Artificial Sweat for Humanoid Finger

To achieve favorable Frictional Tactile Sensation （FTS） for robot and humanoid fingers, this report investigated the effects of human finger sweat on Friction Coefficient （FC） and verified the effectiveness of artificial sweat on FTS tbr a humanoid finger. The results show that the model sweat （salt and urea water faked real sweat） increases the FC of the real finger sliding on the high hygroscopic and rough surface （paper）, whereas on the low hygroscopic and smooth surface （PMMA）, the sweat forms a fluid film and decreases FC, restricting severe finger adhesion. Further, the film formation and capillary adhesion force of sweat were discussed. The experimental results with the artificial sweats （ethanol and water） and humanoid finger （silicone rubber skin with tactile sensors） verifies the effectiveness. The artificial sweat restricts severe adhesion （stick-slip vibration）, and enhances cognitive capability of FTS.     

Personalized microbiome-driven effects of non-nutritive sweeteners on human glucose tolerance

1. Download : Download high-res image (202KB)
2. Download : Download full-size image

     

Neonatal incubator or artificial womb? Distinguishing ectogestation and ectogenesis using the metaphysics of pregnancy

A 2017 Nature report was widely touted as hailing the arrival of the artificial womb. But the scientists involved claim their technology is merely an improvement in neonatal care. This raises an under-considered question: what differentiates neonatal incubation from artificial womb technology? Considering the nature of gestation—or metaphysics of pregnancy—(a) identifies more profound differences between fetuses and neonates/babies than their location (in or outside the maternal body) alone: fetuses and neonates have different physiological and physical characteristics; (b) characterizes birth as a physiological, mereological and topological transformation as well as a (morally relevant) change of location; and (c) delivers a clear distinction between neonatal incubation and ectogestation: the former supports neonatal physiology; the latter preserves fetal physiology. This allows a detailed conceptual classification of ectogenetive and ectogestative technologies according to which the 2017 system is not just improved neonatal incubation, but genuine ectogestation. But it is not an artificial womb, which is a term that is better put to rest. The analysis reveals that any ethical discussion involving ectogestation must always involve considerations of possible risks to the mother as well as her autonomy and rights. It also adds a third and potentially important dimension to debates in reproductive ethics: the physiological transition from fetus/gestateling to baby/neonate.     

采自祁连山的冷杉侧耳生物学特性及栽培条件探索

以采自甘肃省祁连山国家级自然保护区菌物保育区的野生侧耳作为试验材料,通过形态学及系统发育分析方法将其鉴定为冷杉侧耳Pleurotus abieticola。对该菌株生物学特性及栽培条件进行初步研究,结果表明：菌丝体最适生长温度为25℃;最适pH为7.0;最适碳源为玉米粉;最适氮源为豆粉;在以棉籽壳、木屑和麸皮为栽培料时,可获得子实体。     

光周期和温度对虎斑蝶卵、幼虫及蛹存活的影响

通过在人工气候箱内设定不同光周期和温度梯度单虫饲养观察个体发育史,研究了光周期和温度对虎斑蝶Danaus genutia幼期存活的影响,研究结果可为该高观赏价值蝶种的规模化养殖提供依据。结果表明,在长光照(L∶D=15∶9)条件下,17.5、20.0、22.5、25.0、27.5、30.0℃时虎斑蝶卵的孵化率分别为63.72%、71.67%、65.75%、75.00%、67.12%、59.56%,幼虫的存活率分别为85.67%、85.96%、91.19%、89.20%、80.86%、68.78%,蛹的存活率分别为82.76%、100.00%、96.00%、97.06%、100.00%、100.00%;在短光照(L∶D=9∶15)条件下,17.5、20.0、25.0、30.0℃时虎斑蝶卵的孵化率分别为86.36%、67.06%、75.00%、77.50%,幼虫的存活率分别为85.05%、84.59%、85.74%、80.78%,蛹的存活率分别为93.30%、94.12%、100.00%、100.00%。结果表明,17.5℃和30.0℃均不利于虎斑蝶幼期的存活,20.0～27.5℃是其幼期生长发育适宜的温度范围。长光照利于幼虫的存活,短光照利于卵的孵化和蛹的羽化;在17.5～30.0℃内,较高的温度利于蛹的羽化,而较低的温度利于卵的孵化和幼虫的存活;温度对虎斑蝶卵的孵化、幼虫的存活及蛹的羽化影响大于光周期;在养殖生产上,建议将幼期养殖温度控制在20.0～27.5℃,幼虫期饲养在长光照下为宜,卵和蛹期置于短光照下为宜。     

Nest box contentions: Are nest boxes used by the species they target?

Nest boxes have grown in popularity as a habitat management tool in Australia during the last decade. This management use remains contentious because some studies suggest nest boxes are ineffective. There are three recent contentions: (i) nest boxes mostly benefit common species, (ii) exotic species may be dominant users of nest boxes, and (iii) species of conservation concern use nest boxes infrequently. We address these contentions using data from 1865 nest boxes involving eight nest box designs. These nest boxes were installed predominantly <200 m from a road in association with highway duplication and re‐alignment across 16 projects in New South Wales. The Common Brushtail Possum (Trichosurus vulpecula) is the species of most relevance to contention 1. It used 9% of boxes overall including 26% of ‘possum’ designated boxes. The most frequent nest box users were small petaurid gliders (mostly Sugar Gliders, Petaurus breviceps) which used 63% of ‘small glider’ designated boxes. This nest box and another suited to the Sugar Glider comprised 40% of all boxes installed, so it is not surprising that this species might be a common user. Exotic species were uncommon users of the nest boxes enabling contention 2 to be rejected. Active hives of Feral Honeybees (Apis mellifera) occupied just 1% of boxes, and another 1% of boxes were used by introduced rodents and birds. The Squirrel Glider (Petaurus norfolcensis) is the species most relevant to contention 3. It was seen in 80 boxes across 11 projects, representing 7% of the three types most frequently used. These observations are not consistent with the third contention. Nest boxes can provide many important insights about the requirements and interactions of hollow‐dependent fauna. However, they are not intended as an alternative to retaining hollow‐bearing trees.     

Nest box revealed habitat preferences of arboreal mammals in box‐ironbark forest

Habitat preferences need to be understood if species are to be adequately managed or conserved. Habitat preferences are presumed to reflect requirements for food, shelter and breeding, as well as interactions with predators and competitors. However, one or more of these requirements may dominate. Tree‐cavity‐dependent wildlife species are one example where shelter or breeding site requirements may dominate. We installed 120 nest boxes across 40 sites to target the vulnerable Brush‐tailed Phascogale (Phascogale tapoatafa) and the non‐threatened Sugar Glider (Petaurus breviceps). The provision of shelter sites where few of quality are available may enable better resolution of habitat preferences. Over three years, we observed the Brush‐tailed Phascogale at 17 sites, whereas the Sugar Glider was observed at 39 sites. We tested four broad hypotheses (H1–H4) relating to habitat that may influence occupancy by these species. There was no influence of hollow (cavity) abundance (H1) on either species suggesting our nest boxes had satisfied their shelter requirements. There was no influence of habitat structure (canopy and tree proximity) (H2) immediately around the nest box trees. We found no influence of distance to the forest edge (H3). Variables at and away from the nest box site that appear to reflect foraging substrates (H4) were influential on the Brush‐tailed Phascogale. Sugar Glider occupancy was only influenced by a single variable at the nest box site. The lack of influence of any other variables is consistent with the very high occupancy observed, suggesting most of the forest habitat is suitable when shelter sites are available. We found no evidence that the Sugar Glider reduced site use by the Brush‐tailed Phascogale.     

Do soil inoculants accelerate dryland restoration? A simultaneous assessment of biocrusts and mycorrhizal fungi

Biological soil crusts (biocrusts) and arbuscular mycorrhizal (AM) fungi are communities of soil organisms often targeted to assist in the achievement of multiple ecological restoration goals. In drylands, benefits conferred from biocrust and AM fungal inoculation, such as improved native plant establishment and soil stabilization, have primarily been studied separately. However, comparisons between these two types of soil inoculants and investigations into potential synergies between them, particularly at the plant community scale, are needed to inform on‐the‐ground management practices in drylands. We conducted two full‐factorial experiments—one in greenhouse mesocosms and one in field plots—to test the effects of AM fungal inoculation, biocrust inoculation, and their interaction on multiple measures of dryland restoration success. Biocrust inoculation promoted soil stabilization and plant drought tolerance, but had mixed effects on native plant diversity (positive in greenhouse, neutral in field) and productivity (negative in greenhouse, neutral in field). In greenhouse mesocosms, biocrust inoculation reduced plant biomass, which was antagonistic to % root length colonized by AM fungi. Inoculation with native or commercial AM fungi did not influence plant establishment, drought tolerance, or soil stabilization in either study, and few synergistic effects of simultaneous inoculation of AM fungi and biocrusts were observed. These results suggest that, depending on the condition of existing soil communities, inoculation with AM fungi may not be necessary to promote dryland restoration goals, while inoculation with salvaged biocrust inoculation may be beneficial in some contexts.