Don’t miss moon and Venus February 28

Tonight – February 28, 2017 – catch the slender waxing crescent moon and the dazzling planet Venus in the western sky after sunset. The moon and Venus will be the first two celestial objects to pop out at evening dusk. That’s because these two rank as the brightest and second-brightest heavenly bodies to light up the nighttime, respectively.

Then, after night truly falls and it’s dark, try spotting the planets Mars and Uranus in a single binocular field of view …

Aim your binoculars at Mars to view Uranus nearby.

Do you have a telescope? This is a super time to aim it at Venus. This world will be passing between us and the sun on March 25 and thus, for some week now, Venus has been waning in phase. In other words, as it nears the (approximate) line between us and the sun, the day side of Venus is shifting more and more away from us.

A telescope reveals Venus in a rather slim crescent phase now. Surprisingly, perhaps, it’s better to look at Venus through a telescope at dusk than at nightfall. The glare of Venus is a bit overwhelming after dark.

Here is a collection of Venus images from December 2016 to February 2017 showing how the size and phase of Venus has changed in recent weeks. On March 25, Venus will pass between the Earth and sun. Afterwards, it’ll emerge into the morning sky. Image via our friend Tom Wildoner at LeisurelyScientist.com.

Once again, the best time to view Venus with the telescope is dusk, so concentrate on the moon and Venus before nightfall. Tonight – February 28 – Venus’ disk is approximately 17% illuminated by sunshine. However, from now until March 25, Venus’ phase will wane (get thinner) while the angular diameter of its disk will increase.

We give you some idea of what’s ahead by listing the phase and angular diameter for certain dates. Remember that 1^o = 60′ and that 1′ = 60″.

February 28, 2017
Venus phase: 17% illuminated
Angular diameter: 47”

March 10, 2017
Venus phase: 8% illuminated
Angular diameter: 54”

March 20, 2017
Venus phase: 2% illuminated
Angular diameter: 59”

Venus will be very close to one second (1′ = 60″) in diameter for a few weeks, centered on March 25, 2017. It’s said that some people can actually see the crescent with the naked eye (or at least binoculars) when its angular diameter is this large.

Venus will come closest to Earth for the year on March 25, 2017 as it passes (more or less) in between the Earth and sun at inferior conjunction. See the diagram below.

By the way, at his particular inferior conjunction, Venus will pass a whopping 8^o north of the sun. That far-northern inferior conjunction will give folks at northerly latitudes (United States, Canada, Europe and northern Asia) a chance to see Venus in both the evening and morning sky for several days in a row, starting on or near March 20.

The Earth and Venus orbit the sun counterclockwise as seen to the north of the solar system plane. Venus reaches its greatest eastern elongation in the evening sky about 72 days before inferior conjunction and its greatest western elongation in the morning sky about 72 days after inferior conjunction. This world exhibits its greatest illuminated extent midway between a greatest elongation and an inferior conjunction.

Bottom line: On February 28, 2017, seek out the moon and Venus at dusk, and then look for Mars and Uranus in the same binocular field at nightfall.

from EarthSky http://ift.tt/2lh01iD

Tonight – February 28, 2017 – catch the slender waxing crescent moon and the dazzling planet Venus in the western sky after sunset. The moon and Venus will be the first two celestial objects to pop out at evening dusk. That’s because these two rank as the brightest and second-brightest heavenly bodies to light up the nighttime, respectively.

Then, after night truly falls and it’s dark, try spotting the planets Mars and Uranus in a single binocular field of view …

Aim your binoculars at Mars to view Uranus nearby.

Do you have a telescope? This is a super time to aim it at Venus. This world will be passing between us and the sun on March 25 and thus, for some week now, Venus has been waning in phase. In other words, as it nears the (approximate) line between us and the sun, the day side of Venus is shifting more and more away from us.

A telescope reveals Venus in a rather slim crescent phase now. Surprisingly, perhaps, it’s better to look at Venus through a telescope at dusk than at nightfall. The glare of Venus is a bit overwhelming after dark.

Here is a collection of Venus images from December 2016 to February 2017 showing how the size and phase of Venus has changed in recent weeks. On March 25, Venus will pass between the Earth and sun. Afterwards, it’ll emerge into the morning sky. Image via our friend Tom Wildoner at LeisurelyScientist.com.

Once again, the best time to view Venus with the telescope is dusk, so concentrate on the moon and Venus before nightfall. Tonight – February 28 – Venus’ disk is approximately 17% illuminated by sunshine. However, from now until March 25, Venus’ phase will wane (get thinner) while the angular diameter of its disk will increase.

We give you some idea of what’s ahead by listing the phase and angular diameter for certain dates. Remember that 1^o = 60′ and that 1′ = 60″.

February 28, 2017
Venus phase: 17% illuminated
Angular diameter: 47”

March 10, 2017
Venus phase: 8% illuminated
Angular diameter: 54”

March 20, 2017
Venus phase: 2% illuminated
Angular diameter: 59”

Venus will be very close to one second (1′ = 60″) in diameter for a few weeks, centered on March 25, 2017. It’s said that some people can actually see the crescent with the naked eye (or at least binoculars) when its angular diameter is this large.

Venus will come closest to Earth for the year on March 25, 2017 as it passes (more or less) in between the Earth and sun at inferior conjunction. See the diagram below.

By the way, at his particular inferior conjunction, Venus will pass a whopping 8^o north of the sun. That far-northern inferior conjunction will give folks at northerly latitudes (United States, Canada, Europe and northern Asia) a chance to see Venus in both the evening and morning sky for several days in a row, starting on or near March 20.

The Earth and Venus orbit the sun counterclockwise as seen to the north of the solar system plane. Venus reaches its greatest eastern elongation in the evening sky about 72 days before inferior conjunction and its greatest western elongation in the morning sky about 72 days after inferior conjunction. This world exhibits its greatest illuminated extent midway between a greatest elongation and an inferior conjunction.

Bottom line: On February 28, 2017, seek out the moon and Venus at dusk, and then look for Mars and Uranus in the same binocular field at nightfall.

from EarthSky http://ift.tt/2lh01iD

Growing meaty fish [Life Lines]

Image of a gilthead sea bream by Roberto Pillon – via Wikimedia Commons

Similar to humans, muscle growth in fish is increased with exercise. Unlike humans, however, teleost fish are able to continue growing in length as well as weight throughout their lives. This type of meat, I mean muscle, growth happens in two ways: 1) muscle cells get bigger and 2) new muscle cells form. Researchers at the University of Barcelona in Spain wanted to know what effect moderate sustained swimming would have on the muscles of young fingerling gilthead sea bream, a type of teleost fish (image above). Their findings were published in the American Journal of Physiology – Regulatory, Integrative and Comparative Physiology.

The fish were placed in either a tank with normal water flow (350 liters per hour) for voluntary movements or moderate flow sufficient for the fish to swim at a moderate intensity (700 liters per hour). After 5 weeks, they found that muscles towards the head of the fish began to remodel and grow new blood vessels to supply the new muscle cells that were also being produced. These anterior muscles are known for producing powerful and fast contractions and their study shows that they can indeed be changed by swimming during a time when the fish are normally rapidly growing anyway. In contrast to the anterior muscles, those closer to the tail of the fish showed closer to normal growth patterns. Since these fish are important in aquaculture, being able to optimize their growth and the quality of their meat is important.

Source:

EJ Vélez, S Azizi, E Lutfi, E Capilla, A Moya, I Navarro, J Fernández-Borràs, J Blasco, J Gutiérrez. Moderate and sustained exercise modulates muscle proteolytic and myogenic markers in gilthead sea bream (Sparus aurata). American Journal of Physiology – Regulatory, Integrative and Comparative Physiology. [In Press] doi:10.1152/ajpregu.00308.2016

from ScienceBlogs http://ift.tt/2m5lO05

Image of a gilthead sea bream by Roberto Pillon – via Wikimedia Commons

Similar to humans, muscle growth in fish is increased with exercise. Unlike humans, however, teleost fish are able to continue growing in length as well as weight throughout their lives. This type of meat, I mean muscle, growth happens in two ways: 1) muscle cells get bigger and 2) new muscle cells form. Researchers at the University of Barcelona in Spain wanted to know what effect moderate sustained swimming would have on the muscles of young fingerling gilthead sea bream, a type of teleost fish (image above). Their findings were published in the American Journal of Physiology – Regulatory, Integrative and Comparative Physiology.

The fish were placed in either a tank with normal water flow (350 liters per hour) for voluntary movements or moderate flow sufficient for the fish to swim at a moderate intensity (700 liters per hour). After 5 weeks, they found that muscles towards the head of the fish began to remodel and grow new blood vessels to supply the new muscle cells that were also being produced. These anterior muscles are known for producing powerful and fast contractions and their study shows that they can indeed be changed by swimming during a time when the fish are normally rapidly growing anyway. In contrast to the anterior muscles, those closer to the tail of the fish showed closer to normal growth patterns. Since these fish are important in aquaculture, being able to optimize their growth and the quality of their meat is important.

Source:

EJ Vélez, S Azizi, E Lutfi, E Capilla, A Moya, I Navarro, J Fernández-Borràs, J Blasco, J Gutiérrez. Moderate and sustained exercise modulates muscle proteolytic and myogenic markers in gilthead sea bream (Sparus aurata). American Journal of Physiology – Regulatory, Integrative and Comparative Physiology. [In Press] doi:10.1152/ajpregu.00308.2016

from ScienceBlogs http://ift.tt/2m5lO05

SpaceX to send 2 people around moon

On July 18, 2016, SpaceX’s Falcon 9 rocket lifted off, carrying the Dragon resupply spacecraft to the International Space Station for the company’s ninth commercial resupply mission. Image via NASA/Tony Gray.

Elon Musk’s private spaceflight company SpaceX announced today (February 27, 2017) that it has been approached by two (unnamed) indviduals, two private citizens, who will pay to be flown around the moon and back to Earth by late next year. SpaceX said the lunar journey will last “about a week” and travel deeper into space than any human has ventured before. The Washington Post reported:

The announcement comes as many believe NASA, which for years has been on a ‘journey to Mars’ under the Obama administration, is increasingly focused on heading to the moon under Trump, who would like to make a splash in his first term.

A SpaceX mission in 2018 would likely circle the moon before NASA gets another chance.

Fly me to the moon … Okhttps://t.co/6QT8m5SHwn

— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) February 27, 2017

The full statement from SpaceX follows:

We are excited to announce that SpaceX has been approached to fly two private citizens on a trip around the moon late next year. They have already paid a significant deposit to do a moon mission. Like the Apollo astronauts before them, these individuals will travel into space carrying the hopes and dreams of all humankind, driven by the universal human spirit of exploration. We expect to conduct health and fitness tests, as well as begin initial training later this year. Other flight teams have also expressed strong interest and we expect more to follow. Additional information will be released about the flight teams, contingent upon their approval and confirmation of the health and fitness test results.

Most importantly, we would like to thank NASA, without whom this would not be possible. NASA’s Commercial Crew Program, which provided most of the funding for Dragon 2 development, is a key enabler for this mission. In addition, this will make use of the Falcon Heavy rocket, which was developed with internal SpaceX funding. Falcon Heavy is due to launch its first test flight this summer and, once successful, will be the most powerful vehicle to reach orbit after the Saturn V moon rocket. At 5 million pounds of liftoff thrust, Falcon Heavy is two-thirds the thrust of Saturn V and more than double the thrust of the next largest launch vehicle currently flying.

Later this year, as part of NASA’s Commercial Crew Program, we will launch our Crew Dragon (Dragon Version 2) spacecraft to the International Space Station. This first demonstration mission will be in automatic mode, without people on board. A subsequent mission with crew is expected to fly in the second quarter of 2018. SpaceX is currently contracted to perform an average of four Dragon 2 missions to the ISS per year, three carrying cargo and one carrying crew. By also flying privately crewed missions, which NASA has encouraged, long-term costs to the government decline and more flight reliability history is gained, benefiting both government and private missions.

Once operational Crew Dragon missions are underway for NASA, SpaceX will launch the private mission on a journey to circumnavigate the moon and return to Earth. Lift-off will be from Kennedy Space Center’s historic Pad 39A near Cape Canaveral – the same launch pad used by the Apollo program for its lunar missions. This presents an opportunity for humans to return to deep space for the first time in 45 years and they will travel faster and further into the Solar System than any before them.

Designed from the beginning to carry humans, the Dragon spacecraft already has a long flight heritage. These missions will build upon that heritage, extending it to deep space mission operations, an important milestone as we work towards our ultimate goal of transporting humans to Mars.

Over the past year, SpaceX has gotten increasingly successful at landing its Falcon 9 rocket upright. The video below shows the most recent landing on February 19, 2017.

SpaceX has been developing its Dragon spacecraft to carry supplies and crew. The video below features a look at a crewed Dragon interior.

Bottom line: Elon Musk of SpaceX announced on Februry 27, 2017 that the company has been approached by two private citizens who will pay for a trip around the moon and back.

from EarthSky http://ift.tt/2mxJiIU

On July 18, 2016, SpaceX’s Falcon 9 rocket lifted off, carrying the Dragon resupply spacecraft to the International Space Station for the company’s ninth commercial resupply mission. Image via NASA/Tony Gray.

Elon Musk’s private spaceflight company SpaceX announced today (February 27, 2017) that it has been approached by two (unnamed) indviduals, two private citizens, who will pay to be flown around the moon and back to Earth by late next year. SpaceX said the lunar journey will last “about a week” and travel deeper into space than any human has ventured before. The Washington Post reported:

The announcement comes as many believe NASA, which for years has been on a ‘journey to Mars’ under the Obama administration, is increasingly focused on heading to the moon under Trump, who would like to make a splash in his first term.

A SpaceX mission in 2018 would likely circle the moon before NASA gets another chance.

Fly me to the moon … Okhttps://t.co/6QT8m5SHwn

— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) February 27, 2017

The full statement from SpaceX follows:

We are excited to announce that SpaceX has been approached to fly two private citizens on a trip around the moon late next year. They have already paid a significant deposit to do a moon mission. Like the Apollo astronauts before them, these individuals will travel into space carrying the hopes and dreams of all humankind, driven by the universal human spirit of exploration. We expect to conduct health and fitness tests, as well as begin initial training later this year. Other flight teams have also expressed strong interest and we expect more to follow. Additional information will be released about the flight teams, contingent upon their approval and confirmation of the health and fitness test results.

Most importantly, we would like to thank NASA, without whom this would not be possible. NASA’s Commercial Crew Program, which provided most of the funding for Dragon 2 development, is a key enabler for this mission. In addition, this will make use of the Falcon Heavy rocket, which was developed with internal SpaceX funding. Falcon Heavy is due to launch its first test flight this summer and, once successful, will be the most powerful vehicle to reach orbit after the Saturn V moon rocket. At 5 million pounds of liftoff thrust, Falcon Heavy is two-thirds the thrust of Saturn V and more than double the thrust of the next largest launch vehicle currently flying.

Later this year, as part of NASA’s Commercial Crew Program, we will launch our Crew Dragon (Dragon Version 2) spacecraft to the International Space Station. This first demonstration mission will be in automatic mode, without people on board. A subsequent mission with crew is expected to fly in the second quarter of 2018. SpaceX is currently contracted to perform an average of four Dragon 2 missions to the ISS per year, three carrying cargo and one carrying crew. By also flying privately crewed missions, which NASA has encouraged, long-term costs to the government decline and more flight reliability history is gained, benefiting both government and private missions.

Once operational Crew Dragon missions are underway for NASA, SpaceX will launch the private mission on a journey to circumnavigate the moon and return to Earth. Lift-off will be from Kennedy Space Center’s historic Pad 39A near Cape Canaveral – the same launch pad used by the Apollo program for its lunar missions. This presents an opportunity for humans to return to deep space for the first time in 45 years and they will travel faster and further into the Solar System than any before them.

Designed from the beginning to carry humans, the Dragon spacecraft already has a long flight heritage. These missions will build upon that heritage, extending it to deep space mission operations, an important milestone as we work towards our ultimate goal of transporting humans to Mars.

Over the past year, SpaceX has gotten increasingly successful at landing its Falcon 9 rocket upright. The video below shows the most recent landing on February 19, 2017.

SpaceX has been developing its Dragon spacecraft to carry supplies and crew. The video below features a look at a crewed Dragon interior.

Bottom line: Elon Musk of SpaceX announced on Februry 27, 2017 that the company has been approached by two private citizens who will pay for a trip around the moon and back.

from EarthSky http://ift.tt/2mxJiIU

Who were those masked men? [Stoat]

Or, as John Abraham puts it in the Graun, Just who are these 300 ‘scientists’ telling Trump to burn the climate? It appears that long-term union man Lindzen has been organising again, buoyed perhaps by the prospect of some kind of reward from the Trump admistration. It seems rather notable to me, however, that none of those who might have hoped for some baubles to be tossed their way have got anything; but it’s still early.

This has shades of the 2007 official nutter’s list. That was “100 prominent scientists”many of whom were neither prominent nor scientists. This bumps the number up to 300, and prominent has been promoted to “eminent”. But – yes, you guessed, it wasn’t hard – it is really just the usual suspects padded out with a variety of non-entities. Well, read JA in the Graun if you like.

So, who is “Serge Wasterlain”? No other identifying marks are provided. Who is “Claes Sundin”? Could he be the well-known author of “Luftwaffe Fighter Aircraft in Profile “. Lyndon E. Taylor at least has a PhD, but no other identifying marks. Do not confuse Nelson, Brand with Nelson, Darren. Soon, Willie is there as well as Morner. Lubos is there, as former Harvard; in 2007 he was former Harvard but at Prague; Prague has now vanished. Odd. But not interesting. Humlum is there, Idso, Happer, Gerlach, Dyson. More nordics that I might expect. Who *isn’t* there? Spencer, Christie, Michaels. Morgenstern is there but alas not Rosencratz.

As to the pic: I nicked that off someone and don’t know the original source. Do tell if you know.

from ScienceBlogs http://ift.tt/2ls8Iqp

Or, as John Abraham puts it in the Graun, Just who are these 300 ‘scientists’ telling Trump to burn the climate? It appears that long-term union man Lindzen has been organising again, buoyed perhaps by the prospect of some kind of reward from the Trump admistration. It seems rather notable to me, however, that none of those who might have hoped for some baubles to be tossed their way have got anything; but it’s still early.

This has shades of the 2007 official nutter’s list. That was “100 prominent scientists”many of whom were neither prominent nor scientists. This bumps the number up to 300, and prominent has been promoted to “eminent”. But – yes, you guessed, it wasn’t hard – it is really just the usual suspects padded out with a variety of non-entities. Well, read JA in the Graun if you like.

So, who is “Serge Wasterlain”? No other identifying marks are provided. Who is “Claes Sundin”? Could he be the well-known author of “Luftwaffe Fighter Aircraft in Profile “. Lyndon E. Taylor at least has a PhD, but no other identifying marks. Do not confuse Nelson, Brand with Nelson, Darren. Soon, Willie is there as well as Morner. Lubos is there, as former Harvard; in 2007 he was former Harvard but at Prague; Prague has now vanished. Odd. But not interesting. Humlum is there, Idso, Happer, Gerlach, Dyson. More nordics that I might expect. Who *isn’t* there? Spencer, Christie, Michaels. Morgenstern is there but alas not Rosencratz.

As to the pic: I nicked that off someone and don’t know the original source. Do tell if you know.

from ScienceBlogs http://ift.tt/2ls8Iqp

Scientific Integrity Act: Protecting the government science that protects all of us [The Pump Handle]

Government scientists play essential roles in our country’s top public health achievements. From food-safety improvements to tobacco cessation, we rely on them to warn us of health risks, identify solutions, and create standards that promote public health. The Trump administration puts our health at risk when it instructs science-based agencies to halt communications; requires political-appointee review of EPA science; gives attention to people who make dangerous and uniformed statements about vaccines; and selects an EPA administrator who ignores decades of evidence on climate change.

Senator Bill Nelson (D-FL), joined by 26 of his colleagues, has introduced the Scientific Integrity Act (S 338), which notes, “independent, impartial science and the scientific process should inform and guide public policy decisions on a wide range of issues, including improvement of public health, protection of the environment, and protection of national security.” The bill would require agencies that conduct or fund scientific research to develop principles to ensure open communication, and to develop and enforce scientific integrity policies. It would also allow for the National Academy of Public Administration to study the effectiveness of these policies and recommend improvements.

Scientific integrity policies aren’t a new idea. Following widespread concerns about suppression of science in the George W. Bush administration, President Obama issued a memorandum directing federal agencies to develop sceintific integrity policies, under the guidance of the White House Office of Scientific and Technology Policy (OSTP). The Union of Concerned Scientists, which has been a leading force in the push for scientific integrity, followed agencies’ progress in developing these policies. They evaluated several specific policy components — peer review policies, media policies, procedures for dealing with differing scientific opinions, etc. — as well as the administration’s overall progress on promoting independent science, increasing government transparency, and enhancing public participation. UCS’s 2017 report Preserving Scientific Integrity in Federal Policymaking both assesses that progress and offers recommendations to President Trump for carrying it forward.

I imagine the Scientific Integrity Act attempts to put scientific integrity into statute because the sponsoring Sentaors aren’t confident the administration will protect it otherwise. UCS’s Gretchen Goldman comments on the bill’s provision to address political tampering:

Another provision of the bill requires agencies to develop procedures that “identify, evaluate the merits of, and address instances in which the scientific process or the integrity of scientific and technological information may be compromised.” This is an important inclusion since to date, not all scientific integrity policies at federal agencies have detailed procedures for assessing the validity of and addressing allegations of scientific integrity abuses.

This lack of clarity in current agency policies has had damaging impacts on scientists who raise, or are accused of, scientific integrity violations. A scientist at Los Alamos National Laboratory, for example, appeared to have lost his job over publishing a paper that the Department of Energy didn’t like. When a scientist at the US Department of Agriculture was accused of violating the scientific integrity policy, he was subjected to a long review process that may not have included an independent assessment of the claims. Thankfully, both the DOE and USDA have revised their scientific integrity policies to strengthen the allegation evaluation procedures.  A law requiring all science agencies to make allegation procedures clearer would improve evaluation of scientific integrity violations across the government and give federal scientists fairer assessments.

It’s easy to forget about the essential work government scientists do, but we will suffer if it’s compromised. Science-based federal agencies didn’t get everything right under President Obama, but they made important improvements in scientific integrity. If the Trump administration makes it harder for federal scientists to fulfill their agencies’ missions, we’ll see the negative impacts in our air, water, food, drugs, and disease risk. I’m glad Senator Nelson and his colleagues are acknowledging the importance of government science in public health with the Scientific Integrity Act.

from ScienceBlogs http://ift.tt/2lODUBi

Government scientists play essential roles in our country’s top public health achievements. From food-safety improvements to tobacco cessation, we rely on them to warn us of health risks, identify solutions, and create standards that promote public health. The Trump administration puts our health at risk when it instructs science-based agencies to halt communications; requires political-appointee review of EPA science; gives attention to people who make dangerous and uniformed statements about vaccines; and selects an EPA administrator who ignores decades of evidence on climate change.

Senator Bill Nelson (D-FL), joined by 26 of his colleagues, has introduced the Scientific Integrity Act (S 338), which notes, “independent, impartial science and the scientific process should inform and guide public policy decisions on a wide range of issues, including improvement of public health, protection of the environment, and protection of national security.” The bill would require agencies that conduct or fund scientific research to develop principles to ensure open communication, and to develop and enforce scientific integrity policies. It would also allow for the National Academy of Public Administration to study the effectiveness of these policies and recommend improvements.

Scientific integrity policies aren’t a new idea. Following widespread concerns about suppression of science in the George W. Bush administration, President Obama issued a memorandum directing federal agencies to develop sceintific integrity policies, under the guidance of the White House Office of Scientific and Technology Policy (OSTP). The Union of Concerned Scientists, which has been a leading force in the push for scientific integrity, followed agencies’ progress in developing these policies. They evaluated several specific policy components — peer review policies, media policies, procedures for dealing with differing scientific opinions, etc. — as well as the administration’s overall progress on promoting independent science, increasing government transparency, and enhancing public participation. UCS’s 2017 report Preserving Scientific Integrity in Federal Policymaking both assesses that progress and offers recommendations to President Trump for carrying it forward.

I imagine the Scientific Integrity Act attempts to put scientific integrity into statute because the sponsoring Sentaors aren’t confident the administration will protect it otherwise. UCS’s Gretchen Goldman comments on the bill’s provision to address political tampering:

Another provision of the bill requires agencies to develop procedures that “identify, evaluate the merits of, and address instances in which the scientific process or the integrity of scientific and technological information may be compromised.” This is an important inclusion since to date, not all scientific integrity policies at federal agencies have detailed procedures for assessing the validity of and addressing allegations of scientific integrity abuses.

This lack of clarity in current agency policies has had damaging impacts on scientists who raise, or are accused of, scientific integrity violations. A scientist at Los Alamos National Laboratory, for example, appeared to have lost his job over publishing a paper that the Department of Energy didn’t like. When a scientist at the US Department of Agriculture was accused of violating the scientific integrity policy, he was subjected to a long review process that may not have included an independent assessment of the claims. Thankfully, both the DOE and USDA have revised their scientific integrity policies to strengthen the allegation evaluation procedures.  A law requiring all science agencies to make allegation procedures clearer would improve evaluation of scientific integrity violations across the government and give federal scientists fairer assessments.

It’s easy to forget about the essential work government scientists do, but we will suffer if it’s compromised. Science-based federal agencies didn’t get everything right under President Obama, but they made important improvements in scientific integrity. If the Trump administration makes it harder for federal scientists to fulfill their agencies’ missions, we’ll see the negative impacts in our air, water, food, drugs, and disease risk. I’m glad Senator Nelson and his colleagues are acknowledging the importance of government science in public health with the Scientific Integrity Act.

from ScienceBlogs http://ift.tt/2lODUBi

The best video of the Oscar Envelope screw up! [Greg Laden's Blog]

This is much better than the one you’ve already seen.

from ScienceBlogs http://ift.tt/2mD3Q1X

This is much better than the one you’ve already seen.

from ScienceBlogs http://ift.tt/2mD3Q1X

How protein misfolding may kickstart chemical evolution

The origami of disease, and of life: Research into the abnormal folding of proteins related to neurodegenerative conditions is providing insights into how life may emerge from a chemical system.

By Carol Clark

Alzheimer’s disease, and other neurodegenerative conditions involving abnormal folding of proteins, may help explain the emergence of life – and how to create it.

Researchers at Emory University and Georgia Tech demonstrated this connection in two new papers published by Nature Chemistry: “Design of multi-phase dynamic chemical networks” and “Catalytic diversity in self-propagating peptide assemblies.”

“In the first paper we showed that you can create tension between a chemical and physical system to give rise to more complex systems. And in the second paper, we showed that these complex systems can have remarkable and unexpected functions,” says David Lynn, a systems chemist in Emory’s Department of Chemistry who led the research. “The work was inspired by our current understanding of Darwinian selection of protein misfolding in neurodegenerative diseases.”

The Lynn lab is exploring ways to potentially control and direct the processes of these proteins – known as prions – adding to knowledge that might one day help to prevent disease, as well as open new realms of synthetic biology. For the current papers, Emory collaborated with the research group of Martha Grover, a professor in the Georgia Tech School of Chemical & Biomolecular Engineering, to develop molecular models for the processes.

“Modeling requires us to formulate our hypotheses in the language of mathematics, and then we use the models to design further experiments to test the hypotheses,” Grover says.

Darwin’s theory of evolution by natural selection is well-established – organisms adapt over time in response to environmental changes. But theories about how life emerges – the movement through a pre-Darwinian world to the Darwinian threshold – remain murkier.

The researchers started with single peptides and engineered in the capacity to spontaneously form small proteins, or short polymers. “These protein polymers can fold into a seemingly endless array of forms, and sometimes behave like origami,” Lynn explains. “They can stack into assemblies that carry new functions, like prions that move from cell-to-cell, causing disease.”

This protein misfolding provided the model for how physical changes could carry information with function, a critical component for evolution. To try to kickstart that evolution, the researchers engineered a chemical system of peptides and coupled it to the physical system of protein misfolding. The combination results in a system that generates step-by-step, progressive changes, through self-driven environmental changes.

“The folding events, or phase changes, drive the chemistry and the chemistry drives the replication of the protein molecules,” Lynn says. “The simple system we designed requires only the initial intervention from us to achieve progressive growth in molecular order. The challenge now becomes the discovery of positive feedback mechanisms that allow the system to continue to grow.”

The research was funded by the McDonnell Foundation, the National Science Foundation’s Materials Science Directorate, Emory University’s Alzheimer’s Disease Research Center, the National Science Foundation’s Center for Chemical Evolution and the Office of Basic Energy Sciences of the U.S. Department of Energy.

Additional co-authors of the papers include: Toluople Omosun, Seth Childers, Dibyendu Das and Anil Mehta (Emory Departments of Chemistry and Biology); Ming-Chien Hsieh (Georgia Tech School of Chemical and Biomolecular Engineering); and Neil Anthony and Keith Berland (Emory Department of Physics).

Related:
Peptides may hold 'missing link' to life

from eScienceCommons http://ift.tt/2mw7dZc

The origami of disease, and of life: Research into the abnormal folding of proteins related to neurodegenerative conditions is providing insights into how life may emerge from a chemical system.

By Carol Clark

Alzheimer’s disease, and other neurodegenerative conditions involving abnormal folding of proteins, may help explain the emergence of life – and how to create it.

Researchers at Emory University and Georgia Tech demonstrated this connection in two new papers published by Nature Chemistry: “Design of multi-phase dynamic chemical networks” and “Catalytic diversity in self-propagating peptide assemblies.”

“In the first paper we showed that you can create tension between a chemical and physical system to give rise to more complex systems. And in the second paper, we showed that these complex systems can have remarkable and unexpected functions,” says David Lynn, a systems chemist in Emory’s Department of Chemistry who led the research. “The work was inspired by our current understanding of Darwinian selection of protein misfolding in neurodegenerative diseases.”

The Lynn lab is exploring ways to potentially control and direct the processes of these proteins – known as prions – adding to knowledge that might one day help to prevent disease, as well as open new realms of synthetic biology. For the current papers, Emory collaborated with the research group of Martha Grover, a professor in the Georgia Tech School of Chemical & Biomolecular Engineering, to develop molecular models for the processes.

“Modeling requires us to formulate our hypotheses in the language of mathematics, and then we use the models to design further experiments to test the hypotheses,” Grover says.

Darwin’s theory of evolution by natural selection is well-established – organisms adapt over time in response to environmental changes. But theories about how life emerges – the movement through a pre-Darwinian world to the Darwinian threshold – remain murkier.

The researchers started with single peptides and engineered in the capacity to spontaneously form small proteins, or short polymers. “These protein polymers can fold into a seemingly endless array of forms, and sometimes behave like origami,” Lynn explains. “They can stack into assemblies that carry new functions, like prions that move from cell-to-cell, causing disease.”

This protein misfolding provided the model for how physical changes could carry information with function, a critical component for evolution. To try to kickstart that evolution, the researchers engineered a chemical system of peptides and coupled it to the physical system of protein misfolding. The combination results in a system that generates step-by-step, progressive changes, through self-driven environmental changes.

“The folding events, or phase changes, drive the chemistry and the chemistry drives the replication of the protein molecules,” Lynn says. “The simple system we designed requires only the initial intervention from us to achieve progressive growth in molecular order. The challenge now becomes the discovery of positive feedback mechanisms that allow the system to continue to grow.”

The research was funded by the McDonnell Foundation, the National Science Foundation’s Materials Science Directorate, Emory University’s Alzheimer’s Disease Research Center, the National Science Foundation’s Center for Chemical Evolution and the Office of Basic Energy Sciences of the U.S. Department of Energy.

Additional co-authors of the papers include: Toluople Omosun, Seth Childers, Dibyendu Das and Anil Mehta (Emory Departments of Chemistry and Biology); Ming-Chien Hsieh (Georgia Tech School of Chemical and Biomolecular Engineering); and Neil Anthony and Keith Berland (Emory Department of Physics).

Related:
Peptides may hold 'missing link' to life

from eScienceCommons http://ift.tt/2mw7dZc