature, animal, underwater, and human subjects.

The 5th annual edition is no exception, with amazing glimpses of everything from slumbering frogs, to magnetic waves, to microscopic life, to rarely seen deep sea creatures. Across a wide range of categories, photographers around the world managed to snap some extremely striking images, making even some of the creepiest of crawlies look pretty cute for a change. Check out a few of our favorite finalists and winners of 2023 below, and remember to keep an eye out for the little things this year. They’re always there and worth seeing, even if you don’t have a camera in hand.

Invertebrate Portrait Finalist: “Look Into My Eyes,” portrait of a damselfly covered in dew taken in May in Shropshire, UK © Pete Burford | cupoty.com

Intimate Landscape 2nd Place Winner: “Ice Fossiel,” ‘In winter, many of the flooded wetlands in the Netherlands can be skated upon. The ice is often damaged, with pieces being chipped off. On one such occasion, I discovered a small chunk of ice stuck to a frozen twig that made me think of a prehistoric find.’ © Piet Haaksma | cupoty.com

Human Made Finalist: “Electric Storm in a Bottle,” Light captured in a pair of bottles to look like an electrical storm taken on November 6th in Hemel Hempstead, UK. © Rachel McNulty | cupoty.com

Invertebrate Portrait Finalist: “Allacma Fucsca,” A dark brown globular springtail (Allacma fusca) taken on September 24th in Solingen, Germany. © Jacek Hensoldt | cupoty.com

Human Made Finalist: “Magnetic Waves,” Light through the glass of a front door creates an ‘electric’ effect taken on
June 23rd in Stourbridge, UK. © Chris Mills | cupoty.com

Fungi 1st Place Winner: “The Ice Crown,” ‘This 1mm tall slime mould (Didymium squamulosum) was found in leaf litter on a Buckinghamshire woodland floor in January. Attracted by the way the frost had formed a crown shape on top of the fruiting body, I had to be very careful not to breathe on it. During a previous attempt with another slime mould, my breath had melted the ice when I inadvertently got too close.’ © Barry Webb | cupoty.com

Butterflies & Dragonflies 2nd Place Winner: “Letting Go,” ‘‘Capturing a Four-spotted skimmer dragonfly (Libellula quadrimaculata) mating is particularly difficult because they connect and mate in-flight without any warning and for only a few seconds. The moment captured in this photo is just after the male has finished depositing his sperm on the female’s eggs and they are disconnecting. She will then attempt to deposit the eggs in the water and he will hover near her to ward off other males who would like to also mate with her.’ © Steve Russell | cupoty.com

Animals Finalist: “Picking Flowers,” ‘An Elephant enjoys a nutritional meal of water lily flowers as it makes its way across the Chobe River, Botswana. As flood water reaches the Chobe river (all the way from its starting point in Angola) the waterways are transformed with a wave of flowers.’ © William Steel | cupoty.com

Animals Finalist: “Pandercetes Sp. Squared,” ‘I was observing a large huntsman spider (Pandercetes sp.) on a tree when it suddenly leapt and caught a moving subject next to it. Upon closer inspection, I realised that a smaller huntsman spider had caught its own prey and while feeding on it, it had attracted the attention of the larger spider. If you look closely, you can see the pools of venom secreting from its fangs. Cannibalism among spiders is quite common, but finding such beautiful spiders showing this behaviour was a highlight from my trip to Malaysia.’ © Peter Grob | cupoty.com

Animals Finalist: “Frogs and Toad Mating,” ‘‘As I was walking around my local lake looking for amphibians on a warm spring evening I began to hear the calls of frogs and toads coming from a small area around the roots of an Alder tree at the edge of the water. I watched the mass of amphibians until the light disappeared and noticed two frogs next to the water on the edge of the footpath. When I went to have a better look and take some images, I noticed that this pair had a common toad attempting to join!’ © Nathan Benstead | cupoty.com

See more at Cupoty.com.

The post Check out some of the past year’s best close-up photography appeared first on Popular Science.

Articles may contain affiliate links which enable us to share in the revenue of any purchases made.

In an era of climate change, Alaska’s predators fall prey to politics

Lois Parshley / Grist — Sun, 14 Jan 2024 17:00:00 +0000

According to the Alaska Department of Fish and Game, a recent cull reduced an area’s bear population by 74 percent, though no baseline studies to determine their numbers were conducted there. Deposit Photos

This article was originally featured on Grist.

As spring arrived in southwestern Alaska, a handful of people from the state Department of Fish and Game rose early and climbed into small airplanes. Pilots flew through alpine valleys, where ribs of electric green growth emerged from a blanket of snow. Their shadows crisscrossed the lowland tundra, where thousands of caribou had gathered to calve. Seen through the windscreen, the vast plains can look endless; Wood-Tikchik State Park’s 1.6 million acres comprise almost a fifth of all state park land in the United States.

As the crew flew, it watched for the humped shape of brown bears lumbering across the hummocks. When someone spotted one, skinny from its hibernation, the crew called in the location to waiting helicopters carrying shooters armed with 12-gauge shotguns.

Over the course of 17 days, the team killed 94 brown bears—including several year-old cubs, who stuck close to their mothers, and 11 newer cubs that were still nursing—five black bears and five wolves. That was nearly four times the number of animals the agency planned to cull. Fish and Game says this reduced the area’s bear population by 74 percent, though no baseline studies to determine their numbers were conducted in the area.

The goal was to help the dwindling number of Mulchatna caribou by reducing the number of predators around their calving grounds. The herd’s population has plummeted, from 200,000 in 1997 to around 12,000 today. But the killings set off a political and scientific storm, with many biologists and advocates saying the operation called into question the core of the agency’s approach to managing wildlife, and may have even violated the state constitution.

The Board of Game, which has regulatory authority over wildlife, insisted that intensive control of predators in Wood-Tikchik was the best way to support the struggling herd. But the caribou, which provide essential food and cultural resources for many Alaska Native communities, are facing multiple threats: A slew of climate-related impacts have hampered their grazing, wildfires have burned the forage they rely on, warmer winters may have increased disease, and thawing permafrost has disrupted their migrations.

With conditions rapidly changing as the planet warms, wildlife managers nationwide are facing similar biodiversity crises. Rather than do the difficult work of mitigating rising temperatures, state agencies across the country are finding it easier to blame these declines on predation.

“We don’t want to talk about how the tundra is changing, because that’s something we can’t fix,” says Christi Heun, a former research biologist at Alaska Fish and Game.

In Wyoming, where a deadly winter decimated pronghorn and mule deer, the state spent a record $4.2 million killing coyotes and other predators and is considering expanding bear and mountain lion hunts. Wildlife officials in Washington are contemplating killing sea lions and seals to save faltering salmon populations from extinction. In Minnesota, hunters are inaccurately blaming wolves for low deer numbers and calling for authorities to reduce their population. Culls like these are appealing because they are tangible actions—even when evidence suggests the true threat is much more complex. “You’re putting a Band-Aid on the wrong elbow,” says Heun, who now works for the nonprofit Defenders of Wildlife.

As the climate crisis intensifies, she and others say, wildlife management strategies need to shift too. “All we can do is just kind of cross our fingers and mitigate the best we can,” she adds. For people whose job is to control natural systems, “that’s a hard pill to swallow.”

In January 2022, a flurry of snow fell as the Alaska Board of Game gathered in Wasilla, far from where the Mulchatna caribou pawed through drifts, steam rising from their shaggy backs. Its seven members are appointed by the governor. Though they make important decisions like when hunting seasons open, how long they last, and how many animals hunters can take, they are not required to have a background in biology or natural resources. They also do not have to possess any expertise in the matters they decide. Board members, who did not respond to requests for comment, tend to reflect the politics of the administration in office; currently, under Republican Governor Mike Dunleavy, they are sport hunters, trappers, and guides.

That day, the agenda included a proposal to expand a wolf control program from Wood-Tikchik onto the Togiak National Wildlife Refuge—though that would require federal approval from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; the government ultimately rejected the proposal.

The conversation began with two Fish and Game biologists summarizing their research for the board on the herd. Nick Demma explained that, like most ungulates, on average half of Mulchatna’s calves survive. In a study he conducted, many died within two weeks of birth; he mentioned as an aside that their primary predators are brown bears. “But I want to stress that this basic cause of death and mortality rate information is of little use,” he quickly added. Predator and prey dynamics are complex: The calves may have died anyway from injury or disease, and their removal may reduce competition for food and resources, improving the herd’s overall health.

When Demma tried to analyze the existing wolf control program, he found he didn’t have the data he needed to see if removing the canines helped calves survive. In fact, from 2010 to 2021, when Fish and Game was actively shooting wolves, fewer caribou survived. So the researchers turned their attention to other challenges the herd might be facing.

His colleague, Renae Sattler, explained that preliminary data from a three-year study suggested there could be a problem with forage quality or quantity, especially in the summer. This could lower pregnancy rates or increase disease and calf mortality. In the 1990s, the herd had swelled as part of a natural boom-and-bust cycle, leading to overgrazing. The slow-growing lichen the animals rely on takes 20 to 50 years to recover. Compounding that, climate change is altering the tundra ecosystem the animals rely upon. She also found that today, 37 percent of the sampled animals had, or were recently exposed to, brucellosis, which can cause abortions, stillbirths, and injuries. Biologists consider such high levels of disease an outbreak and cause for concern.

Sattler also noted that half of the animals that died in the study’s first year were killed by hunters taking them out of season—meaning the predators killing the most adult caribou were people. For all these reasons, the biologists suggested that the Board of Game reconsider the wolf control program.

Commissioner Doug Vincent-Lang, who oversees the agency, immediately questioned their conclusions, and their recommendation. Killing predators, he said during the meeting, “seems like one of the only things that’s within our direct control.” In other words, it was better than doing nothing.

Demma seemed taken aback, and chose his words carefully. “I guess what we are kind of trying to present there is just the information,” he told the board. “It’s—you know—wolves aren’t an important factor right now.” The meeting broke for lunch. When it resumed, the board unanimously voted to continue the wolf program through 2028, and, even more surprisingly, to add brown and black bears over a larger area. The public and Fish and Game biologists didn’t have the typical opportunity to comment on this expansion of predator control.

When he heard what happened, “I just was stunned. I was shocked,” says Joel Bennett, a lawyer and a former member of the Board of Game for 13 years. A hunter himself, Bennett served on the board under four governors and recalls his colleagues having a greater diversity of backgrounds and perspectives. Their votes were always split, even on less contentious issues. The unanimous vote “in itself indicates it’s a stacked deck,” he says. That’s a problem, because “the system only works fairly if there is true representation.”

In August, Bennett and the Alaska Wildlife Alliance filed a lawsuit claiming the agency approved the operation without the necessary “reasoned decision-making,” and without regard for the state’s due process requirements. Bennett also was troubled that the state has tried to keep information about the cull private, including where the bears were killed. He suspects that, to have slain so many animals in just 17 days, the flights might have veered beyond the targeted area. He also wonders if any animals were left wounded. “Why are they hiding so many of the details?” he asked. A public records request reveals that although the board expected the removal of fewer than 20 bears, almost five times that many were culled without any additional consideration.

Alaska’s wildlife is officially a public resource. Provisions in the state constitution mandate game managers provide for “sustained yields,” including for big game animals like bears. That sometimes clashes with the Dunleavy administration’s focus on predator control. In 2020, for example, the board authorized a no-limit wolf trapping season on the Alexander Archipelago, a patchwork of remote islands in southeast Alaska. It resulted in the deaths of all but five of the genetically distinct canines. The Alaska Wildlife Alliance sued, a case Bennett is now arguing before the state Supreme Court. “That was a gross violation of ‘sustained yield’ in anyone’s definition,” he says, adding that even today, there is no limit on trapping wolves there.

Once, shooting bison from moving trains and leaving them to rot was widely accepted. Attitudes have evolved, as have understandings about predators’ importance—recent research suggests their stabilizing presence may play a crucial role in mitigating some of the effects of climate change. Other studies show predators may help prey adapt more quickly to shifting conditions. But Bennett worries that, just as Alaska’s wildlife faces new pressures in a warming world, management priorities are reverting to earlier stances on how to treat animals. “I’ve certainly done my time in the so-called ‘wolf wars,’” Bennett says, “but we’re entering a new era here with other predators.”

Even as legal challenges to the board’s decisions move forward, scientific debate over the effectiveness of predator control has flourished. Part of the problem is that game management decisions are rarely studied in the way scientists would design an experiment. “You’ve got a wild system, with free-ranging animals, and weather, and other factors that are constantly changing,” says Tom Paragi, a wildlife biologist for the state Department of Fish and Game. “It’s just not amenable to the classic research design.” Even getting baseline data can take years, and remote areas like Wood-Tikchik, which is accessible only by air or boat, are challenging and expensive places to work.

Paragi has for more than a decade monitored the state’s intensive wildlife management programs and believes predator control can be effective. Looking at data collected since 2003, he notes that when Alaska culled wolves in four areas in a bid to bolster moose, caribou, and deer populations, their numbers increased. They also remained low in those areas where wolves were left alone. (His examination of this data has not yet been published or subject to peer review.) Elsewhere in the state, removing 96 percent of black bears in 2003 and 2004, reducing hunting, and killing wolves boosted the number of moose. Heavy snowfall during the next two winters killed many of the calves, and most of the bears returned within six years, but Paragi still considers the efforts a success. By 2009, the moose population had almost doubled.

He’s also not convinced that Demma and Sattler were right when they told board members that predation doesn’t appear to be the most pressing issue for the Mulchatna caribou. He says record salmon runs have likely brought more bears near the park and the calving grounds, and warmer temperatures have fostered the growth of vegetation that provides places to hide as they stalk caribou. As to the suggestion that the herd is suffering from inadequate food supplies, he notes that their birth rate has been high since 2009. That’s often a strong indicator of good nutrition.

But Sattler says, “It isn’t that cut-and-dried.” A female caribou’s body condition, she explains, exists on a spectrum and affects her survival, the size and strength of any calves, and how long she can nurse or how quickly she gets pregnant again. “The impact of nutrition is wide-reaching and complex, and it isn’t captured in pregnancy rates alone.” Understanding how nutrition, brucellosis, and other factors are impacting the herd is complicated, she says.

There are a lot of interacting factors at play on the tundra—and among those trying to determine how best to help the herd. “Part of the frustration on all sides of this is that people have different value systems related to managing wild systems,” Paragi says. To him, last spring’s bear kill wasn’t truly a question of science. “We can present the data, but what you do with the data is ultimately a political decision,” he says.

Sterling Miller, a retired Fish and Game research biologist and former president of the International Association for Bear Research and Management, acknowledges that crafting regulations is left to the politically appointed Board of Game. But Miller says the agency tends to dismiss criticism of its predator control, when there are valid scientific questions about its effectiveness. In 2022, Miller and his colleagues published an analysis, using Fish and Game harvest data, showing that 40 years of killing predators in an area of south-central Alaska didn’t result in more harvests of moose. “Fish and Game has never pointed out any factual or analytical errors in the analyses that I’ve been involved with,” he says. “Instead, they try to undercut our work by saying it’s based on values.”

Miller also was involved in what remains one of the agency’s best examples of predator relocations. In 1979, he and another biologist moved 47 brown bears out of a region in south-central Alaska, which resulted in a “significant” increase in the survival of moose calves the next fall. But Miller says Fish and Game often misquotes that work. In reality, due to a lack of funding, Miller didn’t study the young animals long enough to see if they actually reached adulthood. Similarly, Fish and Game conducted an aerial survey this fall of the Mulchatna herd, finding more calves survived after the bear cullings. But Miller and other biologists say that’s not the best metric to measure the operation’s success: These calves may still perish during their first winter.

The Alaskan government is the only one in the world whose goal is to reduce the number of brown bears, Miller says, despite the absence of baseline studies on how many bears are in this part of the state. It irks him that the state continues to use his research as justification for allowing predator measures like bear baiting. In most parts of Alaska, Miller says, “the liberalization of bear hunting regulations has just been so extreme.”

While last year’s bear killings were particularly egregious, similar cullings have gone largely unnoticed. State data shows over 1,000 wolves and 3,500 brown and black bears have been killed since 2008 alone. In 2016, for example, the federal government shared radio tag information with the state, which used it to kill wolves when they left the safety of the Yukon-Charley Rivers National Preserve—destroying so many packs that it ended a 20-year study on predator-prey relationships. “There weren’t enough survivors to maintain a self-sustaining population,” recounted an investigation by the nonprofit Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility. The nearby caribou herd still failed to recover.

Multiple employees for Fish and Game, who didn’t want to be named amid fear of repercussions, told Grist that the agency was ignoring basic scientific principles, and that political appointees to the Board were not equipped to judge the effectiveness of these programs.

Even these criticisms of the agency’s science have been subject to politics: This summer, a committee of the American Society of Mammalogists drafted a resolution speaking out about Alaska’s predator control—only for it to be leaked to Fish and Game, which put up enough fuss that it was dropped. Link Olson, the curator of mammals at the University of Alaska Museum of the North, was one of many who supported the group taking a position on the issue. Olson says that even as someone who “actively collect[s] mammal specimens for science,” he is deeply concerned with Alaska’s approach to managing predators.

A month later, 34 retired wildlife managers and biologists wrote an open letter criticizing the bear cull and calling the agency’s management goals for the Mulchatna herd “unrealistic.” Meanwhile, neither Demma nor Sattler, the biologists who cautioned the board, are still studying the herd; Demma now works in a different area of the agency, and Sattler has left the state and taken a new job, for what she says are a variety of reasons.

Every fall, millions of people follow a live-streamed view of the biggest bears in Katmai National Park, which sits southeast of Wood-Tikchik. The animals jockey for fish before their hibernation, in an annual bulking up that the National Park Service has turned into a playful competition, giving the bears nicknames like “Chunk,” and, for a particularly large behemoth, 747.

Though marked on maps, animals like 747 don’t know where the comparative safety of the national park ends and where state management begins. This can mean the difference between life and death, as Alaskan and federal agencies have taken very different approaches to predator control: The National Park Service generally prohibits it. This has sparked a years-long federalism battle. Back in 2015, for example, the Board of Game passed a rule allowing brown bear baiting in the Kenai National Wildlife Refuge, leading the Fish and Wildlife Service to ban it in 2016. The state sued, and in 2020 the Trump administration proposed forcing national wildlife refuges to adopt Alaska’s hunting regulations. Similarly, the National Park Service challenged whether it had to allow practices like using spotlights to blind and shoot hibernating bears in their dens in national park preserves. In 2022, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that federal agencies have ultimate authority over state laws in refuges; last year, the Supreme Court declined to hear the case.

How these agencies interact with local communities is markedly different, too. Both Alaska Fish and Game and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service have regional advisory groups where residents can weigh in on game regulations, but Alissa Nadine Rogers, a resident of the Yukon- Kuskokwim Delta who sits on each, says that, unlike the federal government, it feels like “the state of Alaska does not recognize subsistence users as a priority.” On paper, the state prioritizes subsistence use, but under its constitution, Alaska can’t distinguish between residents, whereas the federal government can put the needs of local and traditional users first. This has frequently led to separate and overlapping state and federal regulations on public lands in Alaska.

Many people in the region rely on wildlife for a substantial part of their diet. Since the area isn’t connected by roads, groceries must be barged or flown in, making them expensive—a gallon of milk can cost almost $20. In addition to being an important food source, caribou are a traditional part of her Yupik culture, Rogers explains, used for tools and regalia. It’s a real burden for local communities to be told they can’t hunt caribou, which has driven poaching. As state and federal regulations have increased restrictions on hunting, she says residents have difficulty obtaining enough protein to sustain themselves through the winter. “If people don’t understand how it is to live out here, what true perspective do they have?” she asks. “Subsistence users are the ones who bear the burden when it comes to management. And a lot of the time, folks aren’t feeling that their voices are being heard or adequately represented.”

Yet Rogers says state and federal systems can provide an important balance to each other, and she approves of Fish and Game’s predator control efforts. As the former director of natural resources for the Orutsararmiut Native Council, she helped the council write a resolution, later passed by the statewide Alaska Federation of Natives, supporting last spring’s bear and wolf cull. She thinks officials should focus more on climate change but believes culling remains a useful tool. “It gives a vital chance for the [caribou] population and immediately supports growth and recovery,” Rogers says. She also asked Fish and Game to institute a five-year moratorium on all hunting of the herd. “If we go any lower, then we’re pretty much gonna be facing extinction.”

Who gets to make choices about the state’s fish and wildlife resources is a point of increasing tension this year, as a lawsuit unfolds between the state and federal government over who should manage salmon fisheries on the Kuskokwim River, to the west of the Togiak refuge. All five of its salmon returns have faltered for over a decade—making game like caribou even more critical for local communities. (In sharp contrast, to the east of the river, Bristol Bay has seen record recent returns, showing how variable climate impacts can be.) The Alaska Native Federation and the federal government say fishing should be limited to subsistence users, while the state has opened fishing to all state residents.

To ensure Alaska Native communities have a voice in such critical decisions, the Federation called for tribally designated seats on the Board of Game this fall. “We need to have a balanced Board of Game that represents all Alaskans,” says former Governor Tony Knowles. He, too, recommends passing a law to designate seats on the board for different types of wildlife stakeholders, including Alaska Native and rural residents, conservationists, biologists, recreational users, and others. Knowles also proposes an inquiry into Fish and Game’s bear killings, including recommendations on how to better involve the public in these decisions. “We deserve to know how this all happened so it won’t happen again.”

It’s clear to many that business as usual isn’t working. “I have no idea how the state comes up with their management strategy,” says Brice Eningowuk, the tribal administrator for the council of the Traditional Village of Togiak, an Alaska Native village on the outskirts of the Togiak refuge. He says Fish and Game didn’t tell his community about the bear cull, and he expressed skepticism that primarily killing bears would work. “Bears will eat caribou, but that’s not their primary food source,” he says.

Part of the solution is setting more realistic wildlife goals, according to Pat Walsh, whose career as a U.S. Fish and Wildlife biologist involved supervising the caribou program in the Togiak refuge. Recently retired, he says the current goal for the Mulchatna herd size was set 15 years ago, when the population was at 30,000, and is no longer realistic. Reducing that goal could allow targeted subsistence use—which might help ease some of the poaching. Though Fish and Game has killed wolves around the Mulchatna herd for 12 years, he points out the caribou population has steadily dropped. “We recommended the board reassess the ecological situation,” he says, and develop goals “based on the current conditions, not something that occurred in the past.”

Today’s landscape already looks quite different. Alaska has warmed twice as quickly as the global average, faster than any other state. When Rogers was in high school, she tested the permafrost near her house as an experiment. As a freshman, she only had to jam the spade in the ground before she hit ice. By the time she was a senior, it thawed to a depth of 23 inches—and in one location, to 4 feet. Summers have been cold and wet, and winters have brought crippling ice storms, rather than snow. Berry seasons have failed, and the normally firm and springy tundra has “disintegrated into mush,” Rogers says.

Feeling the very ground change beneath her feet highlights how little sway she has over these shifts. “How are you gonna yell at the clouds? ‘Hey, quit raining. Hey, you, quit snowing’?” Rogers asked. “There’s no way you can change something that is completely out of your control. We can only adapt.”

Yet despite how quickly these ecosystems are shifting, the Department of Fish and Game has no climate scientists. In the meantime, the agency is authorized to continue killing bears on the Mulchatna calving grounds every year until 2028. (The board plans to hear an annual report on the state’s intensive management later this month.) As Walsh summarizes wryly, “It’s difficult to address habitat problems. It’s difficult to address disease problems. It’s easy to say, ’Well, let’s go shoot.’”

Management decisions can feel stark in the face of nature’s complexity. The tundra is quite literally made from relationships. The lichen the caribou feed on is a symbiotic partnership between two organisms. Fungus provides its intricately branching structure, absorbing water and minerals from the air, while algae produces its energy, bringing together sunlight and soil, inseparable from the habitat they form. These connections sustain the life that blooms and eats and dies under a curving sweep of sky. It’s a system, in the truest and most obvious sense — one that includes the humans deciding what a population can recover from, and what a society can tolerate.

As another season of snow settles in, the caribou cross the landscape in great, meandering lines. There are thousands of years of migrations behind them and an uncertain future ahead. Like so much in nature, it’s hard to draw a clear threshold. “Everything is going to change,” Rogers says.

This article originally appeared in Grist at https://grist.org/science/alaska-predator-control-caribou-wolves-bear-hunt/.

Grist is a nonprofit, independent media organization dedicated to telling stories of climate solutions and a just future. Learn more at Grist.org

This study is just one of the many planned projects for these blubbery, flippered research assistants. According to ABC Australia, the tracker-adorning seals are part of a 20-year project to understand the grooves and depths of the East Antarctic continental shelf and the seafloor below it. Turning the seals into effective free-roaming sensors can fill in gaps in data related to some of the most hard-to-get-to parts of the Antarctic ocean, as the seals are “tweeting” small packets of information they’ve collected to a satellite every time they surface.

[Related: Tagging along with sharks to the ocean’s twilight zone]

Seals may know secret spots, too, that humans have never ventured to before, and they’re still actively exploring, diving down to the seafloor to forage, even when blankets of ice prevent ships and other human devices from accessing certain regions of Antarctica.

This science is happening for an important reason. Getting a more accurate picture of the labyrinthic world under Antarctic ice is key to making predictions about how and how fast melting occurs as a result of climate change. The seals are definitely not the only tool scientists are deploying. Submersible robots like Boaty McBoatface and Icefin are also on a similar mission.

There are many lacunas in the reams of scientific data regarding how the ocean is structured, and how its inhabitants traverse it. Part of the shortcoming is because researchers are approaching the task from a human perspective, and not seeing the environment the way an animal living there would. This could be why there are so many remaining mysteries around phenomena like, for example, where eels reproduce. Using an inside source, or an inside marine animal so to speak, may not be the worst idea to spy on their world.

The method is already yielding results. Other than the seals, a team of scientists from Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution have tagged sharks to study the quirks of the ocean’s twilight zone, and another team tagged turtles in the Indian Ocean to gather data that could be used to predict cyclones.

The post Seals with funny hats are helping map the Antarctic seascape appeared first on Popular Science.

Articles may contain affiliate links which enable us to share in the revenue of any purchases made.

Overfeeding cats will mess with their guts and poop

Laura Baisas — Fri, 03 Nov 2023 15:00:00 +0000

Roughly 60 percent of domestic cats in the United States are considered overweight. Deposit Photos

Among domestic cats, feline obesity is the most frequent nutritional disorder veterinarians in the United States see. Defined as a body weight that is 20 percent or more above a normal weight of eight to 12 pounds, it can impact a cat’s longevity and lead to diabetes and chronic inflammation among other health problems. A study published in the Journal of Animal Science in September found that overeating has some observable effects on feline gut microbiota and digestive system.

[Related: A new shot can be a safe and effective alternative to surgical spaying.]

According to study co-author and University of Illinois nutritional scientist Kelly Swanson, about 60 percent of cats in the US are considered overweight.

“While many studies have investigated feline weight loss, there has been little focus on the opposite process, which is also important. In this study, we wanted to learn more about the metabolic and gastrointestinal changes that occur as a result of overeating and weight gain in cats,” Swanson said in a statement.

Complex changes

In the study, 11 adult spayed female cats were fed a standard dry cat food for two weeks. Baseline body measurements were taken and they were then allowed to eat as much as they wanted. The researchers also collected blood and poop samples at regular intervals and monitored their physical activity. Weight gain was assessed using a body condition score (BCS), which is similar to the controversial body mass index (BMI) in humans. BCS is measured on a 9-point scale where anything 6 or above is considered overweight. Like in humans, BCS is a quantitative, but also subjective, method for evaluating body fat in pets.

The cats immediately increased their food intake when they were allowed to overeat and they began to gain weight. When the study began, their average BCS was 5.41. Their BCS increased to 8.27 after 18 weeks of overfeeding. This corresponds to the cats being about 30 percent overweight by body mass.

The researchers also analyzed changes in how much the felines pooped, their gastrointestinal transit time, how well nutrients were being digested, and changes in the build up of their gut microbiome over the 20-week study.

“We found that as cats ate more and gained weight, gastrointestinal transit time was reduced, and so was digestive efficiency. When the body gets less food, it will be more efficient in extracting nutrients. But when the amount of food increases, it passes through the digestive system faster and fewer nutrients are extracted in the process,” Swanson explained.

A cat-specific bacteria shift

During the 18 weeks of weight gain, the composition of the cats’ gut microbiome also changed. An anti-microbial bacteria that helps stimulate the immune system and inhibits pathogens called Bifidobacterium increased. At the same time, a bacteria that degrades fiber and has been linked to pro-inflammatory disease called Collinsella decreased. According to Swanson, these results are the opposite of what has been measured in overweight humans and suggests that their association to weight gain is complicated.

[Related: Your cat probably knows when you’re talking to it.]

“The change in the gastrointestinal transit time was a novel finding and a potential reason for the change in fecal microbiota. Future studies should consider measuring transit time to better explain modifications to the microbiome of pets,” Swanson added.

The more the cats ate, the more they pooped. At the same time that the cats were putting on pounds, fecal pH decreased, meaning that their poop became more acidic. A low fecal pH in humans indicates that the body isn’t absorbing fat or carbohydrates well. It appears that a lower fecal pH with higher food intake also reduced digestibility for cats.

To measure activity level, the team used special collars. The cats were kept in a group setting where they could interact with one another and play with toys, except on the days when stool samples were collected.

“We expected that weight gain might lead to decreased physical activity, but we did not observe any consistent changes in activity level. However, this could vary with individual cats and their environment, and how much their owners interact with them,” said Swanson.

At the end of the study, the cats were put on a restricted-feeding diet that helped them return to their previous weights. A better understanding of the gastrointestinal and metabolic changes that occur with obesity in domestic pets could help with future prevention and treatment plans. Another new study co-authored by Swanson, demonstrated that restricted feeding can promote safe weight and fat loss in cats.

The team also suggests that pet parents encourage regular physical activity with their cats. They can make it fun for the cats by stimulating foraging by placing food around the house, or using food puzzles during mealtime. Both of these strategies promote engagement and mental enrichment, according to Swanson.

The post Overfeeding cats will mess with their guts and poop appeared first on Popular Science.

Articles may contain affiliate links which enable us to share in the revenue of any purchases made.

Rats may have imaginations

Laura Baisas — Thu, 02 Nov 2023 18:00:00 +0000

Like in humans, the rat’s hippocampus is the part of the brain where mental maps of the world are stored. Deposit Photos

The ability to get lost in thoughts and use our imaginations to daydream might not be completely unique to humans. A study published November 2 in the journal Science found that rats can think about objects and places that are not right in front of them.

[Related: How science came to rely on the humble lab rat.]

Imagining locations that are away from our current position is a component of both memory and conjuring up possible future scenarios. If animals have this ability, they could have a form of imagination that is similar to our species.

“The rat can indeed activate the representation of places in the environment without going there,” Chongxi Lai, a co-author of the study and engineer and neuroscientist at Howard Hughes Medical Institute, said in a statement. “Even if his physical body is fixed, his spatial thoughts can go to a very remote location.”

To learn more, Lai and a team at Howard Hughes Medical Institute in Maryland designed a series of experiments to see if rats can use their thoughts to imagine going towards a specific location or moving a remote object.

A new brain-machine interface and virtual reality system for rats. In this experiment, a rat uses this system to navigate to a goal solely by thinking about where it wants to go. According to the rules of this system, physical movement by the rat does not affect the rat’s location in the virtual environment. Only by controlling its hippocampal brain activity can the rat control where it goes. Specifically, in this system the animal is virtually moved toward the ‘decoded location’ that the hippocampal activity represents. CREDIT: Lai et al.

Reading a rat’s mind

When humans and rodents experience events or visit places, specific neural activity patterns are activated in their hippocampus. This area of the brain is responsible for spatial memory and stores mental maps of the rat’s world. It is also involved in recalling past events and imagining future situations. To recall memories, specific patterns related to places and events are generated in the hippocampus. Chimpanzees have been shown to have the ability to pretend, but scientists are still figuring out how chimps and other non-human animals think.

To peer inside of a rat’s brain and look at these brain patterns, the team developed a real-time “thought detector.” This system measures neural activity and translates what it means using a brain-machine interface (BMI).

The BMI produced a connection between the electrical activity occurring in the rat’s hippocampus and the animal’s position in a 360-degree virtual reality arena. It allowed the researchers to see if a rat can activate hippocampal activity to think about a location in the virtual arena without physically traveling there.

A rat ‘thought dictionary’

With the BMI in place, the team worked to decode the brain signals in the rats. They built a “thought dictionary” of what the brain activity patterns looked like when the rat was traveling through the virtual arena in the experiment.

To do this, the rat was harnessed into a virtual reality system. As the rat walked on a spherical treadmill, its movements were translated onto a 360-degree screen. The rat was rewarded when it navigated towards its goal.

While the rat walked on the treadmill, the BMI system recorded the activity occurring in the hippocampus. The team saw which neurons were activated when the rat navigated the virtual arena to reach each goal. These signals provided them with the basis for a real-time translation of what was going on in the hippocampus.

With the thought dictionary set up, the team disconnected the treadmill. The rat was rewarded for the first step of reproducing the hippocampal activity pattern that was associated with walking towards a goal location.

The Jumper task and the Jedi task

Next, they designed two different tasks for the rats to perform–the Jumper task and the Jedi task.

In the Jumper task, the BMI translated the rat’s brain activity into motion on a screen. The animal was essentially using its thoughts to find a reward by thinking about where it needs to go to obtain it. This is a thought process similar to traveling to work or school and imagining the buildings and places we will pass along the way.

[Related: We probably have big brains because we got lucky.]

The Jedi task had a rat hypothetically move an object to a location in its mind. The rat was fixed in a virtual place, but controlled its hippocampal activity to envision moving the object towards a goal. This is similar to how a person sitting on a couch imagining getting up and refilling a water glass in a kitchen. The team then changed the location of the rat’s goal, which required it to produce activity patterns associated with the new location.

They found that the rats can precisely and flexibly control their hippocampal activity. Surprisingly, they could sustain this activity and hold their thoughts on a given location for many seconds. This time frame is similar to the amount of time humans can take to relive past events or imagine new scenarios.

“The stunning thing is how rats learn to think about that place, and no other place, for a very long period of time, based on our, perhaps naïve, notion of the attention span of a rat,” Tim Harris, a study co-author and biophysicist from Howard Hughes Medical Institute, said in a statement.

According to the team, this study shows how BMI can be used to probe hippocampal activity and could be a new way to study this critical region of the brain. BMI is increasingly used in prosthetics, and this new work could be used to develop devices based on these same principles.

The post Rats may have imaginations appeared first on Popular Science.

Articles may contain affiliate links which enable us to share in the revenue of any purchases made.

The science behind mixing honey into cocktails

Noah Lederman — Thu, 02 Nov 2023 12:00:00 +0000

Honey, alcohol, and citrus work well together. Depositphotos

In Washington, D.C., a honey bee landed on a restaurant bar, creating quite a stir. But a man a few feet away, who was allergic to the insect’s sting, was not alarmed. This bee’s head and wings were metal, and its abdomen glass.

The bistro, Bresca, which means “honeycomb” in Catalan, likes to serve its riff on a Bee’s Knees cocktail in this bee-like vessel. And, to fit the theme, Bresca’s version swaps out simple syrup made of processed sugar and water for a syrup made entirely of honey and water. Unlike the sucrose-heavy simple syrups that many bartenders use in cocktails, honey is mostly fructose and glucose. Because fructose is sweeter than sucrose, honey goes a long way in a cocktail, and knowing how to use it is key to impressing your guests.

Use different varieties of honey to your benefit

“Honey comes from thousands and thousands of varietals of plants,” says Juliana Rangel, associate professor of apiculture at Texas A&M’s College of Agriculture and Life Sciences. “Each plant has its own unique [taste] profile that’s not found in [table] sugars.”

[Related: How to build a garden that’ll have pollinators buzzin’]

When you are familiar with the varieties of honey available to you, you can choose the perfect honey to complement the other ingredients in a cocktail. “Horsemint honey,” Rangel notes, which comes from a plant that grows wildly across central Texas and other areas, “would be a great complement to a minty beverage like mojitos because the honey itself has those components.” Rangel also explains that because honey naturally contains acids, it combines well with citrus fruits often used in cocktails.

Work with honey’s texture, not against it

Honey, unlike a simple syrup, imparts mouthfeel, texture, and aroma, says Chris Gerling, senior extension associate at Cornell University’s College of Agriculture and Life Sciences.

“Because honey has this viscosity, this texture, and waxiness,” Gerling says, “it helps to soften and round out ethanol, which can be harsh. It can make the more strident parts of bitters… less aggressive.”

But because of honey’s thickness, it needs to be thinned out before it goes into a cocktail. At the urban apiary on the rooftop of the Hilton hotel in McLean, Virginia, the harvest goes to the kitchen and bar, where it’s mixed with equal parts warm water. This keeps it viscous and flavorful, but loose enough to be blended easily into a cocktail of whiskey, Cointreau, and muddled lemon slices so the oils from the skin can help round out the drink.

Actually, mind your beeswax

Bees work busily, visiting flowers and converting pollen and nectar in their stomachs to remove water and produce a simple sugar. A harvesting bee then passes this nectar to another bee that stores this sugar in the honeycomb, drying it out with their wings and capping it with beeswax. As it turns out, beeswax is another useful agricultural product and has its place around alcohol.

Bresca’s bartender works much like a bee. Not only is cocktail construction a busy process, but to infuse the right flavors into the drink, the bartender must move it from vessel to vessel, aging it in beeswax for nine days before it goes into the metal and glass bee.

Storing a cocktail in a jar with a beeswax-coated interior is a lot like putting wine into an oak barrel, Gerling explains. “Alcohol is a solvent. It’s extracting properties from the beeswax.”

Hawksmoor in New York City goes as far as infusing whiskey with melted beeswax harvested from Manhattan rooftops to make their Night Nurse cocktail. After time in the refrigerator, the bartender skims off all that rises to the surface—about a quarter of the initial wax. It’s the same process as fat-washing a cocktail, and the melted beeswax imparts floral flavors and a creamy mouth-feel. Hawksmoor also acid-adjusts their honey with malic acid from apples and citric acid for a cleaner taste.

[Related: 5 ways to keep bees buzzing that don’t require a hive]

While Rangel says beeswax can add an earthy and floral taste to a cocktail, she is less keen on aging alcohol in beeswax. Alcohol will degrade the wax particles, she says, resulting in leaching. And because bees visit agricultural crops and can carry pesticides on their bodies, those chemicals get imparted into the beeswax, giving it a chemical residue.

But it’s no different than eating a salad without the organic label stamped on the bag. And it’s probably no worse than the alcohol itself.

“In urban environments,” Rangel notes, “the pesticides are actually less.”

The post The science behind mixing honey into cocktails appeared first on Popular Science.

Articles may contain affiliate links which enable us to share in the revenue of any purchases made.

The sea star’s whole body is a head

Laura Baisas — Wed, 01 Nov 2023 16:00:00 +0000

The unusual five-axis symmetry of sea stars (Patiria miniata) has long confounded our understanding of animal evolution. Laurent Formery

When looking at a sea star–or starfish–it’s not really clear which part of its identical five pointed body is considered its head. This question has puzzled biologists for decades, but some new research says that a starfish’s whole body could function like a head. The findings are described in a study published November 1 in the journal Nature and might have solved the mystery of how sea stars and other echinoderms evolved their distinctively shaped bodies.

[Related: This strange 500-million-year-old sea urchin relative lost its skeleton.]

By staining genetic material with fluorescent labels, researchers can examine how key genes behave across the sea star body. CREDIT: Laurent Formery. Laurent Formery

Searching for heads and trunks

Sea stars are invertebrates that belong to a group of animals called echinoderms.This group also includes sea urchins and sand dollars and they all have bodies that are arranged in five equal and symmetric sections. Early in their evolution, echinoderms had a bilaterally designed ancestor with two mirrored sides more like a human’s.

“How the different body parts of the echinoderms relate to those we see in other animal groups has been a mystery to scientists for as long as we’ve been studying them,” Jeff Thompson, a co-author of the study and evolutionary biologist at the University of Southampton in the United Kingdom, said in a statement. “In their bilateral relatives, the body is divided into a head, trunk, and tail. But just looking at a starfish, it’s impossible to see how these sections relate to the bodies of bilateral animals.”

In the new study, an international team of scientists compared the molecular markers in sea stars with a wider group of animals called deuterostomes. This group includes echinoderms like sea star and bilateral animals including vertebrates. Deuterostomes all share a common ancestor, so comparing their development can offer clues into how echinoderms evolved their more unique five-pointed body plan.

They used multiple high-tech molecular and genomic techniques to see where different genes were expressed during a sea star’s development and growth. Micro-CT scanning also allowed the team to understand the shape and structure of the animals in closer detail.

Sea star mapping

Team members from Stanford University, the University of California, Berkeley, and Pacific BioSciences, used techniques called RNA tomography and in situ hybridization to build a three-dimensional map of a sea star’s gene expression to see where specific genes are being expressed during development. They specifically mapped the expression of the genes that control the growth of a sea star’s ectoderm, which includes its nervous system and skin.

They found gene signatures associated with head development almost everywhere in juvenile sea stars. The expression of genes that code for an animal’s torso and tail sections were also largely missing.

[Related: What’s killing sea stars?]

“When we compared the expression of genes in a starfish to other groups of animals, like vertebrates, it appeared that a crucial part of the body plan was missing,” said Thompson. “The genes that are typically involved in the patterning of the trunk of the animal weren’t expressed in the ectoderm. It seems the whole echinoderm body plan is roughly equivalent to the head in other groups of animals.”

The molecular signatures that are typically associated with the front-most portion of an animal’s head were also localized towards the middle of each of the sea star’s five arms.

“It’s as if the sea star is completely missing a trunk, and is best described as just a head crawling along the seafloor,” study co-author and Stanford University evolutionary biologist Laurent Formery said in a statement. “It’s not at all what scientists have assumed about these animals.”

Sea stars and other echinoderms may have evolved their five-section body plan by losing the trunk region that their bilateral ancestors once had. This chance would have allowed them to move around and feed differently than animals with two symmetrical arms.

“Our research tells us the echinoderm body plan evolved in a more complex way than previously thought and there is still much to learn about these intriguing creatures,” said Thompson. “As someone who has studied them for the last ten years, these findings have radically changed how I think about this group of animals.”

This research was supported by the Leverhulme Trust, NASA, the NSF, and the Chan Zuckerberg BioHub.

The post The sea star’s whole body is a head appeared first on Popular Science.

Articles may contain affiliate links which enable us to share in the revenue of any purchases made.

Giant prehistoric lamprey likely sucked blood—and ate flesh

Laura Baisas — Tue, 31 Oct 2023 16:00:00 +0000

The Jurassic lampreys Yanliaomyzon had a feeding apparatus that surprisingly resembles that of the pouched lampreys. It foreshadows the ancestral flesh-eating habit of present day. lampreys. Heming Zhang

Lampreys are the vampires of the ocean and the lakes they can invade. While these eel-like parasitic vertebrates don’t use two sharp fangs to suck blood, lampreys have a toothed oral sucker that latches onto their prey and feasts on their host’s blood. Modern day lampreys are found in temperate zones of most of the world’s oceans except in Africa. However, specimens of their extinct ancient ancestors are fairly rare in the fossil record, despite dating back roughly 360 million years. Now, paleontologists in northern China have found two unusually large fossilized lamprey species that fill a large evolutionary gap. The specimens are described in a study published October 31 in the journal Nature Communications.

[Related: Why sea lampreys are going to be a bigger problem for the Great Lakes.]

“We found the largest fossil lampreys ever found in the world,” study co-author and Chinese Academy of Sciences paleontologist Feixiang Wu tells PopSci. “Based on these fossils, our study assumed that the most recent common ancestor of modern lampreys was likely eating flesh rather than sucking blood as conventionally believed.”

The earliest known lampreys date back about 360 million years ago during the Paleozoic Era. These early species are believed to have been only a few inches long and had weak feeding structures. The 160 million-year-old fossils in this new study were discovered in the Lagerstätte Yanliao Biota in northeastern China and date back to the Jurassic. The longer of the two specimens is named Yanliaomyzon occisor. It is more than 23 inches long and is estimated to have had 16 teeth. The shorter 11 inch-long species is named Yanliaomyzon ingensdentes and had about 23 teeth. By comparison, modern lampreys range from six to 40 inches long.

These Jurassic lampreys from China are jawless predators of the Age of Dinosaurs. They suggest that living lampreys are ancestrally flesh-eating and most probably originated in the Southern Hemisphere of the Late Cretaceous. CREDIT: Heming Zhang.

Their well-preserved oral discs and “biting” structures indicate that these lamprey species had already evolved enhanced feeding structures, bigger body size, and were predators by the Jurassic period. It also appears that they had already evolved a three-phased life cycle by this point

Lampreys begin their lives as burrowing freshwater larvae called ammocetes. During this stage, they have rudimentary eyes and feed on microorganisms with their toothless mouths. They spend several years in this stage, before transforming into adults. Some move into saltwater, while others will remain in freshwater. As adults, they become parasites that attach to a fish with their mouths and feed on their blood and tissue. Lampreys eventually return to freshwater to reproduce, where they build a nest, then spawn, and then die.

It is still unclear when lampreys evolved this lifecycle and their more complex teeth for feeding. These new well-preserved fossils fill an important gap in the fossil record and give some insights into how its lifecycle and feeding originated.

[Related: Evolution made mosquitos into stealthy, sensitive vampires.]

The study also pinpoints where and when today’s lamprey’s first appeared. “We put modern lampreys’ origin in the Southern Hemisphere of the Late Cretaceous,” says Wu.

The Late Cretacous lasted from 100.5 million years ago to 66 million years ago and ended with the mass extinction event that wiped out the dinosaurs. In future research, the team would like to search for specimens from the Cretaceous. According to Wu, this time period could be very important to their evolutionary history.

More fossilized specimens could also provide more accurate ideas of what kinds of flesh ancient lampreys feasted on with all those teeth and how that has evolved over time.

“Living lampreys are always hailed as ‘water vampires,’ but their ancestor might be a flesh eater, their teeth tell,” says Wu.

The post Giant prehistoric lamprey likely sucked blood—and ate flesh appeared first on Popular Science.

Articles may contain affiliate links which enable us to share in the revenue of any purchases made.

Newfound mosasaur was like a giant Komodo dragon with flippers

Laura Baisas — Mon, 30 Oct 2023 14:30:00 +0000

An artist’s illustration of two Jormungandr walhallaensis mosasaurs fighting. Henry Sharpe

Paleontologists in North Dakota have discovered new species of mosasaur. These giant meat-eating aquatic lizards swam the Earth’s seas about 80 million years ago during the late Cretaceous period. This new species is named Jormungandr walhallaensis after a sea serpent in Norse mythology named Jörmungandr and Walhalla, North Dakota where its fossils were found. The findings are described in a study published October 30 in the Bulletin of the American Museum of Natural History.

[Related: Dinosaurs who stuck together, survived together.]

“If you put flippers on a Komodo dragon and made it really big, that’s what it would have looked like,” study co-author and Richard Gilder Graduate School PhD student Amelia Zietlow, said in a statement.

The first mosasaur specimens were discovered over 200 years ago and the word “mosasaur” even predates the word “dinosaur” by roughly 20 years. There are still several unanswered questions about these ancient sea lizards, including how many times they evolved to have flippers and when they became fully aquatic. Scientists believe that they evolved to have their signature flippers at least three times and possibly four or more. It is also still a mystery if mosasaurs are more closely related to present day monitor lizards or snakes or another living creature entirely. This new specimen fills in some knowledge gaps of how the different groups of mosasaurs are related to each other.

“As these animals evolved into these giant sea monsters, they were constantly making changes,” Zietlow said. “This work gets us one step closer to understanding how all these different forms are related to one another.”

Researchers in northeastern North Dakota first discovered the Jormungandr fossil in 2015. It included a nearly complete skull, jaws, and cervical spine, and a number of vertebrae. An extensive analysis revealed that the fossil is of a new species that has multiple features that are also seen in two other mosasaurs: Clidastes and Mosasaurus. Clidastes is a smaller animal of about six to 13 feet long that lived roughly 145 million years ago. Mosasaurus was much larger at almost 50 feet long and lived about 99.6 to 66 million years ago alongside the Tyrannosaurus rex.

[Related: This four-legged snake fossil was probably a skinny lizard.]

The new specimen is about 24 feet long and has flippers. It also has a shark-like tail similar to other early mosasaur species. It also likely would have had “angry eyebrows,” caused by a bony ridge on its skull. Its slightly stumpy tail would have also been shorter than the rest of its body.

Jormungandr was likely a precursor to the bigger Mosasaurus.

“This fossil is coming from a geologic time in the United States that we don’t really understand,” study co-author and paleontologist from the North Dakota Geological Survey Clint Boyd said in a statement. “The more we can fill in the geographic and temporal timeline, the better we can understand these creatures.”

In Norse mythology, Jörmungandr is an enormous sea serpent or worm who encircles the Earth. Jörmungandr is believed to be the middle child of the trickster god Loki and the giantess Angrboða. Thor the god of thunder also has an ongoing battle with Jörmungandr and it is believed that the two will fight to the death during Ragnarok, or the end of the world.

The post Newfound mosasaur was like a giant Komodo dragon with flippers appeared first on Popular Science.

Articles may contain affiliate links which enable us to share in the revenue of any purchases made.

The best pet water fountains of 2023

Stacey L. Nash — Wed, 07 Jul 2021 17:59:00 +0000

Anna Stampfli, Unsplash
We may earn revenue from the products available on this page and participate in affiliate programs. Learn more ›

Best for dogs PetSafe Healthy Pet Gravity Food or Water Station

SEE IT
This durable model is stainless steel and easy to clean.

Best for cats Eufy Water Fountain

SEE IT
This five-stage water filtering system ensures safe and clean water for your furry friend.

Best high-capacity PetSafe Drinkwell Platinum

SEE IT
This item has an activated carbon filter and is made of BPA-free plastic.

Pet ownership includes the rewards of companionship and the love of your furry friend. It also comes with a lot of work. The best pet water fountains take some of the work out of your hands by providing cats and dogs with clean, fresh water. These bubbly, burbling fountains are made in different styles, designs, and materials to meet the varying needs of different pet households. A gravity-fed, battery-powered, or standard electric model could help you keep your pets hydrated with purer water 24/7.

Best overall: PetSafe Healthy Pet Gravity Food or Water Station

Best for cats: Eufy Water Fountain

Easiest to clean: PetSafe Drinkwell Original Pet Fountain

Best high-capacity water fountain: PetSafe Drinkwell Platinum

Best budget: Wonder Creature Cat Water Fountain

The best pet water fountains: Reviews & Recommendations

Cat and dog water fountains have become popular pet supplies to keep your furry friends hydrated. The trick is determining which design—faucet, flower, gravity-fed, multi-basin, high-capacity—best fits your pet and lifestyle. Once you get an idea of the size you need and how you’d like the fountain to fit in with the rest of your home’s décor, the right fountain will likely present itself.

Best overall: PetSafe Healthy Pet Gravity Food or Water Station

PetSafe

SEE IT

The PetSafe Healthy Pet Gravity Food or Water Station comes in three sizes—64-, 128-, or 320-ounce sizes. The manufacturer provides a chart that shows how long the water should last in each one based on the size of the pet using the water station. Even the smallest dog water fountain can last several days before it needs a refill. The entire water station comes apart for easy cleaning and includes a dishwasher-safe stainless steel basin. However, the water tank is hand wash only, though it doesn’t need cleaning as often as the basin. This model doesn’t come with a water filter, but the manufacturer sells one separately. This company also offers a matching food station in the same size options.

Best for cats: Eufy Water Fountain

Eufy

SEE IT

The Eufy Water Fountain offers an attractive design that caters to the needs of a cat. A water filtration system removes impurities and contaminants from the water, leaving clean water for the picky feline. A BPA-free ABS plastic basin resists scratches, bites, and drops up to 1.6 feet. An angled opening provides a splash guard to protect floors and fits the natural angles of a cat’s body.

Easiest to clean: PetSafe Drinkwell Original Pet Fountain

PetSafe

SEE IT

The PetSafe Drinkwell Original Pet Fountain has a 50-ounce capacity so your pet is never dehydrated. The bowl is top-shelf dishwasher safe, and the BPA-free fountain ensures your furry friend is always drinking fresh water. This fountain includes a 5.5-foot electrical cord connected to the water pump. The pump comes apart in a three-step process, granting access to all of the fountain’s components for thorough cleaning. Reassembly is intuitive.

Best high-capacity water fountain: PetSafe Drinkwell Platinum

PetSafe

SEE IT

The PetSafe Drinkwell Platinum’s reservoir completely removes from the base for fast, easy filling. A faucet-style design provides two drinking options—the faucet or the basin. It also offers adjustable flow control. The carbon filter removes odors and strange flavors for picky pets but needs occasional changing. The BPA-free fountain is dishwasher-safe (top rack only) for easier maintenance and cleaning.

Best budget: Wonder Creature Cat Water Fountain

Wonder Creature

SEE IT

The Wonder Creature Cat Water Fountain’s affordable price tag might attract you, but the premium features will seal the deal. A window on the tank lets you see the water level, and there’s also a blue indicator light that turns red when water starts to run low. Additionally, an auto-shutoff feature turns the pump off if the tank runs dry, preventing burnouts. The stainless steel basin stays cleaner than average thanks to a design that keeps debris from collecting at the edges. As a bonus, it includes a silicone mat to protect the floor.

What to consider when shopping for the best pet water fountains

Pet water fountains provide a set-it-and-forget-it watering option. Most, though not all, models have a built-in filtration system to remove hair and debris from drinking water. There are also different types and shapes to consider. Everything from the number of pets to the size of the animals using the fountain can also determine which model works best for your household. Take a look at the factors you’ll need to consider before making the final decision on these great pet supplies.

What type of water fountain do you want?

There are three basic fountains types—flower, faucet, and gravity-fed. The flower and faucet models are electric or battery-powered. They both continuously recycle water, filtering it as they do so. There’s not a lot of difference performance-wise between flower and faucet models. It often comes down to what you (and your pet) prefer.

The third option, a gravity-fed water fountain, features a large water container with a filter in the spout that feeds water into a basin via a valve. The valve and gravity do all of the work. It’s easy to see when the water container is ready for a refill, and these models come in larger sizes than the other two types.

A word of warning—sometimes pets refuse to use one type of water fountain for no other reason than they don’t like it, and you can’t always predict what a pet will like until they’ve tried it.

How hard is the water fountain to assemble and clean?

In general, the more pieces the water fountain has, the more difficult it is to take apart and clean. Models with at least a few dishwasher-safe pieces make cleaning easier.

Cleaning and maintenance also include monitoring and changing any filters. Some models feature multi-stage filtration, which offers cleaner water but also means more complicated (and expensive) filters. Models with easy access to simple, washable filters save time and work on the pet owner’s part.

How many pets will use the drinking fountain?

The more pounds of pet you have, the more water the fountain needs to produce. Cats and small dogs can get by with just about any pet water fountain. However, multi-pet homes or homes with large dog breeds may need a high-capacity water fountain that holds over 100 ounces of water at a time.

How well does the filter work, how often does it need replacing, and how much do replacement filters cost?

Filters remove hair and other debris that finds its way into the water. Keep in mind that pets can drink water that humans wouldn’t dare touch without suffering a single stomach cramp. Some have sponge filters that need little more than rinsing and squeezing out the water, and others feature multi-stage filtration with two to three-part filters that require more frequent replacement.

The cost of replacement filters can quickly add up, especially if they’re clogged by something as common as pet saliva. Check the price of replacement filters and how often the manufacturer recommends replacing them to get a better idea of the water fountain’s total lifetime cost.

What materials make up the drinking fountain?

Some people find the more expensive stainless steel and ceramic water fountains resist water deposits and clean better than plastic models. However, there’s no clear basis for those claims.

Stainless steel pet water fountains are more likely to be dishwasher safe and resist the wear and tear of a rambunctious pet. Ceramic fountains often look better aesthetically, but they’re more likely to chip than either stainless steel or plastic. BPA-free plastic works well for many homes. However, it may show nicks and scratches more readily than stainless steel and ceramic.

Will the drinking fountain be visible?

Pet water fountains come in fun designs and colors, adding a touch of personality to the room. Most of the time, they’ll be at least partially visible to guests. Generally, you want a model that isn’t an eyesore.

Many faucet and flower designs stand out with their gentle burble, while others, like modern plastic designs, are transparent and blend into the background. Others are basic and functional, looking like a giant upside-down water bottle attached to a basin. No matter what design you choose, it should fit in with the existing decor and meet your design goals—disappear into the back or add a fun water feature.

Some pets may find the water fountain a source of entertainment. Consequently, it’s best to place them on a waterproof mat or flooring that won’t be damaged by water exposure.

FAQs

Q: Should I leave my water fountain on all the time?

You don’t have to leave pet water fountains running all of the time, but they are designed to do so. In some cases, you probably should, and there are a few reasons why you might want to. Electric and battery-powered pet water fountains use a pump to recycle water through a filter to keep it free of debris and bacteria. If you stop that pumping action, it takes extra effort on the pump’s part to start that circulation process again.

Turning the pump off also gives time for bacterial growth. The filter then has to play catch up. Second, an electric water fountain that’s constantly running often attracts pets. For animals that may not drink enough, the constant access to moving water can encourage them to drink more. However, if you let the water fountain run continuously, you must make sure it doesn’t run dry and burn out the pump.

Q: How often should the fountains be cleaned?

How often the fountain needs cleaning depends on a few factors, like how many animals use it and how much debris gets in the fountain. Fountains in single-pet homes probably need to be cleaned once every other week. However, if you live where it’s dusty or have several pets using the fountain, it might need cleaning once or twice a week.

Q: How often should you change the water in the fountain?

Change the water about every two days. At that rate, the water stays clean, and the fountain won’t run dry. However, if you have several animals using the fountain, you may need to change the water more often. More animals will drink more, spill more, and leave behind more hair and saliva in the water.

The final word on shopping for the best pet water fountains

Pet water fountains are one of those pet supplies that can reduce the workload of pet ownership. You’ll still need to keep an eye on water levels, but your pet will have constant access to fresh, clean water. However, the pros may come with some cons, including filter replacements and general maintenance. Still, for many pet parents, the convenience of a fountain outweighs the price of replacing filters.

Why trust us

Popular Science started writing about technology more than 150 years ago. There was no such thing as “gadget writing” when we published our first issue in 1872, but if there was, our mission to demystify the world of innovation for everyday readers means we would have been all over it. Here in the present, PopSci is fully committed to helping readers navigate the increasingly intimidating array of devices on the market right now.

Our writers and editors have combined decades of experience covering and reviewing consumer electronics. We each have our own obsessive specialties—from high-end audio to video games to cameras and beyond—but when we’re reviewing devices outside of our immediate wheelhouses, we do our best to seek out trustworthy voices and opinions to help guide people to the very best recommendations. We know we don’t know everything, but we’re excited to live through the analysis paralysis that internet shopping can spur so readers don’t have to.

The post The best pet water fountains of 2023 appeared first on Popular Science.

Articles may contain affiliate links which enable us to share in the revenue of any purchases made.

New refuge provides hope for critically endangered toad

Christine Peterson/High Country News — Mon, 30 Oct 2023 09:00:00 +0000

Molter scans a Wyoming toad for the microchip that indicates he was raised in captivity. After noting the toad’s location and the number of his microchip, she will release him back into his Laramie Basin habitat and continue her survey. Christine Peterson

This article was originally featured on High Country News.

The Wyoming toad, which evolved to live in a small slice of southeastern Wyoming, is one of the most endangered amphibians in North America. But now, at least, it will have more room to recover: On Oct. 10, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service announced the creation of the Wyoming Toad Conservation Area.

“When we invest in a species like the Wyoming toad, we really can turn it around,” Fish and Wildlife Service Director Martha Williams told High Country News. “This is a perfect example of what we can do when we persevere and give a species time, and when we all work together toward its long-term recovery.”

No one knows exactly how many Wyoming toads used to live in Albany County, Wyoming, though reports from the mid-1900s suggest they were once abundant. They’re a glacial relic, isolated in the Laramie Basin and separated from their closest relative, the Canadian toad, by hundreds of miles. In 1984, after land-use changes, disease and pesticides caused their numbers to crash, they were placed on the U.S. endangered species list. But the species continued to decline, in part because of the deadly chytrid fungus that is still ravaging amphibian populations worldwide. When the last known population of Wyoming toads began to crater, biologists scooped up the remaining 10 individuals to breed in captivity.

For almost 20 years, researchers released captive-bred toads on the Mortenson Lake National Wildlife Refuge and on nearby private properties designated as “safe harbors” under the Endangered Species Act. But the Laramie Basin’s toad population, facing disease and habitat degradation, languished.

In 2017, the agency decided to improve the toad’s chances by working with willing landowners to buy or pay for easements on up to 43,000 acres.

Years later, The Conservation Fund, an environmental nonprofit, purchased 1,078 acres of braided streams, marsh and lush grassland—prime toad habitat, in other words—from a private owner. The Fish and Wildlife Service then bought the land and has now designated it as the Wyoming Toad Conservation Area.

The National Wildlife Refuge system, which is managed by the Fish and Wildlife Service, has historically protected only federal lands, but in 2006, the agency began to designate conservation areas, which primarily include conservation easements on private land. The agency now oversees more than 560 wildlife refuges and 13 conservation areas, while another two conservation areas—one in the Missouri Headwaters of Montana and another in Florida’s Everglades—are in the works.

“When we invest in a species like the Wyoming toad, we really can turn it around.”

The new conservation area secures some much-needed habitat, but the Wyoming toad still faces a long road to recovery. Under the Endangered Species Act, the species needs five separate, stable breeding populations before it can be considered eligible for delisting. Researchers have documented breeding in four Laramie Basin populations over the last six years, but disease, small population sizes and fragmented habitat still threaten the species, says Rachel Arrick, the Wyoming toad recovery coordinator for the Fish and Wildlife Service. She is unable to estimate the number of toads on the landscape, largely because they’re so hard to find, but biologists continue to supplement the local populations with captive-bred animals: This year, 824 adults, 25,211 tadpoles and 260 baby toadlets were released in the Laramie Basin.

The captive toad populations that exist at zoos and rearing facilities across the country mean that researchers can also use these releases to field-test treatments for chytrid, which remains prevalent in the basin. Most recently, Arrick has been studying whether probiotics can boost the toads’ chytrid-fighting microbiome. Researchers are also investigating how and why some Wyoming toads are able to survive chytrid and even acquire immunity to it. This research is particularly important given that 41% of the world’s amphibian species are threatened with extinction, due in part to the fungus.

Laramie Basin landowner Fred Lindzey works with the Fish and Wildlife Service to provide habitat for the toads and facilitate regular surveys on his land. Under his safe harbor agreement, the agency will not demand more of him without his consent. (He is also allowed to change the way he uses his property, but if his activities were to threaten toad habitat, the agency would request permission to collect the resident toads.)

Lindzey acknowledges that restoring a critically endangered species like the Wyoming toad to health is “an uphill battle.” But he takes comfort in the new conservation area.

“It continues to be a good sign that we as people are interested in recovery and keeping these species around,” he said. “And maybe one spring, we’ll wake up and hear so many calling you can’t hear yourself talk.”

Christine Peterson lives in Laramie, Wyoming, and has covered science, the environment and outdoor recreation in Wyoming for more than a decade. Her work has appeared in National Geographic, Outdoor Life and the Casper Star-Tribune, among others. We welcome reader letters. Email High Country News at editor@hcn.org or submit a letter to the editor. See our letters to the editor policy.

The post New refuge provides hope for critically endangered toad appeared first on Popular Science.

Articles may contain affiliate links which enable us to share in the revenue of any purchases made.

In the spirit of survival: How Indigenous protectors are saving rez dogs

Kendra Coulter / MIT Press — Sat, 28 Oct 2023 23:00:00 +0000

Some dogs have one family, while others, often called community dogs, may move among different families’ yards and homes. Robert Alexander/Getty Images

This article was originally featured on MIT Press. This article is excerpted from Kendra Coulter’s book “Defending Animals: Finding Hope on the Front Lines of Animal Protection.”

In many native communities around the lands we now call North America, dogs roam freely. They may be viewed as a risk to people’s safety, members of the community, or some combination, depending on where you are and who you ask. Often called rez dogs, the animals are imbued with many different identities. Some native people themselves identify with the dogs as relatives and reflections, members of families, similarly hungry and rejected, and stubborn and wily survivors who are emblematic of the Indigenous spirit.

“Whenever I visit tribal communities, I am always on the lookout for my relatives, the rez dogs,” writes Dr. Michael Yellow Bird, dean of social work at the University of Manitoba and member of the Mandan, Hidatsa, and Arikara Nation in North Dakota. “I want to know their stories: How did they get to where they are today? How did they survive? What happened to their babies, their parents, their friends, and their culture? What do they dream about? What hopes do they have for the future? What can they tell us about the fate of the human race and the planet?” He says that the lives of rez dogs cannot be uncoupled from human-human relationships, and particularly from the impacts of European arrival on native ways of living, learning, and honoring fellow creatures, including dogs. “The condition of dogs in our communities is a reflection of us. If they are sick, it is because we are also sick.” Many other Indigenous people who work with animals make a similar argument.

“The condition of dogs in our communities is a reflection of us. If they are sick, it is because we are also sick.”

Although unknown to many outside native communities, rez dogs have attracted the attention of some animal protection groups concerned about their health and safety, especially those in regions with harsher climates. These organizations have proceeded in a range of ways: Some have stolen the dogs right off the land, while others have reached out to leaders in these communities to offer assistance by bringing veterinary services, food, and other supplies, or rehoming the dogs outside the community.

Other animal organizations have been invited into native communities (usually called First Nations or Indigenous communities in Canada) to exchange knowledge. With its successful Northern Dogs project, the International Fund for Animal Welfare, for example, built relationships with First Nations to better understand challenges before co-developing programs to address issues facing the communities. “Today, we offer veterinary services, culturally relevant education, and real-life solutions for communities that would otherwise not have them.” Dialogue and relationship building must come first, particularly because of the longer pattern of outsiders telling native people that they can’t take care of their own. This has not only happened with dogs but also with children. Native children have been taken into state systems or religious residential schools designed to assimilate and destroy Indigenous cultures and spirits. The children experienced harsh treatment, abuse, and disease, and many died. Decades of these patterns have created widespread and intergenerational trauma with psychological, social, and economic symptoms as well as mistrust. Understanding these truths, and working for reconciliation and healing, is difficult but necessary.

Many native communities have their own law enforcement and/or animal care and control services tasked with investigating potential harm and/or enforcing the communities’ animal bylaws, which may permit free-roaming dogs or not. Native communities are diverse and have responded in different ways to rez dogs. Ermineskin Cree First Nation has developed a comprehensive law covering dogs at large, dangerous dogs, excessive barking, licensing, and protection. It begins from a place of respect, establishing that the nation “has a deep and abiding respect of the Creator’s Natural Laws and a great sense of stewardship, with a long-standing traditional and spiritual relationship with domesticated animals, in particular dogs (atimwak), and holds such animals in high-regard and, as such, strives to ensure that matters related to such animals are carried out in a conscientious, respectful and prompt manner.” It also states that the regional Animal Protection Act applies on the reserve.

Animal services officer Norm Running Rabbit of the Siksika First Nation differentiates between dogs being “allowed” to roam free and being recognized “as free beings, as animals that should be without restraints.” Speaking to the Alberta Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (Alberta SPCA), he explains that this means dogs who are technically “owned” and cared for may be free to move about too. Some dogs have one family, while others, often called community dogs, may move among different families’ yards and homes. He recognizes that many people are not accustomed to this approach, and that safety and animal welfare issues have emerged and will arise. The chief and council of the Siksika First Nation created an action plan, including building its own team and infrastructure. Running Rabbit works to enforce humane standards of care and responds to safety concerns—both animal protection and animal control.

He sees the dedicated animal services program with specialized officers who can handle issues responsively and work proactively to offer lessons for other native communities. Siksika has formed relationships with outside partner animal organizations, including to provide veterinary care, and Running Rabbit emphasizes the need for those who want to work with native communities and are guests on the land to learn and then respect protocols and local cultures, and get to know both leaders and community members. In a similar vein, Yellow Bird highlights the need to see the difference between being “a rescuer and a supporter,” and central to this is not making assumptions. This kind of work is about mutual respect.

Diana Webster of the White Earth Band of Ojibwe founded the Native American Humane Society in 2014 to serve as a bridge between tribal and outside animal welfare organizations. She works to empower native peoples as they respond to the animal issues in their communities. Speaking at the Reconciliation in Animal Welfare Symposium, a historic event that brought together those who work in animal welfare to better understand Indigenous history and lived experiences, Webster says, “When I first started in animal advocacy, it was all about rescue and spay-neuter. But I quickly realized that what it really was all about was the relationship that people have with their animal. We were going into communities and finding that people really love their animals, but they don’t have the resources or access to the services that their animals need.” She stresses that the work is emotionally difficult and can be frustrating. “A lot of it is being done by women, by strong women. We need to build systems and build onto existing systems.” Based on her leadership experiences, she offers advice for people wanting to help animals in native communities. She suggests breaking big tasks down, taking the time to plan, and trying not to get jaded. Webster also encourages people not to be obsessed with perfection and instead be kind to themselves as they do their best.

The number of native tribes and nations that have their own animal services agencies is growing. Some bring vet clinics into their communities. Some work with national organizations like the American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (ASPCA) and the Humane Society of the United States’ Pets for Life as well as local or regional humane societies.

Indigenous peoples are also creating their own grassroots organizations such as Rez Road Adventures, the brainchild of Vernan Kee and Chantal Wadsworth of the Navajo Nation, and Save Rez Dogs, founded by Leah Arcand of the Muskeg Lake Cree Nation. They are working to help dogs, inspire and educate others, build partnerships and community champions for rez dogs, raise funds to make more work possible, and reclaim traditional relationships that have been distorted and damaged by residential schools, the reservation system, intergenerational trauma, and many other effects of colonization. Arcand credits her role as a teacher, mother, and Indigenous woman as to why she does the work, even though it can be emotionally exhausting. Arcand and co-lead Craig Edes, who is Gitxsan and based out of Treaty 6 (Saskatoon, Saskatchewan), emphasize the need to go upstream when seeking to help the dogs. They highlight the value of understanding history, share insightful tools for communities and individuals looking to make a difference, and offer practical advice for people who have dogs. In other words, the big picture and the little details.

Dorothea Stevens, a public health nurse with the San Carlos Indian Health Service, began by transporting animals from her Apache nation in southern Arizona to get the veterinary care they needed. But as the years passed, a group of other volunteers joined her to form the Geronimo Animal Rescue Team. Speaking to the Humane Society of Southern Arizona, Stevens said, “We work along with animal control. We just don’t have the vets that we need and we don’t have the enforcement as far as animal abuse. That’s something we will be working on.”

This sort of work isn’t about denying that problems can emerge and animals—and people—may need help. It’s about doing so in a way that is rooted in respect for everyone.

In addition to responsive work, she highlights the power of education. “As Apaches we respect all animals and we were raised that way a long time ago, but we don’t see this happening anymore. We want to start with the little ones so they can teach the adults.” Emphasizing the range of ways nation members can defend animals, the Rescue Team says, “Adopt. If you can’t adopt, foster. If you can’t foster, sponsor. If you can’t sponsor, volunteer. If you can’t volunteer, donate. If you can’t donate, educate.” In recruiting volunteers, the group stresses essentials like physical strength, and twice it underscores the importance of mental stability, noting, “It can be really tough seeing the condition of some animals.” This sort of work isn’t about denying that problems can emerge and animals — and people—may need help. It’s about doing so in a way that is rooted in respect for everyone.

There are many significant lessons to draw from this landscape and work, whoever and wherever we are. One is the importance of understanding history and context as well as asking questions and learning how things came to be and why, even if it’s uncomfortable, and maybe especially when it is. Another is the need to question stereotypes, myths, and assumptions about Indigenous people. The value of creating but not imposing. The significance of dialogue, reciprocity, and respect. The interconnectedness of pain and healing. The interconnectedness of us all.

Kendra Coulter is Professor in Management and Organizational Studies at Huron University College at Western University and a Fellow of the Oxford Centre for Animal Ethics. She is the author of “Defending Animals,” from which this article is excerpted.

The post In the spirit of survival: How Indigenous protectors are saving rez dogs appeared first on Popular Science.

Articles may contain affiliate links which enable us to share in the revenue of any purchases made.

Why ladybugs and ‘Halloween beetles’ are everywhere right now

Laura Baisas — Fri, 27 Oct 2023 12:00:00 +0000

The Asian Lady Beetles (Harmonia axyridis) aka the Halloween beetles look very similar to more common ladybugs, but they are generally bigger and with more spots. Creative Touch Imaging Ltd./NurPhoto via Getty Images

Bats and spiders get most of the attention for Halloween and spooky season, but October is also ladybug time in many parts of the United States. Alongside their appropriately nicknamed cousins the “Halloween beetle,” residents from Wisconsin to North Carolina to New Hampshire historically report seeing more of these insects indoors this time of year. Here’s why.

[Related: These fold-up robots fly just like ladybugs.]

Looking for warmth

Ladybugs typically spend the warmer summer months outside in gardens and grasses. As fall settles in, the insects likely begin to seek a place to hibernate indoors when the temperatures begin to drop.

They could also be looking for a safe and warm place to lay their eggs. According to This Old House, ladybugs will often leave a trail of pheromones that tells other ladybugs in the colony, “Hey, this place is safe, warm, and perfect for egg-laying,” when they find a good spot to lay eggs.

They are most commonly spotted by doors and windows, where it is easy for them to squeeze inside under cracks. They can also hitch a ride on potted plants and flowers brought into the home.

How to tell a ladybug from a Halloween beetle

The more well-known and common seven spotted ladybugs (Hippodamia convergens) are often confused with their cousins the Asian lady beetle aka harlequin ladybird or the Halloween beetle (Harmonia axyridis). These bugs are also red, but can also appear more orange and have more spots on their backs. It is also more typical for them to swarm houses in the fall and before the winter. Both species are members of the Coccinellidae family of beetles, but belong to a different genus.

The easiest way to tell the two cousins apart is to look at their spots. If there are more spots, it’s a Halloween beetle. If there are only seven, it’s a ladybug. You can also look around their “neck.” Halloween beetles have different markings that look a bit like a butterfly or a black “M.” They are also generally larger than ladybugs.

Ladybugs also typically have a rounded or oval shape. Halloween beetles also have an oval appearance, but they are slightly longer with a pointed head and snout.

According to University of Kentucky entomologists, Asian lady beetles seem to be attracted to lit up surfaces that have a light-dark surface contrast. Homes that are partially illuminated by the sun are then attractive to the beatles.

[Related: How many ants are there on Earth? Thousands of billions.]

“Once the beetles alight on buildings, they seek out crevices and protected places to spend the winter. They often congregate in attics, wall cavities, and other protected locations,” the entomologists told WBIR-TV in Knoxville, Tennessee. “Since lady beetles are attracted to light, they are often seen around windows and light fixtures.”

Can they hurt me or my house?

Ladybugs do more good than harm. They do not carry any diseases and they are a garden’s best friend, by eating aphids and worms that can ruin spring flowers and veggies. Halloween beetles are generally more likely to infest a home.

They are not typically aggressive to humans, but Halloween beetles can bite if they feel trapped or threatened. Like other insects, their bites can create small, red, and itchy marks.

Halloween beetles can also harm furniture or carpets with their secretions. Some safe ways to keep them away include planting mums, lavender, bay leaves, cloves, citronella, and plants in the citrus and mint families to naturally repel ladybugs, sealing entry points to your home, and using door sweeps at the bottom of doors.

The post Why ladybugs and ‘Halloween beetles’ are everywhere right now appeared first on Popular Science.

Articles may contain affiliate links which enable us to share in the revenue of any purchases made.

Wild chimpanzees show signs of potential menopause—a rarity in the animal kingdom

Laura Baisas — Thu, 26 Oct 2023 18:00:00 +0000

Ma Rainey, a post-reproductive female of the Ngogo community of chimpanzees in Kibale National Park, Uganda, and her adult son Wes. Kevin Langergraber/Arizona State University

Living long lives past reproductive age is a real rarity for female members of the animal kingdom. Humans and some species of toothed whales are the only known animals to go through menopause and the reasons behind it are an evolutionary puzzle. A team of primatologists recently found that a group of wild chimpanzees in Uganda also show signs of menopause. The findings are described in a study published October 26 in the journal Science and could provide more insight into this rare biological phenomenon.

[Related: Adolescent chimpanzees might be less impulsive than human teens.]

In humans, menopause typically occurs between the ages of 45 and 55 and is characterized by a natural decline in reproductive hormones and the end of ovarian functions. Some symptoms in humans include chills, hot flashes, weight gain, and thinning hair. The evolutionary benefits of this process are still a mystery for biologists. It is also still unclear why menopause evolved in humans but not in other known long-lived primates.

“During our ongoing twenty five year study of chimpanzees at Ngogo in Kibale National Park, Uganda, we noticed that many old females did not reproduce for decades,” study co-author and Arizona State University primatologist Kevin Langergraber tells PopSci. “It’s a surprising trait from the perspective of evolution: how and why can natural selection favor the extension of lifespan past the point at which individuals can no longer reproduce? We need to know in what species it occurs and which it doesn’t as a first step [to that question].”

To look closer, the authors calculated a metric called the post-reproductive representation (PrR). This measurement is the average proportion of adult lifespan that an animal spends in its post-reproductive state. Most mammals have a PrR close to zero, but the team found that Ngogo chimpanzees have a PrR of 0.2. This means that the female chimpanzees in this group live 20 percent of their adult years in a post-reproductive state.

Urine samples from 66 female chimpanzees from different stages in their reproductive lives also showed that the transition to this post-reproductive state was marked by changes in hormones like gonadotropins, estrogens, and progestins.

While similar hormonal variations are also a way to tell that this transition is happening in humans, the post-reproductive chimpanzees were not involved in raising their offspring’s children. In these chimpanzees, the common grandmother hypothesis, where females live longer after menopause to help take care of future generations, does not appear to apply. This contrasts with some populations of orca whales, where grandmothers are a critical part of raising their offspring’s young to ensure their survival.

[Related: Nice chimps finish last—so why aren’t all of them mean?]

According to the team, there are two possible explanations for these longer post-reproductive lifespans. Chimpanzees and other mammals in captivity can have artificially long post-reproductive lifespans because they are protected from natural predators and some pathogens. Even though they’re a wild population, the Ngogo chimpanzees could also be similarly protected and live artificially long lives. They live in a relatively remote area that is undisturbed by logging and hunting by humans and are exposed to fewer human pathogens. Their current habitat could also be closer to what existed in their evolutionary past compared with other populations of primates that are more affected by humans.

“The study both illuminates and raises questions about the evolution of menopause,” University of Exeter evolutionary biologist Michael Cant wrote in a related review on the study. “It also highlights the power of difficult long-term field studies–often run on small budgets and at constant risk of closure–to transform fundamental understanding of human biology and behavior.” Cant is not an author of the study.

Langergraber says future studies like this one could answer the question of how common substantial post-reproductive lifespans have been throughout chimpanzee evolutionary history and if impacts from humans have kept their survivorship rates artificially low.

The post Wild chimpanzees show signs of potential menopause—a rarity in the animal kingdom appeared first on Popular Science.

Articles may contain affiliate links which enable us to share in the revenue of any purchases made.

Why electric knifefish ‘shimmy’

Laura Baisas — Thu, 26 Oct 2023 15:00:00 +0000

Knifefish like the black ghost knifefish are known for their shimmying motions and electrical pulses. and live in freshwater lakes and rivers in Central and South America. Deposit Photos

Animals have a wide range of ways to make sense of the world around them. Dogs sniff the air around them. Dolphins use echolocation. Humans glance at each other. For the electric knifefish, “shimmying” around in the water like a tadpole helps it make sense of its watery world. But knifefish are not the only ones that wiggle with purpose. In a study published October 26 in the journal Nature Machine Intelligence, scientists describe a wide range of organisms that perform these same wavy patterns of movement to feel out the environment around them.

[Related: Five animals that can sense things you can’t.]

The team behind this study was interested in what the nervous system does when animals move to improve their perception of the world, and if that behavior could be translated to robotic control systems.

“Amoeba don’t even have a nervous system, and yet they adopt behavior that has a lot in common with a human’s postural balance or fish hiding in a tube,” study co-author and Johns Hopkins University mechanical engineer Noah Cowan said in a statement. “These organisms [knifefish and amoebas] are quite far apart from each other in the tree of life, suggesting that evolution converged on the same solution through very different underlying mechanisms.”

An observation tank illuminated by infrared shows electric knifefish behavior with the lights on (top) and lights off (bottom). CREDIT: Johns Hopkins University.

Shimmying in the dark

Knifefish are blade-shaped fish found in freshwater lakes and rivers in Central and South America. They can reach three feet long and eat insects, crustaceans, and other fish. In the wild, they are hardwired to hide to avoid predators. They send out weak electric discharges that sense the predators’ location and find shelter. Wiggling around rapidly helps them actively sense their surroundings to find a place to hide.

While watching electric knifefish in an observation tank, the team noticed that when it was dark, the fish shimmied back and forth significantly more frequently. The fish swayed more gently with occasional bursts of quick movements when the lights were on.

“We found that the best strategy is to briefly switch into explore mode when uncertainty is too high, and then switch back to exploit mode when uncertainty is back down,” co-author and Johns Hopkins computational cell biologist and neuroethologist Debojyoti Biswas said in a statement. When a predator could be nearby, the knifefish will quickly search for somewhere to hide. If they feel safe, they can return back to a more normal and less wiggly state to find food.

Exciting the senses

In the study, the team created a model that simulates the key sensing behaviors of the fish. They used work from other labs and spotted these same sensory-dependent movements in other organisms including amoeba, moths, cockroaches, moles, bats, mice, and even humans.

According to the authors, this is the first time scientists have deciphered this mode-switching strategy in fish and linked the behavior across species. They believe that all organisms have a brain computation that manages uncertainty in their environment.

[Related: How cats and dogs see the world.]

“If you go to a grocery store, you’ll notice people standing in line will change between being stationary and moving around while waiting,” Cowan said. “We think that’s the same thing going on, that to maintain a stable balance you actually have to occasionally move around and excite your sensors like the knifefish. We found the statistical characteristics of those movements are ubiquitous across a wide range of animals, including humans.”

Understanding these sensory mechanisms and their nuances could be used to improve search and rescue drones, space rovers, and other autonomous robots. These same characteristics for looking around could be built into future robots to help them perceive the space around them. The team also plans to explore how these mechanisms work in living things—even in plants.

The post Why electric knifefish ‘shimmy’ appeared first on Popular Science.

Articles may contain affiliate links which enable us to share in the revenue of any purchases made.

This seafaring robot ‘eats’ stinky seaweed and dumps it in deep water

Andrew Paul — Tue, 24 Oct 2023 18:00:00 +0000

After gathering the seaweed, AlgaRay can dive below the surface to deposit its cargo near the ocean floor. Seaweed Generation/University of Exeter

If you’ve ever spent time on a beach in the Gulf of Mexico or the Caribbean, there is a solid chance you stumbled across a slimy mass of stinky, sulfurous-smelling seaweed. The specific marine plant in question during those gross encounters is likely sargassum—while helpful for absorbing CO2, sargassum is also incredibly invasive, and can wreak havoc on both shoreline and ocean ecosystems. Cleanup efforts can cost tens of thousands of dollars while disrupting both tourist and fishing industries, but a recent aquatic robot project is showing immense promise in alleviating sargassum stress. In fact, AlgaRay’s recent successes have even earned it a spot on Time’s Best Inventions of 2023.

Co-designed by Seaweed Generation, a nonprofit organization dedicated to utilizing the versatile plant to help mitigate and remove carbon emissions, an AlgaRay prototype is currently patrolling off the coasts of Antigua. There, the roughly 9-foot-wide robot scoops up clumps of sargassum until its storage capacity is filled, at which point the autonomous bot dives 200m below the surface.

[Related: Rocks may be able to release carbon dioxide as well as store it.]

At this depth, the air pockets that make sargassum leaves so buoyant are so compressed by the water pressure that it simply can’t float anymore. Once released by AlgaRay, the seaweed then sinks to the ocean floor. According to a new writeup by Seaweed Generation’s partners at the University of Exeter, the robot can repeat this process between four and six times every hour. And thanks to a combination of solar panels, lithium batteries, and navigational tools connected to Starlink’s satellite internet constellation, AlgaRay will “ultimately be able to work almost non-stop,” reports the University of Exeter.

Of course, ocean ecosystems are complex and delicate balancing acts at any depth. AlgaRay’s designers are well aware of this, and assure its potential additional ocean floor CO2 deposits won’t be carried out recklessly. Additionally, they note sargassum blooms—exacerbated by human ecological disruption—are already causing major issues across the world.

“Sargassum inundations… cause environmental, social and economic disruption across the Caribbean, Central US and West African regions,” Seaweed Generation CEO Paddy Estridge and Chief of Staff Blythe Taylor, explain on the organization’s website. “Massive influxes of seaweed wash ashore and rot, releasing not just the absorbed CO2 but hydrogen sulfide gasses, decimating fragile coastal ecosystems including mangroves and seagrass meadows and killing countless marine animals.”

[Related: The US is investing more than $1 billion in carbon capture, but big oil is still involved.]

Estridge and Taylor write that humans “need to tread carefully” when it comes to depositing biomass within the deep ocean to ensure there are no “negative impacts or implications on the surrounding environment and organisms.” At the same time, researchers already know sargassum naturally dies and sinks to the bottom of the ocean.

Still, “we can’t assume either a positive or negative impact to sinking sargassum, so a cautious pathway and detailed monitoring has been built into our approach,” Estridge and Taylor write. “The scale of our operations are such that we can measure any change to the ocean environment on the surface, mid or deep ocean. Right now, and for the next few years our operations are literally a drop in the ocean (or a teaspoon of Sargassum per m2).”

As the name might imply, the AlgaRay is inspired by manta rays, which glide through ocean waters while using their mouths to filter and eat algae. In time, future iterations of the robot could even rival manta rays’ massive sizes. A nearly 33-foot-wide version is in the works to collect upwards of 16 metric tons of seaweed at a time—equal to around two metric tons of CO2. With careful monitoring of deep sea repositories, fleets of AlgaRay robots could soon offer an efficient, creative means to remove CO2 from the atmosphere.

“The [Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change] has been very clear that we need to be able to remove (not offset, remove) 10 billion [metric tons] of carbon a year from the atmosphere by 2050 to have a hope of avoiding utter catastrophe for all people and all earth life,” write Estridge and Taylor. Knowing this, AlgaRay bots may be a key ally for helping meet that goal. If nothing else, perhaps some beaches will be a little less overrun with rotting seaweed every year.

The post This seafaring robot ‘eats’ stinky seaweed and dumps it in deep water appeared first on Popular Science.

Articles may contain affiliate links which enable us to share in the revenue of any purchases made.

How kingfishers pull off breakneck dives without hurting their brains

Laura Baisas — Tue, 24 Oct 2023 17:00:00 +0000

Kingfishers can reach speeds of up to 25 miles per hour. Deposit Photos

Among birds, raptors are known for their sight, penguins for their huddling techniques, and some kingfishers are skillful divers. Some of these colorful and long-beaked birds dive headfirst into water to catch fish at break-neck speeds, all without damaging their brains. How they accomplish this feat is all in their genes, according to a study published October 24 in the journal Communications Biology.

[Related: Birds are so specialized to their homes, it shows in their bones.]

The special type of diving kingfishers perform is called plunge-diving. Other birds including gannets and pelicans also plunge-dive, but it is not a common foraging method in the animal kingdom. While kingfishers don’t generally hurt themselves on these dives that can reach up to 25 miles per hour, they do not come without risk.

“For kingfishers to dive headfirst the way they do, they must have evolved other traits to keep them from hurting their brains,” Shannon Hackett, study co-author and associate curator of birds at the Field Museum, said in a statement.

Kingfishers are divided into three families that generally share vivid plumage and smaller feet. Kingfisher species also have varied diets. Not all of them eat fish, with many species eating lizards, insects, and even other kingfishers. After a 2017 study found that the groups of kingfishers that eat fish are not even closely related within the kingfisher family tree, it became clear to Hackett that fishy diets and diving abilities likely all evolved from a common ancestor.

“The fact that there are so many transitions to diving is what makes this group both fascinating and powerful, from a scientific research perspective,” says Hackett. “If a trait evolves a multitude of different times independently, that means you have power to find an overarching explanation for why that is.”

A kingfisher with a successful catch. CREDIT: Richard Towell.

In the study, the team compared the DNA of 30 different kingfisher species to see which genes explain the birds’ diet and their ability to dive without sustaining brain damage. They used specimens from various field work.

“When our scientists do fieldwork, they take tissue samples from the bird specimens they collect, like pieces of muscle or liver. Those tissue samples are stored at the Field Museum, frozen in liquid nitrogen, to preserve the DNA,” study co-author and evolutionary biologist Chad Eliason said in a statement.

They began the process of sequencing the full genomes for each of the kingfisher species, generating the entire genetic code of each bird. They then used software to compare the billions of base pairs that make up these genomes to look for the genetic variations that the diving kingfishers have in common.

[Related: What engineers learned about diving injuries by throwing dummies into a pool.]

They found that the fish-eating birds had several modified genes associated with both diet and brain structure. There were mutations in two interesting places. One mutation was on the birds’ AGT gene, which has been associated with dietary flexibility in other species. The other was on the MAPT gene, which codes for tau proteins that relate to feeding behavior.

Tau proteins help stabilize tiny structures inside the brain. However, the accumulation of too many tau proteins can be harmful. Traumatic brain injuries and Alzheimer’s disease in humans have been associated with a buildup of tau.

“I learned a lot about tau protein when I was the concussion manager of my son’s hockey team,” said Hackett. “I started to wonder, why don’t kingfishers die because their brains turn to mush? There’s gotta be something they’re doing that protects them from the negative influences of repeatedly landing on their heads on the water’s surface.”

The team suspects that these tau proteins may be a mixed-bag for the brain. The same genes that keep the neurons in the brain organized are the same ones that fail from repeated concussions or if someone has Alzheimer’s.

“My guess is there’s some sort of strong selective pressure on those proteins to protect the birds’ brains in some way,” Hackett said.

Some next steps for this research now that the correlated genomic variations have been identified include looking to see what these mutations do and to the proteins that are being produced. They’re also interested in what is going to compensate in a brain for all of the concussive forces and see how it can be applied to human brains.

The post How kingfishers pull off breakneck dives without hurting their brains appeared first on Popular Science.

Articles may contain affiliate links which enable us to share in the revenue of any purchases made.

Bumblebees carbo-load on the fly

Laura Baisas — Tue, 24 Oct 2023 15:00:00 +0000

Bumblebees make decisions about nectar sources “on the fly.”. Deposit Photos

When foraging, bumblebees often have a choice to make. Do they go for the nectar that is the easiest to get, or should they work harder to get nectar with a higher sugar content? A new study found that the priority for the bumblebees is getting the most calories in the shortest amount of time, even at the expense of using up more energy. This trade-off ensures an immediate energy boost for the bumblebee colony, according to a study published October 24 in the journal iScience.

[Related: Female honeybees may pass down ‘altruistic’ genes.]

The study looked at a common species in the United Kingdom called Bombus terrestris or the buff-tailed bumblebee. Bumblebees will drink nectar from flowers and regurgitate it into their nest for other bees to use. They only store a small amount of nectar in their nests, so they must make the most of every opportunity to forage.

To make these choices, bumblebees appear to trade off the time that they spend collecting nectar with the energy content of that nectar. If the sugar content is worth it, the bees will work to collect it despite being more difficult to access. By comparison, honeybees make their foraging decisions by optimizing the amount of energy they are expelling for any nectar, likely to prolong a honeybee’s working life.

Drinking while hovering takes more time and energy, while landing and being still is quicker and requires much less effort. The bumblebee tries to drink from the vertical flower. If the nectar reward on the vertical flowers is not worth spending the extra time to collect, bumblebees will give up and forage from the horizontal flowers instead. CREDIT: Hamish Symington.

“Bumblebees can make decisions ‘on the fly’ about which nectar sources are the most energetically economical,” study co-author and University of Oxford bee biologist Jonathan Pattrick said in a statement. “By training bumblebees to visit artificial slippery flowers and using different ‘nectars’ with high, medium or low amounts of sugar, we found that they could make a trade-off between the energy content of the nectar and how difficult it was to access.”

For the study, Patrick and a team of biologists made 60,000 observations of the bumblebee’s behavior over six months. This allowed them to precisely estimate bumblebee foraging energetics and each bumblebee in the study was observed for up to eight hours a day without a break. The team used artificial flowers that were positioned vertically and horizontally and had slippery surfaces that made it difficult for the bees to grip.

A computer program measured the split-second timing as the bees flew between the fake flowers and foraged for nectar to see how much energy the bumblebees spent flying and how much they collected while drinking. They then identified how the bees decided whether to spend extra time and energy collecting high-sugar nectar from the slippery flowers, or take the easier option of collecting lower-sugar nectar from flowers they could land on.

Each bumblebee was then given one of three tests.

In test one, the nectar on both the vertical and horizontal artificial flowers contained the same amount of sugar. The bumblebees chose to forage from the horizontal flowers instead of spending the extra time and energy hovering around the vertical flowers.

In test two, the vertical flowers had much more sugary nectar than the horizontal flowers and the bumblebees chose to drink almost exclusively from the vertical flowers.

[Related: Bee brains could teach robots to make split-second decisions.]

In test three, the vertical flowers had slightly more sugary nectar than the horizontal flowers. This created a situation where the bumblebees had to make a tradeoff between the time and energy they spent foraging and the energy content in the nectar they were drinking. They ended up feeding from the horizontal flowers.

Based on these test results, the authors conclude that the bumblebees can choose to spend additional time and energy foraging from the more hard-to-access nectar sources, but only if the eventual reward is really worth it. Understanding how this works can help make predictions about what types of flowers the bumblebees are likely to visit and inform choices of the kinds of flowers planted to make fields more bumblebee friendly.

“It’s amazing that even with a brain smaller than a sesame seed, bumblebees can make such complex decisions,” study co-author and University of Cambridge biochemist Hamish Symington said in a statement. “It’s clear that bumblebee foraging isn’t based on a simple idea that ‘the more sugar there is in nectar, the better’ – it’s much more subtle than that. And it highlights that there’s still so much to learn about insect behavior.”

The post Bumblebees carbo-load on the fly appeared first on Popular Science.

Articles may contain affiliate links which enable us to share in the revenue of any purchases made.

Chicken feather fibers could help make less toxic hydrogen fuel cells

Andrew Paul — Tue, 24 Oct 2023 14:10:00 +0000

Chicken feathers are a major pollution byproduct in the poultry industry. DepositPhotos

Chicken feathers, much like human hair and fingernails, are composed mostly of a tough protein called keratin. And like with your own hair and nails, the birds produce a lot of feathers over the course of their lives. Generally speaking, this isn’t a big issue—but it’s another matter for the food industry. Each year, approximately 40 million metric tons of chicken feathers are incinerated during the poultry production process, releasing harmful fumes like carbon and sulfur dioxide.

Finding a new use for all those feathers could dramatically cut down on food waste and pollution, and a team of researchers may have figured out what to do with them: turn feathers into a vital component of green hydrogen fuel cells.

[Related: Why you should build a swing for your chickens.]

As detailed in a new paper published via ACS Applied Materials & Sciences, scientists from ETH Zurich and Nanyang Technological University Singapore (NTU) have developed a method to extract feathers’ keratin and spin it into thin fibers called amyloid fibrils. From there, these fibrils can be installed as a hydrogen fuel cell’s vital semipermeable membrane. Traditionally composed of highly poisonous “forever chemicals,” these membranes allow protons to pass through while excluding electrons. The blocked electrons are then forced to travel via an external circuit from negative anodes to positive cathode, thus creating electricity.

“Our latest development closes a cycle: [we took] a substance that releases CO2 and toxic gasses when burned, and used it in a different setting,” Raffaele Mezzenga, a professor of food and soft materials at ETH Zurich, said in a recent university profile. “With our new technology, it not only replaces toxic substances, but also prevents the release of CO2, decreasing the overall carbon footprint cycle.”

According to researchers, the keratin-derived membranes are already cheaper to produce in a lab setting than existing synthetic hydrogen fuel cell membranes, and hope similar savings will translate to mass production. The team has applied for a joint patent, and is now looking for partners and investors to make the product publicly available. Still, a number of hurdles remain for the fuel cells to become truly viable renewable energy sources. While hydrogen cells’ only emissions are heat and water, the power that actually helps generate their electricity still largely stems from natural gas sources like methane. Such a reliance arguably undercuts hydrogen fuel cells’ promise of green energy.

But even there, chicken feathers could once again come to the rescue. The keratin membranes reportedly also show promise in the electrolysis portion of hydrogen energy production, when direct current travels through water to split the molecules into oxygen and hydrogen.

The post Chicken feather fibers could help make less toxic hydrogen fuel cells appeared first on Popular Science.

Articles may contain affiliate links which enable us to share in the revenue of any purchases made.

Is de-extinction only a pipette dream? This startup has a big, expensive plan to find out.

Andrew Zaleski — Tue, 24 Oct 2023 13:00:00 +0000

A long-time mammoth quest may finally be coming to fruition. Megan Madden for Popular Science

ON A COMPUTER MONITOR, in a laboratory half the size of a galley kitchen, I’m taking a look at the future. But the grainy object on the screen isn’t all that remarkable. It’s just a horse egg in a petri dish, blown up to the point where I can see the outline of its outer membrane. That’s when a white-coated scientist directs my attention to the device at my right: a high-powered microscope projecting the image of the horse egg, with two metal spikes the size of syringes angled at each side of the plate. Beneath me on the floor is an orange pedal I’m instructed to press with my foot. Suddenly, on the screen, I see a laser beam carve an incision into the membrane of the horse egg, like a hot knife going through butter.

In a few more years, the same laser-guided system will be used to punch a hole into an egg taken from an Asian elephant, remove the nucleus of that cell, and insert a nucleus containing edited genes required for surviving arctic temperatures, such as fuzzy hair and extra fat—all in the pursuit of creating the closest animal to a woolly mammoth to walk the Earth in many millennia.

The lab is one stop on my tour of the bioengineering facility of Colossal Biosciences. Co-founded in 2021 by Harvard geneticist George Church and serial entrepreneur Ben Lamm, Colossal is the world’s first de-extinction company. Its purpose? To rewild lost species. In June, I traveled to Dallas to get an in-person look at the 26,000-square-foot research facility where the startup’s innovative might is brought to bear.

Colossal’s plan is to design a hybrid of a prehistoric woolly mammoth—which Church has described as “the cuddly version of a velociraptor”—as well as the thylacine, a marsupial from Australia and Papua New Guinea that died out in 1936, and the quintessential symbol of human-made extinction, the dodo, the last of which was snuffed out on its native island of Mauritius in 1662.

Colossal senior scientist Anna Keyte checks the progress of growing avian embryos in the company’s lab in Austin, Texas. John Davidson

De-extinction as an idea is not new. Church has discussed engineering a new lineage of woolly mammoths from frozen genetic material since 2008. The nonprofit organization Revive & Restore harbors aspirations of returning the extinct passenger pigeon to the skies. Scientists at the San Diego Zoo Wildlife Alliance hope to make gametes from cryopreserved skin cells of northern white rhinoceroses, a subspecies down to its last two members. What makes Colossal unique is its unicorn status: It has raised $225 million in investment capital in just two years and is now valued at $1.45 billion. Peter Thiel, Chris and Liam Hemsworth, the Winklevoss twins, Paris Hilton, and even the not-for-profit partner of the Central Intelligence Agency have all chipped in. (So has Matt Sechrest, co-founder of Recurrent Ventures, which owns Popular Science.)

Which raises a thorny question: What happens when you venture-fund nature?

Lamm, an energetic 41-year-old with a shoulder-length mop of dark hair, is well versed in this space. He comes from the tech world and has founded six different companies in his native Texas. (One of them, an artificial intelligence defense platform that counts the US Space Force and NASA as customers, was just acquired by a Texas-based private equity firm in August.) But the focus on money and investors belies the larger point. De-extinction, Lamm says, is a way to return keystone species to degraded ecosystems while developing the techniques to support future conservation projects. If we can genetically engineer a dodo, for example, what’s to stop us from breeding a more disease-resistant offshoot of Hawaiian honeycreepers, who are currently being decimated by avian malaria?

“[Some of] the technology advances that are going to be necessitated to de-extinct a creature are exactly the same technologies that will be necessary to help creatures not fall over the brink,” says Kenneth Lacovara, a paleontologist and geologist at Rowan University who agrees with Colossal’s mission.

A computer model of the internal organs and skeletal structure of a young thylacine specimen could help with engineering future marsupial hybrids. Colossal Biosciences

Critics, meanwhile, say it’s misguided to scrape the natural world for genetic material to fulfill scientific whims. Why de-extinct obsolete species when there are more than 1,300 endangered and threatened ones in the United States alone that need protection? Observers also argue that introducing the genetic traits of dead creatures into modern analogs is not a means to conservation when the habitats of still-living endangered animals are continually under threat.

“We should protect species and do what we can,” says Lamm. “But that current model of just putting our arms around it, protecting it, just doesn’t work at the same speed at which we are destroying environments.”

The pioneering work Lamm speaks of will take decades. The company expects to birth a mammoth-like calf in about five years and then build up to a whole herd of woolly proxies. But in Colossal’s vision, the reintroduction of lost species is not only a way to right the wrongs of humanity but also a way to generate significant scientific know-how—so we can sustain species currently at risk in an increasingly inhospitable world, lest they perish forever.

THAT AN EARTHBOUND CREATURE like a woolly mammoth could vanish was once utterly unbelievable. French naturalist Georges Cuvier eventually delivered the sobering truth. He made his bones in 1790s Paris studying elephant fossils. Concluding that the remains were too distinct to be directly related to modern-day elephants, Cuvier posited the notion of espèces perdues, “lost species.” It was clear to him that the skeletons belonged to another megafauna that had vanished. Voilà: Extinction became a dilemma for modern science to solve.

Lamm’s fascination began with an introductory call to Church in 2019. His business acumen lay in using artificial intelligence for satellite software systems, and he wondered if the machines could also help with synthetic biology—the practice of building living systems from DNA and other small molecules. At the end of the call, after he idly asked Church what else he was working on, the mammoth comeback came up. “I was like, ‘Wait, what?’ I stayed up all night reading” everything Church had written about his quest, recalls Lamm. Soon he teamed up with the geneticist to form Colossal, where he is now CEO. In September 2021, the company launched with $15 million in seed funding and announced its plan to revive a version of the woolly mammoth.

Colossal widened its focus to the thylacine after Lamm was introduced to Andrew Pask at the University of Melbourne, who had already been conducting research on the marsupial and now consults on the company’s project on the species. More money came in, at which point investors asked the obvious question: What can we do for extinction’s mascot, the dodo? Beth Shapiro, who co-directs the Paleogenomics Lab at the University of California at Santa Cruz and has studied the flightless bird’s genome for almost two decades, advises Colossal’s avian genomics work. A few years ago, she and collaborators from other institutions had assembled the first complete genome of the dodo.

To any expert in this field, the tools in Colossal’s Texas labs aren’t unfamiliar. There are desktop gene sequencers and centrifuges. Hooded substations in a tissue culture lab for manipulating bits of animals. Computers that peer into sequenced DNA and analyze nucleotide bases. The laser-guided microscope I saw in the embryology lab is a proprietary device Colossal invented. In a company of 116 people, more than 60 are cell engineers and geneticists using these tools daily.

What’s important to understand, however, is that despite its talk of de-extinction, not to mention the graphics peppering its website, Colossal will never resurrect an animal. There’s no way to truly reanimate an extinct species by synthesizing its DNA from scratch—even with cutting-edge technology and living cells from an organism, and there are no such cells of a mammoth, dodo, or thylacine.

“It’s still not possible to bring an extinct species back to life if what you mean is an exact copy,” says Shapiro. “What we’re working to do is to create proxies for these extinct species using some of their traits.”

Eriona Hysolli, head of biological sciences at Colossal, samples DNA from a frozen woolly mammoth in Siberia. Colossal Biosciences

Colossal’s real aim is to take existing species closely related to extinct animals, modify their DNA to give them traits similar to the company’s de-extinction targets, and place them in ecological settings that are as similar as possible to where previously extinct species once lived. For the dodo, it may be the Nicobar pigeon, a living cousin that inhabits islands in southeast Asia. For the thylacine, it’s the fat-tailed dunnart, a marsupial that resembles a rat. Modern-day elephants are also in the mix: Although the woolly mammoth has been gone for anywhere from 4,000 to 10,000 years, it has a close relative in the Asian elephant—so close, in fact, that more than 99 percent of the animals’ genomes are identical.

“A mammoth to an Asian elephant is more closely related than an African elephant is to an Asian elephant,” says Eriona Hysolli, Colossal’s head of biological sciences, who works closely with Church out of his lab in Boston and supervises the mammoth work.

What Colossal scientists are trying to do is understand links between genotype and phenotype: how the sequence of letters in DNA code translates to how an animal looks and behaves. Hysolli says they are targeting about 65 sequences in the mammoth genome that confer various cold-adaptive traits, like subcutaneous fat, woolly hair, and dome-shaped craniums. In the genome engineering lab, computers compare the ancient DNA of the mammoth to that of the Asian elephant to identify areas of the elephant genome that must be modified in a future hybrid to express extinct characteristics.

“Are all the phenotypes there? Are all the ecological functions there? That is, for us, what we’re saying is de-extinction,” says Matt James, a former director of animal care at the Dallas Zoo, now chief animal officer at Colossal. “We de-extincted critical genes for these species.”

To do that, Colossal is trying out pluripotent stem cells, which are capable of turning into any adult cell type. Those are created inside the company’s tissue culture lab from Asian elephant cells donated from various sources. (Colossal partners with 11 zoos across the US.) This is where genome engineering and cell manipulation will eventually intersect. There are two ways to insert mammoth genes into an elephant cell: use the ever-popular CRISPR/Cas9 gene-editing tool to insert enzymes that make changes to nucleotide bases along the Asian elephant’s genome, or make multiple sequence changes at once, a process known as multiplexing, with the help of other molecular tools.

Researchers can customize a long-tailed dunnart’s embryonic stem cell by altering the SOX2 genes (seen here in fluorescent colors). Colossal Biosciences

Finally, to complete the mammothification of an Asian elephant, a nucleus from a regular elephant egg would be swapped with the nucleus from a cell modified with snippets of the mammoth genome—something they are planning for by early 2026 so Colossal can meet its projected date of 2028. Known as somatic cell nuclear transfer, it’s the same technique scientists used to make the famous clone Dolly the sheep in 1996. Colossal’s scientists are already practicing with gametes from animals like cows and horses.

Once the hybrid egg develops into an embryo, it will be implanted into a female Asian elephant. The gestation period for a mammoth is the same as for an Asian elephant: around 22 months. And if that fetus survives long enough to be born, it should, hypothetically, be adapted to cold weather because it possesses mammoth traits. It probably won’t have massive tusks, but it will be 200 pounds of flesh, fat, and protective fur.

James is confident that Colossal will be able to produce a mammoth by implanting a modified embryo into a surrogate. To increase its chances, though, he says the team will develop multiple eggs and work with a couple of female elephants. Even so, the first generation of mammoth hybrids won’t go anywhere near the wild. “They will be in what we would call a managed care facility,” says James, which means a sanctuary or some other facility where their anatomy, physiology, and behavior can be studied regularly. The mammoths will have to prove they have the skills to live and thrive independently in the wild.

Skeptics might say the means, in this case, don’t justify the end. “It’s not necessarily accurate to say that the animals will benefit more by being brought back to life rather than just staying dead,” says Zohar Lederman, a physician and bioethicist at the University of Hong Kong.

Others are much more strident. “It seems like a terrible idea to me,” says Karl Flessa, a geosciences professor at the University of Arizona who centers his research work on conservation biology and habitat and species restoration. “Why are you bringing back a Pleistocene animal as the world continues to warm and all of the habitats that were once available for mammoths are pretty much gone? Why would you want to do that?”

IN AN OP-ED for Rolling Stone in July, Colossal CEO Lamm argued that the company’s efforts are absolutely essential to sustaining the biodiversity of the planet. “I came to the conclusion,” he wrote, “that the question is no longer should we practice de-extinction science but how long do we have to get it right.”

Global authorities continually point out that Earth is currently in the middle of an extinction crisis. In 2019, the United Nations published a landmark report stating that one million animal and plant species are close to dying out, which is more than ever before in our history. A subsequent report issued in 2020 by the World Wildlife Fund found that wildlife populations had decreased by two-thirds in the last half-century alone, mainly due to human activities like deforestation, insecticide use, and poaching. In May, four researchers published a study in the journal Nature Ecology & Evolution linking climate change to another mass extinction. They evaluated almost 36,000 species on land and in the ocean and used climate models to show that 15 percent of those organisms will experience dangerous and potentially fatal temperatures if the planet warms by 1.5 degrees Celsius by 2100.

The Asian elephant (left) has the most genetic overlap with the woolly mammoth (right) of any living species. From left: AB Apana / Getty Images; Colossal Biosciences

Lamm, Church, and the rest of Colossal’s corporate chain contend that those sorts of numbers animate the underlying principle of the company: that their lab-made proxies aren’t just some well-funded science project—they can legitimately be used to build resilience in species by pushing them toward the right adaptations in a changing world. The mammoth-elephant hybrid is the classic example. Asian elephants are listed as endangered by the International Union for Conservation of Nature. Merging snippets of woolly mammoth genome with the Asian elephant might give the big mammal a chance to inhabit a place like Pleistocene Park, a large tract of tundra in Russian Siberia that’s free from our interference.

“People say we should be working on endangered species. That’s exactly what we’re working on,” Church told me via video call the day after I toured Colossal’s lab. “One of the advantages of making a hybrid starting from an endangered species is that you give that endangered species a whole new place to live, which is much larger and less encumbered by human conflict than their current location.”

At the same time, the genomic sequencing Colossal currently leads is being put toward the development of a vaccine for a herpesvirus—the primary cause of death of young Asian elephants in zoos in North America.

But geneticist Stephan Schuster remains incredulous. Schuster was part of the Pennsylvania State University team that, in 2008, was the first to sequence nearly a full genome of an extinct animal when it assembled 2.9 billion base pairs from the genome of an 18,000-year-old woolly mammoth found in Siberia. “If there is a single person on the planet that I would trust to get the project accomplished, it is George Church,” he says. But, he adds, talk of resurrecting a mammoth has gone on for a decade, without much to show for it.

Schuster has a long list of queries about Colossal’s methodology. Will changes made to Asian elephant DNA lead to unpredictable mutations elsewhere on the genome? How many elephant pregnancies must happen to create one transgenic animal? How do you implant a mammoth-hybrid embryo into the uterus of an Asian elephant, which is deep inside the animal? “Just show success,” says Schuster. “All the rest, it’s just blah, blah, blah, blah.”

Another one of the scientific community’s main criticisms of Colossal is money versus impact. A $225 million capital fund for species restoration is nothing to sneeze at. Meanwhile, based on an analysis by the Center for Biological Diversity and other conservation groups, the US Fish and Wildlife Service requires a total of $841 million to fully fund all recovery efforts under the Endangered Species Act. The agency’s 2023 budget for protection efforts is just $331 million.

The Nicobar pigeon (left) has a modern island lifestyle that could meld well with unique attributes of the dodo (right). From left: Tambako the Jaguar / Getty Images; Colossal Biosciences

Colossal retains the exclusive license to commercialize any biotechnology that emerges from its de-extinction projects. Lamm assures me that anything that might be applicable to human healthcare—for gene therapy and the like—will be strictly proprietary. The one exception is how the instruments, like its laser-guided embryo-editing tool, are employed for various species preservation projects. “We may open-source some of the technology for its application to conservation,” he says.

The proxies themselves, once born, are also likely to be wholly owned by Colossal, at least for a while. Early hybrids will live in a vast fenced-in area like a nature preserve. Once there are enough members of each de-extincted target that can live and survive in the wild, they will start being released. And that’s when, Colossal says, ownership transfers to the natural world.

“They would become more of a natural resource for the area where they’ve been rewilded,” says chief animal officer James. It would be similar to how we might view elephants already existing in the wild. A specific country doesn’t own an African elephant—although it might be argued that those countries do have a responsibility to protect wildlife. (One location that Colossal is considering for future mammoths is North Dakota; the state development fund invested $3 million in the company earlier this year.)

Skeptics of Colossal’s overall strategy also wonder what will happen should de-extinction efforts prove successful. Creatures that have been gone for tens, hundreds, and thousands of years would suddenly emerge into a vastly different world—one that, by the very metrics Colossal cites, is already far too dangerous for the organisms that are still alive.

“Having mammoths isn’t going to solve any of those problems,” says Ronald Sandler, director of the Ethics Institute at Northeastern University. “It’s not going to reduce habitat loss. It’s not going to reduce carbon emissions. It’s not going to help us prevent a currently extant species from going extinct.”

Take the infamous flightless dodo, which could be an inspiration for shoring up vanishing populations of endemic island pigeons. The scientific process for creating its replacement is different from those for the mammoth and thylacine proxies. Currently, there’s no way to genetically edit a living bird. Scientists can manipulate the egg cell of a mammal when it’s ready to be fertilized because its nucleus is easy to get to—but the yolk of a bird egg makes that impossible. Instead, Colossal plans to create primordial germ cells, which can become sperm or egg cells, and inject them into developing embryos of a living bird. One prime candidate is the Nicobar pigeon. A male and female Nicobar would each then grow up with gametes containing the edits required to birth offspring with the characteristics that so distinguished the dodo, like its flightlessness, S-shaped body, and hooked beak. Say that works multiple times over, enough to generate a population of dodo proxies. What good does that do if its historic home of Mauritius is filled with invasive predators and may be flooded in 100 years?

The fat-tailed dunnart (left) is being studied for “assisted reproductive technologies” to aid the thylacine (right) de-extinction project. From left: Auscape International Pty Ltd / Alamy; Colossal Biosciences

“I’m critical of de-extinction, but I also do think it has a role to play,” says Tom Gilbert, a paleogenomics researcher at the University of Copenhagen. He also worked with Shapiro to produce the dodo genome and is a member of Colossal’s scientific advisory board. In his eyes, releasing “a bad mutant mismatch of something else not adapted to the environment” doesn’t strike him as an effective means of ecosystem restoration. “But if you can excite a generation of young people using crazy de-extinction projects to love nature and get into science, that is going to save the world,” he adds. “If it requires a mutant mammoth-elephant hybrid to get the people excited, that is a valid reason to do it.”

THE BIGGEST OPEN QUESTION is whether Colossal can and will use the bioengineering toolkit it’s developing for the greater conservation good. The startup certainly claims it will: It recently joined forces with Thomas Hildebrandt, another member of its scientific advisory board, who currently leads BioResponse, an international consortium attempting to create a new population of northern white rhinoceroses. Colossal’s supporting role will be to gather DNA from museum specimens of the near-extinct species, analyze the data, and then use its gene-editing tools to help create more diverse northern white rhino embryos. The genetic variation should, in theory, help protect the rare mammals from disease in captive-breeding programs and, eventually, in the wild.

Still, there is no hybrid mammoth, thylacine, or dodo to point to at the moment. For Lamm, generating those ancient species is the priority. “If Colossal does nothing else in conservation or de-extinction, and we cure elephant endotheliotropic herpesvirus and are responsible for saving elephants, that was a pretty good day,” he tells me just after our walk-through of the lab. “But fundamentally…if we aren’t successful in our de-extinction efforts, I will personally not see it as success.”

Yet there is a danger in pursuing ghosts and still-fictional creatures. Mammothlike elephants or big-beaked pigeons or fiercer dunnarts could overshadow wildlife teetering on the precipice of oblivion right now. After all, who cares, really, about the orangefoot pimpleback, an endangered freshwater mussel, or the Oahu tree snail?

When I present paleontologist Kenneth Lacovara with that conundrum, he deems it a false choice. “Yes, we have to do everything we can to conserve species that are on the brink,” he says. “And yes, we should try to bring back species that have gone extinct that were pushed into extinction by humans. I think that’s justice. Those two things are not at odds with each other.”

Maybe not. Could the return of a mammoth-like beast backed by millions of dollars in capital funds stabilize an ancient Arctic ecosystem that traditionally helped trap greenhouse gases deep inside the frozen tundra? “When a species is introduced to a landscape, you can’t always predict what every one of the consequences is going to be,” says Shapiro.

“If we aren’t successful in our de-extinction efforts, I will personally not see it as success.”
Ben Lamm, CEO of Colossal Biosciences

But we certainly know what happens when a species is removed from where it belongs, be that the fault of overzealous humans or larger environmental degradation. Consider the reintroduction of gray wolf packs to Yellowstone National Park, perhaps the preeminent example of the positive ecological effects born from restoring fauna in their native habitats. As one of the top predators in the region, wolves helped bring other wildlife and natural cycles back into balance.

We don’t know what will happen if a woolly mammoth hybrid makes its debut in the 21st century. But the future that Colossal envisions is one in which the act of protecting the animal kingdom goes beyond building fences, zoos, or preserves—one in which humans invest in and invent tools that could prime species for survival, including those that haven’t been dead for thousands of years.

Read more PopSci+ stories.

The post Is de-extinction only a pipette dream? This startup has a big, expensive plan to find out. appeared first on Popular Science.

Articles may contain affiliate links which enable us to share in the revenue of any purchases made.

This Jurassic-era ‘sea murderer’ was among the first of its kind

Laura Baisas — Mon, 23 Oct 2023 19:00:00 +0000

A life-sized reconstruction of the head and jaws of the oldest megapredatory pliosaur called Lorrainosaurus. Model By 10 Tons

With its 19 feet-long torpedo-shaped body and long teeth the newly-described Lorrainosaurus was a fearsome mega predator. The fossilized remains of a 170-million-year-old marine reptile is the oldest-known pliosaur and dates back to the Jurassic era. The discovery is described in a study published October 16 in the journal Scientific Reports.

[Related: Millions of years ago, marine reptiles may have used Nevada as a birthing ground.]

Pliosaurs were members of a group of ocean-dwelling reptiles that are closely related to the more famous long-necked plesiosaurs. Unlike their cousins, these pliosaurs had short necks and massive skulls. From snout to tail, it was likely about 19 feet long and very little is known about the plesiosaurs from this time.

“Famous examples, such as Pliosaurus and Kronosaurus–some of the world’s largest pliosaurs–were absolutely enormous with body-lengths exceeding 10m [32 feet]. They were ecological equivalents of today’s killer whales and would have eaten a range of prey including squid-like cephalopods, large fish and other marine reptiles. These have all been found as preserved gut contents,” study co-author and Uppsala University paleontologist Benjamin Kear said in a statement.

The oldest megapredatory pliosaur, Lorrainosaurus, in the sea that covered what is now northern France 170 million years ago. CREDIT: Joschua Knüppe

Pliosaurs first emerged over 200 million years ago and remained relatively small players in marine ecosystems. Following a landmark restructuring of the marine predator ecosystem in the early to middle Jurassic era (about 175 to 171 million years ago) they reached apex predator status.

“This event profoundly affected many marine reptile groups and brought mega predatory pliosaurids to dominance over ‘fish-like’ ichthyosaurs, ancient marine crocodile relatives, and other large-bodied predatory plesiosaurs,” study co-author and paleobiologist at the Institute of Paleobiology of the Polish Academy of Sciences Daniel Madzia said in a statement.

The fossils in this study were originally found in 1983 in northeastern France, but were recently analyzed by an international team of paleontologists who identified this new pliosaur genus called Lorrainosaurus. The teeth and bones represent what was once a complete skeleton that decomposed and was spread along the ancient seafloor by scavengers and ocean currents.

[Related: The planet’s first filter feeder could be this extinct marine reptile.]

“Lorrainosaurus was one of the first truly huge pliosaurs. It gave rise to a dynasty of marine reptile mega-predators that ruled the oceans for around 80 million years,” Sven Sachs, a study co-author and paleontologist from the Naturkunde-Museum Bielefeld in Germany, said in a statement.

Other than a short report published in 1994, these fossils remained obscure until the team reevaluated the specimens. Finding Lorrainosaurus’ remains indicates that the reign of gigantic mega-predatory pliosaurs likely began earlier than paleontologists previously thought. These giants were also locally responsive to the major ecological changes in the marine environments that covered present day Europe during the early Middle Jurassic.

“Lorrainosaurus is thus a critical addition to our knowledge of ancient marine reptiles from a time in the Age of Dinosaurs that has as yet been incompletely understood,” said Kear.

The post This Jurassic-era ‘sea murderer’ was among the first of its kind appeared first on Popular Science.

Articles may contain affiliate links which enable us to share in the revenue of any purchases made.

How did mummified mice end up on volcanoes in the Atacama Desert?

Laura Baisas — Mon, 23 Oct 2023 15:00:00 +0000

A view from the summit of Volcán Salín, one of three Andean volcanoes where researchers uncovered the mummified cadavers of mice. Analyses of the mummies, combined with the capture of live specimens, suggest that the rodents scaled the Mars-like peaks on their own — and are somehow managing to live on them. Jay Storz/University of Nebraska,Lincoln

It’s a little slice of Mars right here on Earth. The volcanoes of the dry and arid Atacama desert in Argentina and Chile climb roughly 20,000 feet above sea level, with blistering winds, parched conditions, and freezing temperatures. However, a team of biologists who discovered a living two ounce leaf-eared mouse three years ago, have now found multiple mummified mice in these extreme conditions. The findings are described in a study published October 23 in the journal Current Biology.

[Related: Male mice are utterly terrified of bananas.]

“The most surprising thing about our discovery is that mammals could be living on the summits of volcanoes in such an inhospitable, Mars-like environment,” study co-author and University of Nebraska, Lincoln evolutionary biologist Jay Storz said in a statement. “Well-trained mountain climbers can tolerate such extreme elevations during a one-day summit attempt, but the fact that mice are actually living at such elevations demonstrates that we have underestimated the physiological tolerances of small mammals.”

Finding freeze-dried mummy mice

As far back as the 1970s and 1980s, archaeologists reported seeing mouse cadavers at these extreme heights. The assumption was that they naturally must have hitched a ride up the summit with the Incas. These sites are considered sacred to the Inca and the belief was that they could have been brought up along with firewood up the slopes or potentially were offered up as sacrifices.

“You can’t fault the archaeologists for thinking this way, because what other explanation is there?” said Storz. “Nothing could be living up there, so they had to have been brought there.”

Inadvertently, doubts on the mice as hitchhikers theory were cast early in 2020. Storz and his friend and fellow mountaineer Mario Pérez Mamani, captured a live specimen of leaf-eared mouse atop the 22,000-foot peak of Llullaillaco, a volcano on Chile-Argentina border.

Along with the discovery of more live mice, they’ve now found 13 mouse mummies on the summits of three neighboring volcanoes—Salín, Púlar, and Copiapo—all close to four miles above sea level.

“These are basically freeze-dried, mummified mice,” Storz said.

It’s all relative

The frozen in time state also helped preserve their DNA and crucial genetic information. Alongside collaborators from the University of Montana, Storz compared the genetic variation among the leaf-eared mice collected in the lowlands, midlands, and highlands of Atacama Desert. This cross-habitat zone analysis can help trace the evolutionary history of animal populations that are separated by physical barriers, distance, or altitude.

[Related: 1,000-year-old mummy with full head of hair and intact jaw found in Peru.]

The team questioned whether the mummified mice living on top of the Andes Mountains may be a different subpopulation of the leaf-eared rodent that has a colonization history that differs from their more low-land dwelling peers. According to Storz, they found that the mice from the summits and those from the flanks or the base of the volcanoes in the surrounding desert are “one big happy family.”

A species of leaf-eared mouse called Phyllotis vaccarum. CREDIT: Marcial Quiroga-Carmona.

Two pairs of the leaf-eared mummies found on Salín were also closely related, possibly siblings or parents and offspring. Along with the discovery of the live mouse burrows, the equal ratio of males to females found among the mummies, also points to the leaf-eared mouse living in and not just touring these summits.

‘How in God’s name is anything living up there?’

Puna de Atacama is among Earth’s most inhospitable places and NASA has visited the Atacama to practice for future missions on Mars. Its less than 0.6 inches of annual rainfall make it a good analogue for the Red Planet and a rovers designed to dig in Martian soil to search for microbial life have been tested here.

“Even at the base of the volcanoes, the mice are living in an extreme, Martian environment. And then, on the summits of the volcanoes, it’s even more so. It feels like outer space,” said Storz. “It just boggles the mind that any kind of animal, let alone a warm-blooded mammal, could be surviving and functioning in that environment. When you experience it all firsthand, it even further impresses upon you: How in God’s name is anything living up there?”

To learn more, Storz and team have established laboratory colonies of leaf-eared mice that were collected from various altitudes. They acclimated each group to conditions that simulate the Puna de Atacama, hoping to pinpoint the physiological adaptations that the rodents cope with life at the extreme. They’re are also continuing mountaineering surveys of small mammals living on high Andean peaks in Argentina, Bolivia, and Chile.

They believe it possible that avoiding predators such as birds of prey, foxes, mountain lions, and smaller cats could be what’s driving the mice to live here.

“But why they’re ascending to these extreme elevations is still a mystery,” Stoz said.

The post How did mummified mice end up on volcanoes in the Atacama Desert? appeared first on Popular Science.

Articles may contain affiliate links which enable us to share in the revenue of any purchases made.

You can now track NYC subway rats in this popular transit app

Charlotte Hu — Sat, 21 Oct 2023 11:00:00 +0000

Ludovic Bertron / Wikimedia

As cities sprout up in native ecosystems, keeping track of how our urban cohabitants are adapting to them has been a work in progress for scientists. An initiative from The Daily Telegraph and other crowdsourced efforts have been underway in the UK to count the foxes spotted in urban areas, for example. And Microsoft has been using AI to gather information about the growing population of urban monkeys in India.

And in the biggest city in the United States, residents know that the true New Yorkers are the rats. Rats, with their complex community dynamics and resourcefulness, have taken over the town, and forced the city to come up with creative ways to fight back against them, including recently anointing a “rat czar” to head off the problem. As much as people hate to admit it, rats, though jarring whenever they appear, are a part of the urban ecosystem. Like other city dwellers, they’ve learned the ins and outs of city life, and have made the most of it.

In its efforts to understand its rat residents, the city of New York has taken measures to collect rat stats. One project to come out of this data-gathering effort is the rat map, which indicates hot spot gatherings for rodent group hangs. Another app called Transit is taking a more citizen science approach to see where the most popular rat hubs are. Transit uses open transit data provided by city agencies to help riders visualize train and bus times in their area (it works in cities like New York, Boston, and Los Angeles). It aims to help commuters find the best and fastest way to get to their destination. Beyond ingesting schedules, the app also relies on crowdsourced information about alerts or other unexpected events.

@smokulani
#greenscreen #nyc #transit #rats
♬ original sound – smokulani☆

[Related: Open data is a blessing for science—but it comes with its own curses]

Recently, the app launched a new feature called the NYC Subway Rat Detector, which tells users how busy a certain subway station is in terms of recorded rat activity. By asking users to report rat levels at a given subway station through an in-app questionnaire called “Rate-my-ride,” Transit can garner real-time insights at the station from its 1.2 million New York users, as the developers explained in a newsletter they sent out earlier this month. This data doesn’t just get shared with fellow riders and app users, but with the app’s transit agency partners, too.

Will it lead to change? Maybe. The last time Transit riders were asked to tattle on the state of their stations, some of the dirtiest Big Blue Bus stops in Santa Monica, California got a much needed clean-up.

The rat dashboard addition certainly did not go unnoticed. Many TikTok users have since highlighted this update. One such video posted by user @smokulani received more than 1 million views.

“The results are in. And the rats? They’re everywhere,” Transit noted on a web post explaining the feature. Through their research, they found that Manhattan boasts the most rat sightings out of all the boroughs, and the rattiest station in New York is the Grant Av A stop, followed by the Harlem 1 2 3 stop, and the Woodhaven Blvd E F M R stop. They’ve also ranked stops with the highest frequency or number of rat occurrences.

The post You can now track NYC subway rats in this popular transit app appeared first on Popular Science.

Articles may contain affiliate links which enable us to share in the revenue of any purchases made.

The best bird feeder cameras in 2023

Becki Robins — Fri, 20 Oct 2023 20:00:00 +0000

Abby Ferguson
We may earn revenue from the products available on this page and participate in affiliate programs. Learn more ›

Best overall Bird Buddy Smart Bird Feeder

SEE IT
The Bird Buddy offers stylish design, quality images, and a fun app with real-time notifications.

Best for hummingbirds BirdDock Hummingbird Feeder Camera

SEE IT
The nectar attachment of this feeder can be swapped out to hold seed as well.

Best budget WYZE Cam v3

SEE IT
This budget option lets you see the birds without any extras.

Bird feeder cameras make documenting our feathered friends fun and easy, but they aren’t created equally. Some are best for bird-watching in your own backyard, while others are better suited to remote locations. More expensive models have features like solar panels, video options, and smart bird identification, while basic, budget models make feeder photography accessible for just about everyone. No matter what you are looking for, the best bird feeder cameras will allow you to capture quality images of the birds who call your area home.

Best overall: Bird Buddy Smart Bird Feeder

Best trail camera: TECHNAXX Full HD Birdcam TX-165

Best for bird boxes: Hawk Eye HD Nature Cam

Best for hummingbirds: BirdDock Hummingbird Feeder Camera

Best for bird identification: Netvue Birdfy Pro

Best budget: WYZE Cam v3

How we chose the best bird feeder cameras

There are dozens of bird feeder cameras on the market. Though many of them have the same basic features, they don’t all offer the same level of important features like durability, battery life, and accuracy of species detection.

To arrive at our top picks, we relied on our own assessment of each device, including hands-on experience with multiple models. Because bird feeder cameras must be durable, weatherproof, and offer long-lasting performance, we also leaned heavily on user experiences and favored well-reviewed products.

Features like accurate bird identification, solar panel availability, and useful accessories also helped push some models into the limelight. Other options like real-time notification and color night vision were nice to have but not essentials. Still, they didn’t tend to figure into our final decision simply because of their somewhat limited value for bird photography.

The best bird feeder cameras: Reviews & Recommendations

Choosing a bird feeder camera can be tough. There are dozens of available models, and the prices can range from less than $50 all the way up to $400 or more. The key to finding the right bird feeder camera is not necessarily shopping by price but knowing which features are must-haves and which are not. Not everyone will benefit from AI, for example. You may even prefer to use your own knowledge to identify the birds in your photographs. Below are our favorite options, suitable for a range of situations and users.

Best overall: Bird Buddy Smart Bird Feeder

Abby Ferguson

SEE IT

Specs

AI: Yes, identifies more than 1,000 bird species

App compatibility: Android and iOS

Resolution: 5-megapixel photos, 720p video

Battery: 4000 mAh rechargeable lithium-ion battery, optional solar panel

Pros

Sharp images with a 120-degree field of view

Weatherproof from -5°F to 120°F

The smartphone app allows you to see feeders all over the world

Compatible with an optional solar panel and lots of accessories

Three mounting options

Cons

No local storage, so it can’t be used without Wi-Fi

Video resolution is lower than some competitors

The Bird Buddy bird feeder camera is relatively new, but it has much to offer, so it earns our top spot. The bird feeder is attractively designed, so it will look nice in your yard or on your deck with some solar lights, which is an important feature for many. It’s available in blue or vibrant yellow, so you can choose an option that fits your style best. I really enjoy the look of the blue Bird Buddy on the side of my porch, which is a big plus.

The camera module is removable, which is important when it comes time to clean the feeder. It can take five-megapixel photos or offers 720p live-streamed video. The image quality won’t be that of your dedicated mirrorless or DSLR camera, but it is nicely detailed and properly exposed even in backlit situations. And being able to tune in to watch live as a bird chows down is pretty neat.

The camera’s 120-degree field of view is wide enough to capture birds hanging out on the feeder’s side. You can also buy multiple accessories through Bird Buddy to extend the perch or feed different species. With the solar roof (the model we thoroughly tested and reviewed), you’ll never need to think about charging the camera. Without the solar roof, you’ll need to charge the camera every 5 to 15 days.

The Bird Buddy relies on AI to automatically recognize over 1,000 species of birds. The Bird Buddy app notifies you when you have new visitors to your feeder, which is always exciting. You can even browse other Bird Buddy devices all over the world to see species that you wouldn’t otherwise encounter. Plus, the images from your device contribute to migration information for conservation databases. You’ll be helping science progress while getting fun images of your feathered friends.

Best trail camera: TECHNAXX Full HD Birdcam TX-165

TECHNAXX

SEE IT

Specs

AI: None

App compatibility: N/A, no app available

Resolution: 8-megapixel photos, full HD 1080p video

Battery: 4 AA batteries give it a working time of up to 6 months

Pros

Sturdy trail-cam style feeder

6-month battery life

Removable water basin means it can be a feeder or a birdbath

Captures slow-motion video

Cons

No smartphone app or bird identification features

Memory card storage is less convenient than Wi-Fi or Bluetooth

This hybrid bird feeder camera is as tough as any trail camera. However, unlike most trail cameras, it can focus as close as 2 to 6 inches and offers a 100-degree field of view. This means you’ll get much better images of visiting birds than you would with a typical trail cam. The TX-165 takes standard AA batteries but has a working time of up to 6 months. You can leave it in a secure, remote location for a long time without worrying about the battery going flat.

The TX-165 also has a few features you won’t find on other bird feeder cameras. You can fill it with birdseed or fill the removable basin with water and turn it into a birdbath camera. It also takes impressive eight-megapixel images and full HD 1080p video. It’s also capable of 25 frames per second for slow-motion videos.

Best for bird boxes: Hawk Eye HD Nature Cam

Hawk Eye

SEE IT

Specs

AI: None

App compatibility: N/A, no app available

Resolution: 700 tvl (television lines)

Battery: None (includes a 75-foot power cable)

Pros

Compact, so you can hide it almost anywhere

Night vision lets you capture clear images in poor light

Durable and temperature-tolerant to between 35°F and 105°F

Cons

Only shoots video

Not waterproof

Needs to be plugged into a power supply

Birds do a lot more than just eat birdseed, so at some point, you might want to step up to a birdhouse camera. Because the Hawk Eye Nature Cam isn’t built into a feeder, it’s much more flexible than most bird cams. Its small size means you can put it anywhere—on treetops, fence posts, or even in animal burrows (though please exercise caution when putting it down a snake hole). Or it can be wired discreetly into a bird box for a 24/7 look at growing bird families, from egg to fledgling.

The Hawk Eye Nature Cam is meant for live-streaming to your television set. The video resolution is clear and sharp, with 700 tvl (television lines) and 10 infrared diodes. This lets you view clear video even in the darkened environment of a typical bird box. Note, however, that you will need an RCA to USB adapter if you have a modern TV.

The Hawk Eye does have a few drawbacks. It has no battery, so you’ll have to mess with a long extension cord to get it set up. It also isn’t waterproof. If you want to attach it to an unsheltered location, you’ll have to build waterproof housing or limit your use to dry weather. Finally, you can connect the camera to your PC and use additional software to grab photos and video segments from the live stream, but it’s not designed to capture high-resolution stills.

Best for hummingbirds: BirdDock Hummingbird Feeder Camera

BirdDock

SEE IT

Specs

AI: Yes, identifies species and alerts you when birds approach

App compatibility: Android and iOS

Resolution: 2-megapixel photos, full HD 1080p video

Battery: 6400 mAh rechargeable batteries provide 20 to 30 days of operating time

Pros

AI can recognize around 5,000 different species, including hummingbirds

Rechargeable batteries provide 20 to 30 days of use

Hummingbird attachment is removable

Con:

Still photos are much lower resolution than those shot by similar feeders

The app is clunky and difficult to use

The BirdDock is a flexible bird feeder camera that isn’t limited to just capturing photos of seed-eaters. It also offers a removable hummingbird attachment featuring five flower-shaped feeding ports with 0.16-inch holes to keep bees and other insects out. When you want to switch to photographing songbirds, you can remove the hummingbird feeder and fill the device with seeds.

Like other AI feeders, the BirdDock will identify species and alert you when one is approaching the feeder. It has night vision, too, which could help you identify other critters that visit your feeder overnight. This bird feeder camera features a 160-degree field of view and can be used with or without an SD memory card. It provides an impressive battery life of up to 30 days. You can also purchase a separate solar panel to keep the device charged in sunny weather.

The BirdDock has two primary drawbacks: It captures still photos at a relatively low resolution of only two megapixels (though it does also capture full HD 1080p video). It also doesn’t have an especially user-friendly app. Some users complain that the bird identification feature isn’t accurate and that the app frequently disconnects from the camera.

Best for bird identification: Netvue Birdfy Pro

Netvue

SEE IT

Specs

AI: Yes, identifies more than 6,000 different species

App compatibility: Android and iOS

Resolution: Full HD 1080p video

Battery: 5000 mAh rechargeable batteries

Pros

Can identify more than 6,000 different species

Long battery life (the manufacturer claims up to six months of use)

Extra features like squirrel recognition and color night vision

Cons

The bird identification service costs extra

Storing photos on the cloud requires a subscription

The Netvue Birdfy rivals the Bird Buddy with features like ease of use, durability, and photo quality. It has an impressive array of extra features like color night vision. The AI can recognize squirrels, and the built-in microphone lets you yell at them when they’re caught robbing the feeder. You can also upgrade your feeder with add-ons like a solar panel, hummingbird feeder, and perch extension.

The Birdfy has the same features as most other feeders, including automatic capture/motion detection and real-time notification. It takes clear video at close range, provides a 135-degree field of view, and even offers 8x magnification if you want to study the fine details.

Birdfy has an impressive database of 6,000 species, though reviewers note that it isn’t always accurate. When it does misidentify a bird, you have the option to submit a report via the app. This is evidence that Netvue is constantly working to improve its software.

The primary drawback of the Netvue bird feeder camera is you may have to pay for various subscriptions depending on what features you want access to. For example, if you want to take advantage of the bird identification feature, you must pay for a subscription. Likewise, a subscription is required if you want to store photos on the Netvue Cloud for longer than 30 days.

Best budget: WYZE Cam v3

WYZE

SEE IT

Specs

AI: No species identification

App compatibility: Android and iOS

Resolution: 1080p full HD video

Battery: No battery

Pros

Affordable

Weatherproof

Compact for easy mounting

Cons

Minimum focus distance is around 12 inches

No battery; needs to be plugged into a power supply

Bird feeder cameras with all the bells and whistles can be expensive. A $200 feeder might be outside your budget, or you may not need all the features that expensive bird feeder cameras offer. The WYZE Cam v3 is essentially an outdoor security camera. You won’t be able to fill it with birdseed or attach a hummingbird accessory. But you can mount this sturdy little camera next to any commercial bird feeder or install it close to a high-traffic part of your backyard.

The WYZE Cam v3 offers all the basic features you need in a bird cam. It’s weatherproof with an IP65 rating. It takes photos when it senses motion, and it has an app so you can see what’s happening outside in real-time.

The WYZE Cam does have a few drawbacks. One of these is the focus distance. While most dedicated bird cams can focus on subjects as close as a few inches, the WYZE Cam isn’t designed for closeups. You’ll have to mount it at least a foot away from your feeder, meaning you won’t see a lot of detail in your photos.

The WYZE Cam is also wired. It comes with a weatherproof six-foot USB cable, so you’ll have to install it close to your home. On the plus side, once installed, you won’t have to worry about changing or recharging the battery or losing your video stream on a cloudy day.

Things to consider before buying a bird feeder camera

If you love bird watching but don’t want to sit waiting with your binoculars, a bird feeder camera will allow you to capture photos and videos of birds even when you aren’t around.

A bird feeder camera is meant for permanent outdoor use. This means it needs features you probably don’t consider when shopping for other photography gear. Here are some of the most important things you’ll want to think about when shopping for a bird feeder camera.

Durability

Bird feeder cameras can be subject to some serious abuse. The sun’s UV rays and hot temperatures can degrade plastic casings over time. These devices must also withstand storms and sprinklers, remaining waterproof from season to season. Of course, they should also be tough enough to handle the beaks and claws of visiting critters—not just the birds they’re intended for but other potential visitors like squirrels and mice.

Image quality

The image quality of bird feeder cameras is dependent on a few things. Resolution is the first thing most think of, and indeed, it is important with these devices. If you want clear, sharp images, look for bird feeder cameras with higher resolution. These compact cameras won’t offer numbers you may be used to in smartphones or mirrorless cameras, though. Five to eight megapixels for stills and 1080p for video tend to be the highest available at the moment. However, if you aren’t concerned with high levels of detail, you could save some money and opt for a device with a less impressive resolution.

The second factor of image quality is close focusing distance. The majority of shots taken by a bird feeder camera will be up-close. As a result, look for a device capable of getting clear photos at a very short distance. Even as close as a few inches is ideal. Finally, birds don’t tend to sit still for long. Because of this, the camera should be able to freeze action, even in low light conditions like early morning or cloudy days.

WiFi connectivity

WiFi isn’t necessarily a critical feature, but it’s something to consider if you’re going to keep your feeder close to your house. Most people don’t want to trek outside daily to download photos or swap out a memory card. A WiFi connection will let you see what your camera captured at any time of day in any weather. Treating it like a smart-home device will save you from having to venture into the cold, heat, or rain unless you need to change the battery or add birdseed.

Pay attention to the range of the device, too. Shy birds won’t approach your device if it is too close to your home. If it’s too far away, you won’t be able to view your photos without exiting your home.

Mounting options

Each bird feeder camera will have somewhat different requirements for how you install them. Some require a pole, some can be mounted to a fence post, and others can be hung. Depending on where you want the feeder and what tools you have available for installation, some of these options may be better than others for your particular needs.

Battery life

Some bird feeder cameras take basic replaceable AA batteries; others rely on solar panels to power internal rechargeable batteries. Either way, you’ll want to pick a camera that isn’t power-hungry. A good battery will ensure you aren’t constantly changing batteries or missing photos because your camera goes dark on a cloudy day.

Choosing a camera with motion detection is a good place to start. These cameras only activate when there’s something to take a photo of, which helps the battery last longer.

FAQs

Q: How do bird feeder cameras work?

Most bird feeder cameras are triggered by motion. When a bird visits the feeder, the camera will capture a still photo or record video, depending on its design. Some smart bird feeder cameras can also identify species by comparing photos to thousands of stored images of each individual bird species.

Q: What color bird feeder attracts more birds?

A 2017 study found that green or silver bird feeders tend to attract the most visitors, but color preference also seems to be species-specific. Robins in the study, for example, preferred black feeders, while greenfinches and starlings didn’t seem to care about color at all.

Q: Where should I put a bird feeder camera?

Bird feeders should be placed in open spaces but not too far from potential cover. The Humane Society recommends placing feeders 12 feet from brush and trees. This prevents predators from hiding near the feeder and gives the birds cover to fly to if they feel threatened.

Q: Do infrared cameras bother birds?

Infrared light is invisible to birds, so a camera inside a bird box will give you clear pictures while the bird remains in darkness.

Final thoughts on the best bird feeder cameras

Best overall: Bird Buddy Smart Bird Feeder

Best trail camera: TECHNAXX Full HD Birdcam TX-165

Best for bird boxes: Hawk Eye HD Nature Cam

Best for hummingbirds: BirdDock Hummingbird Feeder Camera

Best for bird identification: Netvue Birdfy Pro

Best budget: WYZE Cam v3

Once limited to nature photographers with long telephoto lenses and lots of patience, bird feeder cameras have made bird photography nearly effortless and available to almost anyone. That doesn’t necessarily mean any camera will do, though. Thinking about what you want to get out of your investment is an important first step in choosing a feeder. If you’re hoping to get up-close, detailed shots, pay attention to the example shots provided by the manufacturer and uploaded by users. Consider how important good battery life is to you, and ask yourself if you really need a camera that will identify already familiar local birds.

Why trust us

Popular Science started writing about technology more than 150 years ago. There was no such thing as “gadget writing” when we published our first issue in 1872, but if there was, our mission to demystify the world of innovation for everyday readers means we would have been all over it. Here in the present, PopSci is fully committed to helping readers navigate the increasingly intimidating array of devices on the market right now.

Our writers and editors have combined decades of experience covering and reviewing consumer electronics. We each have our own obsessive specialties—from high-end audio to video games to cameras and beyond—but when we’re reviewing devices outside of our immediate wheelhouses, we do our best to seek out trustworthy voices and opinions to help guide people to the very best recommendations. We know we don’t know everything, but we’re excited to live through the analysis paralysis that internet shopping can spur so readers don’t have to.

The post The best bird feeder cameras in 2023 appeared first on Popular Science.

Articles may contain affiliate links which enable us to share in the revenue of any purchases made.

Bird Buddy Smart Bird Feeder review: A camera that’s not just for the birds

Abby Ferguson — Fri, 20 Oct 2023 17:55:00 +0000

Abby Ferguson
We may earn revenue from the products available on this page and participate in affiliate programs. Learn more ›

Bird watching seems like one of those rites of passage as you get older. You reach a certain age and boom—you suddenly like studying our avian amigos. I have, apparently, reached that age. But I don’t always have time to tromp through fields with binoculars to catch fleeting feathers. Luckily, bird watching these days is extremely easy thanks to the arrival of bird feeder cameras. These devices are built with compact, weather-resistant cameras that typically detect motion to snap photos and videos when a bird comes to feast. They provide close-up views of the snacking species that wouldn’t be possible any other way.

One of the more popular bird feeder cameras—Bird Buddy—was launched as a Kickstarter and has taken the world of bird feeder cameras by storm. It offers an attractive yet practical design and pairs with an easy- and fun-to-use app. The Bird Buddy camera allows you to capture high-quality photos and videos of birds that visit your feeder, and AI even identifies them for you. I’ve had one up for a few months to put it through its paces and have been impressed with the device.

Abby Ferguson

SEE IT

Overview

The Bird Buddy is a modern-looking bird feeder with a removable camera that automatically snaps photos and videos of birds that come to snack.

The easy-to-use app notifies you when you have a visitor and automatically identifies over 1,000 species of birds.

The feeder holds 3.5 cups of birdseed and comes with a scoop.

It comes with a few different ways to mount the feeder. Additional accessories are available for purchase separately.

A Bird Buddy Pro membership unlocks certain app features and higher video quality and costs $2.50 monthly for an annual membership or $2.99 for a monthly plan.

The base-level Bird Buddy costs $239, but we suggest upgrading to the version with a solar roof for unlimited battery life for $299.

Pros

Attractive, modern design

Very little assembly required

Lots of accessories available

App is easy and fun to use

AI features automatically identify birds and other critters

Livestream is available

Records quality, highly-detailed photos and videos

Holds plenty of birdseed

Camera is removable for easy washing

Optional solar roof does away with charging the battery

Bird Buddy provides frequent updates

Cons

Requires a WiFi connection

Water pools in the bird feeder, resulting in moldy birdseed

Some features are locked behind a subscription paywall

Verdict

The Bird Buddy is one of the best bird feeder cameras available thanks to its excellent app usability, advanced AI, and high-quality images and videos. The sleek design is easy to install, clean, and fill, and the removable camera is a nice addition. The reliance on WiFi won’t work for everyone, but smart-home devices are increasingly common, and it allows for immediate access to your camera’s feed.

You can install the Bird Buddy in a few different ways, including mounting to a wall or fence. I went with a third-party wall mount since Bird Buddy’s version was out of stock when I was looking for one, but it has started to sag over time. Abby Ferguson

Bird Buddy setup

Setting up the Bird Buddy involves two parts: Connecting to a WiFi router along with the app and physically installing the bird feeder. The Bird Buddy doesn’t offer any onboard storage, so you’ll need access to a WiFi connection to use the camera and AI features. It uses an 802.11 b/g/n connection at 2.4 GHz plus Bluetooth for connection to the app. You’ll want to install the Bird Buddy app and pair your camera to the app before installing the bird feeder in your yard.

I had substantial issues pairing my Bird Buddy to my WiFi and connecting it to the app, and had to call customer support for assistance. Luckily, the customer support team was incredibly helpful and patient in working through the troubleshooting, and we eventually got it all set up. It is worth noting that I had an early model, so Bird Buddy has likely solved some of those issues to make the pairing process smoother.

Physical installation is simple, depending on how and where you place your bird feeder. You can hang it, mount it to a one-inch pole with the included bottom mount, or purchase a separate wall mount for attaching to fences or walls. The camera slots right into the designated slot, and it’s easy to plug it into the solar roof (if you opt for that).

The little bird prints for traction are a cute touch. Abby Ferguson

Bird Buddy design & build quality

The Bird Buddy bird feeder features a sleek, modern design with smooth curves. Though looks are subjective, I think it looks much more polished than other bird feeder cameras. It’s available in blue or vibrant yellow. Bird Buddy says it features a “bird-friendly design,” though it doesn’t specify what exactly that means. The perch features a raised bird footprint pattern, providing some grip for talons.

The birdseed compartment—which holds 3.8 cups—is enclosed by clear plastic on both sides, allowing you and the birds to see the seed level inside. A back door at the top opens to fill the bird feeder up, though it requires careful maneuvering to get the seed inside and not spill it everywhere since it is a rather small opening. The entire back also comes off for easier cleaning.

Bird feeders and bird feeder cameras are, naturally, outdoor items. As a result, they need to be durable, rugged, and built to withstand the elements. The Bird Buddy ticks those marks nicely. It is made of new and recycled BPA-free plastic and feels solid and sturdy. I have had it up for a handful of months, and after a quick cleaning, it looks brand new. That’s even despite the intense Florida sun constantly beating down on it.

There are tiny drainage holes, but I still had issues with the seed molding after we had rain. Abby Ferguson

Water issues

My main frustration with the design of the Bird Buddy is regarding keeping rain out. There are holes in the bottom that drain water in the event of rain, but they are extremely tiny. Of course, that keeps the small seeds from falling out. Butt hose same seeds can clog the holes, preventing thorough draining. Also, the protective roof helps keep some rain out but doesn’t extend beyond the feeder very much. If there is any wind blowing the rain, it will end up in the feeder. As a result, I had issues with water saturating the birdseed and mold forming.

Granted, this may be a function of where I reside in Florida—a state where strong thunderstorms are a near-daily occurrence in the summer and humidity levels are intense. I had to change the birdseed every week because of the molding. Birds do not like moldy seeds, so I don’t get as many visitors. That’s especially true if I don’t stay on top of cleaning things out. It also means that I’m dumping out seed regularly and cleaning the feeder frequently. Neither of these is ideal and keeps birds away for longer. It may be less of an issue with different birdseed mixes or locations, but it has severely limited the number of birds I attract.

The camera module pops out, which makes cleaning much easier. Abby Ferguson

Camera module details

The Bird Buddy’s camera is housed inside a plastic case. It is weather-resistant, though Bird Buddy doesn’t provide an IP rating. It does say that it can operate in temperatures between -5°F and 120°F. As a result, it will work in most locations throughout the year. The camera module measures 5.1 x 2 x 1.5 inches and fits securely in the bird feeder with the help of a magnet in the back.

The camera takes five-megapixel photos and 720p HD live-streamed video. It is capable of 1080p video clips, though you’ll need to pay for a Bird Buddy Pro membership ($2.50 per month for an annual membership or $2.99 per month for a monthly plan). The 120-degree field of view is wide enough to capture birds hanging out on the side of the feeder. There’s also a built-in microphone for recording bird songs as well, which is a fun addition.

Motion detection

Bird Buddy also built a laser motion detector into the camera. This senses movement on the perch and triggers the camera to take photos or videos when a visitor is present (much like a wireless security camera). I don’t have my bird feeder in a location where I can easily keep watch to test how well the motion detection works. But every time I heard a bird making noise, I received a “postcard” (Bird Buddy’s way of telling you a bird was at your feeder), so it seemed just sensitive enough.

You can switch to Power Saver Mode in the app settings if you want fewer notifications or conserve battery. Or turn on Frenzy Mode to see anything and everything, though you’ll have to pay for a Pro membership.

Power

For power, the Bird Buddy camera utilizes a 4000 mAh rechargeable lithium-ion battery. Bird Buddy says it will last between five and 15 days. Of course, that depends on how many photos it takes, how much you stream live video, and the weather. When it needs a charge, it uses a USB-C cable. I was using the solar roof, which results in infinite battery life. If you want to save some money and don’t opt for the solar roof, the camera is fully removable. That means you won’t need to bring the entire bird feeder (along with any tiny creatures or germs) inside for charging.

The Bird Buddy app is very easy to use. It offers a live video stream and even provides information about the birds that visit your feeder. Abby Ferguson

Bird Buddy app

I’ve been very impressed with the Bird Buddy app during my testing. It is well-designed in design and usability, with many playful components. It is intuitive to use and easy to find what you need very quickly, even as you are getting used to it. It’s clean and minimal, without too many extra things going on.

The app uses AI to automatically identify over 1,000 species, which includes squirrels and rare birds. Unfortunately, I have only had Red-Winged Blackbirds at my feeder, so I haven’t been able to test how accurate the AI identification is beyond that single species. But it always got the Red-Winged Blackbird right, so there’s that.

When a bird visits your feeder, the app notifies you with a “postcard.” These postcards are then saved to your gallery so you can pull them back up anytime. They can even show multiple photos or videos of the same bird if they stick around for a bit. Should there be photos in a set that aren’t worth saving, you can discard them to keep your gallery from getting too cluttered.

Your gallery is sorted by bird type. Tapping on each lets you open all photos and videos the camera has captured over time of that particular species. The page for each bird species will also provide information on that bird so that you can learn more. That includes personality type, what they eat, where they are typically found, how big they are, and what they sound like. For example, the Red-Winged Blackbird page tells me that they are brawlers, open lovebirds, and social butterflies who like to eat insects and seeds and are as big as a slice of pizza.

The community features are a fun way to see birds beyond your own backyard. Abby Ferguson

Community features

Beyond content from your feeder, you can see photos and videos from feeders worldwide in a few different ways. First, you can add some to your list of feeders and receive postcards from them like it is your own feeder. However, if you want to add more than one feeder for more than 72 hours, you’ll need a Pro membership.

If you don’t want to add a feeder, you can still scroll through photos and videos from the community. It’s like social media just for bird content. Birdbuddy TV is a video feed of publicly shared videos from Bird Buddy users. Or you can scroll through photos from the community, applauding people’s results. You can even help identify species by tapping the Wingbuddy link at the top of the Community page.

I was impressed with how sharp the images from the Bird Buddy were and how it handled really high-contrast scenes. Abby Ferguson

Image & video quality

A bird feeder camera doesn’t do much good if the photos aren’t clear enough so you can actually see your avian visitors. The five-megapixel resolution may not seem very impressive, especially compared to smartphones and dedicated cameras. While you won’t be able to print these images to poster size by any means, the camera does offer plenty of quality for viewing on your phone.

The images are clear and sharp, especially when the bird hangs out on the perch. The camera can’t focus much closer than that, though. My main visitor liked to sit right in the birdseed, so it was frequently out of focus, but even still, I could see good amounts of detail with vibrant colors. The auto exposure overall does great, even in extremely high-contrast lighting situations. There were times that the bird was blurry from moving during the exposure, but that wasn’t the norm.

The Bird Buddy video quality is also really good. The footage is clear and well-exposed. If you want higher-quality video, you can upgrade to a Bird Buddy Pro membership, though I have not tested it, so I can’t comment on how much better that video looks.

Abby Ferguson

So, who should buy the Bird Buddy Smart Bird Feeder?

Bird feeder cameras are becoming more and more popular, with new options seeming to pop up regularly. Spending $299 (for the solar roof version) may seem pricey for a bird feeder camera. But the Bird Buddy is priced similarly to other devices, including its closest competitor, the Netvue Birdfy Pro. So, what makes the Bird Buddy stand out?

The Bird Buddy includes a durable yet attractive build, an integrated solar panel for infinite battery life, multiple mounting options, and an easy-to-clean design with a removable camera, which gives it the edge for most users. It’s also remarkably easy to install, with essentially no assembly beyond popping the camera into the feeder. Add to that the easy-to-use and fun app with minimal features behind a paywall, and it takes a clear lead. It’s a connected device that makes you feel a bit more connected with the natural world. If you are interested in keeping an eye on the bird species in your area, it’s hard to beat Bird Buddy.

The post Bird Buddy Smart Bird Feeder review: A camera that’s not just for the birds appeared first on Popular Science.

Articles may contain affiliate links which enable us to share in the revenue of any purchases made.

Prehistoric shark called Kentucky home 337 million years ago

Laura Baisas — Fri, 20 Oct 2023 15:00:00 +0000

An artist’s illustration of Strigilodus tollesonae. The new species is more closely related to modern ratfish than to other modern sharks and rays. Benji Paysnoe/NPS

A group of paleontologists, park rangers, and geologists have discovered a new species of ancient shark in the rock layers of Mammoth Cave National Park in Kentucky. It was uncovered in a large fossil deposit that includes at least 40 different species of shark and their relatives, and even well-preserved skeletal cartilage.

[Related: Megalodons were likely warm-blooded, despite being stone-cold killers.]

The new species is named Strigilodus tollesonae and is a petalodont shark. These extinct sharks had petal-shaped teeth and lived about 337 million years ago. According to the National Park Service, it is more closely related to present day ratfish than sharks or rays and it was identified from teeth found in the cave’s walls. Strigilodus tollesonae likely had teeth that included one rounded cusp used for clipping and a long, ridge inert side that crushed prey the way molars do. Paleontologists believe that it likely lived like modern day skates and fed on worms, bivalves, and small fish.

Strigilodus tollesonae translates to “Tolleson’s Scraper Tooth” and it is named after Mammoth Cave National park guide Kelli Tolleson for her work in the paleontological study that uncovered the new species.

The limestone caves that make up the 400-mile long Mammoth Cave System were formed about 325-million-years ago during the Late Paleozoic. Geologists call this time period the Mississippian Period, when shallow seas covered much of North America including where Mammoth Cave is today.

In 2019, the park began a major paleontological resources inventory to identify the numerous types of fossils associated with the rock layers. Mammoth Cave park staff reported a few fossil shark teeth that were exposed in the cave walls of Ste. Genevieve Limestone in several locations. Shark fossils can be difficult to come by, since shark skeletons are made of cartilage instead of bone. Cartilage is not as tough as bone, so it is generally not well-preserved in the fossil record.

The Mississippian age ancient sea and marine life preserved at Mammoth Cave National Park. CREDIT: Julius Csotonyi/NPS.

The team then brought in shark fossil specialist John-Paul Hodnett of the Maryland-National Capital Parks and Planning Commission to help identify the shark fossils. Hodnett and park rangers discovered and identified multiple different species of primitive sharks from the shark teeth and fine spine specimens in the rocks lining the cave passages.

“I am absolutely amazed at the diversity of sharks we see while exploring the passages that make up Mammoth Cave,” Hodnett said in a statement. “We can hardly move more than a couple of feet as another tooth or spine is spotted in the cave ceiling or wall. We are seeing a range of different species of chondrichthyans [cartilaginous fish] that fill a variety of ecological niches, from large predators to tiny little sharks that lived amongst the crinoid [sea lily] forest on the seafloor that was their habitat.”

[Related: This whale fossil could reveal evidence of a 15-million-year-old megalodon attack.]

In addition to Strigilodus tollesonae, the team have identified more than 40 different species of sharks and their relatives from Mammoth Cave specimens in the past 10 months. There appear to be at least six fossil shark species that are new to science. According to the team, those species will be described and named in an upcoming scientific publication.

The majority of the shark fossils have been discovered in areas of the park that are inaccessible to the public, so photographs, illustrations, and three-dimensional models have been made to display the discovery. The park also plans to celebrate the new shark fossils with multiple presentations and exhibits on Monday October 23.

The post Prehistoric shark called Kentucky home 337 million years ago appeared first on Popular Science.

Articles may contain affiliate links which enable us to share in the revenue of any purchases made.

Best for dogs	PetSafe Healthy Pet Gravity Food or Water Station	SEE IT	This durable model is stainless steel and easy to clean.
Best for cats	Eufy Water Fountain	SEE IT	This five-stage water filtering system ensures safe and clean water for your furry friend.
Best high-capacity	PetSafe Drinkwell Platinum	SEE IT	This item has an activated carbon filter and is made of BPA-free plastic.

Best overall	Bird Buddy Smart Bird Feeder	SEE IT	The Bird Buddy offers stylish design, quality images, and a fun app with real-time notifications.
Best for hummingbirds	BirdDock Hummingbird Feeder Camera	SEE IT	The nectar attachment of this feeder can be swapped out to hold seed as well.
Best budget	WYZE Cam v3	SEE IT	This budget option lets you see the birds without any extras.

Science Articles about Animals | Popular Science

Check out some of the past year’s best close-up photography

In an era of climate change, Alaska’s predators fall prey to politics

Overfeeding cats will mess with their guts and poop

Complex changes

A cat-specific bacteria shift

Rats may have imaginations

Reading a rat’s mind

A rat ‘thought dictionary’

The Jumper task and the Jedi task

The science behind mixing honey into cocktails

Use different varieties of honey to your benefit

Work with honey’s texture, not against it

Actually, mind your beeswax

The sea star’s whole body is a head

Searching for heads and trunks

Sea star mapping

Giant prehistoric lamprey likely sucked blood—and ate flesh

Newfound mosasaur was like a giant Komodo dragon with flippers

The best pet water fountains of 2023

The best pet water fountains: Reviews & Recommendations

Best overall: PetSafe Healthy Pet Gravity Food or Water Station

Best for cats: Eufy Water Fountain

Easiest to clean: PetSafe Drinkwell Original Pet Fountain

Best high-capacity water fountain: PetSafe Drinkwell Platinum

Best budget: Wonder Creature Cat Water Fountain

What to consider when shopping for the best pet water fountains

What type of water fountain do you want?

How hard is the water fountain to assemble and clean?

How many pets will use the drinking fountain?

How well does the filter work, how often does it need replacing, and how much do replacement filters cost?

What materials make up the drinking fountain?

Will the drinking fountain be visible?

FAQs

Q: Should I leave my water fountain on all the time?

Q: How often should the fountains be cleaned?

Q: How often should you change the water in the fountain?

The final word on shopping for the best pet water fountains

Why trust us

New refuge provides hope for critically endangered toad

In the spirit of survival: How Indigenous protectors are saving rez dogs

Why ladybugs and ‘Halloween beetles’ are everywhere right now

Looking for warmth

How to tell a ladybug from a Halloween beetle

Can they hurt me or my house?

Wild chimpanzees show signs of potential menopause—a rarity in the animal kingdom

Why electric knifefish ‘shimmy’

Shimmying in the dark

Exciting the senses

This seafaring robot ‘eats’ stinky seaweed and dumps it in deep water

How kingfishers pull off breakneck dives without hurting their brains

Bumblebees carbo-load on the fly

Chicken feather fibers could help make less toxic hydrogen fuel cells

Is de-extinction only a pipette dream? This startup has a big, expensive plan to find out.

This Jurassic-era ‘sea murderer’ was among the first of its kind

How did mummified mice end up on volcanoes in the Atacama Desert?

Finding freeze-dried mummy mice

It’s all relative

‘How in God’s name is anything living up there?’

You can now track NYC subway rats in this popular transit app

The best bird feeder cameras in 2023

How we chose the best bird feeder cameras

The best bird feeder cameras: Reviews & Recommendations

Best overall: Bird Buddy Smart Bird Feeder

Best trail camera: TECHNAXX Full HD Birdcam TX-165

Best for bird boxes: Hawk Eye HD Nature Cam

Best for hummingbirds: BirdDock Hummingbird Feeder Camera

Best for bird identification: Netvue Birdfy Pro

Best budget: WYZE Cam v3

Things to consider before buying a bird feeder camera

Durability

Image quality

WiFi connectivity

Mounting options

Battery life

FAQs

Q: How do bird feeder cameras work?

Q: What color bird feeder attracts more birds?

Q: Where should I put a bird feeder camera?

Q: Do infrared cameras bother birds?