Five Slimes To Rule Them All

This is Twist. This week in science, episode number 1071, recorded on Wednesday, August 12th, 2026. Five slimes to rule them all. And one slime to bind them. I don't really know. I'm Dr. Kiki, and tonight we will fill your head with red spots, snail slime, and primate brains. But first, thanks to our amazing Patreon sponsors for their generous support of Twist. You can become a part of the Patreon community at patreon.com/thisweek science. Disclaimer, disclaimer, disclaimer. Fouchy in contempt of Congress. The National Academy is capitulating on a climate chapter. More vaccines are optional while MMR might be split into three. And unproven peptides are more available than ever. Maybe Political pet projects have taken over the hill regardless of scientific support. At least we still look to the evidence here on This Week in Science. Coming up next, [music] >> I've got the kind of mind that can't get enough. I want to learn everything. I want to fill it all up with new discoveries that happen every [music] day of the week. There's only one place to go to find the knowledge I seek. I want to know what's happening. What's happening? What's happening this week in science? What's happening? What's happening? What's happening this week in science? [music] >> Good science to you, Kiki. And a good science to you, Blair, and everyone out there. Welcome to another episode of This Week in Science. We're back again to talk about all the science that was fit to spit in this episode of this podcast. I mean, it's not really fit fit to [laughter] print because we're not we don't go to print. So, [clears throat] yeah. I don't know. I got to work on some of these words sometimes. [laughter] >> No, it sounds to me like the plan is to say it and spray it. And that's fine because none of you are actually physically here with us. >> I know. And I have a pop filter, so hopefully that helps a little bit. [laughter] >> I hope everyone had a wonderful week. We're back ready to talk about all the science that we brought tonight. I have stories about some unnatural viruses. Black hole star. Yeah, that's as far as I'm going to go with that one. Bacteria for babies. Maybe some elven coral. >> Some monkey brains. Some trust tests. and the LLM study that we really all needed but didn't know we needed. [laughter] >> Excellent. Excited for that. >> What's an animal corner, Blair? >> Uh, platypus, frogs, snails. >> It sounds like an animal corner. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. Sounds like it's rounded out as well. You got some verts, inverts. >> Yeah. And >> monotream. >> Yeah. Monotreams, amphibians. So many good groups here. Literally three of my favorite animals also. This is pretty exciting. >> So Blair's going to be waiting and patiently [laughter] for her turn for her animal. >> I'll be patient. It's fine. >> I see how it goes. All right. As we jump into the show tonight, I do want to remind everyone that if you have not yet subscribed to This Week in Science, you can find us live streaming on our channels weekly Wednesdays, 8:00 p.m. Pacific timeish on Wednesdays at 8:00 p.m. I said that Wednesdays 8:00 p.m. Pacific timeish, right on YouTube, >> Facebook, and Twitch. I started hearing doors closing and things happening in my house and I got offkilter there with what I was saying. Anyway, you can also find us on our on your favorite podcast platform. You can look for This Week in Science. Look for Twist and you will probably find our wonderful orange starburst flag and be able to subscribe so that you can find us every time a new episode is published. If you want information about show notes, the stories we talk about, please head over to twist.org, our website, where we also have links to our Patreon account and our Zazzle store. But now it is time for the science. Should jump in. >> Let's do it. Okay. Story published um in science. this last week and a bunch of articles came out about it. Carl Zimmer wrote about this in the New York Times and there's a great article if you're not able to get Carl Zimmer's wonderful guest link through the New York Times. Um there is another great article by some scientists in the conversation. Now what is this story? Researchers published in science their work titled generative design of bacteria phasages with genome language models. What does this mean? Scientists have used large language model technology trained on uh genomic information about bacteria phasages, very specific genetic genetic data sets and use that to create synthetic bacteria phasages. We'll just shorten that and say phages from here on out. Now, it's been simplified and said it's a virus. Well, that's because they're like everything that's small and infects things and is, you know, is not really living quote unquote, it's a virus. It's not bacterial. It's these bacteria phasages. Phases, they're virus viruses. They are or bact, I'm sorry about that. They are bacteria viruses. Bacteria phasages are little tiny viruses that infect bacteria >> and they're really cool because we didn't know about them for a long time and then we're like oh my gosh this is where the predator prey arms race for antibiotic resistance all sorts of things like we have found our antibiotic targets very o often because of how they are um similar very important targets that are targeted by these phasages very often. And there are even uh uses in what's called phase therapy for really hard to hard to kill infections where they're using phasages. where they found very specific phasages that infect very specific types of bacteria at very specific targets and they are able to use multiple phasages to be able to get rid of multi-drugresistant bacteria and so this is really important as we're moving into a future without enough really wellworking antibiotics. Okay. So, first thing about this story, very interesting use of the what we call a language model, right? They've taken that model system, the training, it's not language, it's genetic code, right? So, they've they've basically done a similar kind of training set, just the language is base pairs and genetic data. Um, and so they didn't just say, "Here's all the genetic information in the world. Make up a new bacteria phase." They did not do that. They were very, very specific in in their target. What they did is they honed in on one very, very specific natural phase that has a specificity for E.coli. This phase is uh Greek letter Greek letter 174. [laughter] I don't know what I don't know how to say this. Um Omnicom X1 174. Anyway, um this phase is a is a template and was the design template for their genome language models that are called EVO 1 and EVO 2. They used this. They were all these EVO one and EVO 2 models were trained on a bunch of phase genomic data for genetic architecture specificity to host. So basically like oh this type of structure of information goes with E.coli, this goes with Salmonella, this goes with this. Um and so they created using X174 as a template. They basically created a way to to pump out new designs basically to speed up the process of evolution. So instead of relying on the natural process of things just bumping into each other and working to infect bacteria and to reproduce themselves using bacterial mechanisms. They don't have to do that anymore. they can potentially make these viral bacteria viruses in a laboratory. They tested nearly 300 chemically synthesized phase genomes. They got 16 that worked and those 16 were very specific to the host. They were had a had different fitness levels um and they had competitive infection kinetics. And so that's important because that that determines in an ecological system, a bacter microbial bacterial ecological system, the movement of how different phasages are going to be in able to infect or not infect a certain environment. Anyway, they were able to do this. they uh had generated phasages also overcome um bacterial res uh bacterial resistance. So if the bacteria became resistant to phagee antimicrobial therapies, they gave them a mixture of different designed phasages and the mixture was able to end up with survivors and to be able to out compete bacterial resistance. And so this is really important for that predator prey interaction that goes on. So really interesting, great story, lots of cool stuff that is going on with this. The concern is um this was very easily uh managed by uh open- source genome language models. Um and there really aren't any conversations going right now about who regulates and how this kind of techn technology is regulated. if it does become regulated, where, when, and how is this technology allowed to be used? Because >> not only can you use it for therapies and attacking bad bacteria, you could also >> make a superbug. Yeah. >> You could you could boost up a bacteria. You could destroy good bacteria. You could do so many >> different things. And so there is obviously a concern that comes along with it. Mhm. Um, I looked it's uh the the first Greek letter is the word is the word fi for fei. Thank you. >> And I don't know if it's x174 or kai 174. >> That's what I was like. >> Yeah. >> I don't know. I [laughter] don't know for sure. But >> but hey, there you go. Uh, okay. So, it's this is all still very proof of concept. It sounds like >> it is very proof of concept. There are so many reasons this is still far away from actually being used in medicine right or in you know beyond a laboratory at this point in time. This is still you know years in development. You have to make sure you can test these things. How do we even develop a process for ensuring that these kinds of phase therapies, synthetic phased phase therapies could be repeatable and um you know nimble enough and safe enough to use nimly in a hospital setting or in um in an offtheshelf you know how do you make it off the shelf? How do you make it something that works really well? Um but it is a I think it's a really exciting um development in the use of AI for science for medicine for speeding up the possibility of finding therapies and uses you know that and you know otherwise we have to search through all the swamp soup. >> Yeah. Yep. Absolutely. I mean, that's what that's what LLMs are good at is processing data and um creating iterations. Like, that's what they're good at because those are the things that we would have to sit and do manually that an LLM can really handle. If you give them a very clear set of parameters, they got it, you know, and of course this they said they came up with lots of different options for genetic diver, you know, different genomes for phasages. 316 of them worked. So, it's not like, ooh, it's just going to design a great one every time. There's still testing and iteration and all sorts of stuff that needs to be involved. Um, and the article on the conversations website does a really good job of going into the gap that is still existent between designing a phase and treating a patient. So um yeah, but the question is for biocurity, >> how come we're not how come we don't know about people already having this conversation, right? This don't don't why don't we already have regulations about this? We should. Um, anyway, yeah, I think that's a a this is my cool news that's going on that everybody should be aware of because this might be where uh bacterial infections are treated and or how they're treated in the future. Um, you know, how and how do we get there faster? It's this is but there are safety issues. So, it's promised. Yeah. What about platypuses? >> Platypus. >> So platypus um Australia monitoring egg laying mammal. Crazy guys. Um they uh there was a drought in 2019 in Tidbin natural reserve in Canberra. Of course Tidbinilla sounds so Australian. Um >> Tidben Bella. Yes, there were uh they only found uh eight platypuses who had passed and then they found an additional seven who were still alive. They rescued the seven. Five survived long enough to then be returned to the wild, but they didn't know whether spending literally months in captivity after having been born in the wild would affect their ability to reestablish. That is often the case, especially with mammals. Once you bring them in to live with humans, especially kind of in a slap dash approach where it's, you know, you got to kind of just act fast. You're not thinking about like, oh, let's get a platypus um puppet and put them in a dark case and then like, you know, like they were just like, animals are dying. We got to grab them. So, they grabbed them. Um there's a chance that they'll habituate to humans. They won't want to get food on their own. they'll keep approaching humans or they just plain won't survive in the wild afterwards. >> We hope the last one is not the case, >> right? And so, uh, this was a really unique opportunity where they were able to then follow the platypuses post re-release. They followed them for 18 months after they were returned to the nature reserve. They were [snorts] uh they were at the Turanga Zoo for 5 months in human care. They found that the animals quickly reestablished their homes. They resumed normal movement patterns. They settled back into familiar parts of the waterways. All within days of their release, they started acting pretty normal. Four of the five animals remained in the reserve for 10 to 18 months after the release. So, it seems as though they were reestablished successfully. Um this is uh just good evidence that the emergency rescue and return can be an effective conservation tool for platypuses. You know, there's like I said lots of different issues um with um with doing this with other species, but uh there's not a lot of research on platypus. So in this case, looks like the platypus is an animal that you can rescue, treat, bring back to health, and then release back into the wild. Um, they settled back into their regular routine, and they solved they they served their evolution or e ecological purpose in that space. So it seems like they got right back into it. Um, so this just will uh kind of provide one in the win column for this. It'll it encourages researchers to try to do this more conservation to do this more with other species and that at least in theory based on this very small sample size. Platypuses you could do this with and uh you can boost their survivability if there's a natural disaster which obviously there's more of due to climate change and stuff like that. So >> yeah. So I'm now I'm like they've had conservation efforts for various birds, various mammals, various you know monotrems are this we did they did they treat them how did they treat them? >> They you know it was a drought. So I'm >> feed you know like with birds you feed them with sock puppets and you try to get rid of all your >> It sounds like they just brought them into the zoo. So they they just fed them and gave them water and shelter and allowed them to cool off and gained body weight back. Then they released them back into the wild. >> Yeah. So they basically just sheltered the drought. Um because you know they're aquatic animals. So in a drought they if there's no place for them to go, there's no food for them to eat, that's it for them. So hopefully they're able to do this, you know, much more. And I mean, why is it a Australia, New Zealand, these island continent countries? Um, you know, there's there's so many. Is it because they're isolated that they have do they have more animals like the platypus and others that are needing this kind of conservation? Do they have more animals? >> So, I mean, generally speaking, if you're on an island, >> there's less space to move to adapt to a rapidly changing climate. >> So, um, island animals in general are more susceptible just like mountain animals are more susceptible. That's like a a geographical island, right? because you can't go down to exit out into larger territories. Your your your mountain is all you have. So in a mountain, in an island, you are really constrained uh geographically. And so, you know, if I was a polar bear and I was hanging out in the lower parts of Canada, I can scooch further towards the North Pole as the climate warms. But if I am a platypus in Australia that and I need fresh water and there's no fresh water in direct relation to where I am, there's nowhere else I can go, right? So >> generally islands are are more difficult for that. But I think also Australia's really unusual in that they have these like very intensely varied ecosystems. They have freshwater ecosystems. They have deserts. They have mountains. They have beaches. They have like everything in Australia in this pretty geographically small space. So if you have an impact on one kind of like ecological biome, um they can't go next door, they can't go to another neighboring area because it is ecologically so different in that other space. So I think it's it's just a function of like the biogeography of Australia. Um but also the last thing I'll mention is that um because there's so many weirdos in Australia like there's all these evolutionary evolutionarily weird animals. You know some people would call them primitive but just basically that uh certain traits have maintained that have been uh selected out on the mainland. And because of that, that also provides less plasticity in all of their behaviors and needs because they don't have as varied of a um of a genome with like all this evolutionary history of change. They've they're a lot of things have been maintained for millions of years. And so um there there's way less opportunity for them to adapt to the new space, >> right? because they haven't had as much ecological like pressure to evolve as mainland animals have. So in yeah in general like Australia is special. We [laughter] know that. >> We know that. Yeah. >> And their animals are special and they're unlike anything anywhere else on the world in the world. So also that's part of it. You can't be like oh well if we lose this population of platypus we'll just grab some from South America and bring them over. No this is >> different platypus. Yeah. This is all of them. [laughter] >> So like you got to save them. You got to save these habitats um and these populations. And if they can be taken in and taken care of and re-released, golden. That's great. I mean, this makes sense. The the emergency rescue makes sense to me, especially of adult animals because adult animals have already imprinted on their own species as mates. They have already learned their wild uh habits, feeding habits, um habits for predators and vigilance and you know all their they've learned their languages, right? The language of their species and the the other animals in their environment. So there's a part of me that's like I'm not really surprised >> that that they did okay. >> There's certain animals out there that if you like bears are famous for that. Like if you brought a bear inside and you taught them that they could take food from humans. >> Toast. >> All done. >> Yeah. >> No, they're always going to >> hunt and gather. Absolutely not. Are you kidding me? >> I could just go over there and take food from that guy. No. >> I [snorts] just saw a uh and and this made me think and it and of course it's like social media videos people can edit any which way, right? But there was a video that somebody had edited together of various clips of a crow hanging out with a guy. And I don't know, I'm sure that if I showed it to my son, he'd be like, "That's AI." Um, but [laughter] but the whole thing was like, "This is so sweet." You know, hearts and tears. This guy noticed a crow who was thirsty out in the environment and gave him water. And so the crow followed him home and then he just hung the crow hung out with him. And so then the guy fed him and then the crow never left and now the crow jumped on his shoulder and now he rides with him on a bicycle and they're best friends, right? >> And I was like I mean I could imagine a crow >> Yeah. >> giving up independence for somebody who just fed, you know, a crow's smart enough to do that. take advantage, [laughter] you know, but at the same time I was like this just it gives that like wrong the wrong headedness, right? The the wrong visual about how humans should interact with wild animals. And so, especially with a with a a rescue story like this, I think it's very important to say don't feed the animals unless you are a trained professional who is in a situation of helping them on purpose. >> Yes. I mean, listen, we would all love to be Dr. Dittle or Snow White or whatever fantasy character you want to imagine that's with the animals. But >> right, >> for every animal that is taken out of the wild, >> that is an entire life history of that animal that you were taking out of the wild. Even if you could give a perfect life to that animal, which you probably can't, [laughter] >> but even if you could, their children, their children's children, their children's children's children, every plant they could pollinate, every disease they could help abate, that entire ripple has been taken out of the wild. You just you just sliding doors >> that whole bird's life, that whole like the lineage that that bird might have. >> Yeah. >> So that's rough. [laughter] >> Yeah. >> All right. From from rescuing platypuses to don't feed the animals. Um let's talk about black hole [singing] sun. Well, it's a black hole star. Maybe this is a really cool story and [snorts] I remember when the James Webb Space Telescope first started showing images, people were talking about astrophysicists were talking about how there were these red dots in the background like far away uh you know way back in history there were these red dots in the images and they didn't know what the red dots were and Now researchers think they might know what the red dots are. Of course, it's still a hypothesis. They have done computer simulations and uh and analyzed things every which way. So, we don't have we haven't gone and visited one. So, we have no way of knowing. So what they think these red dots in the James Web Space Telescope's images from the early universe are is a new type of astrophysical object. It looks like an enormous red star, but it has too much energy. Energy similar to that of a black hole about a 100,000 our sun masses. And so these researchers put this there. Well, maybe the red is dust from like a big star area. It's so far back in the history. Is that dust? What is it? Could it be hydrogen? Anyway, they realized way more energy. These red dots are blasting out way more energy than a normal star would. And they are big. They're like the size of a solar system. So, they're really big in in their area. These red dots, their analyses, they believe that there is a central black hole surrounded by a cocoon of hydrogen gas. And the hydrogen gas is part of it's getting heated and it's also kind of blocking all of the energy that would initially be emanating from a black hole if it just didn't have anything around it. And so they are really putting forward this idea that it might be a black hole star and that's what they're calling them now. So the red dots they are saying they're calling them black hole stars. They looked at the signatures the energetic signatures of the red dots. The dots were red. They were bright. They were like, "Okay, so the red light that means a few things." So, um, it could be a veil of dust, right? They also were looking up at the pattern of the dust that that they were seeing, but it was like there was a complete cliff when the wavelength of the light that's being detected was considered. And so below certain wavelengths, it just completely goes off. And this is a spectral drop off known as a Balmer break. And so this they know is usually associated with dense gases in the atmospheres of stars. And so they were like this is a really really big break. And so then they were like is it a different stellar atmosphere on a bigger scale? What's going on? And they really think it's a dense screen of hydrogen gas and that this dense screen of hydrogen gas is what you know it's early early universe. So that makes a lot of sense. You it looks like a star but it's super bright so it can't be a star. How do you get that? Not nuclear fusion. It's something bigger. A black hole energy source. And so because of the cocoon and the way the light is coming out and the way that we're seeing it and the fact that it looks like a star, that's why they're calling it a star. It's kind of their shorthand, but it's not really a star star. The way that we think of them, it's a black hole surrounded by hydrogen gas. And they think this is what explains these red dots that we have been seeing. So, they have this one object they've been looking at, mum bh asterisk-1. Um, and this is black hole star one. And this is the first of many of them. And they have been looking at a bunch of these little red dots from the JWIST images and think this is really the thing that explains it all. Their title of their study is a gas enshrouded. I love all this gas enshrouded and gas reddened black hole at cosmic dawn. I mean that's not sensational at all. But these um some of these some of these images from their spectroscopy are really quite wonderful. So um I'm going to share this share these images right now with uh those of you who are in who are watching on the video stream. You've got these um really great energetic visualizations of the red dot in one of the this black black hole star number one and um the energy cliff that we're talking about taking place um at the energetic absorbance of hydrogen. And so they've got some um really great spectrum detail from NearCam and Merie and they're really looking at these things. I think uh the images that they've got here are really really beautiful. Yeah, I know it's quite a headline, right? But um I haven't seen enough people talking about the you know the use of the use of instead of black hole sun, black hole star. I mean, they're so close. They might have copyright issues when it comes to um songwriting, though. Um anyway, they've got this explanation and of course, it's going to be tested and tested and tested, but this is the big this is what publication is for. You want to they want to put all their data out there so that other people can tear it apart, come up with other ideas, and we can see, you know, how close this is to reality. But this is the first really good explanation for these uh red dots that we didn't know what they were once upon a time um when JWIST first started taking its pictures. Um could these objects be the seeds of galaxies? Um [sighs and gasps] I think that's a really interesting question. Um I think that if there's no dust involved that could be ignited. I think this is where because the the seeds of galaxies, you want to have more than just the gas coming together. You want the dust as well. But maybe the energy, this is a great question, Paul. Maybe the energy from the black hole can energize the hydrogen atoms to um interact with each other in a way that would lead to uh to chemical changes that would um impact element formation. Because there is a big question that we've been having about our kind of our theory of element formation. You know, it's the whole idea of the whole question of um is it just the explosions of supernovas that lead to the creation of heavier and heavier elements. And so maybe this has some to I am not I'm speculating. I have no clue. >> Yeah. And Kevin Bearden is saying these are at the furthest resolution of web. So exactly we can't go in any closer and figure out what they are. This is completely hypothetical. They've done be because of the light spectra and the instruments on JWIST were able to get some really good information about absorbance spectra and uh and emission spectra and what we're seeing there. But in terms of really good highresolution imagery, definitely not there. But I don't know. I think it is a a Oh, and one by land, two by sea is saying the fifth explanation by far. But yeah, I I don't know. I think it's the best that I've heard so far. May the five hypotheses challenge one another. This is this is the best part of science. coming up especially the theoretical astrophysics coming up with new ideas. Yeah, the black hole is not going to blow apart. Absolutely not. It should just according to the way that black holes work. It should just be a black hole slowly emitting its energy for a long time. Um and the but it's emitting all that energy that is energizing the space around it. And so it won't blow apart. No. But maybe the energy because it's such an intense amount of energy, maybe that int that that energy intensity will change things. This is something we have no idea. This is um yeah, it's a great question. And Dallas Middleton is asking why do they only show up in the furthest part of where we can see and why wouldn't they exist later in the timeline? And that is a great question. Perhaps because there's no reason for there to be just kind of lonely hydrogen gas as often around black holes in our more complex clumpy universe that we have now versus the more disperse universe that was picking up speed back at that period of time. I am talking out of my butt. So I have I have no idea and I think these are wonderful questions. Maybe we need to get one of our favorite physicists on to talk with us about this and to uh give us a little bit more information. Yeah, it'd be wonderful to see where these if this idea is correct, where it fits in the timeline. Okay, moving on from uh black hole stars. I was hoping Blair would be around to talk with this about this story, but she's taken a very quick break. Um and so I will move forward here into our story about bacteria and female reproduction. Apparently the researchers just publishing this last week in cell host and microbe have shown that lactobacillus bacteria species that exist in the endometrial lining of the of women declines with advancing reproductive age. And they were able to show that as this process moves forward, the aging endometrium has, you know, more inflammation. It has oxidative stress. It doesn't receive any uh embryos, fertilized eggs, etc. into itself easily. And so this is the the problem. As women age, it becomes harder for little zygot to embed into the aged endometrial lining. So they were looking at this study and were able to see that there are multiple lactobacillus strains that exist in the endometrial lining. One in particular, Elgaseri becomes less active as women age. It is the one also that is tied to inhibiting pathogens, anti-inflammatory activity, antioxid oxidant activity and also adhesion to endometrial epithelial cells which is very important for you know some for the grabbing on to things. making sure that the uh endometrial lining can grow thick and uh productive. Anyway, they did uh some work to look at the mechan mechanistic action of elgaceri and how it works in the aged endometrium. They were able to show that when they increased it, it changed a certain signaling molecule and the way that it signals. And this is um this is really what they call it hippo signaling. So in the aged untreated state hippo signaling overactivation leads to decreased yap going into the nucleus. I'm not making this up. After elusary is added they found that that led to normalized hippo hippo normalization. Yeah, normalized hippo signaling that increased YAP uptake into the nucleus. And YAP apparently is very important for these processes that are involved in the endometrial lining being able to accept a fertilized uh egg, a zygote. So anyway, they tested it in mice and what happened when they gave bacteria to aged mice they showed that they had increased implantation rate. So num increased number of implantations and um yeah that could lead to more offspring. So, um, one way that as people are getting older, women are getting older who maybe you're doing IVF, maybe you're thinking of IVF, maybe you are um, you know, taking hormones, maybe you're trying to figure out how to get everything to work. There's this new line of research that suggests that bacteria might be part of creating a better system within your body for supporting pregnancy. So anyway, I think that's so exciting and interesting because why do we ever think of bacteria as being part of something like pregnancy? We talk about the gut brain connection all the time. never talk about it in terms of um how it might support or inhibit or detract from the process of pregnancy. Doop doop. Okay, moving on to my last story from the first for the first part of the show. Um this story I think is so great because it has a Tolken theme. researchers discovered in um Pacific Ocean seammounts. They have discovered a whole new species, not just a whole new species, but a new family of corals. So, I just feel like this is incredibly wonderful news because number one, we talk on this show all the time about climate change and how corals are dying out and we keep talking about the issues, the problems related to coral reefs and their survival. And, you know, and they're beautiful places on this planet. They the biodiversity and the life that coral reefs support are it's just incredible. And it is essential for healthy oceans. And to have discovered not just a new species but a completely new family of coral I think is a very very exciting advancement. So this is a new octooral family. So octoorals, anthsoa, octoalia, oct o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o octocoralia malacalcionia these are um this new octaoral family was discovered from seammounts like I said in the tropical eastern Pacific now these are places where there's volcanic activity where these mounts come up there's lots of uh diverse biodiversity around seammounts very often And in this particular case, there were a couple of oceanographic campaigns that went down off the insular shelf is what they say of Isa del Coco in the Pacific margin of Costa Rica. And they identified a bunch of new taxa, which is really cool. And so this particular study comes from work based out of this 29 2019 trip and another in 20123 to confirm the findings and collect samples. And they were able to show that um the aspects of this coral are unique. They do not fit within the phogenetic definitions. of current extant coral species. And so this is just a very exciting study because they did multiple uh phlogenetic analyses within the order malacionia and they were able to keep working on working on through getting genomic data, multipplexed reads, doing doing the genomic good stuff to parse and select and figure out where everything needed to go. And they have determined that now this is under order class octaoralia order malacionia family Lauren Kadday genus Lauren K and um it is the species Lauren K Elenia. Now, I love this because the picture of the uh octo coral that we have is this beautiful fluffy kind of leafy uh golden coral and it's sitting on what looks to be a reddish rock, but what is actually a bunch of teeny tiny teeny tin bristle stars. These are little brittle starts and they are all over the place. A lot of them covering the the the rock or whatever is coming out of the seamount and the golden feathery appendages of Lauren K are emerging from the bristle stars. And so the researchers named using the Elvish language from Lord of the Rings. And this is another reason why I would love Blair Blair to be here right now because she had a a Tolken story coming up as well. So much Tolken in the show right now. Lauren K, it means golden tree in Quenya or Kenya, the uh the Elvish language. And so it's this is referring to of course the bright yellow treelike colonies, these feathery treelike colonies that are growing. Um, and they say within this paper that was published, the golden octooral gardens on fields of brittle stars evoke the mystic world of elves where they spoke Kenya, their ancient tongue. So anyway, [gasps] yep, Elvish cor Elvish coral everyone. Tolken from the deeps of the Pacific Ocean seam mounts. And we have beauty still being discovered, new species and new families still being identified in the world around us. Even as we could talk about so many other things going missing. I just like looking at it. The field of bristle stars. Anyway, this is this week in science. Thank you so much for joining us for another episode of this science program that is all human produced, not AI. We're doing it live. We're talking about the science. We're curious about how the world works. We're so glad that you're curious, too. If you are a curious person and just want to find out new things about how things work, and have new questions to ponder late at night, early in the morning, I don't know, while you're brushing your teeth, eating your lunch, whenever. I hope you continue to enjoy this week in science. And if you are able, please consider supporting us on Patreon or purchasing something through our Zazzle store. We are listener supported and so these channels are the ways that we're able to really keep this going. If you are able to do that, please have head over to twist.org, click on the Patreon link or the Zazzle store. The Zazzle stuff makes a great gift to some other wonderful Twist lover in your life. So maybe here's here's the process. Find a friend this week, get them hooked on Twist, and then you can go to our website and buy them a Twist gift. And you've done double duty for the show and for your friend and for yourself because you've also expanded our community of amazing people. And I really have to say that this Twist community through the years has been wonderful. It's a real real joy to be here every Wednesday talking to you all. So, thank you for being here. Thank you for your support of this week in science. We really can't do it without you. Okay, we're going to move right into monkey brains. Well, not monkey brains because that is inaccurate as I know anybody who is a listener of this show uh will remind me. Primate brains. the news from this last week after the after our last week's show when I talked about dodos and their brains and the use of fossil skulls from dodos to be able to look at into how their brains maybe worked. So what what senses they relied on more to infer dodo behavior. Well, Duke University researchers led a study that was published this last week in science on the using fossil evidence. So, skulls of multiple primates to support the idea that in the primate brain, we've always been like, "Oo, the frontal cortex, it got so big our the neoortex, right? part of the brain responsible or in primate evolution that is initially responsible for our cognitive prowess on the planet. Well, you know, I'm just going to be braggy there a little bit. Their study suggests it has nothing to do with the frontal loes of the brain, but more specifically to do with vision and that it is because of vision and the need to see clearly, maybe to visualize, maybe to find food and hunt, maybe to have imaginings of visualizations, maybe to understand things, maybe to have, you know, broad abilities when it comes to vision. We know our visual cortex is making up for a very dumb eyeball. Our our eyes are dumb little fluid fil sacks in our heads. They do work, of course, but our visual cortex is everything about visual processing. We would see a completely different universe around us every day if it weren't for our visual cortices. And so what these researchers have done is they've like, well, vision is really important. Visual cortex in primates is pretty big. So let's see how it evolved, how it changed over time in different species of primates compared to the frontal lobe and to other areas of the brain and with respect to brain size in general. So is it that everything's expanding at the same rate? We already know that's not exactly true. Um so they were looking at all these different factors of the changes in brain size over time. Now, they were able to use um not just uh the the Duke Lemur Center Museum of Natural History's collection of skulls and then they were they were also able to use Duke shared materials instrumentation facility to do highresolution microCT scans and reconstruct 3D models. So they had a number of digital models after they scanned all of these skulls. So to be able to look at these endoccasts over time and also use digital tools to be able to look at the scaling, right? So okay, we know how big the inside of the skull case is. We know how big that imprint of the frontal lobe is for a tarsier, for example, or the visual cortex for that animal versus a lemur. The researchers say if everything from humans down to tree shoes, tree shoes, tree shrews, they all fall in the same line relative to the size of the brain, the proportion of the frontal lobe is a constant. And when they looked at the occipital, parietal and temporal regions, which are parts of the brain that are specifically or highly used in processing visual information, those expanded rapidly. So Taurus ears, anthropoids, this is monkeys, apes, and humans are the anthropoids. As we went out along the branch of the primate family tree, as the optic nerve grew larger, so did those areas of the brain. And so, basically, it's a quantitative study of these ancient fossils of a whole bunch of primates by taking advantage of this really interesting collection of old skulls and modern technology. It's really been able to look at the small changes. So, the fact that you're looking at the size of the optic nerve because they're able to see the imprint of the optic nerve in the bottom of the skull case. I mean, this kind of stuff is really impressive and amazing. But the fact that this is um you know the first time that we're really getting this deep of an analysis of this idea to be able to support the evolution of the primate brain as being led by vision as opposed to frontal lobe and attention. Right? So it's like different the different loes are responsible for different things and these uh these researchers really suggest that visual sensory inputs are functionally tied to modular evolution of the primate neoortex. And if we think about it as well, there are so many areas uh where we have talked about um we we've talked about the brain and uh and vision and language and how so many things tie together. And that's one of the big examples that that they bring up that these that vision is highly tied into cognition. So, it's not just vision on its own. It's not just cognition on its own or the the neoortex on its own. It's that the neoortex could get bigger because the visual system was getting bigger. The visual system needed more space maybe in the neoortex for processing all of the visual information and actually applying it cognitively. Um, so I think there are lots of ideas here that are fair game, but yeah, monkey brains, they took lots of pretty pictures and um, I hope you go search for this this study and you know this the the conversation that will no doubt come out of it although it was a uh, a broad collaborative study between many research labs at a number of institutions which really is you know the important way to do research these days we get things done by working together and sharing resources. Right. Okay. As we continue to move on in my stories for the evening, I hope you trust me. Um, trust is very important. And I remember years years years years back oxytocin became this magic hormone for making people like each other and trust each other. And suddenly everybody's like I need to inhale oxytocin before I go to parties. I don't drink anymore. I just do intranals oxytocin. It was a very weird time in uh at least American culture. I am I don't know how it went in the rest of the world but researchers published this evidence that oxytocin can inre increase trust behavior in people but that was like back in 2005 and in since that time there's been a lot of conflicting information a study came out like several years later it was probably like 2015 or so where researchers did a a registered study and this is I'm going to say props for this group for doing registered studies because this basically means they go this is our hypothesis. This is what we're going to look at. Here's they they put everything out in the open in terms of their hypothes hypothesis, their alternate hypothesis, the stats they're going to use, how they're going to do the whole study before they even start. And so I mean this this it it's done very well. Okay. So they did one study and they were like it doesn't seem like that original data bears out. Like we've seen stuff in other studies that doesn't seem to work. And our registered study basically says there's not a general effect. There's an effect, but we don't know exactly what it is. It looks like guys who don't trust generally, who have a low trust profile, and I I guess apparently that's a way that you are being um judged. um that people who have a low trust profile that they're the ones who respond to oxytocin that oxytocin increases in trust in individuals who don't trust very easily. So they said okay we've got our registered study and it this is this is an area we need to go and look at. So what did they do? Another registered study and now we have the results. They have um uh this new study. It's in an international team. Ernst fair from the University of Zurich, Bodov and Paul Bengart Otto Vaneric University in Madburgg. Carolyn declared this study ahead of time that involved about 360 men who were rated as having low trust profiles. So they basically went out and asked people questions and they're like, "Oh, you don't trust people be in our study." Anyway, they um only did this study on men. So it can be compared to earlier oxytocin studies. Um and obviously other studies moving forward will be either um have have female uh women or um other ratios of control groups. But their control group this time was basically oxytocin or a placebo, no oxytocin. And then they participated in a trust game. So under anonymity, it was like, "Okay, you're anonymous. This other person's anonymous. How much money do you want to give him? Asked him first and then gave him oxytocin and then asked him again, how much money do you want to give to this anonymous person on the other side of this computer system? They were able to show that compared to their earlier study and pooling the data together, they were able to show that when low disposition trust men had oxytocin doses, their trust increased about 17%. So that's and they're saying trust is how much money they would give people. So basically they would give people more money. 17% more money when they gave when after they'd had oxytocin. So what they have shown pretty well is that oxytocin has a selective effect. It does increase trust in people but not all people. And it's not just you take oxytocin and become more trustful. it relies on context whether or not the disposition of an individual to trust is low or high or whatever. Um, and so what they've really been able to show also is that within that low trust disposition, it doesn't matter where you are in the low trust disposition, slightly low or highly distrustful, if you are in there, you're still going to be impacted by oxytocin. But the questions are, how does it work? What exactly does it do to the brain? And the researcher fair says it's possible that the hormone intensifies the expectation that others will cooperate. And so this kind of goes back with like another study that I was talking about a couple of weeks ago that had that was related to oxytocin and um pretty much related to you know how people are going to anticipate results come out. Blair Hi. >> Are you back? >> I'm [clears throat] back. >> Yay. [laughter] >> Oh, I didn't see. >> Did I miss everything? >> Not everything. I have not told um the the one story of the LLM study we we didn't know that we need, but we really did. We really did. But um I can save that for after Blair's Animal Corner if you would like to >> move on. I've been doing my thing. I will save my one last story for the cherry on top at the end of the show. >> Perfect. >> Yes. But now it is time for that wonderful part of the show that we love to call [music] Blair's Animal Corner. She loves a creature great and small. >> Buy a [music] pet mill. A pet. >> No pet at all. You want to hear about animals? She's your girl. Except [music] for giant squ. >> What you got, Blair? >> Oh my goodness. Well, let's start with the frogs. I have some analysis paralysis. analysis paralysis of whether or not you should talk about the frogs. >> No, the frogs have analysis paralysis. >> The frogs do. Oh my. >> Yes. Um, so frogs, they call for each other when it is time to mate. Female tree frogs, they like to pick their most desirable mates. And so, um, this is looking at Copes gray tree frogs. They gather on ponds during mating season. They listen to large groups of males chirping and noisy choruses and then they pick the most desirable male. [snorts] Um what they found is that if the pond is too crowded then the females will get choice overload and they will struggle to pick the most desirable male. They actually think that this choice overload is influential in the evolution of the species over time. Because if they always picked the longest most desirable call, then the shorter calls would become less and less prevalent. But because of the choice overload, they posit that this allows the females to continually make the quote unquote wrong choice and allow those genes to perpetuate into future generations. Oh my gosh. So, oops, I made a wrong choice. >> Well, it's just like h it's so hard to pick. Oh no, I got pistachio ice cream. >> But could have got vanilla. Could have gotten chocolate. >> Got the pistachio. >> But but that's not a an issue that will likely impact your future chance of success, aside from, you know, if you're allergic to nuts. That's the question. So, um the question is if they are picking the best mate via the best call, is there a relationship between the longest call and better genes? Now, you would assume there is because that is what the desirable call is, right? Like otherwise, why would that be the desirable call? um but unclear as to what kind of link there is between the longer calls and whatever genes are quote unquote better. Um the test study is actually really interesting. So they had female frogs in an enclosure. They had a series of speakers spread around it. They played recordings of real male frogs calling. Females chose their preferred call by hopping towards the speaker. In previous research, they showed that they do prefer the longer calls. The team played these mostly longer target calls and then they would have shorter distraction calls. They observed that the more male calls there were, the more confusion there was from the females. When they had just a couple options to pick from, they pretty much always picked the longer call. But when they had to listen to eight different males at once, they selected the target call only 25% of the time, >> which is way less than chance. >> And in some cases, the females got so overwhelmed that they didn't make a choice at all. And girl, same. >> Nope. Too much. Oh, this is why this is why I don't go places like IKEA or, you know, you know, the big box stores. Too many choices. Too much. Um, >> that's why online shopping is so overwhelming. And I do really miss just going to a store, having three options, and buying a thing. And now instead, I spend four hours on the internet and buy nothing. Um, I'm so glad I'm not alone. >> Yeah. Uh, so to make sure that they weren't just having trouble hearing the desirable call, um, they actually ran an identical experiment but with background noise. So, um, there were male calls overlapping, but then they were in a noisy environment. So, that kind of replicated when there were eight different calls. Um, so similar kind of like decibb. Um, the noisy environment didn't have an effect on the female's choices. So, they were instead struggling with choice, it would appear. Um, choice overload shapes the genetics. Um, evolutionary theory, for example, suggests that if females have strong preferences for males with long calls, the males with short chirps should disappear. But they haven't. And so this is the explanation. Choice overload could potentially keep males with short calls in the gene pool by causing enough confusion that females choose a mate who is in theory less optimal. So did they explain it all? How how many different calls do they normally hear in in the wild? >> Question question. Yeah. >> Is it eight, 10, 20? Like how >> So, not to sound like a broken record, but like with habitat destruction and climate change, you could end up with more frogs in one area because the the pond is smaller because there are less ponds. And so you could end up with kind of more overload than there has been in the past potentially. I don't know. >> So hypothetically, speculatively, it could lead to um continued diversity within the male frog population >> um and the songs that are sung, but it would not necessarily be great for overall population longevity and growth. Well, so I mean, but here's the thing. Like, why are there sneaker jackfish that like can get by the big impressive male and can mate with females? Why are there sneaker males in male dominant society or you know, so like >> alpha male dominant? Yeah. >> Yeah. So, like why why evolutionarily would you need that? And my argument would be genetic variation. >> You just generally need genetic variation. So if there is a benefit of being like, hey, if I call really loud next to this really impressive male, maybe I'll get a mate instead, like that is also an evolutionary advantageous method. >> And so why does that continue? It's because their genes that they are passing along can't be that deleterious or like those babies wouldn't survive. So, their jeans they're providing seem fine. [laughter] >> I guess >> it's okay. Hey, >> you [laughter] know, variation makes the world go round as one would say. But anyway, I just thought it was very funny that female frogs have analysis paralysis. >> But I but so going going back to that with the analogy of a crowded pond ecosystem, right? if there gets to be a cacophony that's too loud. >> Aside from just diversity, >> the other extreme option is that females don't mate. >> Yeah. And I don't I don't know if that would be at all like it would probably be like not tonight >> a headache. Uh or you know [laughter] um it could be that they wait around until some of the males leave and then they make a choice. you know, this was in a lab, so it just kind of had a very clear start and stop time. >> Um, but I think, you know, outside of a >> they need to put the computers in uh in the ponds. >> Yes, >> that's the only way we'll know. [laughter] >> I am highly in favor of LLMs uh working on synthesizing data from field cameras and um sonic data and all that good stuff. Like that is exactly what these things are for. That's what the machine learning should be for is for synthesizing data. >> Mhm. It's way faster than the many years of graduate students doing it over and over again >> and all the citizen scientists that are kind of sort of trained but not really >> but not really. Yeah. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. Do you want to talk about snail slime? [gasps] >> Yes. So, >> but not just one snail slime per species like is >> I foolishly assumed foolishly. >> You are not a fool. >> Snail slime was just snail slime. Did you know they can make different slimes? >> Of course I did not. >> Snails do not produce just one type of slime. They can vary it as needed. They can make it liquid, solid, sticky, slippery. How How does a snail produce completely different material properties using the same building blocks? This is a study looking at snail mucus. [laughter] >> We all love mucus. Mucus is such a wonderful compound. >> Uhhuh. >> It's important. It, you know, it keeps us from getting sick. It keeps our turbinets wet, you know, lots of good stuff. Anyway, um researchers analyzed five different types of snail mucus. Mucus that enables locomotion, mucus that acts as a strong adhesive, mucus that protects the animal from dehydration. Mucus that seals the shell during prolonged periods of rest, and mucus that serves as a defense mechanism. I think I've seen that hard with the hardening of the mucus. >> Yeah. So, I'm going to do that again. So, we have >> Say it again. >> Locomotion, >> adhesive, protecting from dehydration, a shell during periods of rest, and a defense mechanism. These are not all the same mucuses. [laughter] >> [snorts and gasps] >> Researchers found that the snail consistently uses the same components for the different types of music mucus [laughter] mixing them in varying proportions. The chemical building blocks are proteins mostly collagen and calcium. >> Collagen. >> Yes. Okay. >> They found collagen 6 as the key component of mucus. This is known for its structural role in human skin, bones, and joints. Together with disordered calcium carbonate, which the snail stores in its glandular tissue and releases along with the mucus as needed, they adjust the proportion of collagen 6 with the calcium carbonate and that plays a decisive role in controlling the properties of the mucus. The snail uses the total amount of proteins and the proportion of collagen 6 to alter the density of the protein network in the mucus which has a direct effect on its mechanical properties. The denser it is, the tougher the mucus is. Calcium serves as either a cross link in the mucus or as calite to reinforce the material. So that's that like harder shell um that's high in calcium carbonate. So, I'm just looking right now at um you know, of course, I'm as you're talking surfing the web looking for information on snail mucus. >> Uh there was 2019 work on >> um the use of snail mucus or snail slime >> for medicinal uses. M. Mhm. >> And so, you know, not just eating snails, but using snail sky slime for >> um skin inflammation and treating >> Well, it's a common um uh ingredient in a fa in face masks. >> Face masks, right? So, but the the question is now that you're talking about the differential purposes >> of slime, >> do the people using the snail Scott slime for face masks know which one of the which slime is better for your face mask? >> Yeah. They need to like >> fraud the snail just right to do the right kind of slime. >> It's not the sexy slime, it's the defense slime. >> Yes. or you know you need to have a strong trail slime. I don't know. >> So of course that's one of the things that the researchers said at at the end of this was that you know understanding how these natural materials are made um has a variety of potential functions with very few building blocks. Understanding those principles has a great importance for developing sustainable materials. um potentially they could produce environmentally friendly adhesives, functional coatings, materials for medical applications like you're talking about, right? Um but I think for me the thing that I really want to know about next is what the trigger is to change the makeup of the slime? Like is it is it vibrational? Is it like Yeah. Is it is it something they're they're sensing through smell? Is it like does it have to do with how moist the air is? Like what is happening that is triggering the snail to change their mucus and how fast can it shift? So how fast is the the shift in that mucus production? Right? I'm going from traveling down a tree branch to I found another sexy hermaphrodite and um let's have snail time. So >> yeah, I want to dangle, >> you know, like the slugs. Yeah, but >> how fast can that happen? I mean, obviously snails do not move at the speed of sound, so we're not looking at fast changes being necessary, but how relevant to the speed of a snail are they? >> Yeah. No, that's a great question. I mean, >> yeah, >> it's Yeah. And can they switch back and forth? >> Yeah. I just I love this idea that like every time I see a slug or a snail now, I'm going to be like, "What kind of mucus you making? >> What you doing? How much calcium is in there?" >> Got is that strong? >> But that's also like It reminds me too that like it if I was around people who would like poke a snail or a slug and then they would they would start it looked like they were oozing and you'd be like, "You killed it." No. It's like, well, maybe they were just releasing defensive slime and they went off into the bush and they were okay. >> Yes. It's really really only bad if they stepped on this snail and you That was the ooze. >> Yes. But I just Yeah. I just went on a hike with my family a few weeks ago and we probably saw a hundred banana slugs >> and now I feel like I have to go back just to be like, "What kind of slime you got?" And so since snails are doing this, is that the this did they look at slugs as well or they just looked at this one species common brown lip snails? I think it is fair to assume. >> Yeah, I would assume all snails and slugs, >> but they haven't done that work yet. >> I don't know if it's five. I don't know if the makeup would be exactly the same, but I think it is very fair to assume that all snails and slugs create variable mucus. I'd love to know like the difference and uh how it shifts based on slugs snail social structure. >> Yes. [laughter] >> Like how does that work? >> Well, because yeah, like the dangly dangly sexy mucus is definitely a sixth >> that we didn't discuss in these different types, which like what is the makeup of that? Because you're carrying an entire the entire weight of the slug. >> Yeah. And you're building those threads together with another slug. And >> yeah, it's a >> definitely not a spider. >> This go do some googling later and look at slugs that um I can't even while dangling. >> Yeah, they copulate while dangling. They do it via like basically a a a genital sword. They like stab each other in the head and inject sperm directly into the body of the other slug. It's fascinating. Um but yeah, look into it. It's a very interesting um >> wormhole slug hole >> that you could [laughter] fall down. I've spent many an evening in that particular corner of the internet and literature. Anyway, um yeah, so [laughter] don't act surprised, Kiki. You know who's on the show, >> Blair? Were there evenings down the slug hole? >> I have a book that is literally all about invertebrate sex. >> That's >> so >> it's so good. >> That's the whole deal. Anyway, um >> it's a good deal. >> Regardless, uh next time you see a slug or a snail, say, "Hey, what you secretreting, buddy? I will I will take you up on that. [laughter] >> All right, my last story for the night. Uh what I I wanted to talk about this publication out of I science uh researchers using LLM's large language models to generate personality questionnaires personality quizzes and also analyze those personality questionnaires. the researchers in their work and the reason that I I I'm gonna get to why I think this is the study we didn't know we needed and it is a reason that is not highlighted as strongly in the paper as I think it should be the re researchers used what they call the five factor model the big five and this is a hypothesis that personality traits are encoded in lang language. They used LLMs, trained on the DSM5 for personality disorders section and a popular astrology book to generate questionnaires, administer them and also analyze the results. Um, what they found is that the LLMs trained on the DSM5 and an astrology textbook were able to use the scientifically proven or evidenced um, DSM5 very well to support personality types and to create questions that stemmed from the various personality disorders and to be able to actually analyze uh the results based on the various answers that would be given. So if a person gave one certain re result it'd be like oh hey that suggests paranoia or not paranoia blah blah blah the other way when they did this with the astrology textbook they were unable to show any correlation to the 12 astrological signs that have been purported [laughter] to be true by astrology for a very long time. Uhhuh. [sighs] And so um the astrology and and in in the book it's uh in in the paper it's wonderful. The researchers do say in the introduction astrology is included as a contrast case designed to probe the role of source structure independent of scientific grounding. [laughter] Nasty. >> Yeah. [gasps] Um and so in in the conclusion of their paper, what they were able to show is that yeah, this these LLMs can use uh scientifically evidenced personality measures that that are based on psychological uh scientific studies um and to be able to create consistent and useful personality questionnaires. And so this kind of that they used validation measures to show that the questionnaires were actually they were working to show what they wanted to show. What they also were able to show though is that the um the models the LLM based on the results could pretty much give you a a result of what they think you're going to answer before you answer it now. So watch out for that one. But in relation to the astrology situation, um they did find that there were certain aspects of, you know, astrological information that similar to DSM5 information can be generally applicable to proportions of the population. But there was absolutely zero consistency related to you're a Leo, a fire sign, a star, what your star sign, and anything that came out of this. And so really, you know, if you're going to pick any LLM study that you want to use like for evidence of [laughter] usefulness of LLMs, I think it's this one. >> Yeah, it's pretty good. I mean it's we know certain things like that. Um the the arrangement of the stars and planets now during December is completely different from how it was when you were born. So like what is it actually >> and and different from when the original star signs were created and started being used? It's so many >> so many years. >> So like what is it even? It's anyway and it's all based on the Gregorian calendar which is all kind of make it up anyway. >> Yes. >> And it's Yeah. So it's any >> Yeah. So um this study did not you know it did not its effort was not to show anything evidentiary about astrology really but I think they did and they did not highlight it in the way that they should have. >> Yeah. [laughter] >> No I think Paul Disney's right like it was the world's meanest control. So like basically they used it as like we all know this is BS so that's our that's our controls. >> That's our controls. >> Um like but for real use like if people don't believe in real like humans maybe they'll believe in LLM if they tell them that homeopathy is mostly bunk and you know like all these other things that >> that's the scary part of where we're going now actually. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. They ask their their Chad GPT is uh do vaccines cause autism and Chad GBPT says no. Will they actually vaccinate their children? >> You know what the weird thing is? They're probably more likely to trust their chat GPT. >> Yes. >> As opposed to say now the actual CDC or their own doctor which >> well it's because there's because it's a machine. There's this >> facade of impartiality. >> Yes. But it's actually super partial because it wants to tell you exactly what you want to hear. >> It's sick of fantic. So it's like, yes, exactly. You're so right. [laughter] >> My favorite trend on the on the social media video thingies now are the people who are using the different um chat bots to talk to each other. >> Oh, sure. Yes. One I saw recently a young young man was going to meditate and asked had had was ringed by iPhones all with whatever chatter on there and he said I think I would like to u meditate now can you help me all like 12 of these devices pinged it yes well of course meditation and then they were just talking to each other and it was There's no meditating here right now. >> Yeah. [laughter] >> Well, that's even like when you ask them to count and they they'll just go like 1, two, three, and we'll just keep going on like that forever. Like, no, keep going. >> You don't have to talk about how you get to the next number. Let's just keep count. Just go to the next number. It's okay. >> Oh, man. Yes. One by land. CDC is an LLM now. I think that's a t-shirt. [snorts and laughter] Oh dear. Well, that does it for for me for stories. If you had anything else you wanted to talk about? >> Nope. >> Nope. Anyway, um question the personality tests you're taking in the future. You don't know who's giving them. Um but [laughter] >> I know. Well, it's like, do you remember all those um silly always Buzzfeed quizzes? Like, what kind of unicorn are you? Right. >> Those were the beginnings of training these models. >> Yeah. And uh unfortunately, like if you try to do anything like that now, you're going to be feeding your data into an an LLM that can sell your information to >> Yeah. It wasn't LLM back then, but it was still uh it was the beginning of data models. And so those any quiz >> that's like what's your >> your middle name? Just run. Stop answering any quizzes online. >> What month were you born? [laughter] >> You guys correlation lo large language models. There's so much information. Just stop. Do not talk to strange quizzes. Okay. >> Do not talk to strange [laughter] quizzes. Do talk to strange snails, though. I would recommend >> talk to the snails. Yes. Go outside. You can touch grass and talk to snails. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. It's good. All right. I think we've made it to the end of our show. Have we made it? >> Yes. >> All right, everyone. Thank you so much for joining us for another episode of This Week in Science. Everyone in the chat room, you're amazing. I love seeing your chat. So good. So many comments that uh that are po pinging into my brain as we go through our conversations and how we talk about everything. Thank you for being here. Thank you for being a part of the show. And thank you to certain people for really helping to keep the show going. The chatters are a big part of it, but we've also got people like Fada who every week helps with social media and our show notes and is absolutely amazing. So, thank you Fod for all that you do for the show. Additionally, thank you to Paul Disney for recording the show. Thank you to Arin Lord Gourd and other people who really helped to keep our various chat rooms great places to be. I mean, it's by being good people that we maintain good places to be. Thank you for all that you do. Rachel, thank you for editing the show. And thank you so much to our Patreon sponsors. Thank you to Aaron Anathema, Adam Mishkan, Alan Viola, Ally Coffin, Andrew Swanson, Ardum, Arthur Kepler, Bob Calder, Brendan Minish, Brian Carrington, Chris Wniaak, Christopher Drier, Christopher Rapen, Craig Landon, Craig Pototts, Daryl Mshack, Dave Wilkinson, David Youngblood, Derek Schmidt, Don Mundus, EO, Eden Mandell, Eric Knap, Lang out, Fred 104, Guren, Latimore, Greg Briggs, Jack, Jason Olds, John Atwood, John McKe, John Ratneswami, Johnny Gidley, Ken Hayes, Kent Northot, Kevin Perachan, Kevin Rearen, Kurt Larson, Lon Makes, Lauren Gford, Mary Girtz, Marjorie Mark Hessenflow, Mark Jenkins, Noodles, Patrick Pecaro, Paul Pauly, Disney, Paul Ronovich, Pierre Velazar, Richard Badge, Rich Robert Norland, Robert W. Farley, Rodley Lewis, Rudy Garcia, Day, Sean Clarence Lamb, Shubru, Stephanie Embry, Steven Alberon, Steve Leeman, aka Zema, Sue Doster, Theresa Smith, Tony Steel, Vagard, Chevad, and what the if. Thank you all for your support on Patreon. Patreon is pretty much how we pay the bills. So, if you are able and uh interested in helping to support the show, head over to twist.org and click on that Patreon link on next week's show. We will be back Wednesday at 8:00 p.m. Pacific time, broadcasting live from Twitch, YouTube, and Facebook. Yeah, that is right. And if you want to listen to us as a podcast, just search for This Week in Science wherever podcasts are found. If you enjoyed the show, get your friends to subscribe, too. We like your friends. >> For more information on anything you've heard here today, show notes and links to stories will be available on our website. That's at www.twist.org. You can also sign up for a newsletter. >> Yes, we love your feedback. If there's a topic that you want us to cover or address or a suggestion for an interview, let us know. one of our social media accounts, Twist Science, Twist Science, Twist, whatever. We're out there. Um, and you can send us emails, too. But if you do, just put Twist in the subject line so your email doesn't get spam filtered into where Blair into a pile of snail slime. >> Ew. I will not be digging it out. [laughter] We look forward to discussing science with you again next week. And if you've learned anything from the show, remember >> it's all in your head. [laughter] >> This week in science. [music] This week in science. [music] This week in science. This week in science. It's the end of the world. So I'm setting up shop. Got my banner unfurled. It says the scientist is in. I'm going to sell my advice. Show them how to stop the [music] robot with a simple device. I'll reverse global warming with a wave of my hand. And all it'll cost you is [music] a couple of grand. [singing] Cuz this week, science is [music] coming your way. So everybody listen to what I say. I use the scientific method for [music] all that it's worth. And I'll broadcast my opinion all over the earth. Cuz it's [music] this week in science. This week in science. This week in science. Science. Science. Science. This week [music] in science. This week in science. This week in science. This week in science. This week in science. This week in science. [music] This week in science. This week in science.