Evolution: Why it seems to have a direction, and what to expect next

Is intelligent life bad news for diversity? Image via Gudkov Andrey/ Shutterstock.

Matthew Wills, University of Bath

The diversity and complexity of life on Earth is astonishing: 8 million or more living species – from algae to elephants – all evolved from a simple, single-celled common ancestor around 3.5 billion years ago. But does that mean that evolution always and inevitably generates greater diversity and complexity, having a predictable direction?

Charles Darwin identified three ingredients necessary for natural selection to occur. Individuals must be different, so there is variation in the population. They must also be able to pass this variation on to offspring. Finally, individuals must compete for resources that limit the number of offspring they can produce. Individuals with variations that allow them to obtain more resources are likely to produce more offspring like themselves.

Evolution also depends on context and environment, which notoriously change constantly in unpredictable ways. For example, fishes who start living and evolving in unlit caves often lose their eyes, because the costs of developing them outweigh their advantages.

Blind cave fish. Image via wikipedia

So natural selection operates from one generation to the next. It cannot plan ahead or have a goal. In addition, not all evolutionary change is a response to selection, but can be neutral or random. It is not even guaranteed to produce more species, since evolution can occur in a single lineage and this can go extinct at any time. How can we reconcile such an aimless process with the bewildering diversity and complexity we see?

Ecological influence

Ecology and evolution are two sides of the same coin. The environment is not just the physical surroundings of an organism, but also the other biological species with which it interacts.

We can see this environmental interaction deep in the history of life. For billions of years, organisms were “stuck” as single cells within the seas. Several groups independently evolved multi-cellularity (perhaps 25 times). But the first animals, plants and fungi with complex development, different tissues and organs only appeared around 540 million years ago, with the Cambrian “explosion” of diversity.

This may have been triggered by increased levels of oxygen in the oceans, which was, in turn, the result of photosynthesis – the process by which plants and other organisms convert sunlight into energy while releasing oxygen – in much simpler forms of life over millions of years.

Once animals had attained greater size and evolved guts, hard parts, jaws, teeth, eyes and legs, complex food webs became possible – along with “arms races” between predators and prey. Groups with adaptations that enabled them to live on land opened up even more opportunities. Once out of the bag, these innovations were difficult to “uninvent” – promoting diversity.

The only diagram in Darwin’s On the Origin of Species shows species splitting through time. If more species originate than go extinct, then species richness increases. Darwin wondered whether ecological space might simply “fill up” one day.

Diagram from On the Origin of Species. Image via Wikipedia.

But so far as we can tell, the species count has been increasing for most of the last 250 million years. Even past natural mass extinctions were only temporary setbacks that may have created even more opportunities for diversity in the long run.

Variation is not random

As organisms evolve more complicated systems of development, they may, however, become less able to modify certain aspects of their anatomy. This is partly because genes, tissues and organs often have several different functions, so it may become difficult to change one for the better without accidentally “breaking” something elsewhere.

For example, nearly all mammals – from giraffes to humans – are stuck with just seven neck bones. Whenever different numbers develop or evolve, they bring other anatomical problems. Birds are entirely different, and seem to evolve new numbers of neck vertebrae with remarkable ease: Swans alone have between 22 and 25. But in general, while evolution produces new species, the flexibility of the body plans of those species may decrease with rising complexity.

Giraffes have 7 neck bones. Image via John Michael Vosloo/ Shutterstock.

Quite often, closely related species end up being selected along similar paths. Moreover, “developmental bias” means that anatomical variation is not produced at random.

Take mammals. They come from a common ancestor, and have taken strikingly similar forms even though they have evolved on different continents. This is another example of the fact that evolution isn’t entirely unpredictable – there are only so many solutions to the same physical and biological problems, like seeing, digging or flying.

The future of evolution

Clearly, there is an apparent contradiction at the heart of evolutionary biology. On one hand, the mechanisms of evolution have no predisposition for change in any particular direction. On the other hand, let those mechanisms get going, and beyond some threshold, the interwoven ecological and developmental systems they generate tend to yield more and more species with greater maximum complexity.

So can we expect more diversity and complexity going forward? We are now at the beginning of a sixth mass extinction, caused by humans and showing no signs of stopping – wiping out the results of millions of years of evolution. Despite this, humans themselves are too numerous, widespread and adaptable to be at serious risk of extinction any time soon. It is far more likely that we will extend our distribution yet further by engineering habitable biospheres on other planets.

On other planets, we may one day find alien life. Would that follow the same evolutionary trajectory as life on Earth? From one cell, the transition to multi-cellularity may be an easy hurdle to jump. Although it came quite late on Earth, it nevertheless happened many times. More complicated development with different tissue types evolved in only a few groups on Earth, so may represent a higher bar.

If alien biology makes it over some hurdles, its development is indeed likely to favor patterns of increasing diversity and maximum complexity. But perhaps a dominant, intelligent species like humans will always be bad news for many of the other species on the planets where they evolve.

The astronomer Frank Drake proposed an equation to estimate how many intelligent civilizations we might expect in our galaxy. This contained a term for how long such civilizations might exist before destroying themselves. Drake was pessimistic about this: let’s hope he was wrong.

Matthew Wills, Professor of Evolutionary Palaeobiology at the Milner Centre for Evolution, University of Bath

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Bottom line: Why evolution seems to have a direction, and what to expect next.

from EarthSky https://ift.tt/30tHlDy

Is intelligent life bad news for diversity? Image via Gudkov Andrey/ Shutterstock.

Matthew Wills, University of Bath

The diversity and complexity of life on Earth is astonishing: 8 million or more living species – from algae to elephants – all evolved from a simple, single-celled common ancestor around 3.5 billion years ago. But does that mean that evolution always and inevitably generates greater diversity and complexity, having a predictable direction?

Charles Darwin identified three ingredients necessary for natural selection to occur. Individuals must be different, so there is variation in the population. They must also be able to pass this variation on to offspring. Finally, individuals must compete for resources that limit the number of offspring they can produce. Individuals with variations that allow them to obtain more resources are likely to produce more offspring like themselves.

Evolution also depends on context and environment, which notoriously change constantly in unpredictable ways. For example, fishes who start living and evolving in unlit caves often lose their eyes, because the costs of developing them outweigh their advantages.

Blind cave fish. Image via wikipedia

So natural selection operates from one generation to the next. It cannot plan ahead or have a goal. In addition, not all evolutionary change is a response to selection, but can be neutral or random. It is not even guaranteed to produce more species, since evolution can occur in a single lineage and this can go extinct at any time. How can we reconcile such an aimless process with the bewildering diversity and complexity we see?

Ecological influence

Ecology and evolution are two sides of the same coin. The environment is not just the physical surroundings of an organism, but also the other biological species with which it interacts.

We can see this environmental interaction deep in the history of life. For billions of years, organisms were “stuck” as single cells within the seas. Several groups independently evolved multi-cellularity (perhaps 25 times). But the first animals, plants and fungi with complex development, different tissues and organs only appeared around 540 million years ago, with the Cambrian “explosion” of diversity.

This may have been triggered by increased levels of oxygen in the oceans, which was, in turn, the result of photosynthesis – the process by which plants and other organisms convert sunlight into energy while releasing oxygen – in much simpler forms of life over millions of years.

Once animals had attained greater size and evolved guts, hard parts, jaws, teeth, eyes and legs, complex food webs became possible – along with “arms races” between predators and prey. Groups with adaptations that enabled them to live on land opened up even more opportunities. Once out of the bag, these innovations were difficult to “uninvent” – promoting diversity.

The only diagram in Darwin’s On the Origin of Species shows species splitting through time. If more species originate than go extinct, then species richness increases. Darwin wondered whether ecological space might simply “fill up” one day.

Diagram from On the Origin of Species. Image via Wikipedia.

But so far as we can tell, the species count has been increasing for most of the last 250 million years. Even past natural mass extinctions were only temporary setbacks that may have created even more opportunities for diversity in the long run.

Variation is not random

As organisms evolve more complicated systems of development, they may, however, become less able to modify certain aspects of their anatomy. This is partly because genes, tissues and organs often have several different functions, so it may become difficult to change one for the better without accidentally “breaking” something elsewhere.

For example, nearly all mammals – from giraffes to humans – are stuck with just seven neck bones. Whenever different numbers develop or evolve, they bring other anatomical problems. Birds are entirely different, and seem to evolve new numbers of neck vertebrae with remarkable ease: Swans alone have between 22 and 25. But in general, while evolution produces new species, the flexibility of the body plans of those species may decrease with rising complexity.

Giraffes have 7 neck bones. Image via John Michael Vosloo/ Shutterstock.

Quite often, closely related species end up being selected along similar paths. Moreover, “developmental bias” means that anatomical variation is not produced at random.

Take mammals. They come from a common ancestor, and have taken strikingly similar forms even though they have evolved on different continents. This is another example of the fact that evolution isn’t entirely unpredictable – there are only so many solutions to the same physical and biological problems, like seeing, digging or flying.

The future of evolution

Clearly, there is an apparent contradiction at the heart of evolutionary biology. On one hand, the mechanisms of evolution have no predisposition for change in any particular direction. On the other hand, let those mechanisms get going, and beyond some threshold, the interwoven ecological and developmental systems they generate tend to yield more and more species with greater maximum complexity.

So can we expect more diversity and complexity going forward? We are now at the beginning of a sixth mass extinction, caused by humans and showing no signs of stopping – wiping out the results of millions of years of evolution. Despite this, humans themselves are too numerous, widespread and adaptable to be at serious risk of extinction any time soon. It is far more likely that we will extend our distribution yet further by engineering habitable biospheres on other planets.

On other planets, we may one day find alien life. Would that follow the same evolutionary trajectory as life on Earth? From one cell, the transition to multi-cellularity may be an easy hurdle to jump. Although it came quite late on Earth, it nevertheless happened many times. More complicated development with different tissue types evolved in only a few groups on Earth, so may represent a higher bar.

If alien biology makes it over some hurdles, its development is indeed likely to favor patterns of increasing diversity and maximum complexity. But perhaps a dominant, intelligent species like humans will always be bad news for many of the other species on the planets where they evolve.

The astronomer Frank Drake proposed an equation to estimate how many intelligent civilizations we might expect in our galaxy. This contained a term for how long such civilizations might exist before destroying themselves. Drake was pessimistic about this: let’s hope he was wrong.

Matthew Wills, Professor of Evolutionary Palaeobiology at the Milner Centre for Evolution, University of Bath

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Bottom line: Why evolution seems to have a direction, and what to expect next.

from EarthSky https://ift.tt/30tHlDy

Find the Crow, Cup and Water Snake

At nightfall tonight, or any June evening, look in a general southward direction for Spica, the brightest star in the constellation Virgo the Maiden. If you live in the Southern Hemisphere, Spica appears overhead or high in your northern sky around 9 p.m. in early June. Spica is your jumping off point to three faint constellations: Corvus the Crow, Crater the Cup and Hydra the Snake.

If you’re familiar with the Big Dipper, use this signpost star formation to star-hop to Spica, as shown in the sky chart below:

Use the Big Dipper to arc to Arcturus and spike Spica. Read more.

You can use Spica to find the constellation Corvus – and alternately, use Corvus to confirm that you’ve found Spica:

Here’s another way to verify that you’re looking at Spica, the brightest star in the constellation Virgo.

Okay … got Spica? Now, as nightfall deepens into later evening, watch for a number of fainter stars to become visible. That’s when the Crow, the Cup and the Water Snake will come into view.

Sky chart of the constellation Hydra, including Corvus and the Crater via IAU.

In Greek mythology, Apollo sent the crow to fetch a cup of water. The crow, Corvus, got distracted eating figs. It was only after much delay that he finally remembered his mission. Rightly figuring that Apollo would be angry, the crow plucked a snake from the water and concocted a story about how it had attacked and delayed him.

Hydra the Water Snake with the orange star Alphard at its heart. Illustration via Deanspace.

Apollo was not fooled and angrily flung the Crow, Cup and Snake into the sky, placing the Crow and Cup on the Snake’s back.

Then the god ordered Hydra to never let the Crow drink from the Cup. As a further punishment, he ordered that the Crow could never sing again, only screech and caw.

None of these constellations has any bright stars, but Hydra holds the distinction of being the longest constellation in the heavens.

Bottom line: Use the bright star Spica to help you find the constellations Corvus the Crow, Crater the Cup, and Hydra the Water Snake.

Enjoying EarthSky so far? Sign up for our free daily newsletter today!

from EarthSky https://ift.tt/3dQPW74

At nightfall tonight, or any June evening, look in a general southward direction for Spica, the brightest star in the constellation Virgo the Maiden. If you live in the Southern Hemisphere, Spica appears overhead or high in your northern sky around 9 p.m. in early June. Spica is your jumping off point to three faint constellations: Corvus the Crow, Crater the Cup and Hydra the Snake.

If you’re familiar with the Big Dipper, use this signpost star formation to star-hop to Spica, as shown in the sky chart below:

Use the Big Dipper to arc to Arcturus and spike Spica. Read more.

You can use Spica to find the constellation Corvus – and alternately, use Corvus to confirm that you’ve found Spica:

Here’s another way to verify that you’re looking at Spica, the brightest star in the constellation Virgo.

Okay … got Spica? Now, as nightfall deepens into later evening, watch for a number of fainter stars to become visible. That’s when the Crow, the Cup and the Water Snake will come into view.

Sky chart of the constellation Hydra, including Corvus and the Crater via IAU.

In Greek mythology, Apollo sent the crow to fetch a cup of water. The crow, Corvus, got distracted eating figs. It was only after much delay that he finally remembered his mission. Rightly figuring that Apollo would be angry, the crow plucked a snake from the water and concocted a story about how it had attacked and delayed him.

Hydra the Water Snake with the orange star Alphard at its heart. Illustration via Deanspace.

Apollo was not fooled and angrily flung the Crow, Cup and Snake into the sky, placing the Crow and Cup on the Snake’s back.

Then the god ordered Hydra to never let the Crow drink from the Cup. As a further punishment, he ordered that the Crow could never sing again, only screech and caw.

None of these constellations has any bright stars, but Hydra holds the distinction of being the longest constellation in the heavens.

Bottom line: Use the bright star Spica to help you find the constellations Corvus the Crow, Crater the Cup, and Hydra the Water Snake.

Enjoying EarthSky so far? Sign up for our free daily newsletter today!

from EarthSky https://ift.tt/3dQPW74

Big and Little Dippers on June evenings

Tonight, assuming you’re in the Northern Hemisphere, you can easily find the legendary Big Dipper, called The Plough by our friends in the U.K. or The Wagon throughout much of Europe. This familiar star pattern is high in the north at nightfall in June. Find it, and let it be your guide to the Little Dipper, too.

You can find the Big Dipper easily because its shape really resembles a dipper. Meanwhile, the Little Dipper isn’t as easy to find. You need a dark sky to see the Little Dipper, so be sure to avoid city lights.

How do you find the Dippers? Assuming you’re in the Northern Hemisphere, simply face northward on a June evening, and watch for a large dipper-like pattern. That easy-to-see pattern will be the Big Dipper. Notice that the Big Dipper has two parts: a bowl and a handle. See the two outer stars in the bowl? They’re known as The Pointers because they point to the North Star, which is also known as Polaris.

Once you’ve found Polaris, you can find the Little Dipper. Polaris marks the end of the handle of the Little Dipper. You need a dark night to see the Little Dipper in full, because it’s so much fainter than its larger and brighter counterpart.

By the way, can you see the Big Dipper from Earth’s Southern Hemisphere? Yes, if you’re in the southern tropics. Much farther south, and it gets harder because as you go southward on Earth’s globe, the Dipper sinks closer and closer to the northern horizon.

Meanwhile, Polaris, the North Star, disappears beneath the horizon once you get south of the Earth’s equator.

The Big and Little Dippers aren’t constellations. They’re asterisms, or noticeable star patterns. The Big Dipper is part of Ursa Major the Greater Bear. The Little Dipper belongs to Ursa Minor the Lesser Bear.

In his classic book “Star Names: Their Lore and Meaning,” Richard Hinckley Allen claims the Greek constellation Ursa Minor was never mentioned in the literary works of Homer (9th century B.C.) or Hesiod (8th century B.C.). That’s probably because this constellation hadn’t been invented yet, that long ago.

According to the Greek geographer and historian Strabo (63 B.C. to A.D. 21?), the seven stars we see today as part of Ursa Minor (the Little Dipper) didn’t carry that name until 600 B.C. or so. Before that time, people saw this group of stars outlining the wings of the constellation Draco the Dragon.

When the seafaring Phoenicians visited the Greek philosopher Thales around 600 B.C., they showed him how to navigate by the stars. Purportedly, Thales clipped the Dragon’s wings to create a new constellation, possibly because this new way of looking at the stars enabled Greek sailors to more easily locate the north celestial pole.

But it’s not just our names for things in the sky that change. The sky itself changes, too. In our day, Polaris closely marks the north celestial pole in the sky. In 600 B.C. – thanks to the motion of precession – the stars Kochab and Pherkad more closely marked the position of the north celestial pole.

Kochab and Pherkad: Guardians of the Pole

No matter what time of night it is – or what time of year it is – in other words, no matter how the Big Dipper is oriented in the sky, the 2 outer stars in its bowl always point to Polaris, the North Star. Image by EarthSky Facebook friend Abhijit Juvekar.

Bottom line: Look for the Big and Little Dippers in the north at nightfall!

Help EarthSky keep going! Please donate.

EarthSky astronomy kits are perfect for beginners. Order today from the EarthSky store

from EarthSky https://ift.tt/3dMXzeX

Tonight, assuming you’re in the Northern Hemisphere, you can easily find the legendary Big Dipper, called The Plough by our friends in the U.K. or The Wagon throughout much of Europe. This familiar star pattern is high in the north at nightfall in June. Find it, and let it be your guide to the Little Dipper, too.

You can find the Big Dipper easily because its shape really resembles a dipper. Meanwhile, the Little Dipper isn’t as easy to find. You need a dark sky to see the Little Dipper, so be sure to avoid city lights.

How do you find the Dippers? Assuming you’re in the Northern Hemisphere, simply face northward on a June evening, and watch for a large dipper-like pattern. That easy-to-see pattern will be the Big Dipper. Notice that the Big Dipper has two parts: a bowl and a handle. See the two outer stars in the bowl? They’re known as The Pointers because they point to the North Star, which is also known as Polaris.

Once you’ve found Polaris, you can find the Little Dipper. Polaris marks the end of the handle of the Little Dipper. You need a dark night to see the Little Dipper in full, because it’s so much fainter than its larger and brighter counterpart.

By the way, can you see the Big Dipper from Earth’s Southern Hemisphere? Yes, if you’re in the southern tropics. Much farther south, and it gets harder because as you go southward on Earth’s globe, the Dipper sinks closer and closer to the northern horizon.

Meanwhile, Polaris, the North Star, disappears beneath the horizon once you get south of the Earth’s equator.

The Big and Little Dippers aren’t constellations. They’re asterisms, or noticeable star patterns. The Big Dipper is part of Ursa Major the Greater Bear. The Little Dipper belongs to Ursa Minor the Lesser Bear.

In his classic book “Star Names: Their Lore and Meaning,” Richard Hinckley Allen claims the Greek constellation Ursa Minor was never mentioned in the literary works of Homer (9th century B.C.) or Hesiod (8th century B.C.). That’s probably because this constellation hadn’t been invented yet, that long ago.

According to the Greek geographer and historian Strabo (63 B.C. to A.D. 21?), the seven stars we see today as part of Ursa Minor (the Little Dipper) didn’t carry that name until 600 B.C. or so. Before that time, people saw this group of stars outlining the wings of the constellation Draco the Dragon.

When the seafaring Phoenicians visited the Greek philosopher Thales around 600 B.C., they showed him how to navigate by the stars. Purportedly, Thales clipped the Dragon’s wings to create a new constellation, possibly because this new way of looking at the stars enabled Greek sailors to more easily locate the north celestial pole.

But it’s not just our names for things in the sky that change. The sky itself changes, too. In our day, Polaris closely marks the north celestial pole in the sky. In 600 B.C. – thanks to the motion of precession – the stars Kochab and Pherkad more closely marked the position of the north celestial pole.

Kochab and Pherkad: Guardians of the Pole

No matter what time of night it is – or what time of year it is – in other words, no matter how the Big Dipper is oriented in the sky, the 2 outer stars in its bowl always point to Polaris, the North Star. Image by EarthSky Facebook friend Abhijit Juvekar.

Bottom line: Look for the Big and Little Dippers in the north at nightfall!

Help EarthSky keep going! Please donate.

EarthSky astronomy kits are perfect for beginners. Order today from the EarthSky store

from EarthSky https://ift.tt/3dMXzeX

A 2nd exoplanet confirmed for Proxima Centauri

Artist’s concept of Proxima Centauri b and c – depicted here as 2 black dots, a larger one and a smaller one – orbiting their red dwarf star. Proxima Centauri c, the larger planet, might also have a ring system. Image via Michele Diodati/ Medium.

Just a few days ago, scientists announced that the closest known Earth-sized exoplanet, Proxima Centauri b, had been confirmed to orbit the nearest star to our solar system. That’s an exciting development, but now, as scientists announced on June 2, 2020, it seems that another possible planet around the same star also has been verified … Proxima Centauri c! Both planets are only 4.2 light-years away.

The peer-reviewed results were published in Research Notes of the AAS back in April. Astronomer Fritz Benedict of McDonald Observatory presented the findings at the virtual 236th meeting of the American Astronomical Society.

Evidence for Proxima Centauri c was first announced earlier this year by a research group led by Mario Damasso of Italy’s National Institute for Astrophysics (INAF). But the evidence wasn’t conclusive. This second planet for Proxima is apparently a lot larger than Earth and orbits its star every 1,907 days. It orbits at about 1.5 times the distance from its star that Earth orbits from the sun. Not an extreme difference, but Proxima Centauri is a red dwarf star, smaller and cooler than our sun, so at that distance, the planet can be expected to be significantly colder than Earth.

Combined images from the SPHERE instrument on the Very Large Telescope (VLT) in Chile, which appear to show Proxima Centauri c as a bright dot. The location is right where the planet was predicted to be in its orbit. The star is hidden behind the black circle in the center. Image via Gratton et al./ A&A/ Nature Astronomy.

Even though Proxima Centauri is the closest star to the sun, it’s difficult to detect the planets orbiting it. Most exoplanets have been found via the transit method, and this system isn’t oriented with respect to Earth such that its planets transit in front of Proxima, from our perspective. So scientists have to use radial velocity observations, measurements of Proxima’s motion toward and away from Earth, to detect the tiny effects of the planets’ gravitational tuggings on the star.

Benedict’s idea was to look again at previous studies of the star from the 1990s from the Hubble Space Telescope (HST), which used the telescope’s Fine Guidance Sensors (FGS). The FGS can be used for astrometry, where scientists can take very accurate measurements of the positions and motions of objects in the sky. If Proxima Centauri c were really there, FGS should be able to detect it. Benedict said in a statement:

Basically, this is a story of how old data can be very useful when you get new information. It’s also a story of how hard it is to retire if you’re an astronomer, because this is fun stuff to do!

So what did Benedict and his team find?

When they looked at the old Hubble data, they found a planet with an orbital period of 1,907 days, which fit with what had been seen before, for the tentative Proxima Centauri c. The planet had been overlooked before because in the 1990s, researchers only checked the data for planets with orbital periods of less than 1,000 days.

Benedict combined the results of three studies: the Hubble/FGS astrometry, the radial velocity studies and images from the SPHERE instrument on the Very Large Telescope (VLT) in Chile, to better estimate the mass of Proxima Centauri c. He concluded that the planet is approximately seven times more massive than Earth.

Size comparison of the three stars in the Alpha Centauri system, including Proxima Centauri, and the sun. Image via PHL @ UPR Arecibo.

Proxima Centauri is the closest of the three stars in the Alpha Centauri system. Image via ESO/ BBC.

Earlier this year, scientists using the images from SPHERE found what appeared to be a large planet orbiting Proxima Centauri that coincided with the predicted position of Proxima Centauri c at the time.

But based on those images, it was found that Proxima Centauri c appeared to be brighter than expected. If the brightness was entirely from the light reflected off the planet itself, then the planet would be about five times larger than Jupiter. But since its estimated mass is more similar to Neptune’s, it may actually be smaller, but has dust clouds or a huge ring system around it. Determining whether it actually does or not will require more observations. It is bright enough that better images of it should be able to be taken by upcoming space telescopes. That’s not the case, unfortunately, with Proxima Centauri b, since it is smaller and much closer to the star. From another recent paper:

Proxima c could become a prime target for follow-up and characterization with next-generation direct imaging instrumentation due to the large maximum angular separation of ~1 arc second from the parent star. The candidate planet represents a challenge for the models of super-Earth formation and evolution.

As far as possible life is concerned, Proxima Centauri c may be too cold for life as we know it, but we just don’t know enough about it yet. Proxima Centauri b is a better candidate for being potentially habitable, since it is only slightly larger than Earth, orbits in the habitable zone of its star and is estimated to have similar temperatures to Earth. We don’t know enough about the actual conditions on this planet yet either, however.

Fritz Benedict at McDonald Observatory, lead author of the new study. Image via McDonald Observatory.

With at least two planets now confirmed orbiting the closest star to our solar system, combined with the over 4,000 other exoplanets discovered so far, we now know that such exoworlds are common in our galaxy. That is a big step that brings us even closer to answering the biggest question of all: are we alone?

Bottom line: Astronomers at McDonald Observatory have confirmed a second planet orbiting the closest star to our sun.

Source: A Preliminary Mass for Proxima Centauri C

Via McDonald Observatory

from EarthSky https://ift.tt/2zlUV0O

Artist’s concept of Proxima Centauri b and c – depicted here as 2 black dots, a larger one and a smaller one – orbiting their red dwarf star. Proxima Centauri c, the larger planet, might also have a ring system. Image via Michele Diodati/ Medium.

Just a few days ago, scientists announced that the closest known Earth-sized exoplanet, Proxima Centauri b, had been confirmed to orbit the nearest star to our solar system. That’s an exciting development, but now, as scientists announced on June 2, 2020, it seems that another possible planet around the same star also has been verified … Proxima Centauri c! Both planets are only 4.2 light-years away.

The peer-reviewed results were published in Research Notes of the AAS back in April. Astronomer Fritz Benedict of McDonald Observatory presented the findings at the virtual 236th meeting of the American Astronomical Society.

Evidence for Proxima Centauri c was first announced earlier this year by a research group led by Mario Damasso of Italy’s National Institute for Astrophysics (INAF). But the evidence wasn’t conclusive. This second planet for Proxima is apparently a lot larger than Earth and orbits its star every 1,907 days. It orbits at about 1.5 times the distance from its star that Earth orbits from the sun. Not an extreme difference, but Proxima Centauri is a red dwarf star, smaller and cooler than our sun, so at that distance, the planet can be expected to be significantly colder than Earth.

Combined images from the SPHERE instrument on the Very Large Telescope (VLT) in Chile, which appear to show Proxima Centauri c as a bright dot. The location is right where the planet was predicted to be in its orbit. The star is hidden behind the black circle in the center. Image via Gratton et al./ A&A/ Nature Astronomy.

Even though Proxima Centauri is the closest star to the sun, it’s difficult to detect the planets orbiting it. Most exoplanets have been found via the transit method, and this system isn’t oriented with respect to Earth such that its planets transit in front of Proxima, from our perspective. So scientists have to use radial velocity observations, measurements of Proxima’s motion toward and away from Earth, to detect the tiny effects of the planets’ gravitational tuggings on the star.

Benedict’s idea was to look again at previous studies of the star from the 1990s from the Hubble Space Telescope (HST), which used the telescope’s Fine Guidance Sensors (FGS). The FGS can be used for astrometry, where scientists can take very accurate measurements of the positions and motions of objects in the sky. If Proxima Centauri c were really there, FGS should be able to detect it. Benedict said in a statement:

Basically, this is a story of how old data can be very useful when you get new information. It’s also a story of how hard it is to retire if you’re an astronomer, because this is fun stuff to do!

So what did Benedict and his team find?

When they looked at the old Hubble data, they found a planet with an orbital period of 1,907 days, which fit with what had been seen before, for the tentative Proxima Centauri c. The planet had been overlooked before because in the 1990s, researchers only checked the data for planets with orbital periods of less than 1,000 days.

Benedict combined the results of three studies: the Hubble/FGS astrometry, the radial velocity studies and images from the SPHERE instrument on the Very Large Telescope (VLT) in Chile, to better estimate the mass of Proxima Centauri c. He concluded that the planet is approximately seven times more massive than Earth.

Size comparison of the three stars in the Alpha Centauri system, including Proxima Centauri, and the sun. Image via PHL @ UPR Arecibo.

Proxima Centauri is the closest of the three stars in the Alpha Centauri system. Image via ESO/ BBC.

Earlier this year, scientists using the images from SPHERE found what appeared to be a large planet orbiting Proxima Centauri that coincided with the predicted position of Proxima Centauri c at the time.

But based on those images, it was found that Proxima Centauri c appeared to be brighter than expected. If the brightness was entirely from the light reflected off the planet itself, then the planet would be about five times larger than Jupiter. But since its estimated mass is more similar to Neptune’s, it may actually be smaller, but has dust clouds or a huge ring system around it. Determining whether it actually does or not will require more observations. It is bright enough that better images of it should be able to be taken by upcoming space telescopes. That’s not the case, unfortunately, with Proxima Centauri b, since it is smaller and much closer to the star. From another recent paper:

Proxima c could become a prime target for follow-up and characterization with next-generation direct imaging instrumentation due to the large maximum angular separation of ~1 arc second from the parent star. The candidate planet represents a challenge for the models of super-Earth formation and evolution.

As far as possible life is concerned, Proxima Centauri c may be too cold for life as we know it, but we just don’t know enough about it yet. Proxima Centauri b is a better candidate for being potentially habitable, since it is only slightly larger than Earth, orbits in the habitable zone of its star and is estimated to have similar temperatures to Earth. We don’t know enough about the actual conditions on this planet yet either, however.

Fritz Benedict at McDonald Observatory, lead author of the new study. Image via McDonald Observatory.

With at least two planets now confirmed orbiting the closest star to our solar system, combined with the over 4,000 other exoplanets discovered so far, we now know that such exoworlds are common in our galaxy. That is a big step that brings us even closer to answering the biggest question of all: are we alone?

Bottom line: Astronomers at McDonald Observatory have confirmed a second planet orbiting the closest star to our sun.

Source: A Preliminary Mass for Proxima Centauri C

Via McDonald Observatory

from EarthSky https://ift.tt/2zlUV0O

New ‘climate decoder’ to study potentially habitable exoplanets

Artist’s concept depicting different kinds of Earth-like planetary surfaces and their interactions with different kinds of host stars. Such variability can create a variety of climates on these kinds of worlds. The new environmental color decoder should be able to help scientists determine which ones have the most habitable climates. Image via Jack Madden/ Cornell Chronicle.

Over 4,000 exoplanets – worlds orbiting other stars – have been confirmed so far. But these planets are very far away, and we still don’t know much about them. To find out more, newer technology and observations are needed. To that end, scientists at Cornell University have developed a new tool – an environmental color “climate decoder” – that they hope will help astronomers learn more about the climates on some of these distant worlds, particularly potentially habitable Earth-sized planets.

The new peer-reviewed research paper detailing how this decoder would work was published in the June 2020 issue of Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society.

The study focuses on how different kinds of planetary surfaces can affect a planet’s climate. As Jack Madden, a coauthor of the new study, said in a statement:

We looked at how different planetary surfaces in the habitable zones of distant solar systems could affect the climate on exoplanets. Reflected light on the surface of planets plays a significant role not only on the overall climate, but also on the detectable spectra of Earth-like planets.

Artist’s concept of Kepler-186f, the first Earth-sized exoplanet found orbiting in the habitable zone of its star. A growing number of such worlds have been found in recent years. Image via NASA/ NASA Ames/ JPL-Caltech/ T. Pyle.

The red dwarf star TRAPPIST-1 has seven known Earth-sized rocky planets orbiting it (artist’s concept). At least three of them are in the star’s habitable zone. Such worlds would be ideal for study by the new environmental color decoder. Image via NASA/ JPL-Caltech.

The research is in anticipation that new telescopes, such as the upcoming Extremely Large Telescope (ELT) in Chile, will soon be able to study potentially habitable planets more closely than ever before. As stated in the paper:

Large ground- and space-based telescopes will be able to observe Earth-like planets in the near future. We explore how different planetary surfaces can strongly influence the climate, atmospheric composition, and remotely detectable spectra of terrestrial rocky exoplanets in the habitable zone depending on the host star’s incident irradiation spectrum for a range of sun-like host stars from F0V to K7V. We update a well-tested 1D climate-photochemistry model to explore the changes of a planetary environment for different surfaces for different host stars. Our results show that using a wavelength-dependent surface albedo is critical for modelling potentially habitable rocky exoplanets.

The researchers looked at two basic aspects of such exoplanets – the surface color and the light coming from the host star – in order to calculate what the climate might be like on a given planet. There can be a lot of variables to consider; if a planet was covered in dark basalt, that could cause the planet to be very hot, just like hot pavement in summertime. But if there was also a lot of clouds or sand, or even oceans, then the planet might be cooler. If there were a planet orbiting a red dwarf star that happened to have vegetation, then it might also have cooler temperatures. Madden said:

Think about wearing a dark shirt on a hot summer day. You’re going to heat up more, because the dark shirt is not reflecting light. It has a low albedo (it absorbs light) and it retains heat. If you wear a light color, such as white, its high albedo reflects the light, and your shirt keeps you cool.

Artist’s concept of the Extremely Large Telescope (ELT) on Cerro Armazones in northern Chile. First light for the telescope is scheduled for 2025. ELT will be able to find even more potentially habitable exoplanets, including ones that may indeed be Earth-like in some ways. Image via European Southern Observatory (ESO).

Madden’s colleague, and the other coauthor of the study, Lisa Kaltenegger, added:

Depending on the kind of star and the exoplanet’s primary color – or the reflecting albedo – the planet’s color can mitigate some of the energy given off by the star. What makes up the surface of an exoplanet, how many clouds surround the planet, and the color of the sun can change an exoplanet’s climate significantly.

Madden added:

There’s an important interaction between the color of a surface and the light hitting it. The effects we found based on a planet’s surface properties can help in the search for life.

Being able to determine what the climate is like on some exoplanets, at least to some degree, will of course help scientists determine which ones could be the most habitable. New upcoming telescopes, like the ELT, will be essential in that endeavour.

A growing number of Earth-sized and super-Earth worlds – larger and more massive than Earth but smaller than Neptune – are being discovered, including in the habitable zones of their stars, the region where temperatures could allow liquid water to exist.

This is encouraging in the search for life elsewhere.

Jack Madden at Cornell University, one of the coauthors of the new study. Image via Cornell University.

But various factors can affect habitability, such as the composition of the atmosphere and planet itself, abundance or lack of water, the amount of radiation coming from the planet’s star and the actual temperatures. There’s no guarantee that any of these planets could host life, so techniques like the new climate decoder will help scientists determine which ones are the most favorable, at least by earthly standards.

With over 4,000 confirmed exoplanets found already, and thousands more expected in the near future, techniques like the climate decoder will be essential for learning not only what conditions are like on some of these distant worlds, but also whether some of them could be home to the holy grail of exoplanet research … life itself.

Bottom line: Scientists have developed a new technique to figure out what the climate is like on potentially habitable exoplanets.

Source: How surfaces shape the climate of habitable exoplanets

Via Cornell Chronicle

from EarthSky https://ift.tt/3dM9iu5

Artist’s concept depicting different kinds of Earth-like planetary surfaces and their interactions with different kinds of host stars. Such variability can create a variety of climates on these kinds of worlds. The new environmental color decoder should be able to help scientists determine which ones have the most habitable climates. Image via Jack Madden/ Cornell Chronicle.

Over 4,000 exoplanets – worlds orbiting other stars – have been confirmed so far. But these planets are very far away, and we still don’t know much about them. To find out more, newer technology and observations are needed. To that end, scientists at Cornell University have developed a new tool – an environmental color “climate decoder” – that they hope will help astronomers learn more about the climates on some of these distant worlds, particularly potentially habitable Earth-sized planets.

The new peer-reviewed research paper detailing how this decoder would work was published in the June 2020 issue of Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society.

The study focuses on how different kinds of planetary surfaces can affect a planet’s climate. As Jack Madden, a coauthor of the new study, said in a statement:

We looked at how different planetary surfaces in the habitable zones of distant solar systems could affect the climate on exoplanets. Reflected light on the surface of planets plays a significant role not only on the overall climate, but also on the detectable spectra of Earth-like planets.

Artist’s concept of Kepler-186f, the first Earth-sized exoplanet found orbiting in the habitable zone of its star. A growing number of such worlds have been found in recent years. Image via NASA/ NASA Ames/ JPL-Caltech/ T. Pyle.

The red dwarf star TRAPPIST-1 has seven known Earth-sized rocky planets orbiting it (artist’s concept). At least three of them are in the star’s habitable zone. Such worlds would be ideal for study by the new environmental color decoder. Image via NASA/ JPL-Caltech.

The research is in anticipation that new telescopes, such as the upcoming Extremely Large Telescope (ELT) in Chile, will soon be able to study potentially habitable planets more closely than ever before. As stated in the paper:

Large ground- and space-based telescopes will be able to observe Earth-like planets in the near future. We explore how different planetary surfaces can strongly influence the climate, atmospheric composition, and remotely detectable spectra of terrestrial rocky exoplanets in the habitable zone depending on the host star’s incident irradiation spectrum for a range of sun-like host stars from F0V to K7V. We update a well-tested 1D climate-photochemistry model to explore the changes of a planetary environment for different surfaces for different host stars. Our results show that using a wavelength-dependent surface albedo is critical for modelling potentially habitable rocky exoplanets.

The researchers looked at two basic aspects of such exoplanets – the surface color and the light coming from the host star – in order to calculate what the climate might be like on a given planet. There can be a lot of variables to consider; if a planet was covered in dark basalt, that could cause the planet to be very hot, just like hot pavement in summertime. But if there was also a lot of clouds or sand, or even oceans, then the planet might be cooler. If there were a planet orbiting a red dwarf star that happened to have vegetation, then it might also have cooler temperatures. Madden said:

Think about wearing a dark shirt on a hot summer day. You’re going to heat up more, because the dark shirt is not reflecting light. It has a low albedo (it absorbs light) and it retains heat. If you wear a light color, such as white, its high albedo reflects the light, and your shirt keeps you cool.

Artist’s concept of the Extremely Large Telescope (ELT) on Cerro Armazones in northern Chile. First light for the telescope is scheduled for 2025. ELT will be able to find even more potentially habitable exoplanets, including ones that may indeed be Earth-like in some ways. Image via European Southern Observatory (ESO).

Madden’s colleague, and the other coauthor of the study, Lisa Kaltenegger, added:

Depending on the kind of star and the exoplanet’s primary color – or the reflecting albedo – the planet’s color can mitigate some of the energy given off by the star. What makes up the surface of an exoplanet, how many clouds surround the planet, and the color of the sun can change an exoplanet’s climate significantly.

Madden added:

There’s an important interaction between the color of a surface and the light hitting it. The effects we found based on a planet’s surface properties can help in the search for life.

Being able to determine what the climate is like on some exoplanets, at least to some degree, will of course help scientists determine which ones could be the most habitable. New upcoming telescopes, like the ELT, will be essential in that endeavour.

A growing number of Earth-sized and super-Earth worlds – larger and more massive than Earth but smaller than Neptune – are being discovered, including in the habitable zones of their stars, the region where temperatures could allow liquid water to exist.

This is encouraging in the search for life elsewhere.

Jack Madden at Cornell University, one of the coauthors of the new study. Image via Cornell University.

But various factors can affect habitability, such as the composition of the atmosphere and planet itself, abundance or lack of water, the amount of radiation coming from the planet’s star and the actual temperatures. There’s no guarantee that any of these planets could host life, so techniques like the new climate decoder will help scientists determine which ones are the most favorable, at least by earthly standards.

With over 4,000 confirmed exoplanets found already, and thousands more expected in the near future, techniques like the climate decoder will be essential for learning not only what conditions are like on some of these distant worlds, but also whether some of them could be home to the holy grail of exoplanet research … life itself.

Bottom line: Scientists have developed a new technique to figure out what the climate is like on potentially habitable exoplanets.

Source: How surfaces shape the climate of habitable exoplanets

Via Cornell Chronicle

from EarthSky https://ift.tt/3dM9iu5

COVID-19: The Lighthouse Labs leading the way for COVID-19 testing in the UK

COVID-19 testing is essential in the UK’s fight against coronavirus and to help get cancer services back on track. We’ve estimated that between 21,000 and 37,000 COVID-19 tests must be done each day to ensure there are COVID-protected safe spaces for cancer diagnosis and treatment.

It’s vital for healthcare workers to know if their suspected symptoms are COVID-19, or if they’re carrying the virus despite not showing symptoms in order to protect themselves, their families and their patients. It’s also vital that patients are tested before they come into hospital to make sure it’s safe for them to have treatment.

In order to ramp up COVID-19 testing in the UK, a series of Lighthouse Labs have been assembled. Based in Cheshire, Glasgow, and Milton Keynes, they’re expected to be instrumental in the nation’s efforts to increase testing capacity.

Each of the sites took just three weeks to get up and running. But an empty lab is of no use, it must be filled with expert personnel.

We spoke to Cancer Research UK scientists who are volunteering at the Alderley Park Lighthouse lab in Cheshire and at the Beatson Institute in Glasgow, about how and why they decided to get involved in the initiative.

Isabelle Thompson, Alderley Park: “This pandemic is hopefully like nothing we’ll ever live through again and it’s pushing everyone to their limits”

Isabelle Thompson is a scientific officer at the Cancer Research UK Manchester Institute. Day-to-day, Thompson ensures the smooth running of the preclinical pharmacology laboratory at the Cancer Biomarker Centre, a growing team of 20 scientists who look at testing novel therapies for lung cancer.  

Thompson told us how the Cancer Biomarker Centre receive regular updates on what’s going on in the Institute. And it was in one of these meetings that they were told about the opportunity to get involved in the Lighthouse Labs at Alderley Park.

“Because we’ve already got training in a lot of methods that can be used, they said that we would be able to volunteer our time in the labs,” says Thompson.

As soon as the plans were announced, Thompson knew she wanted to get involved, and signed up straight away. “I think if you can do something, then you really should. I felt that if I’ve got the skills to even just go in and do a bit of lab work, even if it’s just for a few months, then I then I think that is a worthwhile thing to do.”

The Alderley Park Lighthouse Lab has 5 different workstations, representing different stages of the testing procedure. Thompson describes how the samples go through a diligent process that begins with simply unpacking the swabs, to deactivating the virus and finding out whether the test is positive or negative.

“Each part of the process isn’t too complex,” Thompson explains, “it just needs to be very meticulously done, which I guess kind of suits the way a lot of scientist’s work”.

Thompson says the volunteers working there have experience of working in labs and are using lots of the same techniques and methods in the Lighthouse Lab that they use in their day jobs. And where their expertise lie depends at which workstation they’ll be placed.

With her background in molecular biology, Thompson went for one of the first workstations, where the live virus is isolated from patient samples and deactivated in preparation for the next step of the process, where some of the virus’ genetic material, known as RNA, is extracted.

But Thompson explains how there was still a lot to learn, and quickly. “It was new for me to be working with patient samples, and with a live virus.”

As well as adapting to new techniques, Thompson is adjusting to a whole new wardrobe. Volunteers must wear full PPE, including safety specs, a Howie-style lab coat, disposable sleeve, visors, extended cuffs and secondary gloves.

And it’s not just what to wear, it’s how to wear it. Anyone working in PPE must get training in how to operate efficiently whilst wearing the equipment. “There’s a lot of different PPE that you need to know how to use. So if your hands are in the hoods, working with the samples, you can’t bring them out, you can’t catch a sneeze. So it’s just a case of getting used to that.”

Recently, Thompson has been training new volunteers and working with a small team to implement new automated robotic systems, looking to optimise the number of samples they can process each day. The Alderley Park Lighthouse Lab is not short of things to do but morale remains high, “everyone’s coming together and everyone’s keen to help you learn”.

Dr Jo Birch, The Beatson Institute: “It’s nice to have that feeling of contributing to the cause”

Dr Jo Birch is a Cancer Research UK scientist who researches glioblastoma, an aggressive brain cancer at our Beatson Institute in Glasgow.

Since the pandemic began and laboratories across the country began to close, Birch was working from home, before being furloughed. “It is quite difficult to work from home, but I was doing as much as I could. I just had a review accepted, so I’d written that up, but it is limited when you can’t get back into the lab of course.”

Birch says it was difficult to leave the lab when they had to. “It’s very strange

Jo in her full PPE.

because I think we’re all very passionate about what we do. It’s like a lifestyle, we all enjoy it and we’re very impassioned to make a difference with what we’re doing. So, it was a very strange feeling when we had to walk away.”

Birch received an e-mail from the University of Glasgow requesting volunteers to sign up for the Lighthouse Lab at the Beatson Institute. Like Thompson, Birch decided to sign up straight away. “You see so much on the news about current under-testing and how that really needs to be improved in order to get people moving and back to work, and everything getting back to normal – so it’s just good to be able to contribute to that.”

After receiving confirmation, Birch was back in the lab within two days, but this time helping the national effort to increasing COVID-19 testing.

Like Thompson, Birch has been assigned to a station at the beginning of the work chain, logging sample barcodes and assigning them to a 96-well plate.

She believes that the Institute has a good chance of getting through a significant number of samples and is ready to take on the challenge. “It’s fairly high-throughput, so it’s 90 samples that go into the machines at a time, along with six essential control samples to ensure the testing process is accurate. And they’ve got a bank of 18 machines now.”

Lilly

from Cancer Research UK – Science blog https://ift.tt/30o5jA9

COVID-19 testing is essential in the UK’s fight against coronavirus and to help get cancer services back on track. We’ve estimated that between 21,000 and 37,000 COVID-19 tests must be done each day to ensure there are COVID-protected safe spaces for cancer diagnosis and treatment.

It’s vital for healthcare workers to know if their suspected symptoms are COVID-19, or if they’re carrying the virus despite not showing symptoms in order to protect themselves, their families and their patients. It’s also vital that patients are tested before they come into hospital to make sure it’s safe for them to have treatment.

In order to ramp up COVID-19 testing in the UK, a series of Lighthouse Labs have been assembled. Based in Cheshire, Glasgow, and Milton Keynes, they’re expected to be instrumental in the nation’s efforts to increase testing capacity.

Each of the sites took just three weeks to get up and running. But an empty lab is of no use, it must be filled with expert personnel.

We spoke to Cancer Research UK scientists who are volunteering at the Alderley Park Lighthouse lab in Cheshire and at the Beatson Institute in Glasgow, about how and why they decided to get involved in the initiative.

Isabelle Thompson, Alderley Park: “This pandemic is hopefully like nothing we’ll ever live through again and it’s pushing everyone to their limits”

Isabelle Thompson is a scientific officer at the Cancer Research UK Manchester Institute. Day-to-day, Thompson ensures the smooth running of the preclinical pharmacology laboratory at the Cancer Biomarker Centre, a growing team of 20 scientists who look at testing novel therapies for lung cancer.  

Thompson told us how the Cancer Biomarker Centre receive regular updates on what’s going on in the Institute. And it was in one of these meetings that they were told about the opportunity to get involved in the Lighthouse Labs at Alderley Park.

“Because we’ve already got training in a lot of methods that can be used, they said that we would be able to volunteer our time in the labs,” says Thompson.

As soon as the plans were announced, Thompson knew she wanted to get involved, and signed up straight away. “I think if you can do something, then you really should. I felt that if I’ve got the skills to even just go in and do a bit of lab work, even if it’s just for a few months, then I then I think that is a worthwhile thing to do.”

The Alderley Park Lighthouse Lab has 5 different workstations, representing different stages of the testing procedure. Thompson describes how the samples go through a diligent process that begins with simply unpacking the swabs, to deactivating the virus and finding out whether the test is positive or negative.

“Each part of the process isn’t too complex,” Thompson explains, “it just needs to be very meticulously done, which I guess kind of suits the way a lot of scientist’s work”.

Thompson says the volunteers working there have experience of working in labs and are using lots of the same techniques and methods in the Lighthouse Lab that they use in their day jobs. And where their expertise lie depends at which workstation they’ll be placed.

With her background in molecular biology, Thompson went for one of the first workstations, where the live virus is isolated from patient samples and deactivated in preparation for the next step of the process, where some of the virus’ genetic material, known as RNA, is extracted.

But Thompson explains how there was still a lot to learn, and quickly. “It was new for me to be working with patient samples, and with a live virus.”

As well as adapting to new techniques, Thompson is adjusting to a whole new wardrobe. Volunteers must wear full PPE, including safety specs, a Howie-style lab coat, disposable sleeve, visors, extended cuffs and secondary gloves.

And it’s not just what to wear, it’s how to wear it. Anyone working in PPE must get training in how to operate efficiently whilst wearing the equipment. “There’s a lot of different PPE that you need to know how to use. So if your hands are in the hoods, working with the samples, you can’t bring them out, you can’t catch a sneeze. So it’s just a case of getting used to that.”

Recently, Thompson has been training new volunteers and working with a small team to implement new automated robotic systems, looking to optimise the number of samples they can process each day. The Alderley Park Lighthouse Lab is not short of things to do but morale remains high, “everyone’s coming together and everyone’s keen to help you learn”.

Dr Jo Birch, The Beatson Institute: “It’s nice to have that feeling of contributing to the cause”

Dr Jo Birch is a Cancer Research UK scientist who researches glioblastoma, an aggressive brain cancer at our Beatson Institute in Glasgow.

Since the pandemic began and laboratories across the country began to close, Birch was working from home, before being furloughed. “It is quite difficult to work from home, but I was doing as much as I could. I just had a review accepted, so I’d written that up, but it is limited when you can’t get back into the lab of course.”

Birch says it was difficult to leave the lab when they had to. “It’s very strange

Jo in her full PPE.

because I think we’re all very passionate about what we do. It’s like a lifestyle, we all enjoy it and we’re very impassioned to make a difference with what we’re doing. So, it was a very strange feeling when we had to walk away.”

Birch received an e-mail from the University of Glasgow requesting volunteers to sign up for the Lighthouse Lab at the Beatson Institute. Like Thompson, Birch decided to sign up straight away. “You see so much on the news about current under-testing and how that really needs to be improved in order to get people moving and back to work, and everything getting back to normal – so it’s just good to be able to contribute to that.”

After receiving confirmation, Birch was back in the lab within two days, but this time helping the national effort to increasing COVID-19 testing.

Like Thompson, Birch has been assigned to a station at the beginning of the work chain, logging sample barcodes and assigning them to a 96-well plate.

She believes that the Institute has a good chance of getting through a significant number of samples and is ready to take on the challenge. “It’s fairly high-throughput, so it’s 90 samples that go into the machines at a time, along with six essential control samples to ensure the testing process is accurate. And they’ve got a bank of 18 machines now.”

Lilly

from Cancer Research UK – Science blog https://ift.tt/30o5jA9

Rise of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere continues unabated

Image via NOAA.

The amount of carbon dioxide (CO2) in Earth’s atmosphere continues to rise, say scientists. On June 4, 2020, scientists from NOAA and Scripps Institution of Oceanography announced that atmospheric CO2 measured at Mauna Loa Observatory in Hawaii reached a seasonal peak of 417.1 parts per million for 2020 in May, the highest monthly reading ever recorded.

Meanwhile, a new study, published May 29,2020 in Geology, concludes that today’s carbon dioxide (CO2) levels are higher than they have been for the past 23 million years. The study’s CO2 timeline revealed no evidence for any fluctuations in CO2 that might be comparable to the dramatic CO2 increase of the present day, suggesting that today’s abrupt greenhouse disruption is unique across recent geologic history. Read more about the study here.

CO2 measurements at Mauna Loa in Hawaii began in 1958, initiating what has become the longest unbroken record of CO2 measurements in the world. The Mauna Loa observatory is a benchmark sampling location for CO2. Perched on a barren volcano in the middle of the Pacific Ocean, the observatory is ideally situated for sampling well-mixed air – undisturbed by the influence of local pollution sources or vegetation – that represents the global background for the northern hemisphere. The Mauna Loa data, together with measurements from sampling stations around the world, are incorporated into NOAA’s Global Greenhouse Gas Reference Network, a foundational research dataset for international climate scientists. Image via NOAA.

Pieter Tans, senior scientist with NOAA’s Global Monitoring Laboratory. Tans said in a statement:

Progress in emissions reductions is not visible in the CO2 record. We continue to commit our planet – for centuries or longer – to more global heating, sea level rise, and extreme weather events every year.

If humans were to suddenly stop emitting CO2, it would take thousands of years for our CO2 emissions so far to be absorbed into the deep ocean and atmospheric CO2 to return to pre-industrial levels.

Image via NOAA/ Scripps Institution of Oceanography.

According to the NOAA report, this year’s peak value was 2.4 parts per million (ppm) higher than the 2019 peak of 414.7 ppm recorded in May 2019. NOAA scientists reported a May average of 417.1 ppm. Scripps scientists reported an May average of 417.2 ppm. Monthly carbon dioxide (CO2) values at Mauna Loa first breached the 400 ppm threshold in 2014, and are now at levels not experienced by the atmosphere in several million years.

The rate of increase during 2020 does not appear to reflect reduction in pollution emissions due to the sharp, worldwide economic slowdown in response to the coronavirus pandemic. The reason, says NOAA, is that the drop in emissions would need to be large enough to stand out from natural CO2 variability, caused by how plants and soils respond to seasonal and annual variations of temperature, humidity, soil moisture, etc. These natural variations are large, and so far the emissions reductions associated with COVID19 do not stand out. If emissions reductions of 20 to 30 percent were sustained for six to 12 months, then the rate of increase of CO2 measured at Mauna Loa would be slowed.

Geochemist Ralph Keeling runs the Scripps Oceanography program at Mauna Loa. He said:

People may be surprised to hear that the response to the coronavirus outbreak hasn’t done more to influence CO2 levels. But the buildup of CO2 is a bit like trash in a landfill. As we keep emitting, it keeps piling up. The crisis has slowed emissions, but not enough to show up perceptibly at Mauna Loa. What will matter much more is the trajectory we take coming out of this situation.

Even though terrestrial plants and the global ocean absorb an amount of CO2 equivalent to about half of the 40 billion tons of CO2 pollution emitted by humans each year, the rate of CO2 increase in the atmosphere has been steadily accelerating. In the 1960s, the annual growth averaged about 0.8 ppm per year. It doubled to 1.6 ppm per year in the 1980s and remained steady at 1.5 ppm per year in the 1990s. The average growth rate again surged to 2.0 ppm per year in the 2000s, and increased to 2.4 ppm per year during the last decade.

Tans said:

There is abundant and conclusive evidence that the acceleration is caused by increased emissions … Well-understood physics tells us that the increasing levels of greenhouse gases are heating Earth’s surface, melting ice and accelerating sea-level rise. If we do not stop greenhouse gases from rising further, especially CO2, large regions of the planet will become uninhabitable.

This graph depicts the last four complete years of the Mauna Loa carbon dioxide record plus the current year. The dashed red lines represent the monthly mean values, centered on the middle of each month. The black lines represent the same, after correction for the average seasonal cycle. Image via NOAA

Bottom line: A NOAA report released in June 2020 says that atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2) measured at Hawaii’s Mauna Loa Observatory for May 2020 was the highest monthly reading ever recorded.

Source: A 23 m.y. record of low atmospheric CO2

Via The Geological Society of America

Via NOAA

from EarthSky https://ift.tt/3hbvL5R

Image via NOAA.

The amount of carbon dioxide (CO2) in Earth’s atmosphere continues to rise, say scientists. On June 4, 2020, scientists from NOAA and Scripps Institution of Oceanography announced that atmospheric CO2 measured at Mauna Loa Observatory in Hawaii reached a seasonal peak of 417.1 parts per million for 2020 in May, the highest monthly reading ever recorded.

Meanwhile, a new study, published May 29,2020 in Geology, concludes that today’s carbon dioxide (CO2) levels are higher than they have been for the past 23 million years. The study’s CO2 timeline revealed no evidence for any fluctuations in CO2 that might be comparable to the dramatic CO2 increase of the present day, suggesting that today’s abrupt greenhouse disruption is unique across recent geologic history. Read more about the study here.

CO2 measurements at Mauna Loa in Hawaii began in 1958, initiating what has become the longest unbroken record of CO2 measurements in the world. The Mauna Loa observatory is a benchmark sampling location for CO2. Perched on a barren volcano in the middle of the Pacific Ocean, the observatory is ideally situated for sampling well-mixed air – undisturbed by the influence of local pollution sources or vegetation – that represents the global background for the northern hemisphere. The Mauna Loa data, together with measurements from sampling stations around the world, are incorporated into NOAA’s Global Greenhouse Gas Reference Network, a foundational research dataset for international climate scientists. Image via NOAA.

Pieter Tans, senior scientist with NOAA’s Global Monitoring Laboratory. Tans said in a statement:

Progress in emissions reductions is not visible in the CO2 record. We continue to commit our planet – for centuries or longer – to more global heating, sea level rise, and extreme weather events every year.

If humans were to suddenly stop emitting CO2, it would take thousands of years for our CO2 emissions so far to be absorbed into the deep ocean and atmospheric CO2 to return to pre-industrial levels.

Image via NOAA/ Scripps Institution of Oceanography.

According to the NOAA report, this year’s peak value was 2.4 parts per million (ppm) higher than the 2019 peak of 414.7 ppm recorded in May 2019. NOAA scientists reported a May average of 417.1 ppm. Scripps scientists reported an May average of 417.2 ppm. Monthly carbon dioxide (CO2) values at Mauna Loa first breached the 400 ppm threshold in 2014, and are now at levels not experienced by the atmosphere in several million years.

The rate of increase during 2020 does not appear to reflect reduction in pollution emissions due to the sharp, worldwide economic slowdown in response to the coronavirus pandemic. The reason, says NOAA, is that the drop in emissions would need to be large enough to stand out from natural CO2 variability, caused by how plants and soils respond to seasonal and annual variations of temperature, humidity, soil moisture, etc. These natural variations are large, and so far the emissions reductions associated with COVID19 do not stand out. If emissions reductions of 20 to 30 percent were sustained for six to 12 months, then the rate of increase of CO2 measured at Mauna Loa would be slowed.

Geochemist Ralph Keeling runs the Scripps Oceanography program at Mauna Loa. He said:

People may be surprised to hear that the response to the coronavirus outbreak hasn’t done more to influence CO2 levels. But the buildup of CO2 is a bit like trash in a landfill. As we keep emitting, it keeps piling up. The crisis has slowed emissions, but not enough to show up perceptibly at Mauna Loa. What will matter much more is the trajectory we take coming out of this situation.

Even though terrestrial plants and the global ocean absorb an amount of CO2 equivalent to about half of the 40 billion tons of CO2 pollution emitted by humans each year, the rate of CO2 increase in the atmosphere has been steadily accelerating. In the 1960s, the annual growth averaged about 0.8 ppm per year. It doubled to 1.6 ppm per year in the 1980s and remained steady at 1.5 ppm per year in the 1990s. The average growth rate again surged to 2.0 ppm per year in the 2000s, and increased to 2.4 ppm per year during the last decade.

Tans said:

There is abundant and conclusive evidence that the acceleration is caused by increased emissions … Well-understood physics tells us that the increasing levels of greenhouse gases are heating Earth’s surface, melting ice and accelerating sea-level rise. If we do not stop greenhouse gases from rising further, especially CO2, large regions of the planet will become uninhabitable.

This graph depicts the last four complete years of the Mauna Loa carbon dioxide record plus the current year. The dashed red lines represent the monthly mean values, centered on the middle of each month. The black lines represent the same, after correction for the average seasonal cycle. Image via NOAA

Bottom line: A NOAA report released in June 2020 says that atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2) measured at Hawaii’s Mauna Loa Observatory for May 2020 was the highest monthly reading ever recorded.

Source: A 23 m.y. record of low atmospheric CO2

Via The Geological Society of America

Via NOAA

from EarthSky https://ift.tt/3hbvL5R