By Max Kozlov A sliver of human brain in a small vial starts to melt as lye is added to it. Over the next few days, the caustic chemical will break down the neurons and blood vessels within, leaving behind a grisly slurry containing thousands of tiny plastic particles. Toxicologist Matthew Campen has been using this method to isolate and track the microplastics — and their smaller counterparts, nanoplastics — found in human kidneys, livers and especially brains. Campen, who is at the University of New Mexico in Albuquerque, estimates that he can isolate about 10 grams of plastics from a donated human brain; that’s about the weight of an unused crayon. Microplastics have been found just about everywhere that scientists have looked: on remote islands, in fresh snow in Antarctica, at the bottom of the Mariana Trench in the western Pacific, in food, in water and in the air that we breathe. And scientists such as Campen are finding them spread throughout the human body. Detection is only the first step, however. Determining precisely what these plastics are doing inside people and whether they’re harmful has been much harder. That’s because there’s no one ‘microplastic’. They come in a wide variety of sizes, shapes and chemical compositions, each of which could affect cells and tissues differently. This is where Campen’s beige sludge comes into play. Despite microplastics’ ubiquity, it’s difficult to determine which microplastics people are exposed to, how they’re exposed and which particles make their way into the nooks and crannies of the body. The samples that Campen collects from cadavers can, in turn, be used to test how living tissues respond to the kinds of plastic that people carry around with them. “Morbidly speaking, the best source I can think of to get good, relevant microplastics is to take an entire human brain and digest it,” says Campen. © 2025 Springer Nature Limited

Keyword: Neurotoxins; Robotics
Link ID: 29669 - Posted: 02.12.2025

By Emily Anthes The English language is full of wonderful words, from “anemone” and “aurora” to “zenith” and “zodiac.” But these are special occasion words, sprinkled sparingly into writing and conversation. The words in heaviest rotation are short and mundane. And they follow a remarkable statistical rule, which is universal across human languages: The most common word, which in English is “the,” is used about twice as frequently as the second most common word (“of,” in English), three times as frequently as the third most common word (“and”), continuing in that pattern. Now, an international, interdisciplinary team of scientists has found that the intricate songs of humpback whales, which can spread rapidly from one population to another, follow the same rule, which is known as Zipf’s law. The scientists are careful to note that whale song is not equivalent to human language. But the findings, they argue, suggest that forms of vocal communication that are complex and culturally transmitted may have shared structural properties. “We expect them to evolve to be easy to learn,” said Simon Kirby, an expert on language evolution at the University of Edinburgh and an author of the new study. The results were published on Thursday in the journal Science. “We think of language as this culturally evolving system that has to essentially be passed on by its hosts, which are humans,” Dr. Kirby added. “What’s so gratifying for me is to see that same logic seems to also potentially apply to whale song.” Zipf’s law, which was named for the linguist George Kingsley Zipf, holds that in any given language the frequency of a word is inversely proportional to its rank. There is still considerable debate over why this pattern exists and how meaningful it is. But some research suggests that this kind of skewed word distribution can make language easier to learn. © 2025 The New York Times Company

Keyword: Language; Evolution
Link ID: 29662 - Posted: 02.08.2025

By Avery Schuyler Nunn Migratory songbirds may talk to one another more than we thought as they wing through the night. Each fall, hundreds of millions of birds from dozens of species co-migrate, some of them making dangerous journeys across continents. Come spring, they return home. Scientists have long believed that these songbirds rely on instinct and experience alone to make the trek. But new research from a team of ornithologists at the University of Illinois suggests they may help one another out—even across species—through their nocturnal calls. “They broadcast vocal pings into the sky, potentially sharing information about who they are and what lies ahead,” says ornithologist Benjamin Van Doren of the University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign and a co-author of the study, published in Current Biology. Using ground-based microphones across 26 sites in eastern North America, Van Doren and his team recorded over 18,300 hours of nocturnal flight calls from 27 different species of birds—brief, high-pitched vocalizations that some warblers, thrushes, and sparrows emit while flying. To process the enormous dataset of calls, they used machine-learning tools, including a customized version of Merlin, the Cornell Lab of Ornithology’s bird-call identification app. The analysis revealed that birds of different species were flying in close proximity and calling to one another in repeated patterns that suggested a kind of code. Flight proximity was closest between migrating songbirds species that made similar calls in pitch and rhythm, traveled at similar speeds, and had similar wing shapes. © 2025 NautilusNext Inc.,

Keyword: Language; Evolution
Link ID: 29661 - Posted: 02.08.2025

By Matt Richtel Cursing is coursing through society. Words once too blue to publicly utter have become increasingly commonplace. “Language is just part of the whole shift to a more casual lifestyle,” said Timothy Jay, a professor emeritus of psychology at the Massachusetts College of Liberal Arts in North Adams, Mass. Dr. Jay has spent a career studying the use of profanity, from what motivates it to the ways in which it satisfies, signals meaning and offends. Although officially retired, he has continued to edit studies on profanity and he recently offered an expert opinion in an ongoing legal dispute in Michigan over whether the phrase “Let’s go Brandon” (a euphemism used to denigrate former President Joseph R. Biden Jr.) should be reasonably interpreted as “profane.” (It should not, Dr. Jay opined.) Dr. Jay posits that the increasingly casual nature of the spoken word derives in part from the way people communicate on social media. One study, published in 2014 by other researchers in the field, found that curse words on Twitter, now known as X, appeared in 7.7 percent of posts, with profanity representing about 1 in every 10 words on the platform. That compared to a swearing rate of 0.5 to 0.7 percent in spoken language, the study found. If that data troubles you, Dr. Jay has some thoughts on how to dial back the profanity. F*@%-free February, anyone? Tis interview has been condensed and edited for clarity, and scrubbed of some of the vernacular that Dr. Jay conceded he regularly uses on the golf course. © 2025 The New York Times Company

Keyword: Emotions; Language
Link ID: 29660 - Posted: 02.08.2025

By Katharine Gammon Today more than 55 million people around the world have Alzheimer’s disease and other dementias, which ravage the minds of those who suffer from them and have devastating impacts on their family members. In spite of decades of research, the precise origins of these diseases continue to elude scientists, though numerous factors have been found to be associated with higher risk, including genetics and various lifestyle and environmental factors. Nautilus Members enjoy an ad-free experience. Log in or Join now . The quest has recently taken a turn to a newer model for studying the brain: brain organoids. These three-dimensional clumps of neuronal tissue derived from human stem cells have been used to study everything from epilepsy to the origins of consciousness. And now, researchers in Massachusetts are slamming them with miniature metal pistons to test out whether they can lend credence to a controversial hypothesis: that concussions might reactivate a common virus in the brain, increasing dementia risk. A decade of research suggests traumatic brain injury, whether from accidents or high-contact sports, is a standout risk factor for Alzheimer’s and other forms of neurodegenerative decline. Some estimates suggest that up to 10 percent of cases could be attributed to at least one prior head injury, but why is not fully understood. Separately, a growing body of research proposes that viral infection, including a common virus known as herpes simplex one, can also increase susceptibility to these diseases. But all three things—head trauma, viral infection, and dementia—have not been directly connected in experimental research, until now. One of the challenges in getting to the roots of dementia is that humans lead complex, messy lives. In the soup of risk factors—from high blood pressure to loneliness to genetic inheritance—it can be hard to filter out the most impactful forces that have contributed to the onset of any one dementia case. There are no ethical ways to test these questions on humans, of course, while using lab animals presents its own ethical and cost challenges. Animals are never a perfect match for humans anyway, and dementia-related findings in animals have so far not translated well to human patients. © 2025 NautilusNext Inc.,

Keyword: Alzheimers; Brain Injury/Concussion
Link ID: 29646 - Posted: 01.29.2025

By Smriti Mallapaty For the first time, scientists have tracked microplastics moving through the bodies of mice in real time1. The tiny plastic particles are gobbled up by immune cells, travel through the bloodstream and eventually become lodged in blood vessels in the brain. It’s not clear whether such obstructions occur in people, say researchers, but they did seem to affect the mice’s movement. Microplastics are specks of plastic, less than 5 millimetres long, that can be found everywhere, from the deep ocean to Antarctic ice. They are in the air we breathe, the water we drink and the food we eat. They can even enter our bloodstreams directly through plastic medical devices. Studies show that microplastics, and smaller nanoplastics, have made their way into humans’ brains, livers and kidneys, but researchers are just beginning to understand what happens to these plastic intruders and their effect on human health. One study last year, for example, found that people with micro- and nano-plastics in fatty deposits in their main artery were more likely to experience a heart attack, stroke or death2. In the latest study, published in Science Advances today, Haipeng Huang, a biomedical researcher at Peking University in Beijing, and his colleagues wanted to better understand how microplastics affect the brain. They used a fluorescence imaging technique called miniature two-photon microscopy to observe what was happening in mouse brains through a transparent window surgically implanted into the animal’s skull. The imaging technique can trace microplastics as they move through the bloodstream, says Eliane El Hayek, an environmental-health researcher at University of New Mexico in Albuquerque. “It’s very interesting, and very helpful.” © 2025 Springer Nature Limited

Keyword: Neurotoxins; Stroke
Link ID: 29641 - Posted: 01.25.2025

By Emily McLaughlin Three days after our baby was born, my husband and I brought our newborn daughter home to our house in Tarrytown, New York. I was 32, fit and healthy, and had had an uneventful pregnancy. But on the second afternoon back home, while nursing, a thunderclap headache struck. The pounding in my temple literally brought me to my knees. I tried to tough it out, but it didn’t go away. That evening, I called my doctor. Since I was low-risk with normal blood pressure, she suggested rest and hydration. Then in the middle of that night, while I was still in debilitating pain, dark spots started to float across my vision. As my husband rushed me to the hospital, he asked me a few simple questions as he drove: Did you page the doctor? How’s your nausea? My answers came out in slow motion at first, then turned into a stutter, before they finally stopped. At the hospital, an emergency brain scan showed an intracerebral hemorrhage in the right frontal lobe — the site of executive functioning, creativity and emotion. The next thing I remember is waking in the Neuro-ICU of a nearby hospital — paralyzed on the left side, unable to smile, process time or even read the sign telling nurses I wasn’t allowed to swallow in case the muscles in my mouth were affected and I choked. I couldn’t get the words out to ask if I’d be trapped in my head for good. Ten days later, on blood pressure and antiseizure meds, I was finally allowed to go home to my newborn. It felt like I needed more care than she did. With only one strong, normally working arm, I couldn’t cradle my baby. A constant headache made it impossible to stand. Doctors said the headaches might last a year, until the blood in my brain reabsorbed. My left leg worked, but poor balance made even walking around the house difficult. The left half of my face couldn’t move, and my speech came out weak and slowly. I could not connect emotion to the rhythm of my words. I delivered questions as flat, imperative statements.

Keyword: Stroke; Hormones & Behavior
Link ID: 29604 - Posted: 12.21.2024

By Annie Liontas In 2016, Marchell Taylor lay in his windowless, six-by-eight cell in the Denver County Jail. Only 36 days after being released after serving time for drug and robbery convictions, he robbed a Papa John’s and assaulted an employee. Because of his record, Mr. Taylor faced 300 years of imprisonment. He asked himself: Why am I back here? Answering his question may require looking back to 1978, when he was 9 years old and his family’s car slammed into a wall. He woke up to blood on his face. The brain injury he sustained went untreated. Shortly after that, his behavior changed, and he became, in his words, “snappy and violent.” By age 10, he was regularly turning to marijuana and alcohol. At 13, he was breaking into houses. At 14, he robbed a 7-Eleven. In 1993 he was picked up for aggravated robbery and ended up in a maximum security facility. For the next two decades, Mr. Taylor was in and out of institutions like this. That is until the Brain Injury Alliance of Colorado diagnosed him with a brain injury in 2016 while he was awaiting trial. After administering a screening, psychologists at the Men’s Mental Health Transition Unit — a pioneering mental health program in the Denver County Jail — gave Mr. Taylor access to therapies for mental health, including cognitive behavioral therapy and eye movement desensitization and reprocessing therapy, which helps process traumatic memories and experiences. These treatments taught him about his brain, and he says it has made all the difference. It is tempting to dismiss brain injury at an early age as the cause of years of criminal behavior. It’s certainly true in Mr. Taylor’s case that there were other contributing factors, including ongoing substance abuse, a lack of money and weak social and psychological support. But after spending years researching brain injuries in an effort to understand my own recovery from several and as a friend of Mr. Taylor’s, I’m reckoning with the fact that experts are only now beginning to recognize the connection between brain injury and incarceration. While such trauma may not offer a tidy explanation for histories like his, growing insight into this connection offers an opportunity to change the grim legacy of incarceration and mental illness in this country by treating an underlying factor that can fuel recidivism. © 2024 The New York Times Company

Keyword: Aggression; Brain Injury/Concussion
Link ID: 29585 - Posted: 12.04.2024

By Janna Levin It’s fair to say that enjoyment of a podcast would be severely limited without the human capacity to create and understand speech. That capacity has often been cited as a defining characteristic of our species, and one that sets us apart in the long history of life on Earth. Yet we know that other species communicate in complex ways. Studies of the neurological foundations of language suggest that birdsong, or communication among bats or elephants, originates with brain structures similar to our own. So why do some species vocalize while others don’t? In this episode, Erich Jarvis, who studies behavior and neurogenetics at the Rockefeller University, chats with Janna Levin about the surprising connections between human speech, birdsong and dance. JANNA LEVIN: All animals exhibit some form of communication, from the primitive hiss of a lizard to the complex gestures natural to chimps, or the songs shared by whales. But human language does seem exceptional, a vast and discrete cognitive leap. Yet recent research is finding surprising neurological connections between our expressive speech and the types of communication innate to other animals, giving us new ideas about the biological and developmental origins of language. Erich is a professor at the Rockefeller University and a Howard Hughes Medical Institute investigator. At Rockefeller, he directs the Field Research Center of Ethology and Ecology. He also directs the Neurogenetics Lab of Language and codirects the Vertebrate Genome Lab, where he studies song-learning birds and other species to gain insight into the mechanism’s underlying language and vocal learning. ERICH JARVIS: So, the first part: Language is built-in genetically in us humans. We’re born with the capacity to learn how to produce and how to understand language, and pass it on culturally from one generation to the next. The actual detail is learned, but the actual plan in the brain is there. Second part of your question: Is it, you know, special or unique to humans? It is specialized in humans, but certainly many components of what gives rise to language is not unique to humans. There’s a spectrum of abilities out there in other species that we share some aspects of with other species. © 2024 Simons Foundation

Keyword: Language; Evolution
Link ID: 29572 - Posted: 11.23.2024

Nicola Davis Science correspondent Whether it is news headlines or WhatsApp messages, modern humans are inundated with short pieces of text. Now researchers say they have unpicked how we get their gist in a single glance. Prof Liina Pylkkanen, co-author of the study from New York University, said most theories of language processing assume words are understood one by one, in sequence, before being combined to yield the meaning of the whole sentence. “From this perspective, at-a-glance language processing really shouldn’t work since there’s just not enough time for all the sequential processing of words and their combination into a larger representation,” she said. However, the research offers fresh insights, revealing we can detect certain sentence structures in as little as 125 milliseconds (ms) – a timeframe similar to the blink of an eye. Pylkkanen said: “We don’t yet know exactly how this ultrafast structure detection is possible, but the general hypothesis is that when something you perceive fits really well with what you know about – in this case, we’re talking about knowledge of the grammar – this top-down knowledge can help you identify the stimulus really fast. “So just like your own car is quickly identifiable in a parking lot, certain language structures are quickly identifiable and can then give rise to a rapid effect of syntax in the brain.” The team say the findings suggest parallels with the way in which we perceive visual scenes, with Pylkkanen noting the results could have practical uses for the designers of digital media, as well as advertisers and designers of road signs. Writing in the journal Science Advances, Pylkkanen and colleagues report how they used a non-invasive scanning device to measure the brain activity of 36 participants. © 2024 Guardian News & Media Limited

Keyword: Language; Attention
Link ID: 29527 - Posted: 10.26.2024

By Katarina Zimmer Adriana Weisleder knows well the benefits of being bilingual: being able to communicate with one’s community, cultivating connection with one’s heritage culture, contributing to the richness and diversity of society, and opening up professional opportunities. Research also suggests some cognitive benefits of bilingualism — such as improved multitasking — although those are more debated, says Weisleder, a developmental psychologist and language scientist of Costa Rican heritage who directs the Child Language Lab at Northwestern University near Chicago. Nearly 22 percent of Americans speak a language other than English at home; many of them are English and Spanish speakers from immigrant families. Yet many children from immigrant families in the United States struggle to develop or maintain proficiency in two languages. Some may lose their heritage language in favor of English; others may fall behind in schools where their progress is evaluated only in English. In a 2020 article in the Annual Review of Developmental Psychology, Weisleder and educational psychologist Meredith Rowe explain how a person’s environment — at a family, community and societal level — affects language acquisition. In the US, for instance, language development in children from immigrant families is influenced by parental misconceptions about raising children bilingually, a general scarcity of support for bilinguals in schools, and anti-immigrant sentiment in society more broadly. In her research, Weisleder leads in-depth studies of bilingual toddlers in different social contexts to better understand how they comprehend and learn multiple languages. She hopes her insights will help to dispel misconceptions and fears around bilingualism and improve support for children learning multiple languages.

Keyword: Language; Development of the Brain
Link ID: 29526 - Posted: 10.26.2024

By Christa Lesté-Lasserre Even if your cat hasn’t gotten your tongue, it’s most likely getting your words. Without any particular training, the animals—like human babies—appear to pick up basic human language skills just by listening to us talk. Indeed, cats learn to associate images with words even faster than babies do, according to a study published this month in Scientific Reports. That means that, despite all appearances to the contrary, our furtive feline friends may actually be listening to what we say. Cats have a long history with us—about 10,000 years at last count—notes Brittany Florkiewicz, an evolutionary psychologist at Lyon College who was not involved in the work. “So it makes sense that they can learn these types of associations.” Scientists have discovered a lot about how cats respond to human language in the past 5 years. In 2019, a team in Tokyo showed that cats “know” their names, responding to them by moving their heads and ears in a particular way. In 2022, some of the same researchers demonstrated that the animals can “match” photos of their human and feline family members to their respective names. “I was very surprised, because that meant cats were able to eavesdrop on human conversations and understand words without any special reward-based training,” says Saho Takagi, a comparative cognitive scientist at Azabu University and member of the 2022 study. She wondered: Are cats “hard-wired” to learn human language? To find out, Takagi and some of her former teammates gave 31 adult pet cats—including 23 that were up for adoption at cat cafés—a type of word test designed for human babies. The scientists propped each kitty in front of a laptop and showed the animals two 9-second animated cartoon images while broadcasting audio tracks of their caregivers saying a made-up word four times. The researchers played the nonsense word “keraru” while a growing and shrinking blue-and-white unicorn appeared on the screen, or “parumo” while a red-faced cartoon Sun grew and shrank. The cats watched and heard these sequences until they got bored—signaled by a 50% drop in eye contact with the screen.

Keyword: Language; Development of the Brain
Link ID: 29521 - Posted: 10.19.2024

By Erica Goode Over the last decades, researchers who study animal behavior have succeeded in largely blurring the line between Homo sapiens and other animals. Like their human counterparts, animals feel emotions, they solve problems, they communicate and form complicated relationships, investigators have found. Any number of books — think of Ed Yong’s “An Immense World” or Marc Bekoff’s “The Emotional Lives of Animals” — have been dedicated to exploring these relatively recently recognized abilities. Yet few books on the ways animals communicate have been written through the eyes of a scientist as cautious and as thoughtful as zoologist Arik Kershenbaum, the author of “Why Animals Talk: The New Science of Animal Communication.” Kershenbaum, a lecturer and fellow at the University of Cambridge, is distrustful of simplistic explanations, wary of assumptions, devoted to caveats — few statements come without qualification. In Socratic fashion, he asks a lot of questions, the answers to which, in many cases, neither he nor anyone else can yet provide. That did not deter him from writing the book and it should not deter other people from reading it. But those who pick up “Why Animals Talk” expecting to find proof of animal telepathy or hoping for a dictionary of elephant-speak or a word-for-word translation of humpback whale songs, will be disappointed. (On Amazon, one disgruntled reviewer summarized the book: “Animals don’t really talk – The End.”) If there is a message that Kershenbaum wants to get across, it’s that, as much as we’d like to be able to hold conversations with our pets or chat with chimpanzees at the zoo, it makes no sense to expect animals to communicate in the same way that humans do, “with the same equipment as we have, the same ears and eyes and brains.”

Keyword: Animal Communication; Language
Link ID: 29513 - Posted: 10.12.2024

By Jennifer Couzin-Frankel Even a mild concussion can cause disconcerting and sometimes lasting symptoms, such as trouble concentrating and dizziness. But can it make someone more likely to commit a crime? After all, a disproportionate number of people in the criminal justice system previously suffered a traumatic brain injury (TBI). But according to new research into the medical and juvenile justice records of Danish teenagers who suffered a blow to head as children, such injuries don’t cause criminal behavior. Although TBI and criminality often travel together, the researchers found in this Danish population it’s a case of correlation, not causation. “I think this study very clearly indicates that you can’t just [say], ‘Hey, my kid has a mild TBI, he or she is screwed,” says Joseph Schwartz, a criminologist at Florida State University who has studied the issue in juveniles and adults. At the same time, he cautions that there are important variables this study wasn’t designed to capture, such as the treatment received, the effect of repeat TBIs, and the circumstances surrounding the injury. All of these, he says, could influence criminal behavior in some people. Beyond showing high rates of past TBI among those charged with or convicted of crimes, research into this topic has been limited. Studies have found that mild TBI is associated with later behavioral problems, including impulsivity and inattentiveness, which are also linked with criminal behavior. At the same time, it’s well known that “the risk factors in the child and the family for TBIs are the same as the risk factors for delinquency,” including poverty and parental substance abuse, says Sheilagh Hodgins, a clinical psychologist at the University of Montreal. She notes, too, that impulsivity and attention and conduct disorders heighten the risk of sustaining a mild TBI in the first place. © 2024 American Association for the Advancement of Science.

Keyword: Brain Injury/Concussion; Aggression
Link ID: 29503 - Posted: 10.02.2024

By Joanna Thompson, Hakai Magazine From January to May each year, Qeqertarsuaq Tunua, a large bay on Greenland’s west coast, teems with plankton. Baleen whales come to feast on the bounty, and in 2010, two bowhead whales entered the bay to gorge. As the pair came within 100 kilometers (about 60 miles) of one another, they were visually out of range, but could likely still hear one another. That’s when something extraordinary happened: They began to synchronize their dives. Researchers had never scientifically documented this behavior before, and the observation offers potential proof for a 53-year-old theory. Baleen whales are often thought of as solitary — islands unto themselves. However, some scientists believe they travel in diffuse herds, communicating over hundreds of kilometers. Legendary biologist Roger Payne and oceanographer Douglas Webb first floated the concept of acoustic herd theory (or should it be heard theory?) in 1971. This story is from Hakai Magazine, an online publication about science and society in coastal ecosystems, and is republished here with permission. Payne, who helped discover and record humpback whale song a few years prior, was struck by the fact that many toothed cetaceans such as killer whales and dolphins are highly social and move together in tight-knit family groups. These bands provide safety from predators and allow the animals to raise their young communally. Payne speculated that the larger baleen whales might travel in groups, too, but on a broader geographic scale. And perhaps the behemoths signaled acoustically to keep in touch across vast distances. Webb and Payne’s original paper on acoustic herd theory demonstrated that fin whale vocalizations — low-frequency sounds that carry long distances — could theoretically travel an astonishing 700 kilometers (over 400 miles) in certain areas of the ocean. However, it’s been easier to show that a whale is making a call than to prove the recipient is a fellow cetacean hundreds of kilometers away, says Susan Parks, a behavioral ecologist at Syracuse University in New York who studies animal acoustics.

Keyword: Animal Communication; Evolution
Link ID: 29502 - Posted: 10.02.2024

By Katarina Zimmer If we could talk with whales, should we? When scientists in Alaska recently used pre-recorded whale sounds to engage in a 20-minute back-and-forth with a local humpback whale, some hailed it as the first “conversation” with the cetaceans. But the interaction between an underwater speaker mounted on the research boat and the whale, which was described last year in the journal PeerJ, also stimulated a broader discussion around the ethics of communicating with other species. After the whale circled the boat for a while, the puffs from her blowhole sounded wheezier than usual, suggesting to the scientists aboard that she was aroused in some way—perhaps curious, frustrated, or bored. Nevertheless, Twain—as scientists had nicknamed her—continued to respond to the speaker’s calls until they stopped. Twain called back three more times, but the speaker on the boat had fallen silent. She swam away. Scientists have used recorded calls to study animal behavior and communication for decades. But new efforts—and technology such as artificial intelligence—are striving not just to deafly mimic animal communication, but also to more deeply understand it. And while the potential extension of this research that has most captured public excitement—producing our own coherent whale sounds and meaningfully communicating with them—is still firmly in the realm of science fiction, this kind of research might just bring us a small step closer. The work to decipher whale vocalizations was inspired by the research on humpback whale calls by the biologist Roger Payne and played an important role in protecting the species. In the 1960s, Payne discovered that male humpbacks sing—songs so intricate and powerful it was hard to imagine they have no deeper meaning. His album of humpback whale songs became an anthem to the “Save the Whales” movement and helped motivate the creation of the Marine Mammal Protection Act in 1972 in the United States. © 2024 NautilusNext Inc.,

Keyword: Animal Communication; Evolution
Link ID: 29501 - Posted: 10.02.2024

By Emily Anthes The common marmoset is a certified chatterbox. The small, South American monkey uses an array of chirps, whistles and trills to defend its territory, flag the discovery of food, warn of impending danger and find family members hidden by dense forest foliage. Marmosets also use distinct calls to address different individuals, in much the same way that people use names, new research suggests. The findings make them the first nonhuman primates known to use name-like vocal labels for individuals. Until this year, only humans, dolphins and parrots were known to use names when communicating. In June, however, scientists reported that African elephants appeared to use names, too; researchers made the discovery by using artificial intelligence-powered software to detect subtle patterns in the elephants’ low-pitched rumbles. In the new study, which was published in Science last month, a different team of researchers also used A.I. to uncover name-like labels hiding in the calls of common marmosets. The discovery, which is part of a burgeoning scientific effort to use sophisticated computational tools to decode animal communication, could help shed light on the origins of language. And it raises the possibility that name-bestowing behavior may be more widespread in the animal kingdom than scientists once assumed. “I think what it’s telling us is that it’s likely that animals actually have names for each other a lot more than maybe we ever conceived,” said George Wittemyer, a conservation biologist at Colorado State University who led the recent elephant study but was not involved in the marmoset research. “We just never were really looking properly.” Marmosets are highly social, forming long-term bonds with their mates and raising their offspring cooperatively in small family groups. They produce high-pitched, whistle-like “phee calls” to communicate with other marmosets who might be hidden among the treetops. “They start to exchange phee calls when they lose eyesight of each other,” said David Omer, a neuroscientist at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem who led the new study. © 2024 The New York Times Company

Keyword: Animal Communication; Language
Link ID: 29480 - Posted: 09.14.2024

By Darren Incorvaia Imagine being a male firefly when suddenly the telltale flashing of a female catches your eye. Enthralled, you speed toward love’s embrace — only to fly headfirst into a spider’s web. That flashy female was in fact another male firefly, himself trapped in the web, and the spider may have manipulated his light beacon to lure you in. This high-stakes drama plays out nightly in the Jiangxia District of Wuhan, China. There, researchers have found that male fireflies caught in the webs of the orb-weaver spider Araneus ventricosus flash their light signals more like females do, which leads other males to get snagged in the same web. And weirdly, the spiders might be making them do this, almost like hunters blowing a duck call to attract prey. “The idea that a spider can manipulate the signaling of a prey species is very intriguing,” said Dinesh Rao, a spider biologist at the University of Veracruz in Mexico. “They show clearly that a trapped firefly in the web attracts more fireflies.” Dr. Rao was not involved in the research, but served as a peer reviewer of the paper published Monday in the journal Current Biology. Xinhua Fu, a zoologist at Huazhong Agricultural University in Wuhan, was in the field surveying firefly diversity when he first noticed that male fireflies seemed to end up ensnared in orb-weaver spider webs more often than females. Wondering if the spiders were somehow specifically attracting males, he teamed up with Daiqin Li and Shichang Zhang, animal behavior experts from nearby Hubei University, to get to the bottom of this sticky mystery. Working near paddy fields and ponds, the researchers observed the flashing of trapped male fireflies and saw that it more closely resembled that of females than of free-flying males. Trapped males flashed using only one of their two bioluminescent lantern organs, and they made one flash at a time rather than multiple flashes in quick succession, the same lighting signals females send when trying to attract males. © 2024 The New York Times Company

Keyword: Animal Communication; Sexual Behavior
Link ID: 29443 - Posted: 08.21.2024

Julia Kollewe Oran Knowlson, a British teenager with a severe type of epilepsy called Lennox-Gastaut syndrome, became the first person in the world to trial a new brain implant last October, with phenomenal results – his daytime seizures were reduced by 80%. “It’s had a huge impact on his life and has prevented him from having the falls and injuring himself that he was having before,” says Martin Tisdall, a consultant paediatric neurosurgeon at Great Ormond Street Hospital (Gosh) in London, who implanted the device. “His mother was talking about how he’s had such a improvement in his quality of life, but also in his cognition: he’s more alert and more engaged.” Oran’s neurostimulator sits under the skull and sends constant electrical signals deep into his brain with the aim of blocking abnormal impulses that trigger seizures. The implant, called a Picostim and about the size of a mobile phone battery, is recharged via headphones and operates differently between day and night. The video player is currently playing an ad. You can skip the ad in 5 sec with a mouse or keyboard “The device has the ability to record from the brain, to measure brain activity, and that allows us to think about ways in which we could use that information to improve the efficacy of the stimulation that the kids are getting,” says Tisdall. “What we really want to do is to deliver this treatment on the NHS.” As part of a pilot, three more children with Lennox-Gastaut syndrome will be fitted with the implant in the coming weeks, followed by a full trial with 22 children early next year. If this goes well, the academic sponsors – Gosh and University College London – will apply for regulatory approval. Tim Denison – a professor of engineering science at Oxford University and co-founder and chief engineer of London-based Amber Therapeutics, which developed the implant with the university – hopes the device will be available on the NHS in four to five years’ time, and around the world. © 2024 Guardian News & Media Limite

Keyword: Robotics; Epilepsy
Link ID: 29442 - Posted: 08.19.2024

By Sara Talpos Nervous system disorders are among the leading causes of death and disability globally. Conditions such as paralysis and aphasia, which affects the ability to understand and produce language, can be devastating to patients and families. Significant investment has been put toward brain research, including the development of new technologies to treat some conditions, said Saskia Hendriks, a bioethicist at the U.S. National Institutes of Health. These technologies may very well improve lives, but they also raise a host of ethical issues. That’s in part because of the unique nature of the brain, said Hendriks. It’s “the seat of many functions that we think are really important to ourselves, like consciousness, thoughts, memories, emotions, perceptions, actions, perhaps identity.” Saskia Hendriks, a bioethicist at the U.S. National Institutes of Health, recently co-authored an essay on the emerging ethical questions in highly innovative brain research. In a June essay in The New England Journal of Medicine, Hendriks and a co-author, Christine Grady, outlined some of the thorny ethical questions related to brain research: What is the best way to protect the long-term interests of people who receive brain implants as part of a clinical trial? As technology gets better at decoding thoughts, how can researchers guard against violations of mental privacy? And what best way to prepare for the far-off possibility that consciousness may one day arise from work derived from human stem cells? Hendriks spoke about the essay in a Zoom interview. Our conversation has been edited for length and clarity.

Keyword: Robotics
Link ID: 29441 - Posted: 08.19.2024