Check out this video on his creation - a vehicle that can travel on land, water, and air!

With the recent death of whale trainer Dawn Brancheau, attacked and drowned by Tilikum, an orca at SeaWorld in Orlando, questions have been raised about keeping these giants in captivity. Animal rights activists were quick to point the finger at marine parks such as SeaWorld, citing the event as just another piece of evidence in support of the argument to release orcas, which are held captive only to generate a profit, back into the wild. But is it just that easy to release the whales and tell them to be on their way?

Some scientists say that the release of killer whales, which are thought to number over 40 around the globe, back into their natural habitat is no easy task. A group of American and Danish researchers published the article "From captivity to the wild and back: An attempt to release Keiko the killer whale" in the journal Marine Mammal Science, which, as the title describes, documents an attempt at reintroducing Keiko, the star of the 1993 film "Free Willy", back into the wild. The program which began in 1996 and lasted into the 2000s had little success. Keiko had little interaction with other orcas and failed to associate with a wild pod. He also found it difficult to hunt and despite the efforts of the trainers, continued to rely on human contact. In 2003, Keiko died still semi-captive.

Despite this tragic event, the jury remains out on what to do with these creatures we still know very little about. Other than elucidating their acoustic behavior not much has been gained by studying these animals in captivity. Therefore, some argue that the science doesn't justify them being held in tanks, while other say that orcas like Tilikum provide a valuable asset through companionship to his fellow orcas at SeaWorld. And so the tug-of-war continues between big industry and those fighting for animal rights.

“Evidence for a recent increase in forest growth,” a study published in the February 23 issue of the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, suggests that an increased rate of tree growth in the eastern U.S. could be linked to climate change.

Measuring the growth of hardwood trees in Maryland, scientists have shown what some have called a “tree growth spurt.” Based on 22 years of tree biomass data, the study reveals that trees in this area are growing at increased rates- two to four times faster than usual. Measurements of tree diameters were used to determine these rates. Scientists narrowed down the possible variables to temperature changes, CO₂ levels, and the increased length of the growing season, factors all related to climate change. Data collected for CO₂ levels in the area provided a likely explanation (levels rose about 12% since the study’s start).

According to co-author Geoffrey G. Parker, it’s likely that the trees have adapted to atmospheric changes. Trees take in CO₂, and atmospheric CO₂ levels have risen, so trees have probably been absorbing more CO₂.

Does this mean forests will be filled with gigantic, super-CO₂-absorbing trees? According to Parker, the continuation of this trend isn’t guaranteed because other nutrients that trees need aren’t rising to match the increase in CO₂ levels.

The eastern U.S. isn’t the only place where tree growth has been linked to climate change. Another study conducted by scientists from the University of Arizona’s Laboratory of Tree-Ring Research showed the increased growth of bristlecone pine trees in California and Nevada. Their study of ring widths (of both alive and dead trees) provided data that went back 4,600 years! The “growth spurt” of these trees seems to have started during the second half of the 20^th century. Because of the high elevations of these trees, however, their growth could not be sufficiently explained by CO₂ levels. Instead, scientists looked to an increase in temperature as the major cause. According to researcher Malcolm Hughes, temperature change at that altitude could have consequences for humans too, since water supplies are located on mountains.

Sources:

“Evidence for a recent increase in forest growth”

"Growth Spurt in Tree Rings Prompts Questions About Climate Change"

"Study Finds a Tree Growth Spurt"

"Study: Eastern Trees in the Midst of a Growth Spurt"

Ah romantic love, it is that seemingly unexplainable phenomenon that has inspired countless songs, poems and sudden inabilities to think properly. It seems almost ludicrous to think that it could be studied empirically because of the highly subjective nature of the experience, but scientists have continued to try. Specific neuroendocrine and behavioral changes have been characterized but scientists are still pursuing mechanistic explanations.

Two popular theories considered in a recent paper by Johan N. Lundstrom and Marilyn Jones-Gotman in Hormones and Behavior are attention theory and deflection theory. Attention theory posits that romantic love arises from increased attention towards a partner and deflection theory claims that it is decreased attention towards other potential partners that brings about the experience of love.

Lundstrom and Jones-Gotman wanted to disentangle the role that these mechanisms may play in romantic love. So the authors thought hey, why not investigate body odor?  Now I don't think Shakespeare would have necessarily written a sonnet about the romantic nature of body odor (though he has touched on halitosis). But you know, it actually makes a good deal of sense: odors are very strongly associated with memories and I imagine the specific odor of a partner is firmly rooted in the neural circuits of an individual.

Lundstrom and Jones-Gotman hypothesized that if attention towards a partner is increased as proposed by attention theory, then an individual (in this case, the authors were looking at women) should have a heightened ability to identify her partner's odor. Along this line of thought, the authors presented a corollary to this hypothesis as well: a given heterosexual woman should have a decreased ability to identify a male friend's body odor, but not that of a female friend... this idea draws from deflection theory. So in this test we see an attractive synthesis of both attention and deflection theories. Based on the experimental setup, it seems the results should be able to shed light on both ideas.

After some interesting methodology to collect body odors (involving the male participants sleeping in the same shirt for seven straight nights), the authors found a negative correlation (r = -0.63, p < 0.01) between the amount of romantic love expressed by the woman for her significant other and her ability to recognize the body odor of a male friend, meaning the more 'in love' a woman was, the less she was able to recognize the body odor of another male. Interestingly, the authors found no significant correlation between amount of romantic love and ability to recognize a partner's body odor. Because of the drop-off in recognition of ‘other potential mates' with the amount that the woman was in love, these results support deflection theory as a possible mechanism underlying ot accompanying romantic love.

The authors finally propose a neuroendocrine mechanism governing this difference. Oxytocin and vasopressin are neuropeptides with an inverse sort of relationship. Oxytocin has been shown to modulate ‘feelings of trust' whereas vasopressin is linked with ‘social recognition and attention'. The two peptides have structural similarities and can bind to each other's receptors, so the authors propose that elevated oxytocin during romantic love can, along with the obvious behavioral effects, inhibit the effects of vasopressin, effectively decreasing recognition of other potential mates.

I think the neuroendocrine hypothesis proposed by the authors is quite intriguing. It is both fascinating and testable, which gives it credence in the empirical world. Now it seems there are probably a large number of physiological changes during romantic love (perhaps, for example, fluctuation within dopaminergic circuits), but I think the authors' hypothesis is an important one that could begin the elucidation of the biological basis of love. Even if we might never be able to fully understand this crazy little thing called love, we can still attempt to approach a biological understanding. And that's at least something.

In a recent study published in The American Naturalist, researchers from the University of South Carolina and Indiana State University discovered that pregnant cricket mothers may be passing cues about predators to their unborn cricket offspring. In the studies the researchers conducted, experimental pregnant crickets were stalked by wolf spiders, their natural predators, but not eaten by them while the control crickets were not exposed to predators while pregnant. The researchers found that once the cricket offspring were born, those whose mothers had been exposed to wolf spiders were much more likely to look for shelter and to stay hidden longer than cricket offspring whose mothers had not been exposed to wolf spiders. The crickets whose mothers had been stalked by the wolf spiders were also more likely to freeze when coming upon spider feces or a spiders web than the crickets of unexposed mothers, and were therefore more likely to survive longer.

This is significant because crickets do not stick around to care for their offspring after they are born; young crickets are left to fend for themselves. Mothers may instead be able to give their offspring signals, or fore-warnings, of the dangers they may encounter once they are born, leading to higher survival rates. Mothers are therefore able to affect the behavior of their offspring without being present after their birth in order to show their offspring the correct behaviors needed for their survival. It is possible that this also occurs in other species which have little or no parental care.

Researchers are not sure how exactly mothers pass on this information to their young before birth, but one possibility that may be looked into is the production of specific hormones by the mother in response to the stress of predation which may affect the development of the young she is carrying.

The human race began to domesticate the canine about 14,000 years ago, most likely for protection and hunting purposes.  Today, however, we are realizing that by breeding, we have also established an extensive genetic library that features a multitude of phenotypic and behavioral variation.  And now, science is on the verge of tapping into the library of knowledge we have created.

Researchers from the University of Washington have recently performed genome-wide analysis of 10 breeds of dog.  Each breed of dog's genome was examine at 21,000 specific points that are known to differ between breeds.  The study was performed in an attempt to locate genes and resultant protein products that are responsible for certain breed-specific phenotypes, a Shar-pei's wrinkled skin for example.  By identifying the genes responsible for these phenotypes, researchers can then apply this knowledge to help humans with certain diseases.

The research has already begun to bear fruit, as a gene identified to contribute to wrinkled skin in Shar-peis has already been linked to a condition that causes similar wrinkled, rough skin in humans.  With continued research, it could be possible to identify the genes and protein-products responsible for many other human defincies and diseases.

Exploring the dog genome provides an exciting endeavor for genetics.  With thousands of years of artificially selected breeding the dog is the most phenotypically variant species on the planet.  This selected breeding has also led to a unique population of behaviors in the dog.  Researchers hope to study this variety of behaviors as well, in an attempt to determine how much behavior is due to genetics versus environmental factors, the classic "nature vs. nurture" debate.

A study published February 4th, 2010 in the New England Journal of Medicine reported communication via functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) with vegetative or minimally conscious patients.  Patients were placed in the MRI and asked to imagine themselves playing tennis (a motor task) and to imagine walking through the rooms of their home (a spatial task).  These two tasks would activate different parts of their brains, allowing the researchers to determine if the patients were indeed conscious and able to respond to the study's directions.

Five out of the 54 vegetative patients tested were determined to have conscious brain activity that they could control at will.  (Five may not sound like a lot, but imagine being the friend or family member of a "vegetative" patient who turned out to be concsious!)  One patient was pushed farther: not only did the researchers ask him to imagine the two scenarios, but they assigned each scenario as either a "yes" or "no" answer.  In this way, researchers were able to form a line of communication with the patient.  The researchers asked him personal questions to which they did not know the answers beforehand, then checked his answers with his mother.  It should be noted that the five patients who could follow the instructions had suffered brain damage due to head trauma, not loss of oxygen (anoxia); perhaps head trauma patients are more likely to retain consciousness in a "vegetative state."

This is an enormous breakthrough in the way we see and treat comatose patients.  Firstly, "vegetative" patients could undergo this additional direct brain-tap screening of consciousness in addition to bedside neurological tests, allowing physicians to more accurately diagnose and treat patients with brain trauma.  However, before this testing can become common-place, the study's results will have to be replicated.  Additionally, MRI technology is time-consuming and expensive.  Future experiments will be investigating the use of EEGs(electroencephalograms) as communication means for unresponsive patients.  EEGs, in which electrodes are placed on the scalp to measure brain activity, are much less expensive to perform and are much more portable than MRIs.

The second paradigm shift this technology could result in is allowing unresponsive patients to be a part of their treatment plan - letting them make medical choices about themselves for themselves.  However, these patients have suffered brain trauma; their lack of outward signs of consciousness attest to the severe degree of trauma.  How will we be able to determine if patients are capable of making such decisions?  What if a patient wants to remove life support, but family members do not want to?  Can we be sure that the technology is accurate enough to communicate such wishes?  Can we know if the patient has enough cognitive reserve to make such a decision?  Many ethical questions are raised, as well as much hope for patients and their families.

As more information is released and more studies are published, we will be sure to update the blog.

Genetic therapies are experimental treatments that add, replace, or modify genes in ill-patients, attempting to halt the progression of, or even cure, a disease.  Gene-doping uses the same paradigm - adding, replacing, or modifying genes - but with the intent to not treat an illness but rather to enhance human performance.  Two genes in particular may be of interest to athletic gene-dopers: the gene for insulin-like growth factor-1 (IGF-1 gene) and the gene for erythropoietin (EPO).  The IGF-1 gene heals and grows muscle; if used for gene-doping, the IGF-1 gene might push human strength to another level.  EPO increases red blood cells which in turn raises blood oxygen levels and thus, increases endurance.

Gene-doping has been ruled an illegal practice in many sports; moreover, it has been deemed unethical (and therefore, punishable) for physicians to perform genetic therapies on healthy human beings.  There are no reported cases of gene-doping as of yet, but sports organizations will be on the lookout, especially in the upcoming Olympics.  However, it should be noted that, dissimilar to steroids, whose use without a prescription has been banned by a federal law, there is no United States law against gene-doping.  It should also be noted that since gene therapies are new and experimental treatments, they and gene-doping come with many risks and many unknown consequences years down the line.

But if and when genetic therapies become safer practices, will gene-doping become the new steroids in the sports world?  Will athletes flock to this new performance enhancer, thus causing other athletes to jump on the bandwagon or be left with lacking abilities?  Will a nation-wide ban be placed against gene-doping in any individual?  With the advent of genetic knowledge and technology, we need to ask ourselves, how far are we willing to push ourselves?  Should we allow athletes to gene-dope, thus opening the door for the human race to enter a new era of athleticism?  Should we investigate gene-doping in other areas as well - intelligence, perhaps?  How far are we willing to go?

Genetic sequencing at track MRSA:

As drug-resistant strains of staph sicken people around the globe, high-power genome sequencing promises to trace the spread of this infectionResistant strains of the bacteria Staphylococcus aureus are the scourge of hospitals worldwide, frequently sickening and killing patients who were admitted to overcome other ills. And until now, scientists have not been able to closely track the transmission and mutation patterns of single strains.

A new project, using high-throughput, whole-genome sequencing, has begun to demystify MRSA (methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus), revealing how the bacteria tend to spread among patients-and continents. Results of the project were published online January 21 in the journal Science.

Check out the article at Scientific American here.

Hello science majors, science lovers, and anyone peeking at our blog out of curiosity!  Breakthrough is Tufts first undergraduate magazine focused on the natural sciences (think Scientific American, Tufts-style!).  Our magazine will serve as a one-stop source for information on some of the most interesting research currently going on all across Tufts University (and the world at large), in a style of writing that everyone, scientific background or not, will enjoy.

Breakthrough will have two print publications this academic year (one in early February, and one later in Spring semester) so keep an eye out for the magazine.  We will also be updating our blog regularly with items such as smaller articles, interesting links, science news, and upcoming events.  Please comment on our blog - we would love to hear your thoughts on any topics we post about or suggestions for something you'd like us to include in our blog or magazine.

If you are interested in joining Breakthrough, please e-mail This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it .