HuckleB
HuckleB's JournalPosture and waggle control butterfly flight
http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2016/03/posture-and-waggle-control-butterfly-flight?utm_source=newsfromscience&utm_medium=facebook-text&utm_campaign=butterflight-3058"Butterflies soar by using big wings and slow wingbeats—about 10 beats per second, compared with about 200 in honey bees. A new model shows how they control this jerky, erratic flight: good posture and a bit of waggle. Research on butterfly flight has been limited to studying tethered butterflies in wind tunnels, or simulations focusing only on horizontal motion. In the new study, researchers took high-speed videos of orange oakleaf butterflies free-flying in the lab, and then simulated their unruly flight patterns, along with the intricate air currents they produce. The team found that a body posture perpendicular to the ground helps the insects fly upward, especially when combined with a large rotation of their body timed with each flap of their wings. By toning down this waggle or the angle of their body, butterflies can move forward instead of upward, according to a study to be published in Physical Review Letters E. The researchers say that butterfly flight would make a good model for developing tiny flying vehicles that could be used for surveillance and rescue operations. Frenzied fliers like bees are hard to mimic, but a butterfly’s slower, waggling flight might be more manageable for the rescue robots of the future. "
----------------------------------------
Cool video!
Most Urban Farmers Aren't Making a Living
The strong social mission of most urban farms might not be enough for longterm viability, a study suggests.
http://www.citylab.com/work/2016/03/urban-farming-financial-viability-survey/471756/
"A new type of agriculture has recently taken shape in American cities. Vacant properties and high-rise rooftops are morphing into farms, yielding fresh produce and honey, and exposing urban dwellers to the once strictly rural activity of food production. But sadly (and perhaps nor surprisingly), it might be a passing fad.
At least that’s what a new study published in the British Food Journal suggests. Carolyn Dimitri, the lead author and an associate professor of food studies at New York University, set out to assess the viability of American urban farming and to identify what drives urban farmers. She and her colleagues found that about two-thirds had a social mission that went beyond food production and profit. She also found that, regardless of their mission, roughly two-thirds of urban farmers say they’re failing to make a living, reporting sales below $10,000 per year.
In a survey of 370 farmers working in or around U.S. cities, Dimitri and her colleagues posed questions addressing what and how much they produce, how they sell and market their products, the risks and challenges of urban farming, and the farm’s size and characteristics. The researchers allowed the survey respondents to self-identify, so the respondents came from a range of farm types—vertical farms, hydroponic farms, crops planted on large parcels, on tiny lot corners and on rooftops, non-profit and for-profit, located within the downtown of a city, in the suburbs, or even in peri-urban areas.
The majority of urban farmers said that they were producing food not only for profit, but also to educate community members, improve food security, and build community. But only one-third said that they operated as non-profits. Roughly the same number reported earning a living off their farm. (There was no correlation between profit status and profit margin, however.) This raises questions about the long-term financial viability of most of these farms, located as they are on relatively expensive land with little revenue to support them.
..."
---------------------------------------------------
Perhaps someone will figure out a way to make it work, but issues of scale are going to be difficult to overcome.
10,000 New Reasons Not To Worry About Pesticide Residues
http://www.science20.com/agricultural_realism/10000_new_reasons_not_to_worry_about_pesticide_residues-167025"Each year, the farmers around the world who produce our food (fruits, vegetables, grains) get the equivalent of a “grade” on a giant “group project.” For 2014 they got another A+ as they have for many years. The “test” entails thousands of food samples, which the USDA collects from normal US food channels and then scrutinizes for pesticide residues using extremely sensitive laboratory testing methods.
They are checking for any detectable residues (41% of samples have none) and whether any of the detectable residues exceed the conservative “tolerances” set by the EPA (99.6% of the samples met that exacting standard). This means that our regulatory/farming system is working extremely well! Farmers are able to produce crops without the inefficiency and quality issues associated with excessive pest damage, and consumers are able to safely enjoy what they grow.
The official conclusion from the USDA is “These Pesticide Data Program data show that, overall, pesticide residues found on foods tested are at levels below the tolerances established by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and pose no safety concern.”
Chemical pesticides are only one part of the pest control regime, but an important one. The chemical pesticides in use today are predominantly low in mammalian toxicity, but for all pesticides the EPA sets detailed rules for how they can be used (e.g. maximum rates, periods of time before harvest…).
..."
-----------------------------------------------
Not that this would matter to many, but...
Hints of New LHC Particle Get Slightly Stronger
One fresh analysis keeps alive physicists' hope for a breakthrough, but another is disappointing
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/hints-of-new-lhc-particle-get-slightly-stronger/
"Hints of a mysterious new particle at the world's largest particle accelerator just got a little stronger. The excess of photons produced by particle collisions at the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) has kept physicists abuzz since it was discovered three months ago: it is now slightly more statistically significant but still falls well short of the certainty needed to claim a discovery.
In December, physicists announced that they had seen an excess of pairs of ?-ray photons with a combined energy of around 750 gigaelectronvolts. The data came from ATLAS and CMS, the two largest detectors at the 27-kilometre LHC, which is at CERN, the European particle physics laboratory near Geneva, Switzerland.
That excess of photons seen by the CMS experiment has now become slightly more significant, owing to a fresh analysis reported on March 17 at a conference in La Thuile, Italy. But to the disappointment of many, the significance seen by ATLAS actually went down a bit, as a result of a more conservative interpretation of the data.
The data used in the latest CMS analysis is 23% larger as it includes collisions from early in the LHC’s 2015 run, when the detector’s magnet was switched off due to a problem in its cooling system. The magnetic field affects detector electronics, so data taken without the field needed careful and separate calibration. “The good news is, we now we have almost as much data as ATLAS,” says James Olsen, CMS physics coordinator and a physicist at Princeton University in New Jersey.
..."
-----------------------------------------------------------
Well, it's an update, anyway.
Facepalm! NOAA should focus on weather, not climate change, says Rep. Lamar Smith
http://www.csmonitor.com/Environment/2016/0318/NOAA-should-focus-on-weather-not-climate-change-says-Rep.-Lamar-Smith"The US House of Representatives subcommittee on environment held a budget hearing Wednesday to discuss the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s funding during fiscal year 2017. NOAA's $5.9 billion request, a $77 million increase from fiscal year 2016, led to greater discussion on the agency's overall purpose in the US government.
Rep. Lamar Smith (R) of Texas, chairman of the House Science, Space, and Technology Committee, to which the subcommittee on the environment answers, butted heads yet again with NOAA Administrator Kathryn Sullivan, questioning the administration’s climate change research.
The Smith vs. Sullivan feud goes back to last June, when NOAA scientists published a study arguing that a "pause" in global warming never existed. As a strict climate change denier (and someone who has received over $600,000 in donations from the fossil fuel industry), Rep. Smith insisted that the authors fudged the data and subpoenaed NOAA, demanding that all internal communication between the study’s authors be turned over to his committee for examination. Sullivan has since refused, citing the importance of scientific autonomy.
Smith devoted almost his entire 729-word opening statement what he called NOAA’s biased climate change agenda. NOAA's budget request included $190 million for climate change research: a little more than three percent of the administration’s overall proposed budget.
..."
----------------------------------------------------------
Friggin' ugly scumminess. Ugh.
Gene-Editing Tool CRISPR-Cas9 Can Now Monitor And Target RNA In Living Cells
http://www.techtimes.com/articles/142061/20160318/gene-editing-tool-crispr-cas9-can-now-monitor-and-target-rna-in-living-cells.htm"The new genetic tool called CRISPR-Cas9 can now be used as an accessible means to track and target the movement of RNA in living cells, researchers found.
A person's susceptibility to disease and characteristics like the color of the hair or eyes, are all encoded in the deoxyribonucleic acid or DNA. Scientists have long been sequencing human genome in order to develop ways to alter the genetic code. However, there are some diseases that are linked to RNA, another important molecule.
Researchers at the University Of California, San Diego figured out how to use the tool on the messenger RNA that carries genetic instructions from the nucleus of the cell to make new proteins.
"We are just beginning to see the implications of genome engineering using the CRISPR technology, but many diseases, including cancer and autism, are linked to problems with another fundamental biological molecule: RNA," said Gene Yeo of the University of California, San Diego.
..."
--------------------------------------
Interesting stuff.
Big Liquor Holidays.
New Year's Eve, Mardi Gras, St. Patrick's, Cinco de Mayo, Oktoberfest...
Which ones am I missing?
The funny part is that even when I was drinking, and I drank too much, I avoided the stuff on these days. Oh, and I stayed off the roads, too.
Vandana Shiva: Fearmongering in Oregon
http://www.itsmomsense.com/vandana-shiva-fearmongering-in-oregon/Good piece.
How many more physicians will we lose to suicide?
http://www.kevinmd.com/blog/2016/03/many-physicians-will-lose-suicide.html"Almost two years ago I went to the funeral of a medical school classmate. A little more than three weeks before he had jumped from a parking garage after finishing his clinic. He had a loving wife and three young children. He had the respect of his colleagues and the love of his patients. There was nothing out of the ordinary in his financial or personal life. It didn’t make sense, but it rarely does. Something broke inside the mind of someone I have always known to be a happy, easygoing person.
I don’t know why he committed suicide. It seemed to be related to a recent period of intense, severe depression. I don’t know if the pressures of being a physician were a factor, but I do know that physicians have one of the highest, if not the highest suicide rate of any profession; nearly twice the rate of suicide compared to the general population. It may actually be higher. There is tremendous social and institutional pressure to label a death an accident instead of a suicide when ambiguous. If any cohort of people could make suicide look like an accident or death from natural causes, it would be someone in the medical profession.
Of my medical school class of about one hundred, two have been lost to suicide before my 41st birthday. The first was before we even finished medical school. Why do we lose so many physicians to suicide and how many more will be lost?
There are pressures to being a physician that are unseen by most people not working in the medical field. Rates of burnout and major depression are higher in medical students and physicians, and we tend to not seek treatment. Why would we? There is a stigma to mental health problems. Many people view them as a weakness rather than a serious and very real disease. We would never view one of our patients this way, but sometimes we do treat our peers and ourselves this way. Physicians are often afraid to seek help because of fear of losing their medical license, hospital privileges or malpractice insurance. The inconsistency of treatments prescribed by medical boards and physician ‘help’ programs discourages those who need help the most to seek it. If you know a colleague who has gone through this process you know exactly what I mean. Some of these programs cause more economic stress, guilt, shame and depression than they cure. They are a blunt instrument.
..."
--------------------------------------------------
In case any of us didn't remember, health care workers are under extreme pressure every day. We should remember this as we work to improve the systems we've created.
I'm never going to thank Drumpf for anything, but if we can't get together to defeat him...
... What can we get together on?
There's nothing subliminal about his brand of fascism,
Still, I love me some Fishbone!
https://m.
Profile Information
Member since: 2002Number of posts: 35,773
