Wednesday, February 12, 2025

LAB ANIMAL TESTING

Macaque monkeys can learn to associate pictures with sounds and words, even when the words are then spoken by new individuals, showing impressive abilities to learn cross-modal associations


PLOS
Monkeys can identify pictures from words 

image: 

In the experiment, monkeys engage with auditory stimuli—ranging from simple sounds to spoken words—by identifying and selecting the corresponding visual image on a touchscreen. During one trial, a monkey momentarily diverted its attention, turning to observe the researcher, while the test images, reflected on an adjacent side panel, lingered on the screen, awaiting the animal’s tactile response.

view more 

Credit: Cabrera-Ruiz et al., CC-BY 4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)





 

 

Article URLhttps://plos.io/3CrJ9CB

Article title: Monkeys can identify pictures from words

Author countries: México, U.S.

Funding: LL received funding from the Consejo Nacional de Humanidades, Ciencias y Tecnologías (CONAHCYT; Grant Number: 256767; https://conahcyt.mx/) and the Programa de Apoyo a Proyectos de Investigación e Innovación Tecnológica (PAPIIT; Grant Number: IN229323; https://dgapa.unam.mx/index.php/impulso-a-la-investigacion/papiit). JV was supported by the Secretaría de Educación, Ciencia, Tecnología e Innovación de la Ciudad de México (Grant Number: SECTEI/103/2022; https://www.sectei.cdmx.gob.mx/). Elizabeth Cabrera Ruiz conducted this study to fulfill the requirements of the Programa de Doctorado en Ciencias Biomédicas at Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México and received a doctoral scholarship from the Consejo Nacional de Humanidades, Ciencias y Tecnologías (Scholarship Number: 245771; https://conahcyt.mx/). The data presented in this work form part of her doctoral dissertation. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

 

Music advertised to support "work flow" does seem to boost speed of cognitive processing in lab cognition test, likely working by boosting mood


HOW DOES THAT WORK FOR MANUAL LABOR


PLOS
Effects of music advertised to support focus on mood and processing speed. 

image: 

Effects of music advertised to support focus on mood and processing speed.

view more 

Credit: CDD20, Pixabay, CC0 (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)ed to support "work flow" does seem to boost speed of cognitive processing in lab cognition test, likely working by boosting mood

 

 

Article URLhttps://plos.io/42yjfaL

Article title: Effects of music advertised to support focus on mood and processing speed

Author countries: U.S.

Funding: This work was funded by a grant from the company that provided the tracks for the work flow condition to Dr. Ripolles. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

Women are around 40% more generous than men in "Dictator Game" lab experiments measuring generosity, with personality traits and emotions affecting donation decisions



PLOS

Gender differences in dictator giving: A high-power laboratory test 

image: 

Percentage of males and females reporting rationality vs. positive, negative, or other emotions as a reason for their decision in the DG.

view more 

Credit: Barreda-Tarrazona et al., 2025, PLOS One, CC-BY 4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)




Women are around 40% more generous than men in "Dictator Game" lab experiments measuring generosity, with personality traits and emotions affecting donation decisions

Article URLhttps://plos.io/40FyAnh

Article title: Gender differences in dictator giving: A high-power laboratory test

Author countries: Spain

Funding: This work was supported by the Spanish Ministry of Science and Innovation (PID2021-123053OB-I00) and Jaume I University (UJI-B2021-23). The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript..

Journal

DOI

Article Title

Article Publication Date

 ARSON 

Human-caused fires growing faster than lightning fires in the Western US





PNAS Nexus
Western US ecoregions 

image: 

The spatial distribution of the ecoregions in the western United States. 

view more 

Credit: Li et al.




A study shows that there are almost twice as many risky days for large human-caused fires in the American West as there are for lightning-caused fires, due to differences in the level of heat and aridity under which each type of fire is likely to occur. The discrepancy is not accounted for in most fire early warning systems. In addition, risky days for human-caused fires are growing faster than risky days for lighting-caused fires as the climate warms. 

Fa Li and colleagues focused on Vapor Pressure Deficit (VPD), which captures both dryness and heat, reflecting the difference between the actual air water vapor content and saturation. The authors used a Bayesian inference algorithm to model the relationship between VPD and the probability of large fires for the largest 10% of fires in each ecoregion in the western United States. The estimated VPD threshold for large fires ranged from 1.1 to 2.1 kPa for human-ignited large fires and 1.8 to 3.1 kPa for lightning-ignited large fires. One reason for this difference is likely related to the location of the first ignition. Lightning strikes from above, hitting the forest canopy, which is often living and therefore moist. Human-caused fires often ignite at ground level in dried grass or fine dead branches, material which tends to be very dry. Thus human-caused fires can catch and spread when the atmosphere is wetter. Across the west, from 1979-2020, about 30 days a year were sufficiently hot and dry for lightning-ignited large fires, while about 58 days a year were sufficiently hot and dry for human-ignited large fires. The number of flammable days for human-caused fires increased 21% more rapidly than the number of flammable days for fires caused by lightning over the same period. Anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions were responsible for 81% of the increases in human-related flammable days. According to the authors, the results can help build more accurate models of fire risk.


flammable days 

 

Fewer forest fires burn in North America today than in the past—and that's a bad thing



University of Colorado at Boulder
Evolution of wildfires 

image: 

Conceptual figure illustrates the impacts of fire exclusion and suppression on area burned and fire severity in historically frequent-fire North American forests and woodlands represented by the majority of the fire scar sites used in our analysis.

view more 

Credit: Jessie Thoreson




Fewer wildfires burn in North American forests today than in previous centuries, increasing the risk of more severe wildfires, according to research published this week in Nature Communications. The findings may seem counterintuitive, but frequent low-lying surface fires often maintain balance in forests by reducing fuel sources across large areas. 

The new study led by the Cooperative Institute for Research in Environmental Sciences (CIRES) at the University of Colorado Boulder and the U.S. Forest Service’s Rocky Mountain Research Station compared wildfire frequency between two time periods: 1984 to 2022 and 1600 to 1880. Scientists analyzed 1,850 tree-ring records in historically burned areas and compared them to maps documenting the perimeters of modern fires across Canada and the United States. 

The findings show modern-day fires are much less frequent than they were in past centuries, despite recent record-breaking fire years, such as 2020. The results also reveal that much of the continent is in a substantial “fire deficit,” experiencing about 20 percent as much fire as in the past. On average, larger areas of land burned from fires each year before 1880 compared to 1984-2022. This deficit allows fuel to build up over time, creating conditions for more severe fires. 

“It’s a harbinger for far more bad fires to come unless we can get more beneficial management fires on the landscape,” said Chris Guiterman, a CIRES research scientist and member of NOAA’s National Centers for Environmental Information (NCEI) paleoclimate team

Even though a much larger portion of the forest burned in fires in the 18th and 19th centuries, those fires were less devastating: the trees that recorded those fires survived and continued to grow. Modern fires, in contrast, are so severe they often leave forests barren and speckled with dead trees. 

According to the researchers, the differences between historical and contemporary fires likely reflect the changed relationship between fire, forests, and people across much of the U.S. and Canada. Before 1880, fires burned more frequently but less severely across many forests due to traditional burning practices by Indigenous peoples and lightning-sparked fires. These fires often had a stabilizing effect on the forests by clearing out brush and debris—lowering the amount of flammable forest fuels available. 

The disruption of traditional burning practices, widespread livestock grazing, and later suppression of human and lightning-ignited fires have prevented beneficial forest fires from igniting across the U.S over the past century. This has destabilized forests that evolved with and are adapted to fire. Today’s higher-severity wildfires are more likely to harm people and communities while transforming forests into other vegetation types such as shrublands.

This study complements recent research demonstrating that historical fires burned less severely and coincided with drought episodes over large regions

Wildfires are inevitable in forests across the Western U.S. There is an ever-growing body of science around practices to help reduce the probability that these fires will have adverse impacts on forests and humans. Previous research shows that activities such as mechanical fuel treatments and prescribed burning are effective ways to reduce fire impacts, and are in line with both Indigenous management practices and long-term ecological processes. 

“It’s heartbreaking to witness how recent wildfires are devastating people, communities, and forests,” said Sean Parks, research scientist with the U.S. Forest Service Rocky Mountain Research Station, and lead author of the study. “Wildfires are inevitable, so preparing our forests for these events through fuel reduction treatments and prescribed fire will reduce their impacts to communities and forests.”