Reasons to Think About Rome

This is Twist. This week in science, episode number 1076, recorded on Wednesday, September 16th, 2026. Reasons to think about Rome. Everyone, I'm Dr. Kiki and tonight we will fill your head with Roman roads, a Roman scope, and a mosquito toilet. 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.claimer. Disclaimer. Disclaimer. When the view of the future is no longer informed by the past, we risk society's ability to last. When what we do is no longer informed by people, we ask computers to call us sheeple. How many neurons does it take to be human? A question to explore with us 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 [music] up with new discoveries that happen every day of the week. There's only one place to go to find the [music] knowledge I seek. I want to know what's happening. What's happening? What's happening this [music] week in science? What's happening? What's happening? What's happening in science? [music] Good science to you, Kiki. And a good science to you, too, Blair, and everyone out there. Welcome to another episode of This Week in Science. Back again with all the science that's fit to talk about in the short time that we have here tonight. Yes. So glad everyone's back again for another wonderful week of science. WWS, [clears throat] wonderful week of science. Yes, it's been quite the week. We're still uh missing Justin. I don't know when he'll come back, if he'll come back. He's out there working, doing science in the real world. Everyone, >> did he ever exist or was he a shared hallucination? >> This is a very interesting question. [laughter] >> We do not know. We'd love your feedback, everyone. [laughter] >> Did you see Justin? Please. Did you really see him? >> Was he really there? >> Was he really there? [laughter] >> Or was I just putting glasses on and then saying hot takes and then taking them off? [laughter] >> No. No, he's real. I have to believe in him. Just like the Easter Bunny. [laughter] >> Okay. Okay. Uh we have great science news on the show tonight. I have science stories about ancient Roman roads with a modern look, a Venian moon that doesn't exist, mosquito toilets, humanish mouse brains, fly brains, and more. >> What's in the animal corner, Blair? >> I have frozen sperm. I have snake tails. And I have bird migration. I love bird migration. Right now, there's big migrations happening. Um, actually, if you are listening to this at night and your outdoor lights are on and you're in one of the flyaway zones, consider turning off your outdoor lights so that those migrants can have a good a good journey and not get taken off course. Of course. But anyway, that's not what you're talking about. >> Good old Allan always up to trouble. Oh, Alan, tell Alan to be quiet. >> Alan, you're not helping. >> No, this doesn't have to do with Allan at all. It does have to do with climate change, though. Spoilers. >> Oh, boy. >> All those all those artifacts of climate change, the things that happened. Okay, we're going to do this show right now. And as we jump into it, I do want to remind you that subscribing to the Twist podcast anywhere that you find podcasts is a wonderful thing to do for your mental health. Um, it's great to do for your curiosity. And if your friends, family need more curiosity and optimism about things or just, you know, need to know more about things that are happening, get them to subscribe wherever you find your podcasts this week in Science. We're also on Facebook, Twitch, and YouTube. We stream live Wednesdays, 8:00 p.m. Pacific time, kind ofish. It's right around there. And all the recordings are there on those channels where you can watch them later. But we love it when you're here live to join the chat room and be a part of the show. Every time episodes are published, you can go to twist.org to get information about the stories that we discuss, our show notes, all that stuff once the podcast is up and published um a few days later. So that's about it everyone. You ready for the science? >> I'm so ready. >> Yeah, me too. Oo, I'm ready. Let's have the science. All right. Starting off the show, not with brains, but with technology in the sky, way far away from us, like at an Lrangee Point, L2, million miles away pretty much. Um, we talked a bit about the the Nancy Roman Space Telescope, Nancy Grace Roman Space Telescope, NASA's latest space telescope that's going to give us a new view on exoplanets and all sorts of other cool things out in the universe. They have turned it on. It's made it to the LR the L2 Lrangee point and the uh the NASA team has actually activated the coronagraph. They have at first they had to let the telescope rest out at the that Lrangee point for 10 days to dry out and decontaminate. And so, uh, the the drying out and decontaminating, they got the detectors to minus 85 degrees Fahrenheit. This is not the final operating temperature, but on the morning of September 11th, according to NASA, they turned off the instrument heater and let the wild wide field instrument cool down to -225° F. that's 143° C. Turned on the 18 infrared detectors and started taking pictures of the sky. And so their detectors were it were great. Everything is working according to plan. And we have um beautiful detectors that are they have accessed the first photons that have uh detect that have been detected right now. They show an interesting defraction pattern very similar to the defraction pattern that we first saw when the James Web Space Telescope got started. It has to do with the structure of the of the detectors themselves. But over time, what they're going to do is focus those in. So each of the dots that we see that have a really interesting pack picture or pattern right now are going to be very tight light circles and they're going to be just beautiful stars and galaxies out there. But this uh this shows that everything is working the way that they want it to. They are on schedule and in fact the uh the craft did not use up all of its fuel getting out to the Lrange point. And so instead of it's uh you know a shorter mission, they have twice the amount of fuel that they than they planned to have. And so the the length of the mission can now run it can run longer. Hopefully they'll be able to get the everything working in tip-top shape by early 2027 and to have those the first real images available for people to see by early next year. Now the coronagraph the the instrument has some really beautiful filters that actually influence the way the light is seen and the and the reason they've got these kind of pieshaped defraction graded there's very interesting patterns in the picture >> each of them allows the detectors to to basically block out the light from a star so that then they can see exoplanets and other objects that are orbiting distant stars more clearly. So the the coronagraph is specifically created to make seeing distant exoplanets easier so that we can get closer to stars, see what's there, see what's happening. And I'm just very excited about this. It's beautiful, beautiful >> design and technology. >> Nice. >> Yeah. I think I I' I'd love to have a piece of jewelry with one of these designs on it. I think it'd be really pretty. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. So, the exciting news that the Nancy Grace Roman Space Telescope is on schedule, working perfectly. The um the heating system is working the way that they want it to. The cooling is working the way that they want it to. Everything is doing what they want it to do. So, u I am really really looking forward to seeing the images that that come from this eventually. >> Yep. >> It's going to be great. >> Be awesome. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. Yeah. Stars far far away. Okay. And then I want to go from the L2 Lrange to Venus. The next story is um an interesting question. Um have you ever wondered Blair why Venus doesn't have a moon? >> No. >> [laughter] >> All right. It is a question as to >> you why so many planets that we see have moons. What does it mean for planet formation for life on a planet? Yeah. >> Whether or not a moon is present. Um we know Mars has, you know, potato moons. Um it's [laughter] it's got issues. >> Those were thrown up there by Matt Damon, though. That's right. That's true. [laughter] >> Um, we've got our moon which is slowly trying to pull away from the earth and this is a pushpull between our orbital rotation, the mass of earth, the mass of the moon and the delicate balance between the two as they're gravitationally connected. Right? So, a researcher just publishing in the Astrophysical Journal asked the question like what maybe happened to Venus's moon? Did Venus have a moon ever? Would it have made sense for Venus to have had a moon? >> So, actually, it's funny that you bring this up because I had this conversation >> Oh. >> with somebody this morning. Um, but it was about a fictional planet, but it it was kind of this like is it more common to have a moon or to not have a moon and why? So, it feels like it would be more common to have a moon because of just like the sheer likelihood of a planet getting bopped [laughter] >> or capturing something just something's passing by, but it just is at the right speed or the right mass that it gets captured. Gravity >> scattershot of the universe basically, right? like either yes, you're going to catch random detritis that's large enough that will become an orbital, right? Or something's going to carine into the planet that's going to bop a crumb off, which is basically what happened to us, right? So, um >> it seems likely that that would happen. So, if you don't have a moon, it's not that you've never been hit, it's that either it burned up or it was released or it was brought in. Right? It has to be one of those things. >> There are yeah multiple options, right? So what could have happened? >> Okay. All right. >> Yeah. So now as you're considering this and the various possibilities, um this study did a whole bunch of models. So a bunch of physicsbased computer simulations for um different sizes and uh or masses and related to the spin of Venus and how anything could have happened. And so the question ask asked s through simulation. Okay, if Venus had a moon or a moon was created, could it have disappeared since then? What could have happened? And basically what they've come down to is that explaining Venus's present state requires satisfying two constraints simultaneously. And this is from their abstract in um the astrophysic physical journal IOPS science publication loss of the satellite and despinning of an initially rapid rotator. And so when you get impact simulations, there are particular predictions for the spin periods for the that would create Venus's present rotation. So if you think about how uh um the thera theta whatever the the old body that in that crashed into earth and created the moon it it changed the the spin of the earth as well. That impact would also change the spin period because of the inertial physics that are involved and the rotational physics. So the same thing could have happened to Venus. And so a lunar mass satellite could have ended up like at the boundary and and and existed around Venus. But because of the way that Venus is such a slow spinner compared to Earth these days, the absence of a Venian satellite means that this and and the simulations suggest that it could have basically um the moon of Venus probably like smashed into Venus again and became part of Venus eventually. So basically the the bottom line is that the simulations suggest that Venus ate its moon. >> I think it's interesting that that the narrative is saying that Venus ate its moon and not like Venus continually ate moons >> like maybe multiples. >> Yeah. [laughter] >> Like for a long time. >> Yeah. But there's like instead of having a they could have had a collision that created a moon >> Uhhuh. But then because of the way that it didn't keep spinning quickly, Venus is not then the way that it's orbiting and everything that moon probably just slowly returned to Venus and smooshed back into it. >> That's what the simulation suggests. >> But so if it happens in the simulation, it could have happened multiple times, right? Yeah. >> Over the course of billions of years, >> right? Yeah. So anyway, the uh the gravity of the planet combined with the rate at which it spins naturally caused the moon to collapse into Venus. This is according to uh astrophysicist and lead author Steven Kaine. Okay. Yeah, Venus. It's a moon eating planet, but maybe if you sped it up a little bit, it could have kept a moon. But there are so many questions also related to this that that maybe if Venus ha had been more like Earth in its moon formation that it could have kept a moon kept spinning around and maybe life would have gotten started on it. Maybe it wouldn't have heated up in the way that it did. There's so many so many questions, but there's still a lot of tests that need to be done to determine whether or not moons are a requirement for habitability. But >> I don't know since we haven't gone to Venus like really recently knocking on the door. [laughter] >> Yeah, I the Ewoks were on a moon. >> It was the forest moon of Endor. They weren't on Endor proper. So >> that's right. you know, >> and you know, I always go to Star Wars for my >> Yeah. >> you know, ideas. >> Yeah. For real. >> They knew what they were doing. They knew more then in the 70s or I guess ' 80s at that point >> than we do now. >> Than we do now about safe space. They were they were they were keeping it a secret. Sh. [laughter] >> Don't tell anybody. They'll figure this out in 50 years. Shh. [laughter] >> I seriously Star Trek Star Wars. That's all we need to know. >> Yeah. >> Oh, University Star Wars. Star Trek University. Oh boy. Okay, I'm done with this space news for now. You want to talk about really cold sperm? >> Yeah. Yeah. Um, so, uh, cryopreserved sperm. >> Good for biodiversity. Uh, that makes sense. >> This is not the direction that I was expecting to go. Okay. Oh, >> okay. Good to know. >> Yes, this is for animal sperm, not human sperm. Okay. So, first of all, let's toss that preconceived notion out the window. I was not talking about like IVF. I'm talking about >> I'm talking about um cryopreserved sperm alongside diverse breeding populations in zoos and aquariums to improve the long-term survival of endangered species. This is specifically looking at pup fish um in uh Nottingham Trent University and Chester Zoo. They have 18 priority species of pup fish in zoos. >> Wow. >> And current population sizes are too small to maintain healthy levels of genetic diversity over the next century. So they ran a bunch of models looking at genetic diversity and if they would be able to continue breeding these animals in zoos and aquariums for the next hundred years and their model said no. >> Um pup fish are small freshwater fish. They're found in North and Central America and the Caribbean. Um many species have isolated habitats in small numbers. They're endangered because of all the reasons that you could imagine in South America. habitat loss, water extraction, pollution, climate change. And so, um, knowing that their current populations are not sufficient, they ran models and found genetic diversity declining very quickly. So, their options are to increase pupf fish populations in collections, which comes with its own issues. That means you're going to have to collect from the wild. You're going to have to have more places to hold these animals. And then you have to think about scalability. Like if you're using this as a um example species and you want to extrapolate your findings to other endangered species, that's not good news. You can't say go get more elephants. Go get more rhinos. Go get more sharks. Go just just more. we just world would be covered in zoos and preserves and it still probably wouldn't be enough because really what we need is like them to be protected in the wild. But I digress. The point is when they tried to run models to figure out how big their populations would be, they had to be just massive. The average populations would need to be between 1,600 and 9,500 fish for our priority species to maintain genetic diversity for the next hundred years. But >> okay, >> yes, if they introduced cryopreserved sperm in 10% of the breeding attempts, they dramatically reduce the number of fish needed. And in the most favorable scenario, they needed only 150 >> to maintain genetic diversity for the next hundred years >> because they're just adding extra sperm. >> Yeah. You just have your diverse sperm each generation. You save some for later. you introduce it back in in the next generation, you're just like reinvigorating the genetic diversity over and over and over. And so you get like almost infinite permutations because you can take genes from the previous line previous uh generation. Thank you. I don't know why I couldn't think of that word. Previous generation and then um you can bop it into the next generation. That does not mean related fish. It means like, you know, the just an an older fish, but you know, completely unrelated to this one lineage. Now, I'm going to bop that in there. So, instead of a binary choice of like, I want this male and this female to make baby fish, now you can say, I'm going to do that, but then I'm going to pull in option C into the next generation, then I'm going to p pull in option D to the next gener. It's like the biggest French braid ever. So, [laughter] so basically, you're just you're beefing up the genetic diversity. So, well, like from 9,500 individuals to 150, that changes the game just so much. And so, instead of having to look at like, oh, we're going to use crisper and we're going to change up the diversity of the genes and, oh, now we're going to reverse engineer and we're going to use IVF and we're going to put this egg in this rhino and all this kind of. If you can just ice the sperm from one generation and keep bopping it into the genetic line. I love your bop. [laughter] I bop. He bop. We bop. >> Bop the cryoperm into the next generation. Um so yeah. So you can do that and it just uh it really helps >> um keep the genetic diversity for the species. So um it really is wild how just 10% and they were able to keep the genetic health for the next hundred years. No problem. So instead of worrying about collecting more animals, creating more space in captivity, you really can just put some sperm on ice. [laughter] >> And also doing that because it's sperm, you don't have to do IVF. >> Yeah. >> You don't have to worry about, oh, is this egg compatible with that individual or can we fertilize this egg and then put it back into the fish. You can just inseminate the fish. >> So here's my question. like is is this is are these fish that need to be inseminated because there are so many fish where they're I mean it's not broadcast spawning but they lay their eggs in one location and >> kind of just spray the sperm over the eggs. Let's see. >> Yeah. So would >> they external fertilizers? Yes. So they Thank you for asking that question. Um yes. So they they would really just need to like spray thawed sperm onto the egg pile. Like it'd be pretty easy. So, I guess I mean I love this, but I'm wondering how I how reasonable would this be for species like rhinos where they have fewer young, where they have, you know, longer lifespans. It's a a different mating reproductive system than the fish necessarily. And I just wonder how, you know, whether the 10% rule would apply to big mammals or whether this is something because of the way that fish have lots more >> babies at any one time that that the diversity you you need less sperm to maintain the diversity. So >> yeah, so I think it's a good question. I think it's also tough because some species already have a bit of a genetic bottleneck. So, for that reason, you might need more >> because if you're already bottlenecked super bad, >> then um a 10% increase is actually only like a 2% increase because there's so much overlap. So, it really depends on that. It depends on how >> that sperm really was my brother. >> Yeah. [laughter] Um how the IUI works um in some of these animals, but like that's how they do a lot of horse breeding and cow breeding is what is essentially IUI, right? which is in intrauterine insemination for those of you who are I should have said earlier but um >> basically it's the turkey baster. >> Yeah. All creatures great and small. [laughter] >> Um and so uh let's see. I just actually want to see. [snorts] >> Yeah. So the pupf fish, it does look like there's breeding events, >> but I'm having trouble trying to figure out what it is. But either way, um I think that because the the fact you're in captivity also, you can really control where the sperm is coming from from the female. It's a closed system. It' be very easy to be able to kind of >> figure it out. I think generally like fish eggs, they're permeable. They're like >> they're set up for success and it's also a numbers game. There's thousands of them. So >> So this is Yeah. And so I'm wondering these populations in the wild, not necessarily those that are uh being conserved in zoos, aquaria, etc. for these fish. I'm thinking specifically of the desert pup fish, which is only known to live and breathe. It's a blind fish that lives in a cave, like one cave or two caves >> in um in a desert in California. >> Yeah, I see that. And it's an amazing situation where I where I think people are still studying how they maintain their genetic diversity. And I mean I don't think they've got thousands and thousands of fish in these caves because the cave system is you know not that extensive and they also undergo seasonal dry spells and there's >> I don't know. I just I'm just wondering about all of the the nuances and the specific details to different species and do they need do pup fish need less diversity than other fish or other species? How broadly applicable is it? >> Yeah, that's tough. I think that you know this study it looks like was looking at Central and Southern American pup fish. Um mostly Oh no, it looks like also North American. So, a lot of the North American pup fish are like critically endangered and down to like less than a hundred individuals, you know. So, yeah. What was the other one that I was just looking at was um >> uh I lost it. It was it was uh it was another not the desert one, but the >> I'm not sure. I lost it. But um it these North American ones are >> um it looks like a lot of the Oh, Devil's Hole. That one. Devil's whole cupfish. There's only 77 left. [laughter] >> So that I think that's why this is such this is so of interest. >> Yeah. >> Um and it is exciting because we have this technology. We don't have to sit around and wait for them to perfect any of this other stuff like wait for Colossal to figure out their thing, >> right? No. >> No. Just stick the sperm in the freezer [laughter] and then reintroduce it strategically. Um, great. >> And, uh, and these computer models are really good at figuring out when and how to do that. So, uh, you know, that's the math. >> Awesome. >> Yeah, I think it's I think it's exciting. It seems very e um, achievable. I'm not going to say easy, but achievable. Uh, in the world of science and conservation science, relatively cheap. >> Yeah. >> Compared to other things that you could be doing. Um, >> I just I just saw a story about a like 52 55 year old uh woman who just used 22year-old frozen embryos to have a baby. >> So, I mean, our freezers work. >> They sure do, >> right? [laughter] >> Yeah. >> The viability of the sperm will continue. >> That's right. And and so I think it's it's very exciting and I think it's inspiring. Um, and I'm hoping that more conservation scientists will see this and it will spark further research across the animal kingdom on um, running some models, some mathematical models on introducing frozen sperm, trying it out, seeing how it works. So, yeah, great. I'm hopeful. >> I like it that you're hopeful. Let's all be hopeful right now >> about this particular thing and nothing else. >> I am hopeful [laughter] because of frozen sperm. >> Yeah. [gasps] Okay, one thing that we all need to know about um is okay, I remember when I was talking about earlier in the summer the space mirrors that um there's a company that wants to put a giant space mirror up in orbit around the Earth to reflect sun onto the planet. God >> and there be like a beam of sunlight. [laughter] >> Blair, you're hiding your face. >> This is literally a plot in the Simpsons. That's right. But it burned the surface of the earth. It >> sure did. Yeah. >> Yeah. >> So, uh, in this work, researchers again publishing in astro in the astrophysical journal Letters, the researchers have published a study called atmospheric light pollution by proposed reflect orbital space mirrors. They went on to analyze exactly how bright the light from these mirrors which are uh 54 by 54 meters in diameter. Those are that's the theil. It's always something that sounds like it's out of Tolken. Um but it's a pathfinder for a constellation of about 50,000 mirrors. Okay. So the mirrors later are going to be 54 x 54 meters in diameter. The test, the pilot that's been approved is 18 by 18 m and it's going to be >> it's still really big. >> It's really big. It's going to be orbiting at about 600 kilometers and should illuminate a 2.5 kilometer circular patch here on our planet. Um, [sighs] okay. >> Who's in charge of the permits in space? >> Right. So, it's the the international space community should be responsible for this, but the United States um has said, "No, no, no. We can't be trusted right now." >> No, no, no, no, no. >> I know, but that's what >> Nobody should be giving us the keys or the pen for anything. Well, well, if this space mirror does, it has been approved. If it does actually make it to launch, we should know what we're getting in what, you know, how much brightness it's going to bring to those 2.5 kilometers as it I don't know dances across the surface of the Earth. >> It's also big, 2 and a half kilometers. That's >> Yeah. And so, so think it's not it's going to be a beam, but it's not going to be a perfect beam. we have an atmosphere and there's this thing that we know about we have a blue sky because of it called uh the Raleigh scattering or the scattering and this is the aerosol scattering of the light from that beam and so there's reflection from the albido in the sky from the albido of the surface of the planet um there are different atmospheric properties that increase or red uh reduce the scattering that occurs and anyway they did a bunch calculations and they demonstrate that the light pollution caused by one of these satellites is significant altering the nighttime environment up to about 30 km away from that 2.5 km circular patch. [snorts] Remind me why we're doing this. Why do they want a like a light 2 and 12 km patch? I think the idea is that it would allow solar panels to work 24 [snorts] hours a day. >> No, come on. No, we have batteries. What are you doing? >> I know. >> Battery technology has come a long way, people. Um, okay. So uh the the results from this analysis within the beam uh an observer within the beam of one of these 54 meter satellites that's proposed the mirror will appear as a 16.7 mag point light source about four orders of magnitude four mag four mags brighter than the full moon. The sky background will be similar to dusk right after sunset. So bright that you will not be able to see the brightest stars. 14 km away. The glow from a single mirror will exceed the luminance of the full moon sky for the majority of the day. For the majority of the sky, from a distance of 34 kilometers, the sky will still appear brighter than the moon lit sky in the direction of the beam. If 400 mirrors like this, and they're talking about 50,000 mirrors, if 400 m mirrors illuminate the same patch simultaneously, the glow would be obvious from 80 km away. Why are we racing towards death? Why are we doing that? That's what this feels like. This is going to kill birds. It's going to kill bugs. This is going to kill fish. It's going to kill amphibians. >> Talk about Allan. Like >> Allan can take a back seat. Allan's nothing compared to this. Allan, [laughter] sit down. You're fine. What? >> Yeah. >> Nobody's porch light can hold a candle >> to this. >> A standard candle. [laughter] >> I Why? What? >> Energy. as our as our uh chat is lighting up saying this will contribute to global warming >> and so that is a thing that I am very interested in it like don't we want to take energy out of our atmosphere >> why would we add more to our atmosphere up against >> it all >> take this energy that you're putting towards this and I'm talking about like just the power the mental power that y'all are putting towards figuring this out >> and instead figure out how to put solar panels facing the sun [laughter] >> and bop bop the energy back down to us from space. Don't don't bring it here. >> No. >> What are you doing? >> Yeah. Also, like you think you can control exactly where these things go and not ruin endangered species habitat or I mean if it's if it's locked, you know, orbally locked to the planet and just stays in one spot over a bunch of solar panels. I mean, that's maybe less environmental impact, but if you're talking about something that's like a normal satellite and it's going to range over a large >> large amount of the Earth's surface, um, yeah, I don't know. >> Do you really think it's going to orbly lock though? Like I I >> That depends on where where and how they put it. >> Trust cuz also like there's all sorts of other crap up there. It's going to bang into it. Then what? [laughter] [gasps] Where is this going in the atmosphere? >> Well, it's not going to be in the atmosphere. >> Well, yes. So, it's it's >> 600 kilometers up. So, like this is well past the edge of space out where other satellites exist. Actually, it's a great question to see whether this is um if that distance is >> how far? 600 kilometers. >> 600 kilometers. Oh, tippity tappity. I hear you. Tippity tappity. >> No, it's great. >> Let us look it up. >> Uh, low Earth orbit atmosphere. >> Okay. >> Yep. >> The air here is extremely thin, but there's atmospheric drag. >> Yeah. So, this test would not stay up there. is is the basic idea. So, >> oh, here we go. I found a >> it would have to actively try to keep from having its orbit decay, but yeah. Oh, here we go. This is what I was looking for. Okay, so planes are as high as 180. Mhm. uh space shuttles and the like are the ones who go up to 10,000 and beyond. >> Mhm. >> Um it looks like interesting. Yeah. Satellites auroras are in the thermosphere. Huh. Wild. Yeah. So, a lot of our satellites, it seems, are about uh in that 600 the low earth orbit satellites are within that 600 to 800 kilometer distance. Um yeah, but we've got but I that's not where you get like um orbally locked >> but meteors regularly go all the way into the messosphere, it says. >> Oh, sure. Yeah. No, I mean it's just not that far away. Um, >> so it's going to get hit. >> Not necessarily. [laughter] >> I don't think that's the issue. Or you're looking forward to that? >> No, I'm just saying just this whole idea that we can like control it and it'll be orbit orally locked. this giant grid of mirrors. It just feels very precarious and bulky and awkward and it I just don't trust that it would actually stay where it's supposed to be and then before we know it like the the nursing home has it pointed at it and everyone's freaking out because it it doesn't look like nighttime. You know what I mean? Like it just >> Yeah. >> It just it feels silly. I don't understand why we're doing this. I'm angry. >> Yeah. I mean it's a test so far. the test has been approved. Uh I don't think it has a set uh launch date at this point. I don't even think they've made the mirrors yet. I have no idea. But um yeah, we should keep we will keep looking. >> Okay. >> I also think that the the permitting for this should be international. We should have control. >> Yeah. For something like this that could impact the entire planet, it definitely should be. But I mean, every country puts up their own satellites, right? Still does that. we have and will do for a very long time. And so this is simply that kind of adventure at this point. >> Yeah. I feel like there needs to be a limit though. Like something above a certain size and weight, >> you need more buy in. >> But specifically, this is about beaming things down. Even if it's just light, >> it's about impacting the surface of the planet from space. Like this is such a different animal. >> It's Yeah. O, I hate [laughter] it. >> Like, I'm not happy with this. I don't like it at all. >> I didn't need more things to be angry about, but here I am. >> Okay. So, now I'm gonna take you take you back to um something that you don't have to be upset about. >> Oh, great. >> Okay. Let's think about Roman roads. >> Okay. >> Yes. So a group an archaeologist named Tom Bugman's he's created a an atlas of ancient Roman roads and the ancient Roman road website is known as itinerary. Anyway, they've been mapping and uh digitizing all of the roads of ancient Rome. And um in doing so, we have the ability to see how these ancient roads are lined up with modern roads, with um modern travel, how they've changed, how um how the roads, you know, how they would have worked historically and why they might have disappeared and become no longer used over time. Um but anyway, they have 185 or 86,000 miles of roads mapped, which is huge. And so the the findings from this study, they they fly in the face of a bunch of ideas that we've had about Roman roads. Do you have any um myths or ideas in your head that you've ever had? Have you ever thought about Roman roads? I know that like they invented the keystone. [laughter] So like I know on bridges >> great for navigating. They had Yeah, they had mile markers. They had all sorts of u they had two-lane roads in areas of high congestion. There was >> I think I assumed that like in a lot of Europe there are roads that were once Roman roads >> and that's true. Yeah. >> I I was in Rome. Those are Roman roads even now because they're they're in Rome. [laughter] >> Yeah. >> All right. So Kevin Rearen's making the joke, is that the roads that lead to the Nancy Grace Roman Telescope? >> Yes. >> Well, no. But that's the other myth is that all roads lead to Rome. >> Oh, sure. Oh, yes. >> They didn't and they don't. So, investigating the database, no, not all the roads lead to Rome. That is not something that is actually true. That's a just a saying. Um, and also there's this >> Rome wasn't built in a day. They did not build them in a day. >> They didn't build them in a day. That's true. Um, and they also are not straight. The majority of Roman roads not straight. That there was this idea that the Roman art road architects, the people who built the roads, they were so good at their job that the roads were perfectly straight from place to place. And um they have determined that oh no no no they were not. They were windy. There were a few straight sections but more often than not they were very windy and not straight and they followed the local terrain which really makes sense. >> Um >> you don't want a horse going up and down and up and down and up and down. >> Yeah. Exactly. >> They get tired. Um, and so, uh, they also say from their findings, the the idea that the Roman roads have persisted for so long that we're still walking on them is not necessarily true. Many Roman road, ancient Roman roads have fallen to the wayside, have disappeared. They are not main thorough affairs because cities went away, villages disappeared because of the movement of people and where we put our big gatherings of of humans um around Europe. The the uh the roads the Roman roads that were there are not there anymore and it's not the same grid. That's basically what it is. Um, but there's a lot that we know about these Romes, but we really don't know a lot. But there, like you said, there was a a highly highly complex system for the roads in Rome, the capital city, because uh there were 1 million people that lived in the city and it was very dependent on the importation of grain from Alexandria in Egypt. And so they had to ensure that grain could get to all the places in the city that were necessary. And also because it was such a a military society at the time, they also had to be able to allow for troop movements in and out of the city. So there were very um you know interesting aspects of the roads that have to do that. But anyway, um Rome was a center for Mediterranean shipping. According there's this article in Gizmodo that tells some great stories about this. Um however, it was more distributed. Not everything went through Rome. Um and that there Constantinople became the capital of the Roman Empire in the 4th century and that was actually more of a central location than Rome. because of where it was. Anyway, interesting interesting learnings about the ancient Roman roads from a new modern digitization of the database to be able to actually observe these ancient Rome these ancient roads in >> you call them Romes and I like it. [laughter] >> Roman roads. Romes. >> Romes. They're Romes. That's right. Yeah. [sighs and gasps] Anyway, ar this is modern archaeology. It's kind of cool. I think it's very I think it's fun. Um and then uh >> should I talk about mosquito toilets now or should I save it? >> Yeah, give me the mosquito toilet. I don't want to wait. >> You don't want to wait for a mosquito toilet? >> I don't want to wait for mosquito toilets, Kiki. [laughter] Oh no. Oh no. Why on earth would scientists create a mosquito toilet? Why, Blair? >> To collect mosquito pee. >> That's exactly why, actually. Yep. >> Yeah, that makes sense. >> So, these researchers, Dana Price from Ruter Center for Vector Biology, they were thinking about um the idea that, you know, we can study our own viruses in wastewater. And so they thought, can we apply this to insects, to other organisms, especially those that are viral vectors actually or parasite vectors, those that help spread disease. And so they went and they and he says what we did colloquially was build a mosquito toilet. with their toilet. They basically made a funnel and the funnel then drained into a collection tube. They captured like a hundred mosquitoes and then put them into the enclosure. So, it wasn't this isn't a wild wild study, but the mosquitoes were taken from the wild and they fed the mosquitoes dyed sugar water. Um, and mosquitoes pee, in case you didn't know it. And there was enough pee that liquid beaded up on top on the surface of their super water repelling, hydrophobic, 3D printed funnel and slid into a collection tube. And so then they were able to look at mosquito pee. What did they find in the mosquito pee? They found viruses that they didn't even know were present in the United States yet. They also found new viruses. >> President [laughter] Blair. >> I mean, sometimes a virus is a president. That can be true. >> Yeah. [laughter] >> In a president. Um but uh that they didn't know were present in the United States yet. And they also found viruses that have never before been described by science and they don't know what that means necessarily. So there is one uh virus that they found that is uh that was called the it's called a hedwig like virus because originally it was found in white owls in Europe and it would the headwig they called them the hedwig virus because Harry Potter was popular at the time. But these viruses, they found them in animals that were also infected with bird flu. So they don't know whether or not this is something that goes along for the ride with bird flu, whether it's just a benign virus completely having nothing to do with bird flu or maybe it's a kind of virus that can create a situation where bird flu can can infect more easily. So they found headed headwig like viruses in the mosquito pee here in the US which was something that they did not expect. So now they're going to try and look a little bit more closely to see you know where the headwig like viruses are showing up if there's bird flu if there's other stuff um that these blood sucking insects may be carrying and potentially spreading. >> Yeah. Um, but they also found, like I said, brand new viruses. They don't they they seem to be the kinds of viruses that are associated with single-sellled parasites. And there are single-sellled parasites that infect mosquitoes. And so the parasite, they could be specific to viruses specific to the parasites that infect mosquitoes. They could also be um other anyway. There's what they call partiti like viruses, piccornaike viruses. Most of what they've found appear to only infect mosquitoes and are not known to c uh uh cause human disease. >> Well, that would make sense why we haven't found all these ones yet, >> right? Because they're not infecting people, [snorts] >> right? But we don't know like from an ecosystem perspective >> what these viruses do, what they mean, what their importance is. And the question is, can we target things like this? Can we look for things like this or add things like this to the environment that would target mosquitoes more generally? Um but anyway, as mosquitoes are moving into the United States more and more from areas that um you know, we've got Zika viruses, deni, West Nile, all sorts of these these mosquitoes um are carrying viruses and we should be able to at like we look at our wastewater to see what viruses are around in the environment. figure out whether can we can we track the mosquitoes? Can can we track their pee? And so, you know, it would it be possible? They want to be able to create a field ready trap >> that could collect mosquitoes and their pee. >> Yeah, that's the thing is I was looking at the study because I was like, how did this work exactly? So, they they basic they caught a bunch of mosquitoes. They popped them in this closed thing and so they had no choice but to pee in there. But it >> there's no place else to go. if you had an open toilet that like for some reason attracted the mosquitoes to pee and then they continued on or as you're saying they they attracted them trapped them and then they peed in there. So like >> I mean it doesn't hurt to take mosquitoes out out of the wild generally except they are pollinators but um [laughter] >> not all of them are but many of them are >> many are um but you could also you know if you wanted to leave them if you if you wanted to let them leave and you could somehow catch the urine then it would be kind of like >> or the urates or whatever they are it would be like um checking the wastewater system like where this all started right so that would be more akin to checking the waste water system for humans because you'd just be like, "What is this general environment of mosquitoes? What are they working with?" >> Yep. Exactly. What's flowing through the system? >> Yeah. Yeah. More. >> And it might be good to have an early war, >> more mosquito toilets. >> But I'm thinking you could even do this with other animals. Like if you could figure out how to how to coers them to pee in one place, then you could collect pee from other animals, too. >> Invertebrates or vertebrates. And then you could >> [sighs] >> test them. >> You could have an early warning system without actually trapping animals, >> without a actually having to take blood, without having to do all of the handling that normally is necessary for these kinds of processes. >> Yes. Yes. Kevin Reen, catch, release, and release. That's right. >> Catch, release, and release. That is good. I like it. >> You got it. [laughter] >> Excellent. Nice. >> All right, everybody. This is This Week in Science. Thank you so much for joining us for this show. This is our the midpoint of the show. We've got a few more stories to go. I mean, it's a little bit past midpoint, but you know, we've got a few more stories coming up, but I just would love to remind you that we are listener supported, and it is your support that really helps us keep doing what we're doing. So, if you are able to, you know, go to our website, twist.org, or and either, you know, find something for somebody you love on our Zazzle store or or even, you know, click on that Patreon link and become an ongoing supporter. We also have a PayPal link that can help us uh for one time if you just want to if you've got something to give now and you don't know if you'll be able to have the same thing next month. Everything is so questionable these days. So much uncertainty, but that's science, you know, everything's uncertain. Um, we really appreciate anything that you're able to give to be able to keep this keep this show in with computers and microphones and internets and things like that. So, your help is so appreciated. We thank you for your support. We really can't do it without you. And it's time to come back. Not that we went anywhere really. You did you go away? I didn't go away. I'm right here. We're here. And we are here to continue with Blair's Animal Corner with [music] Blair. >> She loves a creature great and small by [music] pet a pet. No pet at all. >> You want to hear about animals? >> She's your girl. Except for [music] giant squirrel. >> What you got, Blair? Do you remember the spider tail viper? >> Yes. >> Yes, >> I do. >> Yes. >> Oh my gosh. Um I talked about this on the show >> some years ago. >> Yeah. >> And I I think I I don't know if I realized it at the time, but it's a fairly newly described species. Um, so this is a viper that has a tail that looks like a spider and they shake it around to look like a spider and a bird comes to eat the spider and the viper gets >> you got eight. >> Yeah. So they're they're like an angler fish on land and with no uh fins. But any [laughter] what's cool about it is that there the first specimen of the snake was collected in 1968. [gasps] People thought that it had a deformity. It's like a tumor or something. Oh. Huh. It bopped on a shelf. Bop bop. >> It bopped onto a shelf and there it sat. And then in 2003 it was looked at again. And then in 2006 they found a new one. [laughter] They found another species. Oh no. In also in 2003 they found another individual with the same tail. And it took until 2006 for them to be formally described, named, and categorized. Um, and so then they were able to create a holotype, which we just talked about a couple weeks ago. So it was the the kind of the I almost want to call it a breed standard, right? Like for that individual animal >> and um that is kind of the >> the standard bearer for physical characteristics for the species. So that was only in 2006 that the spider-tailed viper was officially described and named as a species. Then shortly after that they found their first video of it, which I think is when I No, that can't be right because that was in 2008. They found the first video. So I really don't >> You weren't on the show then? >> No, shortly after that, but not then. But um I don't know what the story was. I meant to look it up, but I forgot. [laughter] I don't know what the story was that I talked about on the show, but basically um they had done some research into how it's used and um that confirming that it is a lure for um prey. And I think maybe also it had to do with the fact that they were able to figure out that it was strategic and intentional and it wasn't just like, oh, my tail kind of looks like a spider. It's like I'm going to shake it and make it look exactly like a spider the way it moves and then I'm going to eat you. Um, but so, uh, that's kind of the background on these guys. They're so cool. >> Now, the reason I bring them back is that they've been CT scanned and that's what Kiki is showing right now. So, the the lab where the holotype lives, >> the field museum there got a new CT machine. >> It's an X-ray computed to tomography machine. So, they were able to scan the objects, take thousands of X-ray images, stack them together, and create a 3D rendering of the object's interior. Why this is of interest is that other snakes with weird tails, like rubber boas. Now, rubber boas I used to work with on the zoo, and I love them because they have little stubby tails that look like their head. And that's on purpose so that a predator will try to bite the head and they oh they just got the tail and then the the rubber boa can get away or bite back or whatever it is. Right? So um they have these little stubby tails that look like a second head. And if you look at their tailbones, their vertebrae look completely different from other snake tail vertebrae. So if you look up rubber boa skeleton, you'll be able to see it. Um, it looks almost like an arrow head or something. It looks kind of stubby and Yeah, look at that one. There you go. >> Um, stubby and uh and totally different from other tail vertebrae on other snakes. >> Yeah. >> So, their assumption was this snake, the spider-tailed viper has a weird tail. It must have weird bones. [laughter] >> Okay. Yeah. And they found nothing. [laughter] >> What? >> They found normal bones. Yeah. So the vertebrae themselves were like any other viper. There is nothing in their skeleton suggesting that their tail looks different on the outside from another snake. And now what's really interesting is that um one of the researchers on this study is a paleontologist. So that's their interest in this is that um they they want to know what the outside and then the skeleton of an animal look like and how they relate so they can put dinosaurs together, right? Like which is why I bring this up is think about all of the dinosaur skeletons and I know I talk about this a lot and how much you just kind of have to make up [laughter] >> because soft tissue soft tissue goes away so much so often. We don't Think about how if you saw the spider-tailed viper's skeleton, would you ever in a million years put a giant spider on the end of their tail? >> Nope. >> No. >> It's just a normal end of a snake tail. >> I just want you to think about that next time you're looking at some dinosaur skeletons. Some of you might look at them more often than others depending on if you have a little paleontologist in your house. Um, but when you're looking at those, think about, do they have any weird soft or keratinous tissue that you can't imagine? Like, do they have weird spider fingers? >> How many dinosaurs had spiders at the end of their tails? >> We don't know. Did they have giant long eyelashes for some reason? >> No. >> Did they have a car k caratinus like growth on their head that looked like a fedora? We'll never know, [laughter] >> man. Dinosaurs with hats. >> Yeah. >> Yes, please. >> Oh my goodness. Yeah. The other piece about this, the other big takeaway is that this is a specimen that was taken 60 years ago. >> The first spider spider tailed viper was taken in 1968. So we are learning about it now which is why these collections are so important to maintain and it's so important for new research students to remember you don't have to go out there like it's very fun to go out there and you should at some point go touch some grass go watch some animals in the real world >> but >> there's also a wealth of information waiting for you in these specimen in the boxes is museums, [laughter] in the fridges, in the rolling cabinets, in the desiccated temperature controlled lockers. They're there. There's so much information waiting for us. Like, it sucks that a lot of animals were taken out of the wild and they were killed and then they were preserved for us to study them later. >> Let's take advantage of that. >> Honor them. >> Honor it. >> Honor their sacrifice. Because the more that we understand these animals, the more we care about them and the better that we can care for the rest of their species. >> So, >> I love that that this growth is nothing to do with the skeleton. It's just these are just uh adapted scales. >> Yep. >> That's right. Just like >> a rattlesnake. >> Yeah. >> Um Hey, do you know what uh shags are? >> I do. >> I love the roughfaced shag. >> Yes. So they're birds. >> They're birds. They're seabirds. Um this particular study is looking at European shags. They uh like other migratory birds, some of them are refusing to migrate. There can be a variety of reasons for that. Number one with a bullet is climate change. If you have a mellow winter, um maybe they don't need to leave and fly south for the winter. Uh maybe it's humans leaving out food so they they don't have to leave because they're there's enough food for them. Like that's what happens here with Canada geese. They're sticking around because there's plenty of food. Winters are getting more mild. They're like, "It's chill. I don't have to go any further south. I'm good. In fact, I'm not going back north. I'm just going to stay right here." >> Yeah. Um, so understanding how migration patterns can change is really important in conservation because of course if you have a population of birds that normally migrates and they stop doing that, you are functionally removing the job that they have from that >> the other place >> web. Yes. Exactly. Yeah. So that ecosystem is losing an entire species if th that particular animal stops migrating or >> but then on top of it wherever it's staying it's that ecosystem has to support those animals for that mild milder but still less >> uh less um productive season. Winter is not known to be the producing season. Are they out competing animals who normally are around? Be they birds or another species, another type of animal, right? Yeah. That can't fly. Um, so it's it's very complicated and there's a lot of moving pieces, but ultimately migration is part of this evolutionary past and the function that these animals serve on the planet, this open system. And uh, if that gets disrupted, it changes a lot of things. There's a lot of dominoes that can fall. So, all that to say, um, the shag was studied, um, from they're found from northern Norway to southern Europe. Um, they look at they looked at the aisle of May in Scotland. Around half the population at this point remains in the same area throughout the winter. The rest migrate they actually migrate north along the coast. >> Oh, wow. Okay. Yep. >> Okay. They just got their their they got their own situation. >> [laughter] >> Um and so uh they want to look at natural selection, genetic variation, behavioral flexibility, all these things and whether there was an impact from these different factors onto whether they migrated or not. They want to be able to predict are more going to migrate, are less going to migrate, is this going to change over time, like what's going on. >> And so they looked at bird banding data, which is the information collected when birds are caught. They either already have a band on or they are fitted with a little bracelet and then they're recorded and released. Then after that they can either be caught and cataloged or sometimes you can see a band through a um a binoculars and then you can kind of record who you saw and then used advanced models to analyze variation selection and genetics over several years. Now what they found was that there's a huge variation between individuals from year to year even. So um somebody who migrates this year might not migrate next year. But what they did see is that whatever they experienced early in life, it has a great impact on their later migration behaviors. The choice an individual bird makes during their very first winter has the largest impact on future migration activity. There are other factors that play a role but that was the biggest one. >> So the it's it's there is kind of a developmental or learning aspect. It's like this is the thing that I do. I stay or I go. >> Right. Exactly. Like oh winters aren't that bad actually as I discovered my very first winter. So, >> I'm a chill. Oh, this one's this one's been rough, but you know what? The first one it was good, so it's probably going to be good again soon. So, >> it's like people who go to Burning Man. >> Yeah. Like, [laughter] it's been bad for like four years in a row, but it'll be good again. >> Um >> Yeah. Gosh. So, all that to say, um, that's important because climate change isn't a steady progression. Even though we have like, oh, it's the hottest year on record. Oh, it's the hottest year on record. You have wet years, you have dry years, you have hot years, you have cold years, the main thing that climate change does is it pushes extremes. And often it's larger variability also. So that's kind of a weird double whammy for these birds because if you have an incredibly hot or an incredibly dry year and that encourages them to stay and they are young, it's their first winter. that's going to push them into behavior that otherwise other factors like their genetics, their plasticity, their um their ability to cope in colder weather uh might not be able to catch up with because of a of one very good or very bad winter, >> right? Um the other problem is that um because it's all over the map and it can be extra hot or extra cold or extra wet or extra dry. Uh coming up with a consistent strategy is never going to work like like plasticity is what's needed for climate change. Right. >> Exactly. Um and and also that that means that the the worst factors get worse, right? So like even a strategy that used to work might not work anymore. So if if you have if these how am I trying to explain like basically like if if you have birds that are born one year and experience one thing and that is how they act the rest of their lives, you might find an entire generation of birds being lost >> or having a really hard life. Um and that can have a huge impact on the the the livelihood of the species basically. So, [snorts] I'm thinking about all the different studies that we've done where uh not us personally that that people have done that have looked at the differences in quote unquote personalities between different individuals in a population. And so, you don't have to call it a personality, but there is the difference in exploratoriness or the uh likelihood of looking for something novel. And so there I'm wondering how that plays into so you have the generational encoding, right? So one year we're staying, the next year's babies it's like getting cold really early. It doesn't seem great. We're leaving. >> And so you have generational differences, but then you're the plasticity that you're talking about. If you don't have individual plasticity at all, then you're going to lose the generations. But if you have individual plasticity, then you have not the full generation but you know 20% >> right >> of the generation who changes their strategy and migrates follows the other birds and migrates here too. >> Right. So so I do wonder you know how much of a how much of an influence there is on that aspect. >> Yeah. No, and I think that's the other piece is like it's really up to those other factors that were measured at lower levels than what their first summer or their first winter was. >> Um because it's out of our hands what happens with climate change to a certain extent. Of course, we can all do things to slow it down or try to reverse the effects, but >> in in terms of real time, um you can't stop the shag from migrating or not migrating. And then that kind of sets in stone their future behavior. It's all those other things are whether they're going to survive that decision. So like is that going to cause a genetic bottleneck? >> Is that going to make them change their behavior? Is it going to select for plasticity? And then this pattern is going to go away. It's yeah, it's it's super complicated and and I think very interesting an interesting piece to all of this that like you don't need to say, oh, climate change has made all the winters hotter, >> so the shags can't handle it. It's more like, oh, well, it makes it so variable that one bad win bad winter can impact an entire generation for the rest of their lives, >> right? But hopefully you have a longer lived species and you don't lose everybody in one generation. >> Yeah. >> Right. >> All you got to do is free some sperm. >> Just free. That's right. Freeze the sperm. >> You'll be fine. >> Freeze the sperm. >> Yeah. I mean, this is this is the really interesting aspect. Birds are and fish I mean the ability of birds and fish to migrate more easily than other organisms I think is very important. But as a result, you know, not all birds used to migrate. Migration was an adaptation. >> You know, birds were born in a spot and everybody stayed in the spot. But then they learned to move, you know, and you went from all the animals staying in one place and being, you know, endemic to becoming nomads and just roaming around looking for food or better better environmental situation. And then you had some that went, well, this is better all the time, so let's move over here and then move over here. And then it becomes a migration pattern that's repeatable like the monarch butterflies every year. Mhm. >> Um but that migration pattern for all these birds like you've noted um it's it is a spectrum of behaviors that there has to be individual variation that leads that goes back and forth into strategies that work better or worse. But the question is can it keep up? That's the big one. >> Yeah. >> With climate change. Yeah. I have a couple of stories, big stories for this week. Pe everybody's talking about not every I don't know everybody everybody everybody >> everybody >> everybody is talking about the humanized mouth mouse brain. >> I wasn't but now I am. Tell me more. [laughter] >> So we've talked about there was these researchers um put human cells into mouse brains into rat brains. They've done this work for uh several years and we've had this conversation related to the small number of human cells of human neural tissue that they transplanted into rat brains last year. This year what they've published on is their work creating mice where the mice were modified so that they were born without their cortex. Like it's it's the palial structures they do. These mice are born without a hippocampus or a cortex really. So all the the thinking parts of the brain and memory parts of the brain learning memory thinking those parts of the brain non-existent and the uh the images of the brain are are incredibly um you know it's fascinating that they were able to create these brains. I honestly I'm like I I am fascinated that these mice were born and able to live. So the normal brain is nice and plump and looks like a little butt. That's the cortex re region. It looks like a like a like a a little butt that's sitting there. >> Um and that does not exist >> for the uh the modified mice >> prehuman cell transplantation. And so this is the key issue. So they made these mice, they were born, their brains developed, they they were living. They just were not living with a high quality of life. I'm going to say >> not living their best life. Yeah. >> Not living their best life here. Um and then the researchers transplanted human tissues. So this is xenotransplantation because it's, you know, alien >> to the mice. The human cells were transplanted in and um grew. They were incorporated. They used um stem cells. These my these neural the neural tissue was um this human derived cortical tissue grew and started to make connections. And one of the interesting aspects of this is that it doesn't look like a pretty little butt anymore, but it has more of a shapeless blob of a cortex than the one without. >> They cut open their skull. >> Yes. So they would cut open the skull of the mice, do an implant, >> a transplant implant into the area of the brain that was missing. And these human cells, they took they they they got on like gang busters. They were happy little human cells. >> Seal these guys back up. They let them run around. >> Yes. And this is one of the things. Yes. and these little mice with these human cells, we start seeing um and there's there are images from the paper that show some of the connections that these human cells started making with within themselves and also to other areas of the brain. And one specific cell type that they saw is very specific to human brains. It's like a it's a long like big connector neuron that is known to connect between disperate areas of the brain. And those neurons have never been able to be grown in cell culture or they don't exist in brain organoids that are created, but they grew in these xenotansplanted mouse brains. >> Oh, this is a big deal. >> Yeah. Yeah. It's it's amazing. And so, >> also, where's the ethics board? I feel like now we're getting in trouble. >> And so this is the interesting we'll talk about this in a minute because they do address this. um they have ethicists, philosophers, and lawyers that are working with them to address all of these issues related to the work that they're doing because the researchers do say that this is the kind of work like they are really looking at what these cells are doing in the mouse brain. >> Wow. >> And um you know also like we said the quality of life for the mice, they are looking at that as well. They're not looking at this as a we're just doing whatever we want to the animals. I mean, they are, but they are asking the important questions and they said they they're trying to keep an eye on this kind of humanized tissue. So far, the mice are acting like mice. There's nothing they can see that is human about the mice. The mice are still mice. They're all grow they're human cells but growing according to mouse programming. So they're not creating human brain structures. >> They're creating mouse brain structures. They're they're following mouse programming >> except for you know some of the cell types that are being seen in there which are very uh humanlike cell structures. And so they're, you know, they're worried. They're like, "We don't know how big of a clump of brain has to be. How how big does that clump of brain has have to be for it to start having more humanlike behavioral attributes." >> So anyway, um they did behavioral tests. They um actually had the mice to in um in open fields, which mice don't like to be out in open fields. It scares them a little bit, but there's a rearing up and like a it's a fear reaction for mice being in the open going on their hind lanes to kind of see what's around so they don't get eaten. Um, and the control mice do this just fine. The a palo mice, the ones without the the cortex or the hippocampus, they did not they do not do those behaviors that are normal for a mouse. the human transplanted cells, they regained that ability. They regained the ability to start doing these behaviors that are more normal for a mouse. That said, >> the behavior is not of these transplant mice is not the same as controls and it is not the same as the apal. The behavior the behaviors >> have different are done in a with different timing there with different frequency. There are differences. So it's not like it's just normal again. That's not happening. There is something different. >> They waved. >> Yeah. >> They start talking. [sighs] >> They don't have they don't have the vocal cords for that. Kiki, come on. Be serious. >> Well, I mean they can laugh. Come on. >> Yeah. >> Um, >> but anyway, these, you know, it's not it's not the same between the transplant and the controls, but it's not a lack complete lack of these behaviors >> like the apalial mice have. So, and there was more and there was learning. They did a Y maze test with the mice >> and were able to show that the control and the transplant mice learned and remembered which arm of the maze to go down. The apaloial mice did not remember. They had no memory. >> But the control mice did, right? >> The control mice did and the transplant mice did. >> Cool. So, so there was a regaining of this ability for the transplant mice. >> So, this is really cool and exciting and and I think groundbreaking and terrifying >> and [laughter] terrifying. So, for the scientific usefulness of the of this, it's not just can we put human cells in a mouse, right? It's not just can we give a mouse a brain with human cells. That's not it. It is the question we have. We use mice for research models. Brain organoids are allowing us to learn so much about cell development in the brain that we normally wouldn't be able to. With brain organoids, we can apply drugs in the dish and get a whole bunch of uh a whole bunch of information about how different therapeutics might or might not work. But to be able to have a behaving animal with human brain cells, it can tell us a lot more about mental illness. It could tell us more about brain disorders. It could tell us more about like the real impacts of therapeutics on the whole animal as opposed to just a ball of cells in a dish. And like I said, with the the incorporation of those longer cell types that are not not normally found in organoids or other neural cell cultures, that's showing that it's a more realistic system in which to study a lot of this stuff. So from a stud a scientific model perspective, this is very exciting. But that again does not allow us to step away from the ethical concerns. >> No. >> At all. [laughter] >> I know this is this is I mean yeah it's not as spooky as I first thought it was but it's definitely it's definitely I'm glad I'm glad they had ethsists and philosophers. >> Yeah. And >> once upon a time you'd talk to a scientist about this kind of stuff and they'd be like, "What? I don't what are you talking about?" And so >> to know that there is integration of these questions and the people who have who who know how to talk about these questions into the process is incredibly reassuring. I don't think it's it solves all the problems by any means, but at least these things are being considered. Um I don't know maybe more so than they are for AI companies but [laughter] um yeah so the the head researcher Pusca is saying one direction is to study fronttotemporal dementia. Oh sure. >> Um you know epilepsy can be studied and like so the you know how the circuits work whether or not abnormal circuits or seizures are developing um neurode de developmental disorders. Um and then the question that is uh that is being considered also is Pusca saying another important question is whether introducing increasingly complex human neural tissue into an animal nervous system could lead to unexpected emergent or novel properties that would require additional ethical consideration. >> And we considered this explicitly and monitored the animals carefully both biologically and behaviorally as the work progressed. And the other side of it, so this is the other side of the ethical uh question. There is an ethical cost and they say this to not developing better models for neurological and psychiatric disease. >> We have the ability >> but not doing it right. So this is, you know, part of the conversation. I think we should be discussing this. Can't wait to hear my son come back from a debate competition. Mom, we had to debate the ethics of human mouse brains. >> Yeah, [laughter] it would be great. Um, and beyond that, I don't know the other the other brain story. I have one other brain story. It was from last week and my son said that I absolutely needed to talk about it, but I wasn't really going to talk about it. I didn't talk about it last week, but I'm bringing it up this week because I think, you know, it's okay. It's great. We finally have sexual parody to um our models of the fruitfly brain. Earlier this year, I reported that researchers had created a full neural model conneto for the female fruitfly brain. >> The fruitfly model became available and immediately people started playing Doom on the female fruitfly brain. Same thing has happened with the male fruitfly brain. The male fruitfly brain, they've extended it a little bit further to include more of the the nerve cord. So that would be more of the spinal cord in a vertebrate, but it's not a vertebrate. It's an invertebrate. And so these 166,000 neurons and I don't know over like some I don't know multiple of millions synapse connections. now are able to show us that there really is sexual dimmorphism between male and female fruit flies. Who knew? There's an area in the male brain where there are neurons that the males have that the females do not have that are specifically related to mating. >> Males and females both have. So there's dorphic existence of neurons related to the, you know, the song of the fruit, the mating call of the fruitly. Both of them are able to hear it, identify it, but there's a dimorphism in the differences of where they're connected, what they do, and what they go on, what behaviors they end up stimulating, right? And so in the male, it creates if you if a male hears a male fruitfly song, they're going to get more aggressive and maybe go fight the guy or maybe they'll start singing themselves, whereas the female is going to be like, "That's nice." Um, and just kind of wait, but then there are also neurons that both the male and the females have because it's just those neurons are necessary for the existence of the organism. So, we've got isomorphic neurons, we've got dimorphic neurons, and we have sex specific neurons. And now we know it for the And of course, we knew this before. We knew this before, but now there are pretty pictures, 3D models, and uh ways for us to play sexually dimorphic doom. [gasps] What I'm hearing is male fruit flies are from the orange peel and female fruit flies are from the apple core. Right. >> Yep. This is You got it. You've got it. >> Oh my goodness. Yep. There's the difference. >> Male and female fruitly brains. They are not the same. They look like fruitly brains, but they are not the same. Yeah, that is your preschool song for the day. >> Great. it. But anyway, um I have heard of people taking the Fruitfly Connecttome and using it as an operating system for doing more than just playing video games. Some people are using them to send emails or to filter their emails. Some people are using the fruitfly. Uh, a friend of mine um is use is using the fruitfly brain to simulate our solar system with the planets as fruit and the flu the fruitfly as a as a spaceship. [laughter] Okay. Traveling the solar system. [laughter] [gasps] >> Oh yes. >> So great. So, if anyone out there is playing around with the flute the the flute fly, >> the [laughter] flute fly. >> Okay. So, we've got the president, we've got we've got Romes and the flute fly. >> Yeah. >> Here we go. [laughter] >> Um, if anyone out there is playing with the fruitfly operating system, email me and let me know what you're doing. Send me pictures or videos, screen caps. I want to know what you are running on a fruitfly. But that's it for me for the day. >> Yeah. [sighs] Have we done it? >> We've done it. >> We did it. We've made it all the way through to the very end. >> We did. >> Can't believe we've done it. Doesn't seem Yeah, it seems like it's time. Everyone, thank you so much for joining us for another episode of This Week in Science. So glad that you could be here to hang out with us so that we could chat about the science. Thank you to those of you who are friends of the show who really really help to make sure that we can get this done every week. FD, thank you so much for your help with social media and show notes. Everyone in the chat room, thank you for chatting. Your comments were hilarious tonight. Oh my gosh, it's been fun to watch what you're saying in the chat room. Gourd, ArinLore, others who help make sure it stays a kind and respectful place. Thank you for doing that. Identity 4, thank you for recording the show. Rachel, thank you so much for editing the show and our Patreon sponsors. Who was that? Ding ding ding. >> That was my water glass. [laughter] >> Ding. [gasps] Patreon sponsors. Thank you too. Aaron Anathema, Adam Mishkon, Alan Biola, Ali Coffin, Andrew Swanson, Ardum, Arthur Kepler, Bob Calder, Brendan Minish, Brian Carrington, Chris Wnjak, Christopher Dryer, Christopher Rapen, Craig Landon, Craig Pots, Daryl Mshack, Dave Wilkinson, David Young Bloodood, Derek Schmidt, Don Mennis, EO, Eden Mandell, Eric Knap, Flying Out, Fred S104, Duburn, Vladimir, Greg Briggs, Jack Jason Olds, John Atwood, John McKe, John Ratner, Swami, Johnny Gidley, Ken Hayes, Kent North, Kevin Peritan, Kevin Rearen, Kurt Larson, Lon Makes, Lauren Gford, Mary Girtz, Marjorie, Mark Hess, Mark Jenkins, Noodles, Patrick, Pecaro, Paul, Paul, Disney Paul Ronovich PR Velazar Richard Badge Robert Norland Robert W Farley Rodney Lewis Rudy Garcia Day Sean Clarence Lamb Shoe Brew Stephanie Embry Steven Albron Steve Leeman aka Zema Sue Aoster Theresa Smith Tony Steel Vagard Chefad and what the if. Thank you for all of your support on Patreon. If any of you out there would like me to try and pronounce your name at the end of the show, please head over to twist.org and click on that Patreon link. $10 or more a month and I will read your name. It's going to be great. Like, what are you going to do? [laughter] I'm gonna read your name. It's amazing [gasps] on next week's show. We will be back on Wednesday at 8:00 p.m. Pacific time broadcasting live from our Twitch, YouTube, and Facebook channels. If you want to listen to us as a podcast, just search for This Week in Science, wherever podcasts are found, wherever you like to get podcasts. Anyway, and if you enjoyed the show, please get your friends to subscribe, too. For more information on anything you've heard here today, show notes and links to our stories will be available on our website. That's at www.twist.org. You know how many W's, don't worry. >> We love your feedback. If there's a topic you'd like us to cover or address or a suggestion for an interview or if you want to let us know what you're doing with your fly brains, please let us know on one of our social media accounts or send us an email. But make sure you put twist in the subject line so your email doesn't get spam filtered into where Blair >> the thermosphere where it's going to get stuck to a dumb mirror. [laughter] >> Dumb mirror. Not a smart mirror. A dumb one. Yeah. Uh, tell that mirror I hate it. 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 or stuck on a mirror. >> This week in science. [music] This week in science. This week in science. This week in [music] science. It's the end of the world. So I'm setting up shop. Got my banner unfurled. It says [music] the scientist is in. I'm going to sell my advice. Show them how to stop the robots with a simple device. I'll reverse global warming [music] with a wave of my hand. And all it'll cost you is a couple [music] of grand. This week, science is coming your way. So, everybody listen to [music] what I say. I use the scientific method for all that it's worth. And I'll [music] broadcast my opinion all over the earth. Cuz [music] it's this week in science. This week in science. This week in science. Science. Science. Science. This week in science. [music] This week in science. This week in science. This week in science. This week [music] in science. This week in science. This week in science. This week in science.