Archive for the ‘Science’ Category

“Gliese 581g”: Habitable planet found?

September 30, 2010
Habitable zone-he

Image via Wikipedia: Habitable zone

From just a week ago “Two researchers have used the pace of past exoplanet finds to predict that the first habitable Earth-like planet could turn up in May 2011″.

A pessimistic forecast perhaps because astronomers may have found the most Earth-like alien planet to date, and it’s located only a short distance away, cosmically speaking. The team says that the planet’s proximity to its sun, coupled with the ease with which it was detected, suggests that the galaxy could be teeming with habitable worlds.

Science reports that:

Gliese 581g looks like a game-changer. Detected from the minuscule amount of gravitational influence it exerts on its star, the planet lives a mere 20 light-years away in the constellation Libra. Gliese 581g is the sixth world discovered around its sun—and the fourth most distant. Yet its orbit brings it closer to its parent star than Mercury is to our sun. Still, it’s squarely within the habitable zone, because the planet’s star, which is a type known as a red dwarf, contains only about 30% of the sun’s mass and shines with only about 1% of its brightness, the researchers will report in an upcoming issue of the Astrophysical Journal.

Read the article:

http://news.sciencemag.org/sciencenow/2010/09/astronomers-find-most-earth-like.html

Tile Drainage: A boon for farming but cause of dead zones in the gulf

September 28, 2010

Tile drainage is an agriculture practice that removes excess water from soil subsurface to enable farming in wetlands. Whereas irrigation is the practice of adding additional water when the soil is naturally too dry, drainage brings soil moisture levels down for optimal crop growth.

Tile drainage ditch (Credit: Todd Royer)

A new paper in the Journal of Environmental Quality by Mark B. David, Laurie E. Drinkwater and Gregory F. McIsaac, Sources of Nitrate Yields in the Mississippi River Basin confirms that the run-off Nitrates from farming in the Missisipi river basin into the Gulf of Mexico leads to seasonal hypoxia. In the summer of 2010 this dead zone in the Gulf spanned over 7,000 square miles. The increased production of crops in this region for ethanol production has only exacerbated the problem. The dead zone in the gulf is a yearly event to be compared to those caused by sporadic oil spills.

gulf of mexico dead zone image

Gulf areas affected by hypoxia: NOAA

(Journal of Environmental Quality 2010 39:1657-1667) via EurekAlert

Tile drainage in the Mississippi Basin is one of the great advances of the 19th and 20th centuries, allowing highly productive agriculture in what was once land too wet to farm. In fact, installation of new tile systems continues every year, because it leads to increased crop yields. But a recent study shows that the most heavily tile-drained areas of North America are also the largest contributing source of nitrate to the Gulf of Mexico. Scientists from the U of I and Cornell University compiled information on each county in the Mississippi River basin including crop acreage and yields, fertilizer inputs, atmospheric deposition, number of people, and livestock to calculate all nitrogen inputs and outputs from 1997 to 2006. For 153 watersheds in the basin, they also used measurements of nitrate concentration and flow in streams, which allowed them to develop a statistical model that explained 83 percent of the variation in springtime nitrate flow in the monitored streams. The greatest nitrate loss to streams corresponded to the highly productive, tile-drained cornbelt from southwest Minnesota across Iowa, Illinois, Indiana, and Ohio.

Farmers are not to blame,” said University of Illinois researcher Mark David. “They are using the same amount of nitrogen as they were 30 years ago and getting much higher corn yields, but we have created a very leaky agricultural system. This allows nitrate to move quickly from fields into ditches and on to the Gulf of Mexico. We need policies that reward farmers to help correct the problem. A lot of people just want to blame fertilizer, but it’s not that simple,” David said. “It’s fertilizer on intensive corn and soybean agricultural rotations in heavily tile-drained areas. There is also an additional source of nitrogen from sewage effluent from people, although that is a small contribution. It’s all of these factors together.”

Graphene Ultracapacitors

September 27, 2010

Graphene is very much the material of the moment.

But graphene actually dates back to 1961. Hanns-Peter Boehm and coauthors Clauss, Fischer, and Hofmann isolated and identified single graphene sheets by transmission electron microscopy (TEM) and X-ray diffraction in 1961 and authored the IUPAC (International Union of Pure and Applied Chemistry) report formally defining the term graphene in 1994. He must have been surprised to learn of its discovery in 2004.

Graphene is a flat monolayer of carbon atoms tightly packed into a two-dimensional (2D) honeycomb lattice, and is a basic building block for graphitic materials of all other dimensionalities. It can be wrapped up into 0D fullerenes, rolled into 1D nanotubes or stacked into 3D graphite.

“Electrons in graphene, obeying a linear dispersion relation, behave like massless relativistic particles. This results in the observation of a number of very peculiar electronic properties – from an anomalous quantum Hall effect to the absence of localization – in this, the first two-dimensional material. It also provides a bridge between condensed matter physics and quantum electrodynamics, and opens new perspectives for carbon-based electronics.” (M.I. Katsnelson)

Properties of graphene are still being discovered and are leading to new studies of relativity and a wave of potential applications in physics, electronics, chemistry and biology (transistors, gas molecule detection, nano-ribbons, nano-tubes, bio-devices and transparent electrodes).

graphene-structure

graphene-structure:www.thp.uni-koeln.de/graphene08/

The IEEE reports that the ultracapacitor—the battery’s quicker cousin—just got faster and may one day help make portable electronics a lot smaller and lighter.  John Miller, president of the electrochemical capacitor company JME, in Shaker Heights, Ohio, and his team reported the new ultracapacitor design this week in Science.

Ultracapacitors don’t store quite as much charge as batteries but can charge and discharge in seconds rather than the minutes batteries take. Using nanometer-scale fins of graphene, the researchers built an ultracapacitor that can charge in less than a millisecond. This agility, its designers say, means that the devices could replace the ubiquitous bulky capacitors that smooth out the ripples in power supplies to free up precious space in gadgets and computers.

ultracapacitor cell: venturebeat.com

One team member, Ron Outlaw, a material scientist at the College of William and Mary, in Williamsburg, Va., came up with an electrode consisting of up to 4 sheets of graphene —a one-atom-thick form of carbon with unusual electronic properties. The graphene was formed so that it stuck out vertically from a 10-nanometer-thick graphite base layer.

Miller’s team, which also included Brian Holloway, a program manager at the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), tested its graphene ultracapacitor in a filtering circuit, part of an AC rectifier. Many rectifiers leave a slight AC echo behind, called a “voltage ripple,” and it’s the capacitor’s job to smooth it out. In order to do that, the capacitor needs to respond well at double the AC frequency—120 hertz in the United States. Most commercial ultracapacitors fail at this filtering role at around 0.01 Hz, but when Miller’s team tested its ultracapacitor in such a 120-Hz filtering circuit, it did the job. That means the smaller ultracapacitors could replace the big electrolytic capacitors that do the filtering now. Miller estimates that a commercial version, operating at 2.5 volts, could be less that one-sixth the size of any other 120-Hz filtering technology.

But even if graphene proves to be more promising than carbon nanotubes, silicon isn’t going away anytime soon.

Dyson spheres and Solar Wind Power by satellite

September 26, 2010

Freeman Dyson is credited with being the first to formalize the concept of the Dyson sphere in his 1959 paper “Search for Artificial Stellar Sources of Infra-Red Radiation”, published in the journal Science.

Dyson Sphere: centauri-dreams.org

However, Dyson was inspired by the mention of the concept in the 1937 science fiction novel Star Maker, by Olaf Stapledon, and possibly by the works of J. D. Bernal and Raymond Z. Gallun who seem to have explored similar concepts in their work. Such a “sphere” would be a system of orbiting solar power satellites meant to completely encompass a star and capture most or all of its energy output. Dyson speculated that such structures would be the logical consequence of the long-term survival and escalating energy needs of a technological civilization.

The New Scientist carries a report on  a speculation about using the solar wind to generate power for use on earth, based on the paper by  Harrop and Schulze-Makuch in the International Journal of Astrobiology, “The Solar Wind Power Satellite as an alternative to a traditional Dyson Sphere and its implications for remote detection”.

The concept for the so-called Dyson-Harrop satellite begins with a long metal wire loop pointed at the sun. This wire is charged to generate a cylindrical magnetic field that snags the electrons that make up half the solar wind. These electrons get funnelled into a metal spherical receiver to produce a current, which generates the wire’s magnetic field – making the system self-sustaining.

Dyson-Harrop Satellite

Any current not needed for the magnetic field powers an infrared laser trained on satellite dishes back on Earth, designed to collect the energy. Air is transparent to infrared so Earth’s atmosphere won’t suck up energy from the beam before it reaches the ground.

Back on the satellite, the current has been drained of its electrical energy by the laser – the electrons fall onto a ring-shaped sail, where incoming sunlight can re-energise them enough to keep the satellite in orbit around the sun.

A relatively small Dyson-Harrop satellite using a 1-centimetre-wide copper wire 300 metres long, a receiver 2 metres wide and a sail 10 metres in diameter, sitting at roughly the same distance from the sun as the Earth, could generate 1.7 megawatts of power – enough for about 1000 family homes in the US.

A satellite with the same-sized receiver at the same distance from the sun but with a 1-kilometre-long wire and a sail 8400 kilometres wide could generate roughly 1 billion billion gigawatts (1027 watts) of power, “which is actually 100 billion times the power humanity currently requires”, says researcher Brooks Harrop, a physicist at Washington State University in Pullman who designed the satellite.

Solar panels cost more per pound than the copper making up the Dyson-Harrop satellites, so according to Harrop, “the cost of a solar wind power satellite project should be lower than a comparative solar panel project”.

A smaller version of this satellite could help power some space missions perhaps in helping generate power for something like the Ulysses spacecraft, which went around the poles of the sun.


Fascinating stuff!

It occurs to me that getting a sharp enough focus for the laser beam may be restricted – everything else becoming feasible –  to “base stations” having no atmosphere and therefore located in space not too far from the satellite.

A point to note about all such schemes where man’s power generation needs on earth are satisfied by using off-earth sources of energy (including solar energy which does not normally get to earth) is that all such power will eventually be dissipated as heat into the first 100m of the earth’s atmosphere. If such power is significant with respect to the solar radiation reaching the earth then cooling will need to be arranged for.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dyson_sphere

Kilimanjaro ice loss was due to tree felling

September 26, 2010

Mt. Kilimanjaro: blog.gohoto.com

The New Scientist reports a new paper by Nicholas Pepin from the University of Portsmouth and his colleagues which suggests that extensive local deforestation in recent decades has likely reduced this flow of  warm, moist air up the Kilimanjaro mountainside depleting the mountain’s icy hood. Trees play an important role here by providing moisture through transpiration which add to the ice cap.

The montane circulation on Kilimanjaro, Tanzania and its relevance for the summit ice fields: Comparison of surface mountain climate with equivalent reanalysis parameters

by N.C. Pepin, W.J. Duane and D.R. Hardy

Article in press: Global and Planetary Change

Of course it’s possible that global warming led – by some unknown mechanism – to the deforestation — but it seems highly unlikely.

Horror! Science cuts

September 25, 2010

science and funding

It is perfectly understandable, predictable and expected that the Science Establishment should find the idea of budget cuts unpalatable. Through the various recent financial crises Universities and Scientific establishments globally have come through relatively unscathed. But like all bubbles that have burst and are bursting it is perhaps time that the protected science funding bubbles took their share of the hit. It is also perhaps time for a return to the quest for scientific knowledge rather than the quest for science funding.

They cannot, on the one hand, use the excuse of “consensus science” to pour money down rotten drains and on the other demand a privileged position protected from the ills being suffered by the majority of society.

Democracy in Science to determine priorities and funding for paths of investigation is both inevitable and correct. But the science itself is indifferent to what the majority vote might think it should be.

In business and management it is almost a cliche that the greatest strides in productivity and effectiveness come at the time of budget and manpower cuts. I see no reason why this should not also apply to science and scientists. The weeping and the tearing of hair would be a little more convincing if it came from third parties and not the Scientific Establishment.

Martin Rees, the president of the Royal Society and all University Vice Chancellors are most perturbed at the spending cuts that might be implemented by the new UK government.

The New Scientist’s Roger Highfield bemoans the damage that could be done to SCIENCE.

Rees was speaking with five university vice chancellors as scientists steel themselves for deep cuts at the Department of Business, Innovation and Skills.

The gory details will be laid bare in October’s Comprehensive Spending Review, in which all government departments have been asked to prepare for budgets to fall by up to 25 per cent, perhaps even more.

In their submission to the Treasury, the Royal Society has described the potential effects of the cuts, where “an X per cent cut would lead to a much more than X per cent decrease in output, because we would lose the most talented people”. They outline three scenarios:

  • 20 per cent cuts are the “game over” scenario, which would cause irreversible destruction and be “very tragic”, said Rees.
  • 10 per cent is the “slash and burn” option with “serious consequences”.
  • Constant cash, a reduction in real terms, “could be accommodated”.

At the Royal Institution, during an event organised by the Campaign for Science and Engineering and the Science Media Centre, Rees also made the point that the UK will be less attractive to mobile talent and young people as other countries invest more in research.

Just to make sure that the Treasury gets the point, the Vice Chancellors also weighed in:

  • Glynis Breakwell of the University of Bath warned about “short termism” and the perils of stop-go funding, which would be “fatal”.
  • Malcolm Grant of University College London described how the cuts will damage research that “touches people’s lives”, squander the investment of the past two decades and damage an asset of great national importance.
  • Andy Haines of the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine outlined how the cuts would harm health research as competitors, such as the US and China, are investing more in these areas.
  • Rick Trainor of King’s College London talked of the damage to long-term research capacity, and Simon Gaskell of Queen Mary, University of London once again underlined the harm to the pool of national talent.

Update: Two more papers retracted by Mount Sinai

September 24, 2010
Mount Sinai School of Medicine logo.png

Image via Wikipedia

There is an epidemic of retractions.

Retraction Watch reports that Gene therapy researcher Savio Woo has retracted two more papers in addition to the 4 retracted earlier.

Mount Sinai School of Medicine researcher Savio Woo, whom Retraction Watch reported last week has already retracted four papers from major journals as two postdocs have been fired from his lab, has retracted two more from Molecular Therapy: The Journal of the American Society of Gene Therapy.

The two papers, both from 2007, were “Metabolic Basis of Sexual Dimorphism in PKU Mice After Genome-targeted PAH Gene Therapy” and “Correction in Female PKU Mice by Repeated Administration of mPAH cDNA Using phiBT1 Integration System.” As Nature noted in its coverage of the other retractions, the papers apparently followed from a now-retracted paper in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences that, as we noted in a previous post, “claimed to have discovered a possible cure for phenylketonuria, or PKU, in mice.”

Li Chen and Zhiyu Li were the pot-docs implicated.

Nobel prize winner retracts more papers

September 24, 2010

Following quickly on the heels of Hausergate and the Mount Sinai misconduct, we now have a Nobel laureate  – Linda Buck – retracting two papers because results from her lab at the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center (FHCRC) were not reproducible (which is a euphemism for faked data). This was not the first time. She also retracted a Nature paper in 2008 for much the same reason. One particular (former) postdoctoral researcher Zhihua Zou is identified as the culprit.

Dr. Buck is a Howard Hughes Medical Institute investigator and also a Member of the Basic Sciences Division at Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center and an Affiliate Professor of Physiology and Biophysics at the University of Washington. She was at Harvard Medical School from 1994 – 2002.

Linda B. Buck

Linda B. Buck

The Scientist reports that:

Two prominent journals have retracted papers by Nobel laureate Linda Buck today because she was “unable to reproduce [the] key findings” of experiments done by her former postdoctoral researcher Zhihua Zou, according to a statement made by the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center (FHCRC), where Buck worked at the time of the publications.

These retractions, a 2006 Science paper and a 2005 Proceedings of the National Academy of the Sciences (PNAS)paper, are tied to a 2001 Nature paperthat she retracted in 2008, due to the inability “to reproduce the reported findings” and “inconsistencies between some of the figures and data published in the paper and the original data,” according to the retraction. Zou was the first author on all three papers and responsible for conducting the experiments.

The FHCRC is currently conducting an investigation into the issue, said Kristen Woodward, senior media relations manager, but no findings of misconduct have been made. John Dahlberg of the Office of Research Integrity declined to comment on the matter.

Yesterday The Scientist reported another case of faked data from the University of Washington. Postdoc fudged epigenetic data.

A former postdoctoral fellow at Washington State University has reportedly falsified data presented in two figures of an epigenetics paper, according to the Office of Research Integrity (ORI) report released late last month. The data fabrication resulted in the retraction of a 2006Endocrinology paper, but a repeat of the original study, which uses newer and more quantitative technology and confirms the paper’s conclusions, will be published next week inPLoS ONE.

“This was an extremely difficult issue for myself and the laboratory to deal with,” said Michael Skinner, a professor of reproduction and environmental epigenetics at WSU who headed the research.

According to the ORI’s report, Hung-Shu Chang, a visiting postdoc from Taiwan who worked in Skinner’s lab from 2005 to 2006, falsified sequencing data used to identify DNA regions in rat sperm cells that had different methylation patterns following treatment with an endocrine disruptor known as vinclozolin.

( Is it just coincidence that the post-docs apparently faking data both at Mount Sinai and in these cases all seem to be of foreign origin? Is it a case of “cheap labour” being pressurised by the need for publications?)

Read more:More retractions from Nobelist – The Scientist – Magazine of the Life Scienceshttp://www.the-scientist.com/blog/display/57699/#comments#ixzz10Q4NXwiY

Postdoc fudged epigenetic data – The Scientist – Magazine of the LifeScienceshttp://www.the-scientist.com/blog/display/57696/#ixzz10QD852cp


New Scientist permits the sun to join the climate club

September 23, 2010

It does seem as if the AGW establishment are preparing the ground for admitting that the sun is perhaps critical for climate.

The New Scientist runs an editorial today grudgingly admitting that “The sun’s activity has a place in climate science”.

FOR many years, any mention of the sun’s influence on climate has been greeted with suspicion.

People who believe human activity has no effect on the climate staked a claim on the sun’s role, declaring it responsible for the long-term warming trend in global temperatures. Climate scientists were often uneasy about discussing it, fearful that any concession would be misunderstood by the public and seen as an admission that climate sceptics are right.

No one has ever denied that the sun has an effect on climate. But the consensus view has always been that variations in the sun’s activity, such as the 11-year sunspot cycle, have insignificant effects. While this remains true, the latest findings show that the sun might be significant on a more regional scale. It seems changes in solar activity can have consequences ranging from higher rainfall in the tropics to extreme weather events in the north.

Mighty sun

But then they go out of their way in this article (see “The sun joins the climate club”) to denigrate the sun.

THE idea that changes in the sun’s activity can influence the climate is making a comeback, after years of scientific vilification, thanks to major advances in our understanding of the atmosphere.

The findings do not suggest – as climate sceptics frequently do – that we can blame the rise of global temperatures since the early 20th century on the sun. “There are extravagant claims for the effects of the sun on global climate,” says Giles Harrison, an atmospheric physicist at the University of Reading, UK. “They are not supported.”

Where solar effects may play a role is in influencing regional weather patterns over the coming decades. Predictions on these scales of time and space are crucial for nations seeking to prepare for the future.

Over the famous 11-year solar cycle, the sun’s brightness varies by just 0.1 per cent. This was seen as too small a change to impinge on the global climate system, so solar effects have generally been left out of climate models. However, the latest research has changed this view, and the next report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), due in 2013, will include solar effects in its models.

But the sun does not much care (Beware the Icarus Syndrome) I think for the scientific establishment and will continue to do its own thing.

Human malaria may have come from gorillas (not chimps)

September 23, 2010

It is heartening to see that science generally works and understanding increases as one discovery leads to another and tentative conclusions from one do not stand in the way of coming to new and different conclusions. Solid and painstaking work in the field and the lab (and not like the so-called science where the grabbing of headlines or the chasing of tenure or generation of funds dominates).

Not very long ago (3rd August 2009) the BBC reported that

Common chimpanzee in the Leipzig Zoo.

Image via Wikipedia

” By looking at blood samples, a US team discovered all world strains of the human malaria parasite falciparum stem from a malaria parasite in chimps. They tell Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences how the species shift probably happened 10,000 years ago when humans turned to agriculture. Although chimps were known to harbour a parasite – Plasmodium reichenowi – that is closely related to the most common of the human malaria parasites, Plasmodium falciparum, many scientists had assumed that the two had co-existed separately. But blood tests on 94 wild and captive chimpanzees in Cameroon and the Ivory Coast suggest falciparum evolved from reichenowi. Francisco Ayala, of the University of California, Irvine, and colleagues found eight new strains of reichenowi that had striking similarities to falciparum and were genetic precursors to the human disease. The leap could have happened as early as two to three million years ago, but most likely to our Neolithic ancestors as recently as 10,000 years ago”.

But further work reported by the BBC yesterday now shows that the human malaria parasite is more likely to have originated with the gorilla parasite.

Gorilla (Nature)

Gorillas may be the source of human cerebral malaria

“Until now, it was thought that the human malaria parasite split off from a chimpanzee parasite when humans and chimpanzees last had a common ancestor. But researchers from the US, three African countries, and Europe have examined malaria parasites in great ape faeces. They found the DNA from western gorilla parasites was the most similar to human parasites.

Malaria is caused by a parasite called Plasmodium, and is carried by mosquitoes. The most common species found in Africa, Plasmodium falciparum, causes dangerous cerebral malaria. Over 800,000 people die from malaria each year in the continent. Until now, scientists had assumed that when the evolutionary tree of humans split off from that of chimpanzees – around five to seven million years ago – so had Plasmodium falciparum. This would have meant that humans and malaria co-evolved to live together. But new evidence suggests human malaria is much newer. Dr Beatrice Hahn of the University of Birmingham, Alabama, in the US, is part of a team that had been studying HIV and related infections in humans and great apes.

To study the DNA of infections in wild apes, you cannot use blood samples. So the team collected 2,700 samples of faecal material from two species of gorilla – western and eastern – and from common chimpanzees and bonobos, also known as pygmy chimpanzees”.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-11393664