School Strikers Welcome The Australian Education Union’s Support For Our #ClimateStrike
Liberal And Labor Must Rule Out New Hunter Valley Coal Power Plant Proposals
Thousands Of Ducks Set To Be Killed
Premier Says ‘See The Outback Before It’s Gassed’
Human 'Footprint' On Antarctica Measured For First Time
Smart Energy Conference & Exhibition 2019
Destruction Of Koala Habitat Now Widespread In NSW
Farmers Slam Minister Roberts’ Dodgy Special Rules For Gas Companies
City Of Hobart First In Australia To Ban Plastics
Kepco’s Bylong Mine Can’t Escape Climate Reality Any Longer
EPA Fines AGL Macquarie $30,000 After Diesel Spill
A Survey On Ticks And Wildlife In The Northern Beaches
Thirteen Mammal Extinctions Prevented By Havens, Study
Tuesday, March 5th, 2019Havens - islands and fenced conservation areas that are free of feral cats and foxes - have already prevented 13 mammal extinctions in Australia, and supported improved conservation for many other species.
A stocktake of where Australia’s havens are, what native mammal species are in them, and where future havens need to go to prevent further extinctions has been released by the Threatened Species Recovery Hub.
Boodies used to occur across two-thirds of Australia, but now only exist within havens. Image: Hugh McGregor / Arid Recovery
Professor Sarah Legge from the University of Queensland led the team of 28 scientists and conservation managers from universities, government conservation agencies and NGOs, who collaborated to undertake the audit. “Predation by feral cats and foxes is the main reason that Australia has the worst mammal extinction record over the last 250 years,’ said Prof Legge.
“At least 80 Australian islands are naturally cat- and fox-free havens which prevented extinctions.
“For example, the greater stick-nest rat became extinct on mainland Australia, but survived on the Franklin Islands off South Australia, which were not reached by foxes or cats.
“Since the 1980’s additional havens have been created in Australia by eradicating feral animals from islands or from within large fenced areas on the mainland.
Woylies are found in seven fenced havens and on three island havens. Nationally woylies have declined from over 200,000 to less than 20,000 in the last 15 years. Predation by foxes and cats is considered the major cause. Once widespread across southern Australia, outside havens, there are now only three small wild populations in Western Australia remaining. Image: Australian Wildlife Conservancy
“Threatened animals have then been moved to these havens to put them out of reach of introduced predators.
“We now have 101 island havens covering 2152 km2 and 17 fenced havens covering 346 km2.
“A key finding of our review was that while more than half of the mammal species in Australia that are vulnerable to cats and foxes have the protection of being in a haven, 29 species are not yet in a single haven.”
According to Dr Jeremy Ringma, a lead researcher on the project, if we want to prevent future extinctions we need to get more strategic about where new havens are located, and which species go into them.
“The 11 most recently created havens have not added any new species to the haven network,” said Dr Ringma.
“Protection is also uneven. Woylies are now found in 10 havens, but the central rock rat, the Australian mammal at greatest risk of extinction in the next 20 years, is not protected in a single haven.
“Havens are being created by a diverse range of groups, including local and state governments, non-government groups and even private individuals.
“This diversity brings resilience to the growing network, but means that the network growth isn’t always optimal when viewed at a national scale.”
This graph shows the Australian mammals that are most vulnerable to foxes and cats and how many populations they have in havens. At the top, the pale field rat is found in over 30 havens. At the bottom, many species are found in no havens. Image: Threatened Species Recovery Hub
Dr Michael Bode from QUT said that to prevent future mammal extinctions we have to increase national collaboration and coordination and be more strategic about where new havens are created.
“We have identified where new havens need to go to get every threatened mammal species that is vulnerable to predation by cats and foxes into at least one haven,” said Dr Bode.
“If we put havens in the right places, we can achieve this with just 12 new havens.
“With 39 new havens, we could protect at least three populations of every threatened predator-susceptible native mammal species.”
Prof Legge concluded, “Cat- and fox-free havens cover tiny fractions of the original distributions of our native species.
“Longer term, we are still seeking ways of reducing fox and cat impacts across the landscape so that native mammals can be restored at bigger scales.
“Until then, cat- and fox-free havens will continue to be a critical tool in preventing extinctions.”
Dr Sally Box, Australia’s Threatened Species Commissioner, welcomed the research and said that understanding where safe havens are needed and identifying species that require protection will be vital for avoiding future extinctions.
“The Australian Government’s Threatened Species Strategy recognises the important role that islands and mainland safe havens play in the fight against extinction”, said Dr Box.
“This science is building a clearer picture of where best to create safe havens that deliver exceptional conservation benefits and protect a wide range of species.”
This map shows existing and planned havens as circles. In order to get every mammal that is vulnerable to cats and foxes into at least one haven, new havens should be prioritised for the 12 regions highlighted. Image: Threatened Species Recovery Hub
The research was undertaken by the Threatened Species Recovery Hub of the Australian Government’s National Environmental Science Program, in collaboration with government and non-government conservation agencies. It has been published in Wildlife Research, Nature Ecology and Evolution, and Conservation Letters.
The Hub is a collaboration of 10 leading Australian universities and the Australian Wildlife Conservancy to undertake research to support the recovery of Australia’s threatened species.
Above image: The first stage of Australian Wildlife Conservancy’s Newhaven Sanctuary nearing completion in Central Australia. Once all stages are complete, Newhaven Sanctuary will be a 650 square kilometres (65,000 hectares) cat- and fox-free haven for wildlife. Image: Australian Wildlife Conservancy
Tuesday, March 5th, 2019
Havens - islands and fenced conservation areas that are free of feral cats and foxes - have already prevented 13 mammal extinctions in Australia, and supported improved conservation for many other species.
A stocktake of where Australia’s havens are, what native mammal species are in them, and where future havens need to go to prevent further extinctions has been released by the Threatened Species Recovery Hub.
Boodies used to occur across two-thirds of Australia, but now only exist within havens. Image: Hugh McGregor / Arid Recovery
Professor Sarah Legge from the University of Queensland led the team of 28 scientists and conservation managers from universities, government conservation agencies and NGOs, who collaborated to undertake the audit.
“Predation by feral cats and foxes is the main reason that Australia has the worst mammal extinction record over the last 250 years,’ said Prof Legge.
“At least 80 Australian islands are naturally cat- and fox-free havens which prevented extinctions.
“For example, the greater stick-nest rat became extinct on mainland Australia, but survived on the Franklin Islands off South Australia, which were not reached by foxes or cats.
“Since the 1980’s additional havens have been created in Australia by eradicating feral animals from islands or from within large fenced areas on the mainland.
Woylies are found in seven fenced havens and on three island havens. Nationally woylies have declined from over 200,000 to less than 20,000 in the last 15 years. Predation by foxes and cats is considered the major cause. Once widespread across southern Australia, outside havens, there are now only three small wild populations in Western Australia remaining. Image: Australian Wildlife Conservancy
“Threatened animals have then been moved to these havens to put them out of reach of introduced predators.
“We now have 101 island havens covering 2152 km2 and 17 fenced havens covering 346 km2.
“A key finding of our review was that while more than half of the mammal species in Australia that are vulnerable to cats and foxes have the protection of being in a haven, 29 species are not yet in a single haven.”
According to Dr Jeremy Ringma, a lead researcher on the project, if we want to prevent future extinctions we need to get more strategic about where new havens are located, and which species go into them.
“The 11 most recently created havens have not added any new species to the haven network,” said Dr Ringma.
“Protection is also uneven. Woylies are now found in 10 havens, but the central rock rat, the Australian mammal at greatest risk of extinction in the next 20 years, is not protected in a single haven.
“Havens are being created by a diverse range of groups, including local and state governments, non-government groups and even private individuals.
“This diversity brings resilience to the growing network, but means that the network growth isn’t always optimal when viewed at a national scale.”
This graph shows the Australian mammals that are most vulnerable to foxes and cats and how many populations they have in havens. At the top, the pale field rat is found in over 30 havens. At the bottom, many species are found in no havens. Image: Threatened Species Recovery Hub
Dr Michael Bode from QUT said that to prevent future mammal extinctions we have to increase national collaboration and coordination and be more strategic about where new havens are created.
“We have identified where new havens need to go to get every threatened mammal species that is vulnerable to predation by cats and foxes into at least one haven,” said Dr Bode.
“If we put havens in the right places, we can achieve this with just 12 new havens.
“With 39 new havens, we could protect at least three populations of every threatened predator-susceptible native mammal species.”
Prof Legge concluded, “Cat- and fox-free havens cover tiny fractions of the original distributions of our native species.
“Longer term, we are still seeking ways of reducing fox and cat impacts across the landscape so that native mammals can be restored at bigger scales.
“Until then, cat- and fox-free havens will continue to be a critical tool in preventing extinctions.”
Dr Sally Box, Australia’s Threatened Species Commissioner, welcomed the research and said that understanding where safe havens are needed and identifying species that require protection will be vital for avoiding future extinctions.
“The Australian Government’s Threatened Species Strategy recognises the important role that islands and mainland safe havens play in the fight against extinction”, said Dr Box.
“This science is building a clearer picture of where best to create safe havens that deliver exceptional conservation benefits and protect a wide range of species.”
This map shows existing and planned havens as circles. In order to get every mammal that is vulnerable to cats and foxes into at least one haven, new havens should be prioritised for the 12 regions highlighted. Image: Threatened Species Recovery Hub
The research was undertaken by the Threatened Species Recovery Hub of the Australian Government’s National Environmental Science Program, in collaboration with government and non-government conservation agencies.
It has been published in Wildlife Research, Nature Ecology and Evolution, and Conservation Letters.
The Hub is a collaboration of 10 leading Australian universities and the Australian Wildlife Conservancy to undertake research to support the recovery of Australia’s threatened species.
Above image: The first stage of Australian Wildlife Conservancy’s Newhaven Sanctuary nearing completion in Central Australia. Once all stages are complete, Newhaven Sanctuary will be a 650 square kilometres (65,000 hectares) cat- and fox-free haven for wildlife. Image: Australian Wildlife Conservancy
Stop Wasteful Water Infrastructure Subsidies For MDB – Study
March 6th, 2019: ANUA study from ANU has found billions of dollars are being wasted in water recovery subsidies to increase irrigation efficiency across the Murray-Darling Basin.
The Australian Government estimates $3.5 billion in subsidised on- and off-farm water infrastructure has achieved some 700 gigalitres per year increases to stream and river flows across the Murray-Darling Basin. A gigalitre (GL) equals a billion litres.
Based on a calculation from a range of estimates, the ANU study found the subsidised water infrastructure may have only delivered 70 GL/year increases to stream and river flows - 630 GL/year less than the Government's estimate.
Professor John Williams, one of the researchers, said 630 GL is more water than is in Sydney Harbour.
"Simply put, without independent and comprehensive water accounting, including what is happening to return flows and the effects of multi-billion dollar subsidies for irrigation infrastructure on stream flows, expect more fish kills, a continuing environmental crisis, and no peace in the Murray-Darling Basin," said Professor Williams from the Centre for Water Economics, Environment & Policy at ANU.
"The Government should halt any further subsidies until their water accounting adds up properly.
"These subsidies should not resume until it can be scientifically determined by how much they increase net stream and river flows, if at all, and at what cost. This requires comprehensive water accounting that was promised in 2004 by Australian governments, that still hasn't been delivered.
"Our study has undergone a comprehensive peer-review process and our findings marry up very well with those in the recent Royal Commission report and the Australian Academy of Science report - we are all singing from the same songbook."
Co-researcher Professor Quentin Grafton said their analysis showed the average cost of water recovery for infrastructure subsidies could be as much as $50 million per GL returned to the Murray-Darling Basin every year.
"We calculate that the actual average cost of increasing stream and river flows from subsidies to increase irrigation efficiency infrastructure in the Murray-Darling Basin could be 10 times more expensive than what is estimated by the Australian Government and 25 times more expensive per litre of water recovered than buying back water entitlements from willing sellers," Professor Grafton said.
"There is too much uncertainty about the actual effect on return flows from increases in irrigation efficiency in the Murray-Darling Basin," Professor Grafton said.
"We acknowledge that there is uncertainty in our own estimates as well, but it only strengthens the case for the long-promised, but never delivered, comprehensive water accounting system to be set up for the Murray-Darling Basin.
"When there is published evidence in peer-reviewed scientific journals of deterioration of key aspects of the ecology in the Basin, ongoing failures of water reform, and misguided policies that are not increasing stream flows, the Australian Government needs to sit up and pay attention and actually deliver what was promised in the Basin Plan.
"There is an urgent need, especially given the drought and the mismanagement of water demonstrated by the Menindee fish kill, to have a much better understanding of where water is, how it is being used, and how we can best recover water to ensure the long-term sustainability of communities, agriculture and the environment in the Basin. Without it, we are flying blind and will not deliver on the key objects of the Water Act."
The peer-review study is published in Australasian Journal of Water Resources.
Missing in action: possible effects of water recovery on stream and river flows in the Murray–Darling Basin, AustraliaJohn Williams & R. Quentin Grafton. Received 14 Jul 2018, Accepted 28 Jan 2019, Published online: 04 Mar 2019
Hume Dam is a major dam across the Murray River - photo by Tim J Keegan - Flickr
March 6th, 2019: ANU
A study from ANU has found billions of dollars are being wasted in water recovery subsidies to increase irrigation efficiency across the Murray-Darling Basin.
The Australian Government estimates $3.5 billion in subsidised on- and off-farm water infrastructure has achieved some 700 gigalitres per year increases to stream and river flows across the Murray-Darling Basin. A gigalitre (GL) equals a billion litres.
Based on a calculation from a range of estimates, the ANU study found the subsidised water infrastructure may have only delivered 70 GL/year increases to stream and river flows - 630 GL/year less than the Government's estimate.
Professor John Williams, one of the researchers, said 630 GL is more water than is in Sydney Harbour.
"Simply put, without independent and comprehensive water accounting, including what is happening to return flows and the effects of multi-billion dollar subsidies for irrigation infrastructure on stream flows, expect more fish kills, a continuing environmental crisis, and no peace in the Murray-Darling Basin," said Professor Williams from the Centre for Water Economics, Environment & Policy at ANU.
"The Government should halt any further subsidies until their water accounting adds up properly.
"These subsidies should not resume until it can be scientifically determined by how much they increase net stream and river flows, if at all, and at what cost. This requires comprehensive water accounting that was promised in 2004 by Australian governments, that still hasn't been delivered.
"Our study has undergone a comprehensive peer-review process and our findings marry up very well with those in the recent Royal Commission report and the Australian Academy of Science report - we are all singing from the same songbook."
Co-researcher Professor Quentin Grafton said their analysis showed the average cost of water recovery for infrastructure subsidies could be as much as $50 million per GL returned to the Murray-Darling Basin every year.
"We calculate that the actual average cost of increasing stream and river flows from subsidies to increase irrigation efficiency infrastructure in the Murray-Darling Basin could be 10 times more expensive than what is estimated by the Australian Government and 25 times more expensive per litre of water recovered than buying back water entitlements from willing sellers," Professor Grafton said.
"There is too much uncertainty about the actual effect on return flows from increases in irrigation efficiency in the Murray-Darling Basin," Professor Grafton said.
"We acknowledge that there is uncertainty in our own estimates as well, but it only strengthens the case for the long-promised, but never delivered, comprehensive water accounting system to be set up for the Murray-Darling Basin.
"When there is published evidence in peer-reviewed scientific journals of deterioration of key aspects of the ecology in the Basin, ongoing failures of water reform, and misguided policies that are not increasing stream flows, the Australian Government needs to sit up and pay attention and actually deliver what was promised in the Basin Plan.
"There is an urgent need, especially given the drought and the mismanagement of water demonstrated by the Menindee fish kill, to have a much better understanding of where water is, how it is being used, and how we can best recover water to ensure the long-term sustainability of communities, agriculture and the environment in the Basin. Without it, we are flying blind and will not deliver on the key objects of the Water Act."
The peer-review study is published in Australasian Journal of Water Resources.
Missing in action: possible effects of water recovery on stream and river flows in the Murray–Darling Basin, Australia
John Williams & R. Quentin Grafton. Received 14 Jul 2018, Accepted 28 Jan 2019, Published online: 04 Mar 2019
Hume Dam is a major dam across the Murray River - photo by Tim J Keegan - Flickr
Culling Noisy Miners Fails In NSW Trial, Study
Tuesday, March 5th, 2019The noisy miner is a threat to many other bird species, but culling them is no solution, according to new research by the Threatened Species Recovery Hub of the National Environmental Science Program.
Lead researcher Richard Beggs from the Australian National University said that noisy miner numbers are now greater than before Europeans arrived in Australia, and on top of the loss of 80% of southern temperate woodlands, this is having a devastating impact on many other species of woodland birds.
Noisy Miner. Land clearing for agriculture has suited this native honey eater, and numbers are now higher than prior to European arrival. They work in groups to drive other birds out of their territory. Photo: Pete Richman CC BY 2.0 Flickr
“The shrubby understory has also been lost from most remaining woodland areas due to things like grazing. This has created the perfect conditions for this aggressive native honeyeater,” said Mr Beggs, a PhD Candidate at the Fenner School of Environment and Society.
“Noisy miners work together to defend their territory and drive other birds out of their habitat.
“It is such a problem for many species of woodland birds already threatened by habitat loss, that noisy miner aggression is now listed as a Key Threatening Process under Australian environmental law.
“Culling may seem an obvious solution, but before investing precious conservation resources into this activity it is important to test if it will work.
The crested shrike-tit is one of many woodland bird species that is aggressively driven away from open woodland habitat by groups of noisy miners. Photo: JJ Harrison CC BY SA 4.0 Wikimedia Commons
“We used a licensed shooter to cull all noisy miners in eight areas of woodland on farmland between Gundagai and Junee in New South Wales, that totalled 208 ha.
“We checked that the noisy miners were completely removed from the sites using a 45-minute playback of a variety of noisy miner calls until there was no response.
“We twice removed all noisy miners from all eight sites, but each cull created a ‘vacuum effect’. Noisy miners from surrounding areas simply moved into the area after the culling stopped.
“Monitoring took place before and for 12 months after culling. Before the culls we counted 510 noisy miners across the sites, and after the culls there were 512.
The red-capped robin is one of many woodland bird species that is aggressively driven away from open woodland habitat by groups of noisy miners. Photo: Patrick Kavanagh CC BY 2.0 Wikimedia Commons
“This is clear evidence that culling noisy miners doesn’t work in this particular landscape.
“The result was unexpected, as noisy miners are generally thought to have a small home range and do not travel very far.
To a community grappling with what to do about the noisy miner, research showing culling to be ineffective is important news. Attention must now move to other approaches to help threatened woodland birds to cope with the pressure of noisy miners.
“Restoring the understory vegetation that is important to so many bird species, calls for more investigation as a potential solution,” said Mr Beggs.
Researcher Richard Beggs installing monitoring cameras. Photo: Richard Beggs
The research has been published in Ecological Applications.
Tuesday, March 5th, 2019
The noisy miner is a threat to many other bird species, but culling them is no solution, according to new research by the Threatened Species Recovery Hub of the National Environmental Science Program.
Lead researcher Richard Beggs from the Australian National University said that noisy miner numbers are now greater than before Europeans arrived in Australia, and on top of the loss of 80% of southern temperate woodlands, this is having a devastating impact on many other species of woodland birds.
Noisy Miner. Land clearing for agriculture has suited this native honey eater, and numbers are now higher than prior to European arrival. They work in groups to drive other birds out of their territory. Photo: Pete Richman CC BY 2.0 Flickr
“The shrubby understory has also been lost from most remaining woodland areas due to things like grazing. This has created the perfect conditions for this aggressive native honeyeater,” said Mr Beggs, a PhD Candidate at the Fenner School of Environment and Society.
“Noisy miners work together to defend their territory and drive other birds out of their habitat.
“It is such a problem for many species of woodland birds already threatened by habitat loss, that noisy miner aggression is now listed as a Key Threatening Process under Australian environmental law.
“Culling may seem an obvious solution, but before investing precious conservation resources into this activity it is important to test if it will work.
The crested shrike-tit is one of many woodland bird species that is aggressively driven away from open woodland habitat by groups of noisy miners. Photo: JJ Harrison CC BY SA 4.0 Wikimedia Commons
“We used a licensed shooter to cull all noisy miners in eight areas of woodland on farmland between Gundagai and Junee in New South Wales, that totalled 208 ha.
“We checked that the noisy miners were completely removed from the sites using a 45-minute playback of a variety of noisy miner calls until there was no response.
“We twice removed all noisy miners from all eight sites, but each cull created a ‘vacuum effect’. Noisy miners from surrounding areas simply moved into the area after the culling stopped.
“Monitoring took place before and for 12 months after culling. Before the culls we counted 510 noisy miners across the sites, and after the culls there were 512.
The red-capped robin is one of many woodland bird species that is aggressively driven away from open woodland habitat by groups of noisy miners. Photo: Patrick Kavanagh CC BY 2.0 Wikimedia Commons
“This is clear evidence that culling noisy miners doesn’t work in this particular landscape.
“The result was unexpected, as noisy miners are generally thought to have a small home range and do not travel very far.
To a community grappling with what to do about the noisy miner, research showing culling to be ineffective is important news. Attention must now move to other approaches to help threatened woodland birds to cope with the pressure of noisy miners.
“Restoring the understory vegetation that is important to so many bird species, calls for more investigation as a potential solution,” said Mr Beggs.
Researcher Richard Beggs installing monitoring cameras. Photo: Richard Beggs
The research has been published in Ecological Applications.
How Did Plants Conquer Land?
March 5, 2019: ANUAn international study has found a drought alarm system that first appeared in freshwater algae may have enabled plants to move from water to land more than 450 million years ago - a big evolutionary step that led to the emergence of land animals, including humans.
Professor Barry Pogson, from The Australian National University (ANU) and one of the study's senior researchers, said humans and other animals would not have evolved if there were no plants on land because they need oxygen to breathe.
"Land plants play that vital role of releasing oxygen into the atmosphere," said Professor Pogson from the ANU Research School of Biology.
Professor Pogson said the team had found the drought alarm system in all land plants they examined.
Members of Professor Barry Pogson's team at ANU, including Dr. Kai Xun Chan (second from left), in the lab. Image credit: Stuart Hay, ANU
"We first found this alarm system in a model laboratory plant a few years ago, but the significance of this most recent discovery is that we have been able to trace this system back to a time before plants were on land," he said.
The team's experiments on species of land plants and algae indicate this alarm system helps plant species protect against drought by triggering the closure of stomata, which are pores that release water vapor and take in carbon dioxide.
The other two senior researchers are Associate Professor Zhonghua Chen from Western Sydney University in Australia and Professor Doug Soltis from Florida Museum of Natural History in the US.
Associate Professor Chen said the alarm system, which he describes as a molecular signalling and protection system, was first assembled in the ancestor algae about 580 million years ago before being passed on to land plants.
"In plants, the same molecular signalling and protection system found in this algae appears to have played a really important role in helping plants endure drought and other harsh conditions as they colonised land," he said.
Professor Soltis said the system that evolved in algae was like building blocks which were used to help make land plants tolerant to drought.
"The same system in the algae did not protect against drought as the algae were in water - the system likely served another important purpose in the survival of those species," he said.
Professor Pogson and ANU colleagues, including co-lead author Dr Kai Xun Chan, are working on helping plants to survive longer in drought conditions, which could eventually benefit major food crops such as barley, rice and wheat.
"Intriguingly, this warning and protection system is activated by a part of the plant and algal cell called chloroplasts, which perform photosynthesis," said Dr Chan from the ANU Research School of Biology.
"This raises new questions on how photosynthesis and chloroplasts might have shaped the evolution of plants. We will capitalise on the widespread functionality of this warning and protection system in all land plants to try to find a way to engineer drought tolerant crops."
The research is published in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America (PNAS): www.pnas.org/cgi/doi/10.1073/pnas.1812092116
March 5, 2019: ANU
An international study has found a drought alarm system that first appeared in freshwater algae may have enabled plants to move from water to land more than 450 million years ago - a big evolutionary step that led to the emergence of land animals, including humans.
Professor Barry Pogson, from The Australian National University (ANU) and one of the study's senior researchers, said humans and other animals would not have evolved if there were no plants on land because they need oxygen to breathe.
"Land plants play that vital role of releasing oxygen into the atmosphere," said Professor Pogson from the ANU Research School of Biology.
Professor Pogson said the team had found the drought alarm system in all land plants they examined.
Members of Professor Barry Pogson's team at ANU, including Dr. Kai Xun Chan (second from left), in the lab. Image credit: Stuart Hay, ANU
"We first found this alarm system in a model laboratory plant a few years ago, but the significance of this most recent discovery is that we have been able to trace this system back to a time before plants were on land," he said.
The team's experiments on species of land plants and algae indicate this alarm system helps plant species protect against drought by triggering the closure of stomata, which are pores that release water vapor and take in carbon dioxide.
The other two senior researchers are Associate Professor Zhonghua Chen from Western Sydney University in Australia and Professor Doug Soltis from Florida Museum of Natural History in the US.
Associate Professor Chen said the alarm system, which he describes as a molecular signalling and protection system, was first assembled in the ancestor algae about 580 million years ago before being passed on to land plants.
"In plants, the same molecular signalling and protection system found in this algae appears to have played a really important role in helping plants endure drought and other harsh conditions as they colonised land," he said.
Professor Soltis said the system that evolved in algae was like building blocks which were used to help make land plants tolerant to drought.
"The same system in the algae did not protect against drought as the algae were in water - the system likely served another important purpose in the survival of those species," he said.
Professor Pogson and ANU colleagues, including co-lead author Dr Kai Xun Chan, are working on helping plants to survive longer in drought conditions, which could eventually benefit major food crops such as barley, rice and wheat.
"Intriguingly, this warning and protection system is activated by a part of the plant and algal cell called chloroplasts, which perform photosynthesis," said Dr Chan from the ANU Research School of Biology.
"This raises new questions on how photosynthesis and chloroplasts might have shaped the evolution of plants. We will capitalise on the widespread functionality of this warning and protection system in all land plants to try to find a way to engineer drought tolerant crops."
The research is published in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America (PNAS): www.pnas.org/cgi/doi/10.1073/pnas.1812092116
PITTWATER YHA OFFERS FREE BEDS FOR GREEN HEARTS
This May, Pittwater YHA opens its doors to green-hearted and green-thumbed guests who'll save the gorgeous Ku-ring-gai Chase National Park from imminent asparagus fern invasion. Yes, seriously.
WHAT IS IT?Bush Regeneration sees eco-conscious, kind hearted humans restore and rehabilitate the gorgeous, sprawling Aussie bush from its weed-infested, degraded state into a healthy, thriving plant community, which will prosper and delight forevermore. Far from just weed removal; Regenerators focus on habitat, drainage, weed sources and establishing native communities. These are big words which probably don’t make much sense – but we have an interactive learning opportunity for you!
WHERE IS IT?Ku-ring-gai Chase National Park, Sydney’s protected north coast, is home to rock engravings, red ochre rock paintings, the fuzziest wildlife you ever did see and the most breathtaking views a Sydneysider or visitor could comprehend; and is currently under threat from invasive asparagus fern; which needs removing. Who knew your Aunty’s fave veggie could be so aggressive?
ALRIGHT - SIGN ME UP!The blissed-out, babbling-brooked, spectacular-viewed, fresh-aired oasis that is our Pittwater YHA, alongside the Northern Beaches Council, are offering you fine green-thumbed and hearted folk the opportunity to volunteer alongside professional Regenerators for a weekend of Pittwater Restoration from May 3 - 5, 2019. Spend two mornings of tending to the gorgeous surrounds and you’ll be rewarded with two nights’ accommodation, two days of meals (morning teas, BBQ lunches and evening dinners) and kayak use throughout your stay. Plus, you’ll be chuffed with yourself for doing your bit for the planet and our futures.
Along with your towels, two sheets, a pillowcase and, sturdy shoes, sunscreen and your breakfasts; you’ll need a $20 contribution for the weekend. For all the T&Cs; head to Pittwater YHA, shoot them an email (Subject: 'Bush Regeneration Weekend') or give them a ring on (02 9999-5748) – the only thing those guys love more than a regenerated bushland is chatting to ladies and gentleman who are keen on the idea!
This May, Pittwater YHA opens its doors to green-hearted and green-thumbed guests who'll save the gorgeous Ku-ring-gai Chase National Park from imminent asparagus fern invasion. Yes, seriously.
WHAT IS IT?
Bush Regeneration sees eco-conscious, kind hearted humans restore and rehabilitate the gorgeous, sprawling Aussie bush from its weed-infested, degraded state into a healthy, thriving plant community, which will prosper and delight forevermore. Far from just weed removal; Regenerators focus on habitat, drainage, weed sources and establishing native communities. These are big words which probably don’t make much sense – but we have an interactive learning opportunity for you!
WHERE IS IT?
Ku-ring-gai Chase National Park, Sydney’s protected north coast, is home to rock engravings, red ochre rock paintings, the fuzziest wildlife you ever did see and the most breathtaking views a Sydneysider or visitor could comprehend; and is currently under threat from invasive asparagus fern; which needs removing. Who knew your Aunty’s fave veggie could be so aggressive?
ALRIGHT - SIGN ME UP!
The blissed-out, babbling-brooked, spectacular-viewed, fresh-aired oasis that is our Pittwater YHA, alongside the Northern Beaches Council, are offering you fine green-thumbed and hearted folk the opportunity to volunteer alongside professional Regenerators for a weekend of Pittwater Restoration from May 3 - 5, 2019. Spend two mornings of tending to the gorgeous surrounds and you’ll be rewarded with two nights’ accommodation, two days of meals (morning teas, BBQ lunches and evening dinners) and kayak use throughout your stay. Plus, you’ll be chuffed with yourself for doing your bit for the planet and our futures.
Along with your towels, two sheets, a pillowcase and, sturdy shoes, sunscreen and your breakfasts; you’ll need a $20 contribution for the weekend. For all the T&Cs; head to Pittwater YHA, shoot them an email (Subject: 'Bush Regeneration Weekend') or give them a ring on (02 9999-5748) – the only thing those guys love more than a regenerated bushland is chatting to ladies and gentleman who are keen on the idea!
Archie's Pittwater Clean Up
My name is Archie Mandin
I am a Seabin Ambassador, I started this campaign because I want to take a stand against ocean plastics!
My goal is to raise enough money to bring a minimum of 20 Seabins to Pittwater NSW as I want to give The Northern Beaches the opportunity to reduce its plastic pollution impact on the ocean. Its amazing how much accidental rubbish comes down our creeks and into our waterways
I need your help to raise money to buy the Seabins a revolutionary ocean cleaning technology which is essentially a floating rubbish bin that operates 24/7 catching all floating debris in the water.
The Seabin helps clean the ocean of floating debris which in turn creates cleaner oceans and we all benefit from this in one way or another. I mean, who really wants to swim in pollution? Not me that’s for sure!
Did you know that 300 million tons of plastic are produced in the world every year, half of which is for single use products, from this more than 8 million tons of plastic is dumped into our oceans every year. We need to do something about it and now with the purchase of a Seabin we can all participate and make a difference!
Join me and my campaign to help ensure cleaner oceans!
What’s a Seabin? The Seabin is a floating rubbish bin that is located in the water at marinas, docks, yacht clubs and commercial ports.
The Seabin can catch an average of 3.9kgs of floating debris per day which adds up to 1.4 tons per year. (depending on weather conditions and debris volumes) The Seabins is catching large plastic bags, bottles, plastic straws, coffee cups, food wrappers, surface oils and micro plastics down to 2 mm small.
How can a Seabin contribute to cleaner oceans?The Seabin contributes to cleaner oceans by removing 1.4 tons of floating debris per unit per year. The location of the Seabin in marinas is ideal and where it matters most, close to the source of entry for floating debris. Ports and Marinas are perfect locations to stop floating debris from entering the open ocean and ocean plastics are also brought in by wind and currents.
Are the Seabins a danger to marine life?The fish According to the team at Seabin, stay away from the surface of the water where the Seabin sucks in the water. They are deterred by the force of the water current. If there are swarms of jellyfish or bait fish it is recommended that the Seabins are turned off until the swarms pass. If a fish was to accidentally go into the Seabin, it would be caught in the Seabin and stay submerged in water until the marina staff retrieve the filter and throw the fish still alive back into the water.
How does it work? Water is sucked in from the surface and passes through a catch bag inside the Seabin, with a submersible water pump capable of displacing 25.000 LPH (liters per hour). The water is then pumped back into the marina leaving litter and debris trapped in the catch bag to be disposed of properly.
Who is responsible for the Seabin?This is the best part of it all, the marina will be the one responsible for the upkeep of the Seabins and also they will be paying for the energy consumption of the Seabin which is around $2 - $3 a day.
The marina enjoys a cleaner marina and the rest of us and the marine life enjoy cleaner oceans with less floating debris polluting our oceans!
Seabins part of a whole solutionSeabins whole solution is Technology, Education, Science, Research and Community. The reason for this is that Technology alone is not the solution to stopping ocean plastics, education is the real solution.
Great! Can our local community be involved also?Yes! The team at Seabin have interactive programs and lessons designed for schools, community and youth to interact with the Seabins and have over 2000 school students engaged around the world, this is something that we can do locally also with support from the team at Seabin Project.
What will we be doing if we participate in these programs?You would be joining an international community contributing important data and feedback on ocean plastics to the Seabin central data base. Renowned scientists, universities and environmental agencies are all a part of the programs also.
The lessons range from identifying ocean plastics to data collection of what the Seabins are catching weekly. The data collection is a very easy activity and where we can all see the measurable impact of debris the Seabins are taking out of the water in all weather conditions.
It’s as simple as counting how many plastic bags, plastic particles, food wrappers and then noting it down on a spreadsheet or app. Weather conditions and location information is also entered into the data base.
How can you help our campaign and make a difference in the world?Every contribution to this crowdfunding campaign helps, be it $1 or $50 dollars, it all adds up and bring us closer to our goal.
Even if you cannot afford a donation, please help by sharing this campaign with your friends and family on social media. The more people that know about the campaign the better!
Thanks everyone for taking the time to check out our campaign!
FOR CLEANER OCEANS!
Archie
FAQS SHEET
Seabin Project FAQs
Q: Can someone pay out the crowdfunding campaign goal?A: Yes! We need help! The more money we can raise, the more Seabins we can buy.
Q: Why crowdfund a Seabin?A: Until now, the Seabins were not for the everyday person to purchase because marinas ports and yacht clubs are the target market for Seabin Group. This is a way where everyday people can give something back to the oceans.
Q: How do Seabins work in tidal areas?A: Seabins at present are designed for floating docks and pontoons. The Seabins move up and down with the tide on the floating dock.
Q. How are the pumps run? A. The pumps are currently electric, and around $2-$3 a day to run.
Q: When are the Seabins available?A: Depending on your countries location, Seabins will be available Feb 2019.
Q: Do any fish get sucked into the Seabins? What about smaller marine life?A: There is a possibility of fish to enter the Seabins, however in the last 2 years of development, the Seabins have only caught a handful of small bait fish. Most of which have been thrown back into the water alive. The fish simply stay away from the flow of water entering the Seabin and with the current fine tuning of the Seabin, the risk is now minimal.
Q: I don’t have any money to donate, how can I help?A: Don’t worry! Your amazing anyways and thanks for even contacting us. We need help to share this project around with any media we can. Social media platforms like Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, websites, bloggers. Also with newspapers, magazines, tv, radio and journalists. Also friends and family!
My name is Archie Mandin
I am a Seabin Ambassador, I started this campaign because I want to take a stand against ocean plastics!
My goal is to raise enough money to bring a minimum of 20 Seabins to Pittwater NSW as I want to give The Northern Beaches the opportunity to reduce its plastic pollution impact on the ocean. Its amazing how much accidental rubbish comes down our creeks and into our waterways
I need your help to raise money to buy the Seabins a revolutionary ocean cleaning technology which is essentially a floating rubbish bin that operates 24/7 catching all floating debris in the water.
The Seabin helps clean the ocean of floating debris which in turn creates cleaner oceans and we all benefit from this in one way or another. I mean, who really wants to swim in pollution? Not me that’s for sure!
Did you know that 300 million tons of plastic are produced in the world every year, half of which is for single use products, from this more than 8 million tons of plastic is dumped into our oceans every year. We need to do something about it and now with the purchase of a Seabin we can all participate and make a difference!
Join me and my campaign to help ensure cleaner oceans!
What’s a Seabin?
The Seabin is a floating rubbish bin that is located in the water at marinas, docks, yacht clubs and commercial ports.
The Seabin can catch an average of 3.9kgs of floating debris per day which adds up to 1.4 tons per year. (depending on weather conditions and debris volumes) The Seabins is catching large plastic bags, bottles, plastic straws, coffee cups, food wrappers, surface oils and micro plastics down to 2 mm small.
How can a Seabin contribute to cleaner oceans?
The Seabin contributes to cleaner oceans by removing 1.4 tons of floating debris per unit per year. The location of the Seabin in marinas is ideal and where it matters most, close to the source of entry for floating debris. Ports and Marinas are perfect locations to stop floating debris from entering the open ocean and ocean plastics are also brought in by wind and currents.
Are the Seabins a danger to marine life?
The fish According to the team at Seabin, stay away from the surface of the water where the Seabin sucks in the water. They are deterred by the force of the water current. If there are swarms of jellyfish or bait fish it is recommended that the Seabins are turned off until the swarms pass. If a fish was to accidentally go into the Seabin, it would be caught in the Seabin and stay submerged in water until the marina staff retrieve the filter and throw the fish still alive back into the water.
How does it work?
Water is sucked in from the surface and passes through a catch bag inside the Seabin, with a submersible water pump capable of displacing 25.000 LPH (liters per hour). The water is then pumped back into the marina leaving litter and debris trapped in the catch bag to be disposed of properly.
Who is responsible for the Seabin?
This is the best part of it all, the marina will be the one responsible for the upkeep of the Seabins and also they will be paying for the energy consumption of the Seabin which is around $2 - $3 a day.
The marina enjoys a cleaner marina and the rest of us and the marine life enjoy cleaner oceans with less floating debris polluting our oceans!
Seabins part of a whole solution
Seabins whole solution is Technology, Education, Science, Research and Community. The reason for this is that Technology alone is not the solution to stopping ocean plastics, education is the real solution.
Great! Can our local community be involved also?
Yes! The team at Seabin have interactive programs and lessons designed for schools, community and youth to interact with the Seabins and have over 2000 school students engaged around the world, this is something that we can do locally also with support from the team at Seabin Project.
What will we be doing if we participate in these programs?
You would be joining an international community contributing important data and feedback on ocean plastics to the Seabin central data base. Renowned scientists, universities and environmental agencies are all a part of the programs also.
The lessons range from identifying ocean plastics to data collection of what the Seabins are catching weekly. The data collection is a very easy activity and where we can all see the measurable impact of debris the Seabins are taking out of the water in all weather conditions.
It’s as simple as counting how many plastic bags, plastic particles, food wrappers and then noting it down on a spreadsheet or app. Weather conditions and location information is also entered into the data base.
How can you help our campaign and make a difference in the world?
Every contribution to this crowdfunding campaign helps, be it $1 or $50 dollars, it all adds up and bring us closer to our goal.
Even if you cannot afford a donation, please help by sharing this campaign with your friends and family on social media. The more people that know about the campaign the better!
Thanks everyone for taking the time to check out our campaign!
FOR CLEANER OCEANS!
Archie
FAQS SHEET
Seabin Project FAQs
Q: Can someone pay out the crowdfunding campaign goal?
A: Yes! We need help! The more money we can raise, the more Seabins we can buy.
Q: Why crowdfund a Seabin?
A: Until now, the Seabins were not for the everyday person to purchase because marinas ports and yacht clubs are the target market for Seabin Group. This is a way where everyday people can give something back to the oceans.
Q: How do Seabins work in tidal areas?
A: Seabins at present are designed for floating docks and pontoons. The Seabins move up and down with the tide on the floating dock.
Q. How are the pumps run?
A. The pumps are currently electric, and around $2-$3 a day to run.
Q: When are the Seabins available?
A: Depending on your countries location, Seabins will be available Feb 2019.
Q: Do any fish get sucked into the Seabins? What about smaller marine life?
A: There is a possibility of fish to enter the Seabins, however in the last 2 years of development, the Seabins have only caught a handful of small bait fish. Most of which have been thrown back into the water alive. The fish simply stay away from the flow of water entering the Seabin and with the current fine tuning of the Seabin, the risk is now minimal.
Q: I don’t have any money to donate, how can I help?
A: Don’t worry! Your amazing anyways and thanks for even contacting us. We need help to share this project around with any media we can. Social media platforms like Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, websites, bloggers. Also with newspapers, magazines, tv, radio and journalists. Also friends and family!
HIV Remission Achieved In Second Patient
March 5, 2019: University College London
A second person has experienced sustained remission from HIV-1 after ceasing treatment, reports a paper led by researchers at UCL and Imperial College London.
The case report, published in Nature and carried out with partners at the University of Cambridge and the University of Oxford, comes ten years after the first such case, known as the 'Berlin Patient.'
Both patients were treated with stem cell transplants from donors carrying a genetic mutation that prevents expression of an HIV receptor CCR5.
The subject of the new study has been in remission for 18 months after his antiretroviral therapy (ARV) was discontinued. The authors say it is too early to say with certainty that he has been cured of HIV, and will continue to monitor his condition.
"At the moment the only way to treat HIV is with medications that suppress the virus, which people need to take for their entire lives, posing a particular challenge in developing countries," said the study's lead author, Professor Ravindra Gupta (UCL, UCLH and University of Cambridge).
"Finding a way to eliminate the virus entirely is an urgent global priority, but is particularly difficult because the virus integrates into the white blood cells of its host."
Close to 37 million people are living with HIV worldwide, but only 59% are receiving ARV, and drug-resistant HIV is a growing concern. Almost one million people die annually from HIV-related causes.
The report describes a male patient in the UK, who prefers to remain anonymous, and was diagnosed with HIV infection in 2003 and on antiretroviral therapy since 2012.
Later in 2012, he was diagnosed with advanced Hodgkin's Lymphoma. In addition to chemotherapy, he underwent a haematopoietic stem cell transplant from a donor with two copies of the CCR5Δ32 allele in 2016.
CCR5 is the most commonly used receptor by HIV-1. People who have two mutated copies of the CCR5 allele are resistant to the HIV-1 virus strain that uses this receptor, as the virus cannot enter host cells.
Chemotherapy can be effective against HIV as it kills cells that are dividing. Replacing immune cells with those that don't have the CCR5 receptor appears to be key in preventing HIV from rebounding after the treatment.
The transplant was relatively uncomplicated, but with some side effects including mild graft-versus-host disease, a complication of transplants wherein the donor immune cells attack the recipient's immune cells.
The patient remained on ARV for 16 months after the transplant, at which point the clinical team and the patient decided to interrupt ARV therapy to test if the patient was truly in HIV-1 remission.
Regular testing confirmed that the patient's viral load remained undetectable, and he has been in remission for 18 months since ceasing ARV therapy (35 months post-transplant). The patient's immune cells remain unable to express the CCR5 receptor.
He is only the second person documented to be in sustained remission without ARV. The first, the Berlin Patient, also received a stem cell transplant from a donor with two CCR5Δ32 alleles, but to treat leukaemia. Notable differences were that the Berlin Patient was given two transplants, and underwent total body irradiation, while the UK patient received just one transplant and less intensive chemotherapy.
Both patients experienced mild graft-versus-host disease, which may also have played a role in the loss of HIV-infected cells.
"By achieving remission in a second patient using a similar approach, we have shown that the Berlin Patient was not an anomaly, and that it really was the treatment approaches that eliminated HIV in these two people," said Professor Gupta.
The researchers caution that the approach is not appropriate as a standard HIV treatment due to the toxicity of chemotherapy, but it offers hope for new treatment strategies that might eliminate HIV altogether.
"Continuing our research, we need to understand if we could knock out this receptor in people with HIV, which may be possible with gene therapy," said Professor Gupta.
"The treatment we used was different from that used on the Berlin Patient, because it did not involve radiotherapy. Its effectiveness underlines the importance of developing new strategies based on preventing CCR5 expression," said co-author Dr Ian Gabriel (Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust).
"While it is too early to say with certainty that our patient is now cured of HIV, and doctors will continue to monitor his condition, the apparent success of haematopoietic stem cell transplantation offers hope in the search for a long-awaited cure for HIV/AIDS," said Professor Eduardo Olavarria (Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust and Imperial College London).
The research was funded by Wellcome, the Medical Research Council, the Foundation for AIDS Research, and National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Biomedical Research Centres at University College London Hospitals, Oxford, Cambridge and Imperial.
The research team is presenting the findings today (March 5) at the annual Conference on Retroviruses and Opportunistic Infections (CROI) in Seattle.
Ravindra K Gupta, Sultan Abdul-jawad, Laura E McCoy, Hoi Ping Mok, Dimitra Peppa, Maria Salgado, Javier Martinez-Picado, Monique Nijhuis, Annemarie M. J. Wensing, Helen Lee, Paul Grant, Eleni Nastouli, Jonathan Lambert, Matthew Pace, Fanny Salasc, Christopher Monit, Andrew Innes, Luke Muir, Laura Waters, John Frater, Andrew M. L. Lever, S. G. Edwards, Ian H. Gabriel & Eduardo Olavarria Ravindra K Gupta, Sultan Abdul-jawad, Laura E McCoy, Hoi Ping Mok, Dimitra Peppa, Maria Salgado, Javier Martinez-Picado, Monique Nijhuis, Annemarie M. J. Wensing, Helen Lee, Paul Grant, Eleni Nastouli, Jonathan Lambert, Matthew Pace, Fanny Salasc, Christopher Monit, Andrew Innes, Luke Muir, Laura Waters, John Frater, Andrew M. L. Lever, S. G. Edwards, Ian H. Gabriel & Eduardo Olavarria. HIV-1 remission following CCR5Δ32/Δ32 haematopoietic stem-cell transplantation.Nature, 2019 DOI: 10.1038/s41586-019-1027-4
Chemical Pollutants In The Home Degrade Fertility In Both Men And Dogs
March 4, 2019: University of Nottingham
New research by scientists at the University of Nottingham suggests that environmental contaminants found in the home and diet have the same adverse effects on male fertility in both humans and in domestic dogs.
There has been increasing concern over declining human male fertility in recent decades with studies showing a 50% global reduction in sperm quality in the past 80 years. A previous study by the Nottingham experts showed that sperm quality in domestic dogs has also sharply declined, raising the question of whether modern day chemicals in the home environment could be at least partly to blame.
In a new paper published in Scientific Reports, the Nottingham team set out to test the effects of two specific human-made chemicals namely the common plasticizer DEHP, widely abundant in the home (e.g. carpets, flooring, upholstery, clothes, wires, toys) and the persistent industrial chemical polychlorinated biphenyl 153, which although banned globally, remains widely detectable in the environment including food.
The researchers carried out identical experiments in both species using samples of sperm from donor men and stud dogs living in the same region of the UK. The results show that the chemicals, at concentrations relevant to environmental exposure, have the same damaging effect on sperm from both man and dog.
Leading the work, Associate Professor and Reader in Reproductive Biology at the School of Veterinary Medicine and Science, Richard Lea, said: "This new study supports our theory that the domestic dog is indeed a 'sentinel' or mirror for human male reproductive decline and our findings suggest that human-made chemicals that have been widely used in the home and working environment may be responsible for the fall in sperm quality reported in both man and dog that share the same environment."
"Our previous study in dogs showed that the chemical pollutants found in the sperm of adult dogs, and in some pet foods, had a detrimental effect on sperm function at the concentrations previously found in the male reproductive tract. This new study is the first to test the effect of two known environmental contaminants, DEHP and PCB153, on both dog and human sperm in vitro, in the same concentrations as found in vivo.
Rebecca Sumner, who carried out the experimental work as part of her PhD, said "In both cases and in both subjects, the effect was reduced sperm motility and increased fragmentation of DNA.
Dr Sumner added: "We know that when human sperm motility is poor, DNA fragmentation is increased and that human male infertility is linked to increased levels of DNA damage in sperm. We now believe this is the same in pet dogs because they live in the same domestic environment and are exposed to the same household contaminants. This means that dogs may be an effective model for future research into the effects of pollutants on declining fertility, particularly because external influences such as diet are more easily controlled than in humans."
Professor Gary England, Dean of the School of Veterinary Medicine and Science and Professor of Comparative Veterinary Reproduction said: "Since environmental pollutants largely reflect a Western way of life such as the effects of industry, the chemicals present in the environment are likely to depend on the location. An important area of future study is to determine how the region in which we live may effect sperm quality in both man and dog."
Rebecca N. Sumner, Mathew Tomlinson, Jim Craigon, Gary C. W. England, Richard G. Lea. Independent and combined effects of diethylhexyl phthalate and polychlorinated biphenyl 153 on sperm quality in the human and dog. Scientific Reports, 2019; 9 (1) DOI: 10.1038/s41598-019-39913-9
Scientists Levitate Particles With Sound To Find Out How They Cluster Together
March 5, 2019: University of Chicago
Scientists from the University of Chicago and the University of Bath used sound waves to levitate particles, revealing new insights about how materials cluster together in the absence of gravity -- principles which underlie everything from how molecules assemble to the very early stages of planet formation from space dust.
"Much of the universe is made up of particles assembling," said Heinrich Jaeger, the Sewell Avery Distinguished Service Professor of Physics, who co-authored a new study that appears in Nature Physics. "With acoustic levitation, we have a beautiful model system to study assembly at scales visible to the human eye, where we can track each particle with precision, and then relate the results to a wide range of often much more microscopic phenomena."
University of Chicago and the University of Bath scientists revealed new insights about how materials cluster together in the absence of gravity. Credit: Melody Lim
Jaeger's lab conducts innovative studies of the laws governing the interactions of particles -- which they've used to create a robotic gripper to pick up almost any object and to explain a long-standing physics mystery that lets you run across the surface of a pool filled with water and corn starch.
In this case, the team was interested in the shape of prototypical clusters that form when, starting from a single particle, more are added one by one. They used sound waves to levitate plastic particles in midair -- each about one millimeter in diameter, about the thickness of a penny -- and studied how these particles interact with each other as they formed clusters, broke up and then reassembling into different configurations.
When there are five particles or fewer, they found, the particles cluster densely in only one configuration. However, when there are at least six particles, there are a number of different shapes they could assemble into when brought together tightly.
By using high-speed cameras to track the levitated particles, the researchers were able to capture these various configurations. They found that groups of six particles can form three distinct compact shapes: parallelogram, chevron and triangle. Adding one more particle to make seven meant that particles clustered together in one of four shapes, which scientists termed a flower, a turtle, a tree or a boat.
"Six particles is the minimum needed to change between different shapes, which is where things get interesting," said co-first author Anton Souslov, then a UChicago postdoctoral researcher and now on the faculty at the University of Bath. "For us scientists, defying gravity to levitate dust also has this more fundamental interest of developing Earth-based experiments to understand how bodies in space like planets start to form." This would be the very earliest stages, the scientists added, when the future planet is just a clump of space dust perhaps a centimeter across -- before gravity starts to become a factor.
One unique aspect of the experiments is that the sound not only levitates the particles, but can also be used to affect how they interact as they float.
"A surprise was that by changing the sound wave frequency, we could manipulate the clusters and influence the shape that emerged," said graduate student Melody Lim, the first author on the paper. Modelling the physics behind such acoustic forces, which was done by Souslov and professor of physics Vincenzo Vitelli, gives scientists a new means to control the assembly process.
They found that rearranging the shapes often depends on one particle acting as a "hinge" and swinging around the others to reconfigure, which could be very useful in a range of potential applications.
The research team now intends to look at how acoustic levitation can bring together larger numbers of particles to assemble more complex structures.
Melody X. Lim, Anton Souslov, Vincenzo Vitelli, Heinrich M. Jaeger. Cluster formation by acoustic forces and active fluctuations in levitated granular matter. Nature Physics, 2019; DOI: 10.1038/s41567-019-0440-9
Exercise Can Improve Non-Motor Symptoms Of Parkinson's Disease
March 4, 2019
Exercise has potential to improve non-motor as well as motor symptoms of Parkinson's disease (PD), including cognitive function, report investigators in a review published in the Journal of Parkinson's Disease.
PD is a slowly progressive disorder that affects movement, muscle control, and balance. While traditionally regarded as a movement disorder, it is now known to be a heterogeneous multisystem disorder -- in recognition of the significant impact that non-motor symptoms have on the quality of life of individuals affected by PD. It is widely acknowledged that physical exercise improves motor symptoms such as tremor, gait disturbances, and postural instability. However, the effect of exercise on non-motor symptoms in PD, especially cognitive function, is less clear.
The number of older people with and without PD that experience cognitive impairment is steadily increasing worldwide. It is associated not only with a substantial rise in healthcare costs, but also affects the quality of life of both patients and relatives or carers. Up to 57% of patients suffering from PD develop mild cognitive impairment within five years of their initial diagnosis, and if they survive more than ten years, the majority will eventually develop dementia. The underlying neurophysiological mechanisms for cognitive decline in PD are not completely understood, but an accumulation of amyloid plaques, mitochondrial dysfunction, and neurotransmitter changes are all suggested to contribute.
A comprehensive literature review was conducted by investigators from the Institute of Movement and Neurosciences, German Sport University, Cologne, Germany, and the VasoActive Research Group, School of Health and Sport Sciences, University of the Sunshine Coast, Queensland, Australia. The studies reviewed included investigations of the effects of coordination exercise, resistance exercise, and aerobic exercise on domain-specific cognitive function in patients with PD. "Physical exercise is generally associated with increased cognitive function in older adults, but the effects in individuals suffering from PD are not known," explained lead investigator Tim Stuckenschneider, MA.
The researchers identified relevant studies published before March 2018. There were 11 studies included with a combined total of over five hundred patients with PD with a disease severity from stages 1 to 4 on the Hoehn & Yahr scale, which is used to describe the symptom progression of PD. In four studies, positive effects of exercise on cognition (memory, executive function, and global cognitive function) were shown with no negative effect of exercise on any cognitive domain. Furthermore, disease severity was generally improved by exercise interventions.
The investigators concluded that all modes of exercise are associated with improved cognitive function in individuals with PD, however, no clear picture of which exercise mode is most effective emerged as they may influence cognitive function differently. Aerobic exercise tended to improve memory best, but different forms of exercises such as treadmill training or stationary bike training may have different effects, although both are considered aerobic exercise. Future studies are needed that directly compare the effects of different exercise modes, as the number of high-quality research projects is still limited.
"The potential of exercise to improve motor and non-motor symptoms is promising and may help to decelerate disease progression in individuals affected by PD," observed Stuckenschneider. "Exercise therapy needs to be, and often already is, an essential part of therapy in individuals with PD. However, it is mostly used to treat motor symptoms. As part of a holistic therapy, the potential of exercise to maintain or improve non-motor symptoms such as cognitive function in individuals with PD needs to be acknowledged, and the most effective treatment options need to be defined. This will not only help practitioners to recommend specific exercise programs, but also ultimately improve the quality of life of the individual. Our work shows that 'exercise is medicine' and should routinely be recommended for people with PD to help combat both the physical and cognitive challenges of the disease."
Tim Stuckenschneider, Christopher D. Askew, Annelise L. Menêses, Ricarda Baake, Jan Weber, Stefan Schneider. The Effect of Different Exercise Modes on Domain-Specific Cognitive Function in Patients Suffering from Parkinson’s Disease: A Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials. Journal of Parkinson's Disease, 2019; 9 (1): 73 DOI: 10.3233/JPD-181484
Margaret Atwood Woos Students With Tales Of Creativity And The Gift Of The Writer
March 6, 2019: by Diane Nazaroff, UNSW Media
The acclaimed author appeared at an exclusive Centre of Ideas event on the Kensington campus.
At the end of her appearance at UNSW Sydney, Margaret Atwood explained how she ended up writing the introduction to Lewis Hyde’s 1983 non-fiction book The Gift.
Hyde describes the book as being about the value of creativity and of its importance in a culture increasingly governed by money and overrun with commodities.
“It’s the only book I recommend to young writers,” the Canadian writer told a mostly female undergraduate audience.
“It’s about the difference between the gift economy which art exists in, and the money economy in which a work of art touches and has to pass through in order to turn back into a gift.”
Many years ago, the author did a favour for her publisher and, in return, asked her publisher to read The Gift manuscript, which he later published.
“People trade stuff all the time, that’s how human beings go about their daily lives, and in The Gift you will read why,” Atwood said.“If you're having trouble with your family, you shouldn't go home for Christmas – gifts are exchanged.“And the difference between gifts and the things you buy is that if you receive a gift, you owe, either to the person that you received from or to somebody else.“And with writing, usually you receive the gift from previous writers, you incorporate it and then you pass it on.”
The highly credentialed writer spoke with UNSW Literary Studies senior lecturer in the Faculty of Arts & Social Sciences Dr Fiona Morrison in an exclusive and intimate event presented by UNSW Centre for Ideas on Kensington campus.
The event followed a sold-out appearance at the Opera House the previous day.
Atwood has written 16 novels, eight collections of short fiction, as well as 50 volumes of poetry, children’s literature, fiction and non-fiction.
She is perhaps best known for her novels, which include The Edible Woman, The Robber Bride, The Blind Assassin, Oryx and Crakeand The Year of the Flood.
Her television adaptations include the 11 Emmy award-winning Handmaid’s Tale and Alias Grace, while MaddAddam Trilogy has just gone into production.
“She is of course a great untold adaptor and reviser of works by others, including writers such as Homer and Shakespeare and is involved very much in finding new shapes and forms for your work as counsel, as commentator and artistic force,” Dr Morrison said.
Atwood said 18th and 19th century novels “were both happily quite female-centric” but noted a change particularly after the ’50s, when there was “a concerted effort made to get women back into the home after the war”.
“And to get them back into the home, [women] were told that their true nature, and the path towards fulfillment, is to basically scoop out their brain.”
She told the audience that “luckily I had a tomboy mother” who was “a very athletic person … a speed skater” and a scientist father, both of whom “weren’t interested in housework or gloves”.
The world literary figure said her most terrifying dystopian plot was the 2003 self-described speculative fiction book Oryx and Crake, adding that she would “have had more plastic in the ocean writing it today”.
“So I think the scariest thing facing us is, should the ocean warm and acidify, that is kind of it for us, because it is the oceans that make 60% to 80% of the oxygen we breathe,” she said.
“If the life forms in those oceans die, you are oxygen depleted to begin with, and that will make us stupider.”
The author, who has a reputation for repudiating science fiction, was asked if she thought speculative fiction was an important genre to deal with contemporary political, economic and ecological issues.
“So speculative fiction says, ‘This is where we could go – is that where we want to live?’,” she said.
“If we don't want to live there, maybe not go there. Maybe rearrange the blueprint so that we're going to be in a different kind of future.”
Asked about the power of words and her favourite written sentence, she said, “It is true that words are very powerful, but they can be used negatively as well as positively … Donald Trump tweets words.”
Atwood said she got “a kick” out of writing really silly birthday songs for her friends and relations.
“Nobody dies, it’s fun to illustrate them,” she said, while also claiming to have written the world’s only home economics opera in 1956.
“For years people who were in it turned up for readings. They are dying off now … I used other people’s music, in fact the head of the Canadian Opera Company said that I ruined Hoffman’s Barcarolle forever.”
Margaret Atwood at UNSW Sydney. Photo: Louise Reily
Royal Australian Mint Celebrates 60 Years Of Iconic Aussie TV Show Mr Squiggle
The Royal Australian Mint (the Mint) is commemorating 60 years of one of Australia's most loved TV characters, Mr Squiggle, with the release of limited edition coins in Woolworths supermarket registers from today, February 28th, 2019.
Four $2 coin designs, with one released each week, have been produced by the Mint with depictions of Mr Squiggle and his friends Gus the Snail, Bill the Steam Shovel and Blackboard.
Mr Squiggle - Week 1
Gus the Snail - Week 2
Bill the Steam Shovel - Week 3
Blackboard - Week 4
Assistant Minister for Treasury and Finance, Zed Seselja, said "Since first appearing on TV screens across Australia in 1959, Mr Squiggle has entertained millions, including me when I was growing up, with his impressive drawings and inquisitive nature.”
“I am thrilled Australians will be able to celebrate Mr Squiggle through this collector coin series, a tribute to a character well-loved in Australian culture. The vibrant colours and intricate illustrations on the coins capture the fun and wonder that Mr Squiggle brought to Australian households for decades.”
Rebecca Hetherington, daughter of Mr Squiggle creator, Norman Hetherington said "lt's such an honour to have the Royal Australian Mint and Woolworths immortalise my father's work in this unique way.
“The coins perfectly represent Mr Squiggle's fun and imaginative view of the world, attributes he shared with my father. I'm excited to share this opportunity with Australians who have grown up with him and remember him fondly, and also to introduce Mr Squiggle to a new generation."
Woolworths General Manager of Programs, Rod Evenden said; “We are pleased to be able to help celebrate 60 years of such an iconic character loved by so many of our customers.
“The $2 coins will only be in our registers for a limited time, so as Blackboard says, 'hurry up' if you want to get your hands on your own piece of Mr Squiggle memorabilia.”
There will be a staggered release of the commemorative coins over the coming weeks, with the first $2 coin design to be released in Woolworths registers nationwide from today.
There will also be a limited release of a collectable coin album at a cost of $15, which in addition to the four $2 coins, will also include two $1 coins and a special 1 cent coin.
2019 60th Anniversary of Mr Squiggle and Friends - 1c
The release of the Mr Squiggle coin collection follows previous coin collections at Woolworths including Possum Magic, Gold Coast 2018 Commonwealth Games and Rio 2016 Olympic and Paralympic Games.
The Mr Squiggle coin collection is available for purchase 13 February 2019 on the Mint’s online store, Woolworths’ website or by phoning 1300 652 020.