http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2016-07/uob-rda071916.php
Public Release: 19-Jul-2016
Researchers discover altruism is favored by chance
Mathematicians may have found an answer to the longstanding puzzle as to why we have evolved to cooperate
University of Bath
•••••
An international team of researchers, publishing in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, has found that altruism is favoured by random fluctuations in nature, offering an explanation to the mystery as to why this seemingly disadvantageous trait has evolved.
The researchers, from the Universities of Bath, Manchester and Princeton (USA), developed a mathematical model to predict the path of evolution when altruistic "cooperators" live alongside "cheats" who use up resources but do not themselves contribute.
•••••
"What we are lacking is an explanation of how these behaviours could have evolved in organisms as basic as yeast. Our research proposes a simple answer - it turns out that cooperation is favoured by chance."
The key insight is that the total size of population that can be supported depends on the proportion of cooperators: more cooperation means more food for all and a larger population. If, due to chance, there is a random increase in the number of cheats then there is not enough food to go around and total population size will decrease. Conversely, a random decrease in the number of cheats will allow the population to grow to a larger size, disproportionally benefitting the cooperators. In this way, the cooperators are favoured by chance, and are more likely to win in the long term.
Dr George Constable, soon to join the University of Bath from Princeton, uses the analogy of flipping a coin, where heads wins £20 but tails loses £10:
"Although the odds winning or losing are the same, winning is more good than losing is bad. Random fluctuations in cheat numbers are exploited by the cooperators, who benefit more then they lose out."
Showing posts with label cooperation. Show all posts
Showing posts with label cooperation. Show all posts
Saturday, December 02, 2023
Friday, September 25, 2020
Born to be wild: Fungal highways let bacteria travel in exchange for thiamine
These different species cooperate for mutual benefit. Too bad so many humans can't do the same with others in their own species.
https://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2020-09/uot-btb092420.php
News Release 24-Sep-2020
University of Tsukuba
Tiny organisms head out on the highway, looking for adventure like they've ridden straight out of the 1960s rock hit, "Born to Be Wild." Researchers from Japan have discovered that while perhaps not as thrill-seeking, bacteria do indeed travel on fungal highways and pay a toll in return.
In a study published this month in Life Science Alliance, researchers from the University of Tsukuba have revealed a mutual bacterial-fungal relationship that lets bacteria travel in exchange for thiamine.
Thiamine (vitamin B1) is essential to the health of almost all living organisms, and is synthesized by bacteria, plants, fungi and some protozoans. Free thiamine is scarce in the environment, and organisms appear to have developed numerous ways of obtaining it.
•••••
"The bacteria cultured with the fungus traveled along fungal filaments using their flagella," explains Professor Nozomu Obana, senior author. "They dispersed farther with the expansion of the fungal colony than they would have otherwise, suggesting that the fungal filaments supply space for bacteria to migrate, disperse and multiply."
The fungus in this study is a type that can synthesize thiamine on its own, but used thiamine produced by the bacteria. Because these bacteria synthesize thiamine extracellularly, neighboring bacteria and fungi in nature could uptake it and use it, saving them the cost of synthesizing it themselves.
•••••
Sunday, March 29, 2020
In Negotiations, Givers Are Smarter Than Takers
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/27/smarter-living/negotiation-tips-giver-taker.html?utm_source=pocket-newtab
By Adam Grant
March 27, 2020
•••••
In one of my favorite studies, researchers tested people’s intelligence with a series of quantitative, verbal and analytical reasoning problems. Then they sent them off to negotiate. Intelligence paid off — but not in the way you might expect. The smarter people were, the better their counterparts did in the negotiation. They used their brainpower to expand the pie, finding ways to help the other side that cost them nothing.
This isn’t an isolated result. In a comprehensive analysis of 28 studies, the most successful negotiators cared as much about the other party’s success as their own. They refused to see negotiations as win-lose or the world as zero-sum. They understood that before you could claim value, you needed to create value. They didn’t declare victory until they could help everyone win.
This isn’t limited to negotiation. Economists find that the higher that Americans score on intelligence tests, the more they give to charity — even after adjusting for their wealth, income, education, age and health. Psychologists demonstrate that the smarter people are, the less likely they are to take resources for themselves — and the more likely they are to give to a group. I’ve discovered in my own research that when success is a sprint, givers may well finish last. But if it’s a marathon, the takers tend to fall behind and the givers often finish first.
•••••
Believing in a fixed pie is a self-fulfilling prophecy. When we expect the worst in others, we bring out the worst in others. When we recognize that everyone feels the impulse to help (unless they’re a sociopath) we have a chance to bring out what Lincoln called the better angels of their nature.
•••••
By Adam Grant
March 27, 2020
•••••
In one of my favorite studies, researchers tested people’s intelligence with a series of quantitative, verbal and analytical reasoning problems. Then they sent them off to negotiate. Intelligence paid off — but not in the way you might expect. The smarter people were, the better their counterparts did in the negotiation. They used their brainpower to expand the pie, finding ways to help the other side that cost them nothing.
This isn’t an isolated result. In a comprehensive analysis of 28 studies, the most successful negotiators cared as much about the other party’s success as their own. They refused to see negotiations as win-lose or the world as zero-sum. They understood that before you could claim value, you needed to create value. They didn’t declare victory until they could help everyone win.
This isn’t limited to negotiation. Economists find that the higher that Americans score on intelligence tests, the more they give to charity — even after adjusting for their wealth, income, education, age and health. Psychologists demonstrate that the smarter people are, the less likely they are to take resources for themselves — and the more likely they are to give to a group. I’ve discovered in my own research that when success is a sprint, givers may well finish last. But if it’s a marathon, the takers tend to fall behind and the givers often finish first.
•••••
Believing in a fixed pie is a self-fulfilling prophecy. When we expect the worst in others, we bring out the worst in others. When we recognize that everyone feels the impulse to help (unless they’re a sociopath) we have a chance to bring out what Lincoln called the better angels of their nature.
•••••
Thursday, August 31, 2017
Links
Wells Fargo: Nearly twice as many potentially fake accounts than originally thought
http://thehill.com/policy/finance/348685-wells-fargo-there-were-nearly-twice-as-many-potentially-fake-accounts-opened
The Multi-headed Hydra of Prejudice
https://www.skeptic.com/reading_room/multi-headed-hydra-of-prejudice/
Obese people lack cells with satiety hormones
https://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2017-08/uob-opl082917.php
Virus that causes mono may increase risk of MS for multiple races
https://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2017-08/aaon-vtc082817.php
Breastfeeding reduces risk of endometriosis diagnosis
https://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2017-08/bawh-brr083017.php
Researchers raise health concerns about off-road vehicles and inhalation of asbestos
https://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2017-08/cchm-rrh083017.php
Profitable cooperation: Ants protect and fertilize plants
https://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2017-08/au-pca082917.php
Wednesday, March 29, 2017
When people know each other, cooperation is more likely than conflict
https://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2017-03/hu-btn032917.php
Public Release: 29-Mar-2017
Building trust, not hate
When people know each other, cooperation is more likely than conflict
Hokkaido University
When anonymity between people is lifted, they more likely cooperate with each other. Playing nice can thereby become a winning strategy, an international team of scientists shows in a study to be published in Science Advances. The findings are based on experiments with a limited number of participants but might have far-reaching implications, if confirmed. Reducing anonymity could help social networks such as Facebook or Twitter that suffer from hate and fake news. It might also help in conflicts about environmental resources.
"Today, it often seems that conflict trumps cooperation, be it on the Internet or in national politics - likewise in evolution, Darwinian selection should result in individuals pursuing their own selfish interest" says lead-author Zhen Wang from Northwestern Polytechnical University in Xi'an, China. Yet despite this perception, there's a lot of cooperation in nature as well as in societies. "Our findings suggest that it is crucial to ask one rather straightforward question: Do the prospective cooperators know each other reasonably well? If they do, they will more likely not try to win at the expense of each other, but together."
•••••
Public Release: 29-Mar-2017
Building trust, not hate
When people know each other, cooperation is more likely than conflict
Hokkaido University
When anonymity between people is lifted, they more likely cooperate with each other. Playing nice can thereby become a winning strategy, an international team of scientists shows in a study to be published in Science Advances. The findings are based on experiments with a limited number of participants but might have far-reaching implications, if confirmed. Reducing anonymity could help social networks such as Facebook or Twitter that suffer from hate and fake news. It might also help in conflicts about environmental resources.
"Today, it often seems that conflict trumps cooperation, be it on the Internet or in national politics - likewise in evolution, Darwinian selection should result in individuals pursuing their own selfish interest" says lead-author Zhen Wang from Northwestern Polytechnical University in Xi'an, China. Yet despite this perception, there's a lot of cooperation in nature as well as in societies. "Our findings suggest that it is crucial to ask one rather straightforward question: Do the prospective cooperators know each other reasonably well? If they do, they will more likely not try to win at the expense of each other, but together."
•••••
Tuesday, September 27, 2016
Compromise nearly guaranteed when a woman is involved in decision-making pairs
https://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2016-07/bc-cng072816.php
Public Release: 28-Jul-2016
Compromise nearly guaranteed when a woman is involved in decision-making pairs
Study finds when making joint decisions, men need to prove masculinity, 'push away' from compromise; findings pertinent to marketers, managers, and consumers
Boston College
More isn't necessarily better when it comes to men making decisions together, especially if you want a middle-of-the-road compromise. That's according to a new study in the Journal of Consumer Research which finds that compromise always occurs among two decision makers when a woman is involved (female-female pairs or mixed gender pairs), but hardly ever when the pair of decision makers are men. The findings could be pertinent to marketers, managers, and consumers alike.
"When men are in the presence of other men, they feel the need to prove their masculinity," says co-researcher Hristina Nikolova, the Coughlin Sesquicentennial Assistant Professor of Marketing with the Carroll School of Management at Boston College. "Both tend to push away from the compromise option because the compromise option is consistent with feminine norms. On the other hand, extremism is a more masculine trait so that's why both male partners tend to prefer an extreme option when making decisions together."
•••••
"No matter what the product is, we see the same effects," says Nikolova. "The compromise effect basically emerges in any pair when there is a woman. However, surprisingly, when you have men choosing together, they actually tend to push away from the compromise option and select one of the extreme options. Say two men are choosing a car and the cars they are considering differ on safety and fuel efficiency - they will either go for the safest car or the one that offers them the most fuel efficiency, but they won't choose an option that offers a little of both." In contrast, individuals and mixed-gender and female-female pairs will likely go for the middle option since it seems reasonable and is easily justified.
According to the study: "When making decisions together, men take actions that are maximally different from feminine norms, which prioritize moderation, and maximally similar to masculine norms, which prioritize extremity. Furthermore, because a female presence makes the masculinity of men in male-female dyads obvious, in these pairings we observe compromise behavior consistent with that of individual decision-makers and female-female dyads."
"In contrast to men," says Nikolova, "women act the same together as they would alone because they don't need to prove anything in front of other women. Womanhood is not precarious and does not need the same level of public defense as manhood. That's why we observe the compromise effect in the joint decisions of two female partners."
Interestingly, the research found that compromise is criticized among other men, but embraced by women.
"Only men judge other men very harshly when they suggest the compromise option to a male partner," says Nikolova. "It doesn't happen when a man suggests the compromise option to a female partner or when women suggest the compromise option so it's really specific to men dealing with other men."
•••••
As for consumers, it's important for male consumers to know what they might buy themselves is different from what they would choose with another man.
"What we're finding is when men have to choose alone, most select the compromise option," says Nikolova. "But when they have to make the decision with another man, they tend to choose one of the extreme options which is not something they would prefer if they were alone. It's important for male consumers to be aware of this when making decisions with other people since the drive to prove their masculinity might lead them to make decisions that they might not enjoy later."
Public Release: 28-Jul-2016
Compromise nearly guaranteed when a woman is involved in decision-making pairs
Study finds when making joint decisions, men need to prove masculinity, 'push away' from compromise; findings pertinent to marketers, managers, and consumers
Boston College
More isn't necessarily better when it comes to men making decisions together, especially if you want a middle-of-the-road compromise. That's according to a new study in the Journal of Consumer Research which finds that compromise always occurs among two decision makers when a woman is involved (female-female pairs or mixed gender pairs), but hardly ever when the pair of decision makers are men. The findings could be pertinent to marketers, managers, and consumers alike.
"When men are in the presence of other men, they feel the need to prove their masculinity," says co-researcher Hristina Nikolova, the Coughlin Sesquicentennial Assistant Professor of Marketing with the Carroll School of Management at Boston College. "Both tend to push away from the compromise option because the compromise option is consistent with feminine norms. On the other hand, extremism is a more masculine trait so that's why both male partners tend to prefer an extreme option when making decisions together."
•••••
"No matter what the product is, we see the same effects," says Nikolova. "The compromise effect basically emerges in any pair when there is a woman. However, surprisingly, when you have men choosing together, they actually tend to push away from the compromise option and select one of the extreme options. Say two men are choosing a car and the cars they are considering differ on safety and fuel efficiency - they will either go for the safest car or the one that offers them the most fuel efficiency, but they won't choose an option that offers a little of both." In contrast, individuals and mixed-gender and female-female pairs will likely go for the middle option since it seems reasonable and is easily justified.
According to the study: "When making decisions together, men take actions that are maximally different from feminine norms, which prioritize moderation, and maximally similar to masculine norms, which prioritize extremity. Furthermore, because a female presence makes the masculinity of men in male-female dyads obvious, in these pairings we observe compromise behavior consistent with that of individual decision-makers and female-female dyads."
"In contrast to men," says Nikolova, "women act the same together as they would alone because they don't need to prove anything in front of other women. Womanhood is not precarious and does not need the same level of public defense as manhood. That's why we observe the compromise effect in the joint decisions of two female partners."
Interestingly, the research found that compromise is criticized among other men, but embraced by women.
"Only men judge other men very harshly when they suggest the compromise option to a male partner," says Nikolova. "It doesn't happen when a man suggests the compromise option to a female partner or when women suggest the compromise option so it's really specific to men dealing with other men."
•••••
As for consumers, it's important for male consumers to know what they might buy themselves is different from what they would choose with another man.
"What we're finding is when men have to choose alone, most select the compromise option," says Nikolova. "But when they have to make the decision with another man, they tend to choose one of the extreme options which is not something they would prefer if they were alone. It's important for male consumers to be aware of this when making decisions with other people since the drive to prove their masculinity might lead them to make decisions that they might not enjoy later."
Monday, September 05, 2016
How humans and wild birds collaborate to get precious resources of honey and wax
http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2016-07/uoc-hha071816.php
Public Release: 21-Jul-2016
How humans and wild birds collaborate to get precious resources of honey and wax
University of Cambridge
By following honeyguides, a species of bird, people in Africa are able to locate bees' nests to harvest honey. Research now reveals that humans use special calls to solicit the help of honeyguides and that honeyguides actively recruit appropriate human partners. This relationship is a rare example of cooperation between humans and free-living animals.
Humans have trained a range of species to help them find food: examples are dogs, falcons and cormorants. These animals are domesticated or taught to cooperate by their owners. Human-animal collaboration in the wild is much rarer. But it has long been known that, in many parts of Africa, people and a species of wax-eating bird called the greater honeyguide work together to find wild bees' nests which provide a valuable resource to them both.
Honeyguides give a special call to attract people's attention, then fly from tree to tree to indicate the direction of a bees' nest. We humans are useful collaborators to honeyguides because of our ability to subdue stinging bees with smoke and chop open their nest, providing wax for the honeyguide and honey for ourselves.
Experiments carried out in the Mozambican bush now show that this unique human-animal relationship has an extra dimension: not only do honeyguides use calls to solicit human partners, but humans use specialised calls to recruit birds' assistance. Research in the Niassa National Reserve reveals that by using specialised calls to communicate and cooperate with each other, people and wild birds can significantly increase their chances of locating vital sources of calorie-laden food.
•••••
Public Release: 21-Jul-2016
How humans and wild birds collaborate to get precious resources of honey and wax
University of Cambridge
By following honeyguides, a species of bird, people in Africa are able to locate bees' nests to harvest honey. Research now reveals that humans use special calls to solicit the help of honeyguides and that honeyguides actively recruit appropriate human partners. This relationship is a rare example of cooperation between humans and free-living animals.
Humans have trained a range of species to help them find food: examples are dogs, falcons and cormorants. These animals are domesticated or taught to cooperate by their owners. Human-animal collaboration in the wild is much rarer. But it has long been known that, in many parts of Africa, people and a species of wax-eating bird called the greater honeyguide work together to find wild bees' nests which provide a valuable resource to them both.
Honeyguides give a special call to attract people's attention, then fly from tree to tree to indicate the direction of a bees' nest. We humans are useful collaborators to honeyguides because of our ability to subdue stinging bees with smoke and chop open their nest, providing wax for the honeyguide and honey for ourselves.
Experiments carried out in the Mozambican bush now show that this unique human-animal relationship has an extra dimension: not only do honeyguides use calls to solicit human partners, but humans use specialised calls to recruit birds' assistance. Research in the Niassa National Reserve reveals that by using specialised calls to communicate and cooperate with each other, people and wild birds can significantly increase their chances of locating vital sources of calorie-laden food.
•••••
What hunter-gatherers can tell us about fundamental human social networks
http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2016-07/cp-whc071316.php
Public Release: 21-Jul-2016
What hunter-gatherers can tell us about fundamental human social networks
Cell Press
Long before the advent of social media, human social networks were built around sharing a much more essential commodity: food. Now, researchers reporting on the food sharing networks of two contemporary groups of hunter-gatherers in the Cell Press journal Current Biology on July 21 provide new insight into fundamental nature of human social organization.
The new work reveals surprising similarities between the Agta of the Philippines and Mbendjele of the Republic of Congo. In both places, individuals maintain a three-tiered social network that appears to buffer them against day-to-day shortfalls in foraging returns.
•••••
"No other apes share food to the extent that humans do," says Andrea Migliano (@andrea_migliano), principal investigator of the Leverhulme Trust-funded Hunter-Gatherers Resilience Project. "Hunter-gatherers' multi-level social structure exists in different groups, to help regulate these cooperative systems. Furthermore, multi-level social structures regulate social rules, friendship and kinship ties, and the spread of social norms, promoting a more efficient sharing and cooperation. Sharing is a crucial adaptation to hunter-gatherers' lifestyles, central to their resilience--and central to the evolution of mankind."
•••••
"Cooperation and especially food sharing are essential for survival in a hunting-and-gathering economy," Dyble says. "The proverb that 'it takes a village to raise a child' is certainly true for hunter-gatherers, who, without food sharing to mitigate the day-to-day shortfalls in foraging, could simply not survive."
•••••
Public Release: 21-Jul-2016
What hunter-gatherers can tell us about fundamental human social networks
Cell Press
Long before the advent of social media, human social networks were built around sharing a much more essential commodity: food. Now, researchers reporting on the food sharing networks of two contemporary groups of hunter-gatherers in the Cell Press journal Current Biology on July 21 provide new insight into fundamental nature of human social organization.
The new work reveals surprising similarities between the Agta of the Philippines and Mbendjele of the Republic of Congo. In both places, individuals maintain a three-tiered social network that appears to buffer them against day-to-day shortfalls in foraging returns.
•••••
"No other apes share food to the extent that humans do," says Andrea Migliano (@andrea_migliano), principal investigator of the Leverhulme Trust-funded Hunter-Gatherers Resilience Project. "Hunter-gatherers' multi-level social structure exists in different groups, to help regulate these cooperative systems. Furthermore, multi-level social structures regulate social rules, friendship and kinship ties, and the spread of social norms, promoting a more efficient sharing and cooperation. Sharing is a crucial adaptation to hunter-gatherers' lifestyles, central to their resilience--and central to the evolution of mankind."
•••••
"Cooperation and especially food sharing are essential for survival in a hunting-and-gathering economy," Dyble says. "The proverb that 'it takes a village to raise a child' is certainly true for hunter-gatherers, who, without food sharing to mitigate the day-to-day shortfalls in foraging, could simply not survive."
•••••
Monday, July 11, 2016
Surprise! This eukaryote completely lacks mitochondria
Mitochondria were originally separate single cell organism that were incorporated into the cells of eukaryotes. So it appears that it is still the case that all the eukaryotes we know about depend on processes they incorporated from other forms of life.
Public Release: 12-May-2016
Surprise! This eukaryote completely lacks mitochondria
Cell Press
Mitochondria are membrane-bound components within cells that are often described as the cells' powerhouses. They've long been considered as essential components for life in eukaryotes, the group including plants, fungi, animals, and unicellular protists, if for no other reason than that every known eukaryote had them. But researchers reporting in the Cell Press journal Current Biology on May 12, 2016 now challenge this notion. They've discovered a eukaryote that contains absolutely no trace of mitochondria at all.
"In low-oxygen environments, eukaryotes often possess a reduced form of the mitochondrion, but it was believed that some of the mitochondrial functions are so essential that these organelles are indispensable for their life," says Anna Karnkowska, a former post-doctoral fellow at Charles University in Prague who is now at the University of British Columbia in Vancouver, Canada. "We have characterized a eukaryotic microbe which indeed possesses no mitochondrion at all."
•••••
Monocercomonoides seems to have gotten by without mitochondria thanks to a cytosolic sulfur mobilization system (SUF) that they acquired from bacteria and that appears to substitute for essential mitochondrial functions. Through a unique combination of events including the loss of many mitochondrial functions and the acquisition of this essential machinery from prokaryotes, "this organism has evolved beyond the known limits that biologists circumscribed," Karnkowska says.
•••••
Tuesday, June 28, 2016
Culture, crowding and social influence all tied to aggressive driving behavior
This describes drivers in Atlanta, Georgia. But several years ago, when I went to Birmingham, Alabama, there was a big contrast. Drivers were considerate. In Georgia, if you put on a turn signal, usually people will try to block you from changing your lane, so if I'm going to need to turn left, I get in the left lane well ahead of time. If I don't, chances are I won't be able to get into the left lane when I need to, and will miss my turn. But in Birmingham, when I put on my turn signal, people let me over, so I didn't have to get in the left lane so far ahead.http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2016-04/osu-cca042616.php
Public Release: 26-Apr-2016
Culture, crowding and social influence all tied to aggressive driving behavior
Oregon State University
A study of angry, competitive and aggressive driving suggests that these dangerous behaviors are becoming a worldwide phenomenon of almost epidemic proportions, and are a reflection of a person's surrounding culture, both on the road and on a broader social level.
The research was done with drivers in China where competitive driving is very common. It concluded that such behavior is more pronounced in men than in women, and is partly a reaction to overcrowded road networks. The study also implies that different social conditions might ultimately translate into better drivers.
•••••
At its worst, aggressive driving can be seen as "road rage" leading to serious or fatal accidents. In lesser forms it is viewed as "competitive" behavior that includes speeding, crowding or lane-hopping that drivers often use to gain a few minutes in an urban rush hour. In all its variations, this behavior is a problem that appears to be increasing. The American Automobile Association estimated that 56 percent of accidents involve aggressive driving.
"China is a good place to study competitive driving because it's very common there," said Haizhong Wang, an assistant professor of transportation engineering in the OSU College of Engineering. "Roads are overcrowded, there's less traffic control, and many drivers are younger or have little training or experience."
The problems in China as it becomes increasingly crowded with drivers, however, reflect similar concerns at varying levels around the world, Wang said. Urban areas and road networks are becoming more crowded and congested. Research such as this may help to better understand the underlying human and psychological behaviors that come into play.
In this analysis, the researchers concluded that drivers in congested situations generally believed that the chaotic traffic state was responsible for their competitive behavior, and they had no option other than to compete for space, the right-of-way, and gain advantages through speed and spacing. In simple terms, it was right and proper that they should try to keep up with or get ahead of traffic; that was the example being set for them, and they drove that way because everyone else did.
However, the study also suggested that "personality traits draw on and are influenced by aspects of one's social environment." The researchers said in their report that this indicates some countries and cultures may be more susceptible due to their social environment, and that improvements in that arena would also be seen in driving behavior.
"The choice to be competitive versus cooperative always starts with culture, by the influences around us and the way other people behave," Wang said. "And it's clear there's a role for education and experience, where studies have shown the value of young drivers participating in driver education programs and receiving positive guidance from their parents and peers."
•••••
As more areas around the world see increasing traffic congestion, Wang said, part of the psychological challenge will be to retain a sense of personal responsibility, avoid mimicking dangerous behaviors of other drivers, and strive for a level of tolerance, courtesy and personal cooperation essential for safe driving.
Tuesday, May 10, 2016
Suffering warthogs seek out nit-picking mongooses for relief
http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2016-03/wcs-sws030716.php
Public Release: 9-Mar-2016
Suffering warthogs seek out nit-picking mongooses for relief
Partnership is a rare example of mammals that exhibit 'mutualism'
Wildlife Conservation Society
Warthogs living in Uganda have learned to rid themselves of annoying ticks by seeking out the grooming services of some accommodating neighbors: a group of mongooses looking for snacks.
Specifically, the warthogs of Queen Elizabeth National Park have learned to lie down in the presence of banded mongooses. In response, the mongoose cleaning crew have learned to inspect the wild pigs for ticks, going so far as to climb on top of their customers to gain access to more parasites.
•••••
"Such partnerships between different mammal species are rare, and this particular interaction illustrates a great deal of trust between participants," said Dr. Andy Plumptre, Director for WCS Albertine Rift Program and author of the published description of the behavior. "It makes you wonder what else may be happening between species that we don't see because, in order to see it, both species need to be unafraid of people."
•••••
The warthog-mongoose encounter is a rare example of mammals exhibiting a symbiotic relationship called mutualism, where two animal species form a partnership with benefits for both groups. The warthogs get a cleaning and the mongooses get a meal. Other examples of mutualism include rhinos, zebras, and other animals that receive visits from parasite-eating birds called oxpeckers, and bees that feed on the nectar of flowers and deliver pollen to other plants.
"Wild pigs never fail to amaze me," commented Dr. Erik Meijaard, Chair of the IUCN/SSC Wild Pigs Specialist Group. "Not many scientists are interested in studying the 18 species of wild pig, but behaviors like the one described here, reiterate how uniquely adaptive, intelligent, and even cute wild pigs are. Pigs play important roles in ecosystem and their protection helps many other species."
Public Release: 9-Mar-2016
Suffering warthogs seek out nit-picking mongooses for relief
Partnership is a rare example of mammals that exhibit 'mutualism'
Wildlife Conservation Society
Warthogs living in Uganda have learned to rid themselves of annoying ticks by seeking out the grooming services of some accommodating neighbors: a group of mongooses looking for snacks.
Specifically, the warthogs of Queen Elizabeth National Park have learned to lie down in the presence of banded mongooses. In response, the mongoose cleaning crew have learned to inspect the wild pigs for ticks, going so far as to climb on top of their customers to gain access to more parasites.
•••••
"Such partnerships between different mammal species are rare, and this particular interaction illustrates a great deal of trust between participants," said Dr. Andy Plumptre, Director for WCS Albertine Rift Program and author of the published description of the behavior. "It makes you wonder what else may be happening between species that we don't see because, in order to see it, both species need to be unafraid of people."
•••••
The warthog-mongoose encounter is a rare example of mammals exhibiting a symbiotic relationship called mutualism, where two animal species form a partnership with benefits for both groups. The warthogs get a cleaning and the mongooses get a meal. Other examples of mutualism include rhinos, zebras, and other animals that receive visits from parasite-eating birds called oxpeckers, and bees that feed on the nectar of flowers and deliver pollen to other plants.
"Wild pigs never fail to amaze me," commented Dr. Erik Meijaard, Chair of the IUCN/SSC Wild Pigs Specialist Group. "Not many scientists are interested in studying the 18 species of wild pig, but behaviors like the one described here, reiterate how uniquely adaptive, intelligent, and even cute wild pigs are. Pigs play important roles in ecosystem and their protection helps many other species."
Friday, April 22, 2016
Do we have free will?
I don't think that what these researchers call "free will" is really what most people mean when they say we have free will. It seems to me that the automatic contrariness is the opposite of what we usually mean by free will.
Public Release: 29-Feb-2016
Do we have free will?
A study by UCSB psychologists explores how disbelief in free will corrupts intuitive cooperation
University of California - Santa Barbara
•••••
The results show that while people are intuitively cooperative, challenging their belief in free will corrupts this behavior and leads to impulsive selfishness. However, when given time to think, participants are able to override the inclination toward self-interest.
"Challenging a person's belief in free will corrupts the more automatic and intuitive mental processes," said corresponding author Protzko, a postdoctoral scholar in Schooler's META (Memory, Emotion, Thought, Awareness) Lab in UCSB's Department of Psychological & Brain Sciences. "Our study suggests that a challenge to an individual's belief in free will can shift this default mechanism -- at least temporarily -- to become intuitively uncooperative and cause an individual to act in their own self-interest." [I would say "perceived" self-interest, since the inclination to cooperation is in our self-interest.]
•••••
"Challenging a person's belief in free will did not seem to provide them with a conscious justification for uncooperative behavior," Protzko said. "If it did, we should have observed fewer contributions when people were given adequate time to think about their decision on the amount to contribute.
"It's very damaging to hear that we don't have free will," said Protzko. "Discounting free will changes the way we see things. Yet given time, we recover and go about our lives as though nothing were different."
Monday, October 12, 2015
Ravens cooperate -- but not with just anyone
http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2015-10/uov-rc-100715.php
Public Release: 7-Oct-2015
Ravens cooperate -- but not with just anyone
Ravens detect cheaters in cooperation
University of Vienna
Several recent studies have already revealed that ravens are among the most intelligent species of birds and even species in general. The cognitive biologists from the University of Vienna now add cooperation the ravens' already impressive resume. "From the wild, it was already known that ravens are able to cooperate when, for example, mobbing predators. But using an experimental set-up working with captive ravens now allowed us to investigate, how exactly they do so", says lead-author Jorg Massen.
In the experiment two ravens had to simultaneously pull the two ends of one rope to slide a platform with two pieces of cheese into reach. If, however, only one individual would pull, the rope would slip through the loops on the platform and the birds were left with the rope and without cheese. Without any training the ravens spontaneously solved this task and cooperated successfully. However, it turned out that they didn't do equally well with everybody, and that they rather work together with friends than with enemies.
Interesting was what happened when one of the two birds cheated and instead of taking only its own reward, also stole the reward of its companion. The victims of such cheats immediately noticed and started defecting in further trials with the same individual. "Such a sophisticated way of keeping your partner in check has previously only been shown in humans and chimpanzees, and is a complete novelty among birds", ends Massen.
Public Release: 7-Oct-2015
Ravens cooperate -- but not with just anyone
Ravens detect cheaters in cooperation
University of Vienna
Several recent studies have already revealed that ravens are among the most intelligent species of birds and even species in general. The cognitive biologists from the University of Vienna now add cooperation the ravens' already impressive resume. "From the wild, it was already known that ravens are able to cooperate when, for example, mobbing predators. But using an experimental set-up working with captive ravens now allowed us to investigate, how exactly they do so", says lead-author Jorg Massen.
In the experiment two ravens had to simultaneously pull the two ends of one rope to slide a platform with two pieces of cheese into reach. If, however, only one individual would pull, the rope would slip through the loops on the platform and the birds were left with the rope and without cheese. Without any training the ravens spontaneously solved this task and cooperated successfully. However, it turned out that they didn't do equally well with everybody, and that they rather work together with friends than with enemies.
Interesting was what happened when one of the two birds cheated and instead of taking only its own reward, also stole the reward of its companion. The victims of such cheats immediately noticed and started defecting in further trials with the same individual. "Such a sophisticated way of keeping your partner in check has previously only been shown in humans and chimpanzees, and is a complete novelty among birds", ends Massen.
Tuesday, July 28, 2015
Resolving social conflict is key to survival of bacterial communities
http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2015-07/uoc--rsc072015.php
Public Release: 22-Jul-2015
University of California - San Diego
Far from being selfish organisms whose sole purpose is to maximize their own reproduction, bacteria in large communities work for the greater good by resolving a social conflict among individuals to enhance the survival of their entire community.
It turns out that, much like human societies, bacterial communities benefit when they can balance opposing needs within the group.
The discovery of this unusual behavior among bacteria in large communities, detailed in a paper in the July 22 advance online publication of Nature, comes not from any inherent altruism among the bacteria. Instead, it "emerges" spontaneously from the community in which the bacteria grow.
"It's an example of what we call 'emergent phenomena'," explained Gürol Süel, an associate professor of molecular biology at UC San Diego who headed the research effort. "Emergent phenomena are processes that you cannot observe or understand if you are studying individuals. You can only understand the process if you look at the collective."
Süel and his colleagues observed this unusual phenomenon while carefully measuring the growth of a microbial community called a "biofilm." Such communities of bacteria and other microorganisms form thin structures on surfaces--such as the tartar that develops on teeth--that are highly resistant to chemicals and antibiotics.
•••••
the researchers discovered that these oscillations resolved a social conflict between individual cells that were cooperating, but also had to compete for food. The reason these biofilms are so hardy is that individuals within the community manage to resolve this internal conflict through coordinating their activities in space and time.
•••••
The conflict is essentially this: Bacteria at the outer edges of the biofilm are the most vulnerable within their community to chemical and antibiotic attacks. At the same time, they also provide protection to the interior cells. But the bacteria at the outer edge are the closest to nutrients necessary for growth. So if they grow unchecked, they can consume all the food and starve the sheltered interior cells.
But that doesn't happen, because the biofilm develops an ingenious solution to this problem that the scientists call "metabolic codependence." Essentially, the interior cells produce a metabolite necessary for the growth of the bacteria on the outside. This provides the inner cells with the ability to periodically put the brakes on the growth of outer cells, which otherwise would consume all the food and starve the cells they are protecting from attack. By periodically preventing the growth on the periphery, inner cells ensure that they have sufficient access to nutrients. By keeping the protected inner cells alive, the biofilm has a much higher chance of surviving antibiotic treatment.
This strategy allows bacteria with conflicting needs to take turns, like drivers approaching an intersection from different directions. In many ways, the internal social conflict within bacterial communities is not unlike the conflicts that opposing groups of individuals must find ways to resolve in order to maintain successful nations or communities.
"Here we have simple bacteria that are genetically identical," added Süel, "and yet in the process of forming a community, they develop distinct areas, like a medieval castle with protective walls manned by soldiers that can provide protection for peasant families to ensure survival of their clan. The fact that you're starting a community where individuals will find themselves either manning the walls or being tucked away inside the castle, gives rise to this emergent phenomenon where you have a division of labor. The bacteria are not 'aware' of this division of labor, none of the bacteria are doing anything consciously. It's something that just emerges out of the complexity of a system with social interactions."
[It "emerges" because those who do it survive better than those who don't.]
•••••
"We developed new techniques to precisely measure biofilm growth, and then quantitatively perturbed the system," said Süel. "And what we found was that the metabolic pathway in question may have been selected for this process by evolution because it involves a small molecule, ammonium, which can diffuse, that is, can get in and out of the cell quickly and can be shared among bacteria."
The discovery that bacteria essentially signal one another with this ammonium metabolite also allows them to chemically communicate with one another over very long distances.
Because the discovery offers a new way to control the growth of biofilms by eliminating the co-dependence of the interior and exterior bacteria, making them selfish rather than altruistic, UC San Diego has submitted a patent application to license the discovery.
"This is a new way to also think about attacking disease-causing biofilms, which are responsible for two-thirds of infections in hospital clinics and are a thousand times more resistant to antibiotics than the same bacterial cell might be outside the biofilm," Süel explained. "We allow the peripheral cells to become selfish or independent and then they kill the protected interior cells for us."
Beyond the obvious medical and industrial applications, bacterial communities may also offer some other lessons for modern society.
"The social conflict we studied is directly applicable to conflicts that arise in human societies," added Süel. "We all face the social dilemma where supporting others, even our competitors, may ultimately make our society stronger. We may be able to learn more about how to resolve our own social conflicts by studying bacterial societies."
Public Release: 22-Jul-2015
University of California - San Diego
Far from being selfish organisms whose sole purpose is to maximize their own reproduction, bacteria in large communities work for the greater good by resolving a social conflict among individuals to enhance the survival of their entire community.
It turns out that, much like human societies, bacterial communities benefit when they can balance opposing needs within the group.
The discovery of this unusual behavior among bacteria in large communities, detailed in a paper in the July 22 advance online publication of Nature, comes not from any inherent altruism among the bacteria. Instead, it "emerges" spontaneously from the community in which the bacteria grow.
"It's an example of what we call 'emergent phenomena'," explained Gürol Süel, an associate professor of molecular biology at UC San Diego who headed the research effort. "Emergent phenomena are processes that you cannot observe or understand if you are studying individuals. You can only understand the process if you look at the collective."
Süel and his colleagues observed this unusual phenomenon while carefully measuring the growth of a microbial community called a "biofilm." Such communities of bacteria and other microorganisms form thin structures on surfaces--such as the tartar that develops on teeth--that are highly resistant to chemicals and antibiotics.
•••••
the researchers discovered that these oscillations resolved a social conflict between individual cells that were cooperating, but also had to compete for food. The reason these biofilms are so hardy is that individuals within the community manage to resolve this internal conflict through coordinating their activities in space and time.
•••••
The conflict is essentially this: Bacteria at the outer edges of the biofilm are the most vulnerable within their community to chemical and antibiotic attacks. At the same time, they also provide protection to the interior cells. But the bacteria at the outer edge are the closest to nutrients necessary for growth. So if they grow unchecked, they can consume all the food and starve the sheltered interior cells.
But that doesn't happen, because the biofilm develops an ingenious solution to this problem that the scientists call "metabolic codependence." Essentially, the interior cells produce a metabolite necessary for the growth of the bacteria on the outside. This provides the inner cells with the ability to periodically put the brakes on the growth of outer cells, which otherwise would consume all the food and starve the cells they are protecting from attack. By periodically preventing the growth on the periphery, inner cells ensure that they have sufficient access to nutrients. By keeping the protected inner cells alive, the biofilm has a much higher chance of surviving antibiotic treatment.
This strategy allows bacteria with conflicting needs to take turns, like drivers approaching an intersection from different directions. In many ways, the internal social conflict within bacterial communities is not unlike the conflicts that opposing groups of individuals must find ways to resolve in order to maintain successful nations or communities.
"Here we have simple bacteria that are genetically identical," added Süel, "and yet in the process of forming a community, they develop distinct areas, like a medieval castle with protective walls manned by soldiers that can provide protection for peasant families to ensure survival of their clan. The fact that you're starting a community where individuals will find themselves either manning the walls or being tucked away inside the castle, gives rise to this emergent phenomenon where you have a division of labor. The bacteria are not 'aware' of this division of labor, none of the bacteria are doing anything consciously. It's something that just emerges out of the complexity of a system with social interactions."
[It "emerges" because those who do it survive better than those who don't.]
•••••
"We developed new techniques to precisely measure biofilm growth, and then quantitatively perturbed the system," said Süel. "And what we found was that the metabolic pathway in question may have been selected for this process by evolution because it involves a small molecule, ammonium, which can diffuse, that is, can get in and out of the cell quickly and can be shared among bacteria."
The discovery that bacteria essentially signal one another with this ammonium metabolite also allows them to chemically communicate with one another over very long distances.
Because the discovery offers a new way to control the growth of biofilms by eliminating the co-dependence of the interior and exterior bacteria, making them selfish rather than altruistic, UC San Diego has submitted a patent application to license the discovery.
"This is a new way to also think about attacking disease-causing biofilms, which are responsible for two-thirds of infections in hospital clinics and are a thousand times more resistant to antibiotics than the same bacterial cell might be outside the biofilm," Süel explained. "We allow the peripheral cells to become selfish or independent and then they kill the protected interior cells for us."
Beyond the obvious medical and industrial applications, bacterial communities may also offer some other lessons for modern society.
"The social conflict we studied is directly applicable to conflicts that arise in human societies," added Süel. "We all face the social dilemma where supporting others, even our competitors, may ultimately make our society stronger. We may be able to learn more about how to resolve our own social conflicts by studying bacterial societies."
Friday, June 19, 2015
Three-year-olds help victims of injustice
http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2015-06/m-thv061815.php
Public Release: 18-Jun-2015
Max-Planck-Gesellschaft
Toddlers have a reputation for being stubborn, selfish, and incapable of sharing. But researchers from the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology in Leipzig (Germany) and the University of Manchester (UK) have found that children as young as three actually will show a surprising level of concern for others and an intuitive sense of restorative justice. Young children prefer to return lost items to their rightful owners, the studies show. If for some reason that is not an option, young children will still prevent a third party from taking what does not belong to them. What is more, both three- and five-year-old children are just as likely to respond to the needs of another individual--even when that individual is a puppet--as they are to their own. The findings in young children from Germany offer new insight into the nature of justice itself, the researchers say.
"The chief implication is that a concern for others--empathy, for example--is a core component of a sense of justice," says Keith Jensen of the University of Manchester. "This sense of justice based on harm to victims is likely to be central to human prosociality as well as punishment, both of which form the basis of uniquely human cooperation."
In human society, cooperation is often encouraged by punishing free-riders. However, earlier studies have shown that chimpanzees do not punish cheaters unless they themselves have been harmed directly. One way to understand the roots of justice in human society is to study the early emergence of the trait in young children. Studies have shown that children are more likely to share with a puppet that helped another individual than with one who behaved badly. They also prefer to see punishment delivered to a doll that deserves it than one that does not. By the age of six, children will pay a price to punish fictional and real peers. Preschoolers can also be encouraged with threats of punishment to behave more generously.
•••••
The findings highlight the value of third-party interventions for human cooperation. They might also come in handy for parents and teachers of preschoolers. "The take-home message is that preschool children are sensitive to harm to others, and given a choice would rather restore things to help the victim than punish the perpetrator," Jensen says. "Rather than punish children for wrong-doings or discuss the wrong-doings of others in punitive or perpetrator-focused ways, children might better understand harm done to the victim and restoration as the solution."
Public Release: 18-Jun-2015
Max-Planck-Gesellschaft
Toddlers have a reputation for being stubborn, selfish, and incapable of sharing. But researchers from the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology in Leipzig (Germany) and the University of Manchester (UK) have found that children as young as three actually will show a surprising level of concern for others and an intuitive sense of restorative justice. Young children prefer to return lost items to their rightful owners, the studies show. If for some reason that is not an option, young children will still prevent a third party from taking what does not belong to them. What is more, both three- and five-year-old children are just as likely to respond to the needs of another individual--even when that individual is a puppet--as they are to their own. The findings in young children from Germany offer new insight into the nature of justice itself, the researchers say.
"The chief implication is that a concern for others--empathy, for example--is a core component of a sense of justice," says Keith Jensen of the University of Manchester. "This sense of justice based on harm to victims is likely to be central to human prosociality as well as punishment, both of which form the basis of uniquely human cooperation."
In human society, cooperation is often encouraged by punishing free-riders. However, earlier studies have shown that chimpanzees do not punish cheaters unless they themselves have been harmed directly. One way to understand the roots of justice in human society is to study the early emergence of the trait in young children. Studies have shown that children are more likely to share with a puppet that helped another individual than with one who behaved badly. They also prefer to see punishment delivered to a doll that deserves it than one that does not. By the age of six, children will pay a price to punish fictional and real peers. Preschoolers can also be encouraged with threats of punishment to behave more generously.
•••••
The findings highlight the value of third-party interventions for human cooperation. They might also come in handy for parents and teachers of preschoolers. "The take-home message is that preschool children are sensitive to harm to others, and given a choice would rather restore things to help the victim than punish the perpetrator," Jensen says. "Rather than punish children for wrong-doings or discuss the wrong-doings of others in punitive or perpetrator-focused ways, children might better understand harm done to the victim and restoration as the solution."
Thursday, May 28, 2015
High levels of cynicism associated with lower income levels later in life
http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2015-05/apa-nme052715.php
Public Release: 28-May-2015
American Psychological Association
Holding cynical beliefs about others may have a negative effect on your income according to research published by the American Psychological Association.
"While previous research has associated cynicism with detrimental outcomes across a wide range of spheres of life, including physical health, psychological well-being and marital adjustment, the present research has established an association between cynicism and individual economic success," says Olga Stavrova, PhD, a research associate at the Institute of Sociology and Social Psychology, University of Cologne, Germany, and lead author on the study which appears in the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology.
•••••
In both studies, a high level of cynicism was associated with lower income.
Another study, focusing on a nationally representative sample of approximately 16,000 people in Germany, found that after nine years people with low levels of cynicism earned on average $300 per month more than their more cynical counterparts.
The final study examined the potential universality of these findings, looking at survey data from 41 countries to see if societal factors could play a role. The negative association between cynicism and lower income was strongest in countries with higher levels of altruistic behavior, lower homicide rates and lower levels of overall societal cynicism.
"There are actually some countries where cynical individuals do not necessarily earn less than their less cynical compatriots," said Stavrova. "These countries are those with pervasively high societal cynicism scores, rare pro-social behavior (e.g., charity donations) and widespread antisocial behavior (as indicated by high homicide rates) - in other words, countries where cynicism might be justified or even somewhat functional."
One reason for these findings could be that cynical individuals are less likely to trust others and therefore forgo cooperation opportunities, said Stavrova. They are more likely to suspect mean motives behind other people's behavior, might be less likely to join collaborative efforts and may avoid asking for help in case of need, which may eventually undermine their economic success.
"For example, employees who believe others to be exploitative and dishonest are likely to avoid collaborative projects and to forgo the related opportunities," said Stavrova. Similarly, cynical individuals might be likely to overinvest resources on protecting themselves from potential deceit, "covering their backs" at costs of focusing on their jobs.
•••••
Public Release: 28-May-2015
American Psychological Association
Holding cynical beliefs about others may have a negative effect on your income according to research published by the American Psychological Association.
"While previous research has associated cynicism with detrimental outcomes across a wide range of spheres of life, including physical health, psychological well-being and marital adjustment, the present research has established an association between cynicism and individual economic success," says Olga Stavrova, PhD, a research associate at the Institute of Sociology and Social Psychology, University of Cologne, Germany, and lead author on the study which appears in the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology.
•••••
In both studies, a high level of cynicism was associated with lower income.
Another study, focusing on a nationally representative sample of approximately 16,000 people in Germany, found that after nine years people with low levels of cynicism earned on average $300 per month more than their more cynical counterparts.
The final study examined the potential universality of these findings, looking at survey data from 41 countries to see if societal factors could play a role. The negative association between cynicism and lower income was strongest in countries with higher levels of altruistic behavior, lower homicide rates and lower levels of overall societal cynicism.
"There are actually some countries where cynical individuals do not necessarily earn less than their less cynical compatriots," said Stavrova. "These countries are those with pervasively high societal cynicism scores, rare pro-social behavior (e.g., charity donations) and widespread antisocial behavior (as indicated by high homicide rates) - in other words, countries where cynicism might be justified or even somewhat functional."
One reason for these findings could be that cynical individuals are less likely to trust others and therefore forgo cooperation opportunities, said Stavrova. They are more likely to suspect mean motives behind other people's behavior, might be less likely to join collaborative efforts and may avoid asking for help in case of need, which may eventually undermine their economic success.
"For example, employees who believe others to be exploitative and dishonest are likely to avoid collaborative projects and to forgo the related opportunities," said Stavrova. Similarly, cynical individuals might be likely to overinvest resources on protecting themselves from potential deceit, "covering their backs" at costs of focusing on their jobs.
•••••
Pinpointing natural cancer drug's true origins brings sustainable production a step closer
http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2015-05/uom-pnc052715.php
Public Release: 27-May-2015
University of Michigan
or decades, scientists have known that ET-743, a compound extracted from a marine invertebrate called a mangrove tunicate, can kill cancer cells. The drug has been approved for use in patients in Europe and is in clinical trials in the U.S.
Scientists suspected the mangrove tunicate, which is a type of a sea squirt, doesn't actually make ET-743. But the precise origins of the drug, which is also known as trabectedin, were a mystery.
By analyzing the genome of the tunicate along with the microbes that live inside it using advanced sequencing techniques, researchers at the University of Michigan were able to isolate the genetic blueprint of the ET-743's producer--which turns out to be a type of bacteria called Candidatus Endoecteinascidia frumentensis.
•••••
"These symbiotic microbes have long been thought to be the true sources of many of the natural products that have been isolated from invertebrates in the ocean and on the land. But very little is known about them because we're not able to get most of them to grow in a laboratory setting," said study senior author David Sherman, the Hans W. Vahlteich Professor of Medicinal Chemistry in the College of Pharmacy and a faculty member of the U-M Life Sciences Institute, where his lab is located.
•••••
Public Release: 27-May-2015
University of Michigan
or decades, scientists have known that ET-743, a compound extracted from a marine invertebrate called a mangrove tunicate, can kill cancer cells. The drug has been approved for use in patients in Europe and is in clinical trials in the U.S.
Scientists suspected the mangrove tunicate, which is a type of a sea squirt, doesn't actually make ET-743. But the precise origins of the drug, which is also known as trabectedin, were a mystery.
By analyzing the genome of the tunicate along with the microbes that live inside it using advanced sequencing techniques, researchers at the University of Michigan were able to isolate the genetic blueprint of the ET-743's producer--which turns out to be a type of bacteria called Candidatus Endoecteinascidia frumentensis.
•••••
"These symbiotic microbes have long been thought to be the true sources of many of the natural products that have been isolated from invertebrates in the ocean and on the land. But very little is known about them because we're not able to get most of them to grow in a laboratory setting," said study senior author David Sherman, the Hans W. Vahlteich Professor of Medicinal Chemistry in the College of Pharmacy and a faculty member of the U-M Life Sciences Institute, where his lab is located.
•••••
Friday, May 22, 2015
Bacteria cooperate to repair damaged siblings
http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2015-05/uow-bct052115.php
Public Release: 21-May-2015
University of Wyoming
A University of Wyoming faculty member led a research team that discovered a certain type of soil bacteria can use their social behavior of outer membrane exchange (OME) to repair damaged cells and improve the fitness of the bacteria population as a whole.
Daniel Wall, a UW associate professor in the Department of Molecular Biology, and others were able to show that damaged sustained by the outer membrane (OM) of a myxobacteria cell population was repaired by a healthy population using the process of OME. The research revealed that these social organisms benefit from group behavior that endows favorable fitness consequences among kin cells.
Wall says, to the research group's knowledge, this is the first evidence that a bacterium can use cell-content sharing to repair damaged siblings.
"It is analogous to how a wound in your body can be healed," Wall says. "When your body is wounded, your cells can coordinate their functions to heal the damaged tissue."
•••••
These myxobacterial cells, in their native environments, must cope with factors that compromise the integrity of the cell, Wall says. Rather than looking out only for themselves like other bacterial species, the individual myxobacteria cells band together as a social group to assist their kin that become damaged.
"Myxobacteria are unusual for bacteria in that they have a true multicellular life," Wall says. "Researchers are interested in how the evolutionary transition occurred toward multi-cellularity; that is, how cooperation develops and single cells are not just interested in themselves. The Darwinian view is that each individual is out for themselves; 'survival of the fittest.'"
"When environmental cells come together, they compete with each other," Wall continues. "With OME, we think it allows myxobacteria cells to transition from a heterogeneous single cellular life to a more harmonious multicellular life."
•••••
"The most direct applicability could be for antibiotic resistance," Wall says. "Within the paper, Chris did an experiment where one strain of myxobacteria conferred antibiotic resistance to another strain. This works by the cells transferring their OM armor.
•••••
Public Release: 21-May-2015
University of Wyoming
A University of Wyoming faculty member led a research team that discovered a certain type of soil bacteria can use their social behavior of outer membrane exchange (OME) to repair damaged cells and improve the fitness of the bacteria population as a whole.
Daniel Wall, a UW associate professor in the Department of Molecular Biology, and others were able to show that damaged sustained by the outer membrane (OM) of a myxobacteria cell population was repaired by a healthy population using the process of OME. The research revealed that these social organisms benefit from group behavior that endows favorable fitness consequences among kin cells.
Wall says, to the research group's knowledge, this is the first evidence that a bacterium can use cell-content sharing to repair damaged siblings.
"It is analogous to how a wound in your body can be healed," Wall says. "When your body is wounded, your cells can coordinate their functions to heal the damaged tissue."
•••••
These myxobacterial cells, in their native environments, must cope with factors that compromise the integrity of the cell, Wall says. Rather than looking out only for themselves like other bacterial species, the individual myxobacteria cells band together as a social group to assist their kin that become damaged.
"Myxobacteria are unusual for bacteria in that they have a true multicellular life," Wall says. "Researchers are interested in how the evolutionary transition occurred toward multi-cellularity; that is, how cooperation develops and single cells are not just interested in themselves. The Darwinian view is that each individual is out for themselves; 'survival of the fittest.'"
"When environmental cells come together, they compete with each other," Wall continues. "With OME, we think it allows myxobacteria cells to transition from a heterogeneous single cellular life to a more harmonious multicellular life."
•••••
"The most direct applicability could be for antibiotic resistance," Wall says. "Within the paper, Chris did an experiment where one strain of myxobacteria conferred antibiotic resistance to another strain. This works by the cells transferring their OM armor.
•••••
Monday, May 18, 2015
Chronic illness causes less harm when carnivores cooperate
http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2015-05/ps-cic051715.php
Public Release: 18-May-2015
Penn State
Gray wolves in Yellowstone National Park have given researchers the first scientific evidence from wild mammals that living in a group can lessen the impacts of a chronic disease. The research also is one of the first studies to measure the costs of infected non-human individuals of any species on members of their group. A paper describing the research will be published in Ecology Letters on May 18, 2015.
"Our research with wolves illustrates that social groups can help to offset the survival costs of infection with the parasite that causes mange," said Emily Almberg, a research scientist at Penn State University and the lead author of the study. "It suggests that social living might help individuals cope with a variety of other chronic conditions -- including other infections, physical injuries, or non-infectious diseases -- for which having access to supportive care and resources can make a big difference for survival."
The study revealed that wolves living alone while infected with mange had a death rate that was five times higher than uninfected wolves living alone. The study also revealed that wolves infected with mange that were living in a pack with at least five other healthy wolves had the same rate of death as their healthy companions. "Our hypothesis is that pack-mates are able to offset the survival costs of infection with mange -- and perhaps other infections -- by assisting with food acquisition and territory defense," said Peter Hudson, the senior author of the paper, director of the Huck Institutes of Life Sciences and Willaman Professor of Biology at Penn State, and a professor at the Nelson Mandela Institute in Tanzania.
The research also revealed that the size of the wolf pack did not predict the risk of individuals becoming infected with mange. But, Almberg said, there are other situations in which social living does come with an increased risk of disease transmission. "What we've under-appreciated in the past are the ways in which social species might compensate for this increased disease risk," she said. "In some cases, social species exhibit adaptive behavior to limit the spread of disease -- things like defending territories or having distinct social roles within the group that limit contact and therefore disease transmission, but our research has shown that group living can alleviate the actual cost of an infection as measured by survival rates."
Public Release: 18-May-2015
Penn State
Gray wolves in Yellowstone National Park have given researchers the first scientific evidence from wild mammals that living in a group can lessen the impacts of a chronic disease. The research also is one of the first studies to measure the costs of infected non-human individuals of any species on members of their group. A paper describing the research will be published in Ecology Letters on May 18, 2015.
"Our research with wolves illustrates that social groups can help to offset the survival costs of infection with the parasite that causes mange," said Emily Almberg, a research scientist at Penn State University and the lead author of the study. "It suggests that social living might help individuals cope with a variety of other chronic conditions -- including other infections, physical injuries, or non-infectious diseases -- for which having access to supportive care and resources can make a big difference for survival."
The study revealed that wolves living alone while infected with mange had a death rate that was five times higher than uninfected wolves living alone. The study also revealed that wolves infected with mange that were living in a pack with at least five other healthy wolves had the same rate of death as their healthy companions. "Our hypothesis is that pack-mates are able to offset the survival costs of infection with mange -- and perhaps other infections -- by assisting with food acquisition and territory defense," said Peter Hudson, the senior author of the paper, director of the Huck Institutes of Life Sciences and Willaman Professor of Biology at Penn State, and a professor at the Nelson Mandela Institute in Tanzania.
The research also revealed that the size of the wolf pack did not predict the risk of individuals becoming infected with mange. But, Almberg said, there are other situations in which social living does come with an increased risk of disease transmission. "What we've under-appreciated in the past are the ways in which social species might compensate for this increased disease risk," she said. "In some cases, social species exhibit adaptive behavior to limit the spread of disease -- things like defending territories or having distinct social roles within the group that limit contact and therefore disease transmission, but our research has shown that group living can alleviate the actual cost of an infection as measured by survival rates."
Saturday, May 16, 2015
Cooperative video game play elicits pro-social behavior, research finds
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2015/05/150508105656.htm
Date: May 8, 2015
Source: Texas Tech University
Summary:
A new study examined aggressive behavior between subjects playing games cooperatively, competitively and by themselves. It seems playing video games cooperatively with others can lead to widespread benefits by making players think helpful behaviors are valuable and commonplace.
One Texas Tech University researcher wondered about the implications of teaming up with others in video games and how this differs from playing alone, competitively, or not at all. It seems playing video games cooperatively with others can lead to widespread benefits by making players think helpful behaviors are valuable and commonplace.
•••••
"What we found was cooperative play seems to have the biggest effect in terms of decreasing aggression toward other people," Velez said. "We found that playing with a helpful partner increases the expectation of others to reciprocate that pro-social behavior and generally be helpful. That applies to not only the teammate, but to others as well. The other interesting thing we found was when playing with a helpful teammate, you're nicer to the other team you just competed against that tried to beat you, even though you don't expect them to give it back to you."
•••••
Date: May 8, 2015
Source: Texas Tech University
Summary:
A new study examined aggressive behavior between subjects playing games cooperatively, competitively and by themselves. It seems playing video games cooperatively with others can lead to widespread benefits by making players think helpful behaviors are valuable and commonplace.
One Texas Tech University researcher wondered about the implications of teaming up with others in video games and how this differs from playing alone, competitively, or not at all. It seems playing video games cooperatively with others can lead to widespread benefits by making players think helpful behaviors are valuable and commonplace.
•••••
"What we found was cooperative play seems to have the biggest effect in terms of decreasing aggression toward other people," Velez said. "We found that playing with a helpful partner increases the expectation of others to reciprocate that pro-social behavior and generally be helpful. That applies to not only the teammate, but to others as well. The other interesting thing we found was when playing with a helpful teammate, you're nicer to the other team you just competed against that tried to beat you, even though you don't expect them to give it back to you."
•••••
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
