Podcast appearances and mentions of Jason G Goldman

Today, you'll learn about how ADHD might have actually helped our ancient ancestors thrive, the way pollution makes it hard for nighttime pollinators to stop and smell the flowers, and a new study that suggests lions, tigers, and other big cats can tell who's talking to them. ADHD Foraging “Attention deficits linked with proclivity to explore while foraging.” by David Barack. 2024. “What is ADHD?” NIH. n.d. “Foraging theory upscaled: the behavioural ecology of herbivore movement.” by N. Owen-Smith, et al. 2010. Pollution & Pollinators “At night, pollution keeps pollinating insects from smelling the flowers.” by Elizabeth Pennisi. 2024. “Here's how insects help keep ecosystems in balance.” WWF. 2023. “Nitrate radicals and biogenic volatile organic compounds: oxidation, mechanisms, and organic aerosol.” by Nga Lee Ng, et al. 2017. Big Cats Listen “Big cats can tell apart known and unknown human voices, study finds.” by Nicola Davis. 2024. “Lions are the Brainiest of the Big Cats.” by Jason G. Goldman. 2016. “Catcalls: exotic cats discriminate the voices of familiar caregivers.” by Taylor Crews, et al. 2024. Follow Curiosity Daily on your favorite podcast app to get smarter with Calli and Nate — for free! Still curious? Get exclusive science shows, nature documentaries, and more real-life entertainment on discovery+! Go to https://discoveryplus.com/curiosity to start your 7-day free trial. discovery+ is currently only available for US subscribers. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Please check out this week's musical guest Senrall! Links will be in the shows below. This week we look at short-form podcast 60-Second Science. Transcript:Hey Pod lovers. I'm your host Marie and  If you're joining us for the first time: Welcome! The Mastercast is a podcast recommendation show that brings you a brand new non-spoiler binge-worthy review every week of the best podcasts in a short and sweet 2-3 minute summary on everything you could want to know, from the number of hosts to on average how long you can expect each episode to be. New episodes come out every Monday. You can find the week's other reviews on the show's social on Instagram @themastercast and Twitter @mastercastpods. If you like what you hear and want to help out this independent show you can find me on Buy me a coffee by searching The Mastercast. I'd really appreciate it. This week's review is on60-Second Science Okay, let's start off by disclosing that this podcast from Scientific American hasn't had 60 second episodes in some time but they're still very short form at around an average length of six minutes. The slight change hasn't meant much to the listeners of this extremely popular pod that's so far ran for 16 years, debuting in 2006 and maintaining an average star of 4.4 out of 5. With such a span it's no wonder they've published over 3,000 episodes of summaries of the latest research in every subject of science including astronomy, chemistry, biology, earth sciences, mathematics, and so much more. If you want to hear the entire backlog you'll have to check out the show's website as many podcast players only have the last 500 available. It's hosted by a revolving cast of scientific journalists who have included Karen Hopkin, Christopher Intagliata, Jason G. Goldman, and Steve Mirsky. There are fascinating stories, interviews from experts, and the occasional pun. Despite its popularity, a common complaint about the show is that its political opinions make it less objective than it should be. I didn't find it to be unbearable but present. As is often the case, microphone quality improves with time but is lacking in earlier episodes. In the latest episode that was published just before the pod's winter break executive producer Jeffery DelViscio revealed that there will be some changes coming. The show will be getting a new name, podcast art, publishing schedule, and finally resign itself to making slightly longer episodes. There's no word yet when the next episode will be out, but it's promised to be soon. Episodes are meant to stay relatively short, and come out three times a week: Monday, Wednesday and Friday. For longer episodes fans can always tune into the company's long-form science podcast Science Talk. Overall a great podcast that lets you stay up to date in science news without a ton of investment. I recommend sneaking in episodes in between some of the multiple episode series you listen to in a day for a little palette cleanser. Try starting with my favorite episodes “Artificial Intelligence Learns to Talk Back to Bigots” and “Coyotes Eat Everything from Fruits to Cats.” Similar pods include Babes of Science, Story Collider, and Transistor. All right, guys, that's all for this week but  remember if you want to see the cover art, sources or the written transcript for this episode be sure to check out the show notes. You can also send us an email at themastercastpodlist@gmail.com. There you can tell us if you have music you would like played on the show or submit a podcast to be recommended. This week's music came from electronic music artist Senrall.  The song featured was “Electric Ocean.” For more from Senrall find them on soundcloud. Links will be in the description as well. Remember to share the show with the pod lovers in your life and tune in next Monday. Thanks for listening.Artists Links: Artist: Senrall Song: Electric OceanSoundcloud: https://soundcloud.com/senrallSources: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/60-second-science/id189330872https://www.scientificamerican.com/podcast/60-second-science/https://www.podchaser.com/podcasts/60-second-science-12388 ★ Support this podcast ★

The premise of the Purple Patch podcast is all about performance and helping you enhance your performance journey to become the best that you can be in sport and in life. This week is part two of the in-depth performance discussion with Alex Hutchinson, who is a leading researcher on everything cutting-edge in the world of athletic performance. Hutchinson is a science journalist who writes about fitness, health, and endurance sports for Outside magazine in his Sweat Science columns. His most recent book is the New York Times bestseller Endure: Mind, Body, and the Curiously Elastic Limits of Human Performance. Before becoming a journalist, he worked as a post-doctoral physicist for the U.S. National Security Agency, and competed for the Canadian national team in track, cross-country, and mountain running. In today’s discussion series, Matt and Alex tackle the last two Purple Patch Pillars of Performance: Strength Training and Recovery. They also dive into the latest research on performance. What are their thoughts and what does the research show about things like: Strength Training to Counter the Effects of Aging Strength Training Globally to Enhance Performance for Younger Athletes The Benefits of Muscle Confusion, Plyometrics and Heavy Weights Key Habits to Optimize Recovery How to Gauge Recovery and Metrics to Best Track Recovery Modalities that Actually Work Cutting Edge Research and Upcoming Trends   Episode Resources Podcast Part One with Alex Hutchinson Alex Hutchinson Outside Magazine How to Make Your Strength Routine Evidence-Based 5 Laws of Sleep for Athletes Why Bronze Medalists are Happier than Silver Winners - Jason G. Goldman   Purple Patch Resources Join the Purple Patch Performance Academy Email info@purplepatchfitness.com with questions about team training and strength programming. Purple Patch Podcast Page   Subscribe to the Purple Patch Podcast: Apple Podcasts Spotify Amazon Music

Hyraxes, which live in Africa and the Middle East, punctuate their songs with snorts. And the snorts appear to reflect the animals’ emotional state. Jason G. Goldman reports. 

Hyraxes, which live in Africa and the Middle East, punctuate their songs with snorts. And the snorts appear to reflect the animals’ emotional state. Jason G. Goldman reports.

The finding could potentially help wildlife managers keep better tabs on their herds. Jason G. Goldman reports. 

The finding could potentially help wildlife managers keep better tabs on their herds. Jason G. Goldman reports. 

Climate change is expected to bring more frequent droughts and heat waves to Africa’s Kalahari Desert. And aardvarks might not be able to cope. Jason G. Goldman reports.

Climate change is expected to bring more frequent droughts and heat waves to Africa’s Kalahari Desert. And aardvarks might not be able to cope. Jason G. Goldman reports.

Hunted areas of Gabon have fewer large mammals and a thicker forest understory—but they also have fewer termites. Jason G. Goldman reports.

Hunted areas of Gabon have fewer large mammals and a thicker forest understory—but they also have fewer termites. Jason G. Goldman reports.

Today's guest is Jason G. Goldman, a science journalist, author, and expedition leader based in Los Angeles. He is one of the authors of the newly released "Wild L.A.: Explore the Amazing Nature In and Around Los Angeles. Jason has written a number of stories for Alta, including two cover stories. His latest for us focuses on UC Riverside researcher Chris Clark, whose research on hummingbirds is changing the way we understand the species. 

People who spent at least two hours outside—either all at once or totaled over several shorter visits—were more likely to report good health and psychological well-being. Jason G. Goldman reports.

People who spent at least two hours outside—either all at once or totaled over several shorter visits—were more likely to report good health and psychological well-being. Jason G. Goldman reports.

Female hyenas keep their clans in line by virtue of their complex social networks. Jason G. Goldman reports. 

Female hyenas keep their clans in line by virtue of their complex social networks. Jason G. Goldman reports. 

Coyotes become fearless around people in just a few generations—which isn’t good for their longterm co-existence with humans in cities. Jason G. Goldman reports.

Coyotes become fearless around people in just a few generations—which isn’t good for their longterm co-existence with humans in cities. Jason G. Goldman reports.

Detroit residents declined an offer of free street trees—but were more willing to accept them if they had a say in the type of tree. Jason G. Goldman reports.

Peafowls' head crests are specifically tuned to the vibrations produced by feather-rattling male peacocks, thus acting as a sort of antenna. Jason G. Goldman reports.

Peafowls' head crests are specifically tuned to the vibrations produced by feather-rattling male peacocks, thus acting as a sort of antenna. Jason G. Goldman reports.

Of the many thousands of species of birds on Earth, only about 25 are known to do something special with their food—they dunk it in water before eating.Nobody knows for sure why the birds do it. It might moisten foods for easier eating. Or it might wash away nasty-tasting chemicals. The behavior is seen most often in super smart species, like crows. And now it's been observed for the first time in a bird called the Australian magpie."We were very, very lucky to see it. It was entirely by chance." University of Cambridge zoologist Eleanor Drinkwater."And so, on a day to day basis, we'd get up and we would essentially spend hours and hours following these different families of magpies around the place, and tempt them towards us and then see how they reacted when we presented them with different foods."The researchers offered an adult male magpie a mountain katydid, an insect that's presumed to be distasteful. It's thought that the insect defends itself against being gobbled up by secreting a bitter substance from underneath its wings as well as by vomiting a bitter-tasting cocktail."This one individual comes up and takes the katydid that we presented and kind of waddles off, and then goes and kind of plops it in a little stream that was behind us. We were kind of watching this together and looking at each other, like, this is a bit interesting. Haven't seen this before."But then something even more surprising happened. The magpie dropped the wet katydid on the ground and hopped away. A few minutes later, a juvenile magpie approached, dunked the katydid once again in the puddle, and then gobbled it up. The observations were described in the journal Australian Field Ornithology. [E. Drinkwater et al., A novel observation of food dunking in the Australian Magpie Gymnorhina tibicen]Drinkwater thinks what they saw might be an example of social learning in this species."To us, it kind of appeared to be the case that it could be food washing. That would make sense within the context of this particular insect.”While the behaviors are hard to interpret, she says that she and her team reported these observations in hopes that other researchers might investigate the behavior further."We were just very, very fortunate to be in the right place at the right time to see this interesting behavior. And in the current day and age, there are loads of people with iPhones and cameras who I'm sure have also captured all sorts of weird and wonderful animal behavior, which might not be common knowledge to the scientific community."And unless those folks think to share their photos and videos with experts, who knows what discoveries are out there remaining to be made.—Jason G. Goldman[The above text is a transcript of this podcast.]中文翻译：在地球上成千上万种鸟类中，只有大约25种人知道他们的食物会做些特别的食物 - 他们在进食前将它们浸泡在水中。没有人确切知道为什么鸟会这样做。它可能滋润食物，更容易进食。或者它可能会洗去令人讨厌的化学物质。这种行为最常见于超级聪明的物种，如乌鸦。现在，这是第一次被称为澳大利亚喜鹊的鸟类。“我们非常非常幸运地看到它。这完全是偶然的。”剑桥大学动物学家Eleanor Drinkwater。“所以，在日常生活的基础上，我们起床了，我们基本上会花费数小时的时间跟踪这些不同的喜鹊家庭，并诱惑他们走向我们，然后看看他们在我们呈现时是如何反应的不同的食物。“研究人员向成年雄性喜鹊提供了一种山羚羊，这种昆虫被认为是令人反感的。据认为，昆虫通过从翅膀下面分泌一种苦味物质以及呕吐一种苦味的鸡尾酒来防御被吞噬。“这个人出现了，拿走我们提出的k and和一种蹒跚的吵架，然后继续把它放在我们身后的一条小溪里。我们有点看着对方，看着对方，就像，这有点有趣。以前没见过。“但后来发生了更令人惊讶的事情。喜鹊把湿漉漉的k k扔在地上然后跳了下去。几分钟后，一只少年喜鹊走近，再一次在水坑里扣了k，然后吞了起来。澳大利亚野生鸟类学杂志对这些观察结果进行了描述。 [E. Drinkwater等，澳大利亚Magpie Gymnorhina tibicen食物扣篮的新观察Drinkwater认为他们所看到的可能是这个物种中社会学习的一个例子。“对我们来说，它似乎可能是食物洗涤。这在这种特殊昆虫的背景下是有意义的。”虽然行为很难解释，但她说她和她的团队报告了这些观察结果，希望其他研究人员可以进一步研究这种行为。“我们非常非常幸运能够在合适的时间出现在正确的地方，看到这种有趣的行为。在当今这个时代，有很多人使用iPhone和相机，我肯定也抓住了所有这些各种奇怪而奇妙的动物行为，这可能不是科学界的常识。“除非那些人想与专家分享他们的照片和视频，谁知道还有什么发现仍然存在。-Jason G. Goldman

Of the many thousands of species of birds on Earth, only about 25 are known to do something special with their food—they dunk it in water before eating.Nobody knows for sure why the birds do it. It might moisten foods for easier eating. Or it might wash away nasty-tasting chemicals. The behavior is seen most often in super smart species, like crows. And now it's been observed for the first time in a bird called the Australian magpie."We were very, very lucky to see it. It was entirely by chance." University of Cambridge zoologist Eleanor Drinkwater."And so, on a day to day basis, we'd get up and we would essentially spend hours and hours following these different families of magpies around the place, and tempt them towards us and then see how they reacted when we presented them with different foods."The researchers offered an adult male magpie a mountain katydid, an insect that's presumed to be distasteful. It's thought that the insect defends itself against being gobbled up by secreting a bitter substance from underneath its wings as well as by vomiting a bitter-tasting cocktail."This one individual comes up and takes the katydid that we presented and kind of waddles off, and then goes and kind of plops it in a little stream that was behind us. We were kind of watching this together and looking at each other, like, this is a bit interesting. Haven't seen this before."But then something even more surprising happened. The magpie dropped the wet katydid on the ground and hopped away. A few minutes later, a juvenile magpie approached, dunked the katydid once again in the puddle, and then gobbled it up. The observations were described in the journal Australian Field Ornithology. [E. Drinkwater et al., A novel observation of food dunking in the Australian Magpie Gymnorhina tibicen]Drinkwater thinks what they saw might be an example of social learning in this species."To us, it kind of appeared to be the case that it could be food washing. That would make sense within the context of this particular insect.”While the behaviors are hard to interpret, she says that she and her team reported these observations in hopes that other researchers might investigate the behavior further."We were just very, very fortunate to be in the right place at the right time to see this interesting behavior. And in the current day and age, there are loads of people with iPhones and cameras who I'm sure have also captured all sorts of weird and wonderful animal behavior, which might not be common knowledge to the scientific community."And unless those folks think to share their photos and videos with experts, who knows what discoveries are out there remaining to be made.—Jason G. Goldman[The above text is a transcript of this podcast.]中文翻译：在地球上成千上万种鸟类中，只有大约25种人知道他们的食物会做些特别的食物 - 他们在进食前将它们浸泡在水中。没有人确切知道为什么鸟会这样做。它可能滋润食物，更容易进食。或者它可能会洗去令人讨厌的化学物质。这种行为最常见于超级聪明的物种，如乌鸦。现在，这是第一次被称为澳大利亚喜鹊的鸟类。“我们非常非常幸运地看到它。这完全是偶然的。”剑桥大学动物学家Eleanor Drinkwater。“所以，在日常生活的基础上，我们起床了，我们基本上会花费数小时的时间跟踪这些不同的喜鹊家庭，并诱惑他们走向我们，然后看看他们在我们呈现时是如何反应的不同的食物。“研究人员向成年雄性喜鹊提供了一种山羚羊，这种昆虫被认为是令人反感的。据认为，昆虫通过从翅膀下面分泌一种苦味物质以及呕吐一种苦味的鸡尾酒来防御被吞噬。“这个人出现了，拿走我们提出的k and和一种蹒跚的吵架，然后继续把它放在我们身后的一条小溪里。我们有点看着对方，看着对方，就像，这有点有趣。以前没见过。“但后来发生了更令人惊讶的事情。喜鹊把湿漉漉的k k扔在地上然后跳了下去。几分钟后，一只少年喜鹊走近，再一次在水坑里扣了k，然后吞了起来。澳大利亚野生鸟类学杂志对这些观察结果进行了描述。 [E. Drinkwater等，澳大利亚Magpie Gymnorhina tibicen食物扣篮的新观察Drinkwater认为他们所看到的可能是这个物种中社会学习的一个例子。“对我们来说，它似乎可能是食物洗涤。这在这种特殊昆虫的背景下是有意义的。”虽然行为很难解释，但她说她和她的团队报告了这些观察结果，希望其他研究人员可以进一步研究这种行为。“我们非常非常幸运能够在合适的时间出现在正确的地方，看到这种有趣的行为。在当今这个时代，有很多人使用iPhone和相机，我肯定也抓住了所有这些各种奇怪而奇妙的动物行为，这可能不是科学界的常识。“除非那些人想与专家分享他们的照片和视频，谁知道还有什么发现仍然存在。-Jason G. Goldman

Only a few kinds of animals are known to learn their vocalizations from listening to others. Us, of course. Elephants. Bats. Cetaceans—whales and dolphins. Pinnipeds—walruses, seals and sea lions. And parrots, hummingbirds and songbirds. That's it. "When your cat meows or your dog barks, it does that because it has genetically inherited that sound. But birds are like us, young animals have to hear adults in order to develop normal sounds."University of Windsor biologist Daniel Mennill. There have been hundreds of conventional experiments done in laboratories with captive birds that support the idea that young birds learn to sing by listening to older birds. These studies also taught us that birds, like humans, have what's called a "sensitive period" early in life, a time when they are most disposed to learn how to vocalize from their elders.But nobody ever did one of those experiments with wild birds. Observational studies, yes. But no true experiments. Until now, thanks to some wild savannah sparrows."So this population of savannah sparrows lives on an island in the Bay of Fundy in eastern North America, and it's been studied since the 1960s, so we know a lot about this population. It means we know every kind of sound that has ever been uttered by a savannah sparrow in this population over the course of many decades."Mennill and his team installed a series of loudspeakers on the island, and they played new tunes that the sparrows would never have heard otherwise. "The kinds of sounds that we broadcast to the animals were based on savannah sparrows, the same species, but recordings collected on the western coast of North America, many thousands of miles away from our study population."For six years, the researchers broadcast these novel songs to five cohorts of sparrows.  "Lo and behold, this bird that arrived to breed in the spring of 2014 opened his beak and sang a song that was a perfect match with one of our stimuli." In all, 26 birds learned their songs from loudspeakers rather than from other birds. And they had the same survival and reproductive success as all the other birds. All but one successfully mated and defended their territories. And four additional birds learned songs from birds that had originally learned from the loudspeakers."What we have now is a very unique, maybe a globally unique population of animals, where some of the animals sing population typical songs, that sound like other animals in their breeding population. But our experimental subjects who are living there now, are singing songs that are slightly different." By returning to the island year after year, Mennill can study not only vocal learning, but the transmission of culture from one generation to the next. There's a lot going on in those bird brains. —Jason G. Goldman  (The above text is a transcript of this podcast) [Daniel J. Mennill et al. Wild birds learn songs from experimental vocal tutors]

Only a few kinds of animals are known to learn their vocalizations from listening to others. Us, of course. Elephants. Bats. Cetaceans—whales and dolphins. Pinnipeds—walruses, seals and sea lions. And parrots, hummingbirds and songbirds. That's it. "When your cat meows or your dog barks, it does that because it has genetically inherited that sound. But birds are like us, young animals have to hear adults in order to develop normal sounds."University of Windsor biologist Daniel Mennill. There have been hundreds of conventional experiments done in laboratories with captive birds that support the idea that young birds learn to sing by listening to older birds. These studies also taught us that birds, like humans, have what's called a "sensitive period" early in life, a time when they are most disposed to learn how to vocalize from their elders.But nobody ever did one of those experiments with wild birds. Observational studies, yes. But no true experiments. Until now, thanks to some wild savannah sparrows."So this population of savannah sparrows lives on an island in the Bay of Fundy in eastern North America, and it's been studied since the 1960s, so we know a lot about this population. It means we know every kind of sound that has ever been uttered by a savannah sparrow in this population over the course of many decades."Mennill and his team installed a series of loudspeakers on the island, and they played new tunes that the sparrows would never have heard otherwise. "The kinds of sounds that we broadcast to the animals were based on savannah sparrows, the same species, but recordings collected on the western coast of North America, many thousands of miles away from our study population."For six years, the researchers broadcast these novel songs to five cohorts of sparrows.  "Lo and behold, this bird that arrived to breed in the spring of 2014 opened his beak and sang a song that was a perfect match with one of our stimuli." In all, 26 birds learned their songs from loudspeakers rather than from other birds. And they had the same survival and reproductive success as all the other birds. All but one successfully mated and defended their territories. And four additional birds learned songs from birds that had originally learned from the loudspeakers."What we have now is a very unique, maybe a globally unique population of animals, where some of the animals sing population typical songs, that sound like other animals in their breeding population. But our experimental subjects who are living there now, are singing songs that are slightly different." By returning to the island year after year, Mennill can study not only vocal learning, but the transmission of culture from one generation to the next. There's a lot going on in those bird brains. —Jason G. Goldman  (The above text is a transcript of this podcast) [Daniel J. Mennill et al. Wild birds learn songs from experimental vocal tutors]

Researchers taught two dozen wild sparrows new songs, by playing them the recordings of sparrows that live thousands of miles away. Jason G. Goldman reports.

Researchers taught two dozen wild sparrows new songs, by playing them the recordings of sparrows that live thousands of miles away. Jason G. Goldman reports.

Ever hear of the pronghorn antelope in the American west? Well, it's not really an antelope—it's actually more closely related to giraffes than to true antelopes. And the last known migration of pronghorns occurs between Grand Teton National Park and the upper Green River Basin in western Wyoming. The so-called "path of the pronghorn" stretches more than 150 miles and is one of the longest mammal migration corridors that remain in North America. That stretch is also the only federally designated wildlife migration corridor. The trouble is that the corridor intersects with roads and fences, presenting obvious problems to the animals. So Wyoming officials built eight wildlife crossings along some 12 miles of U.S. highway 191: two overpasses and six underpasses. But having a crossing doesn't mean wildlife will use it. So researchers decided to assess the impacts of the $9.7 million investment."We're out in the field, on spotting scopes, watching these animals as they're approaching brand-new structures. This was a perfect setting, because we had been studying these pronghorn, these animals on their long-distance migration, for about a decade."Wildlife Conservation Society biologist Renee Seidler, now at the Idaho Department of Fish and Game.She focused her observations on an area called Trapper's Point. Twice a year, between one and two thousand pronghorn, along with some three thousand mule deer pass through the area. Archaeological evidence indicates that pronghorn have been moving through Trapper's Point for at least six thousand years. But now they have to contend with highways and fast cars. Before the wildlife crossings were built, the 12 miles of the two-lane highway 191 saw an average of 85 animal-vehicle collisions each year."We looked at how many times an animal would attempt to use the crossing structure before they were able to successfully get to the other side. And the success rate of crossing within that definition increased over time."In other words, the pronghorn eventually learned to use the crossing. And that's good news for motorists too: Seidler found a 70 percent reduction in wildlife-vehicle collisions. The results are in the journal Global Ecology and Conservation.Four years after the crossings were built, every single pronghorn successfully used them to avoid the highway and complete their migration."These are migrations that have been compared to migrations on the Serengeti in Africa. These are stellar, long-distance migrations, and I think as a culture we should hold innate pride in that… Wyoming did a really good thing when they put in these crossing structures and fences, so that these animals can continue their migration."—Jason G. Goldman  (The above text is a transcript of this podcast) 

Ever hear of the pronghorn antelope in the American west? Well, it's not really an antelope—it's actually more closely related to giraffes than to true antelopes. And the last known migration of pronghorns occurs between Grand Teton National Park and the upper Green River Basin in western Wyoming. The so-called "path of the pronghorn" stretches more than 150 miles and is one of the longest mammal migration corridors that remain in North America. That stretch is also the only federally designated wildlife migration corridor. The trouble is that the corridor intersects with roads and fences, presenting obvious problems to the animals. So Wyoming officials built eight wildlife crossings along some 12 miles of U.S. highway 191: two overpasses and six underpasses. But having a crossing doesn't mean wildlife will use it. So researchers decided to assess the impacts of the $9.7 million investment."We're out in the field, on spotting scopes, watching these animals as they're approaching brand-new structures. This was a perfect setting, because we had been studying these pronghorn, these animals on their long-distance migration, for about a decade."Wildlife Conservation Society biologist Renee Seidler, now at the Idaho Department of Fish and Game.She focused her observations on an area called Trapper's Point. Twice a year, between one and two thousand pronghorn, along with some three thousand mule deer pass through the area. Archaeological evidence indicates that pronghorn have been moving through Trapper's Point for at least six thousand years. But now they have to contend with highways and fast cars. Before the wildlife crossings were built, the 12 miles of the two-lane highway 191 saw an average of 85 animal-vehicle collisions each year."We looked at how many times an animal would attempt to use the crossing structure before they were able to successfully get to the other side. And the success rate of crossing within that definition increased over time."In other words, the pronghorn eventually learned to use the crossing. And that's good news for motorists too: Seidler found a 70 percent reduction in wildlife-vehicle collisions. The results are in the journal Global Ecology and Conservation.Four years after the crossings were built, every single pronghorn successfully used them to avoid the highway and complete their migration."These are migrations that have been compared to migrations on the Serengeti in Africa. These are stellar, long-distance migrations, and I think as a culture we should hold innate pride in that… Wyoming did a really good thing when they put in these crossing structures and fences, so that these animals can continue their migration."—Jason G. Goldman  (The above text is a transcript of this podcast) 

Twice a year, thousands of pronghorn antelope and mule deer migrate through Wyoming, and newly built highway crossings are sparing the lives of animals—and motorists. Jason G. Goldman reports.

Twice a year, thousands of pronghorn antelope and mule deer migrate through Wyoming, and newly built highway crossings are sparing the lives of animals—and motorists. Jason G. Goldman reports.

At about 7:30pm on September 7, 2017, Hurricane Irma reached the Turks and Caicos Islands. By the next morning, the neighborhood called Blue Hill was gone. And on South Caicos Island, 75% of rooftops were obliterated. Two weeks later, Hurricane Maria followed in Irma's destructive footsteps. And Harvard University biologist Colin Donihue happened to be there a few days before the hurricanes blew through."The Turks and Caicos islands is home to a couple of different endemic species of lizard, that's lizards that are only found there. We were interested in one in particular, called Anolis scriptus, the Turks and Caicos anole."The mission of that first expedition, before the two hurricanes, was to assay the lizard population in anticipation of a program to eradicate the islands of invasive rats—which threaten the lizards. This work included taking detailed measurements of the bodies of lizards they trapped and released. The researchers intended to return several years later, after the rats were gone, to re-assess the lizards. But that plan changed. “We realized after the hurricanes had come through that we had a really serendipitous opportunity to test this question of whether hurricanes can act as agents of natural selection on wild populations in their path. Now this had never really been asked before, because hurricanes are just really hard to predict…we just happened to be in the right place at the right time to have that baseline data."Which is why he and his team returned to the archipelago…just six weeks after his first visit.They expected that lizards with longer limbs and larger toepads would be the ones better able to cling to trees and therefore more likely to survive the storms. And they were almost right. Longer front legs and larger toepads indeed helped. But shorter hindlimbs were actually better. The results are in the journal Nature. [Colin M. Donihue, et al. Hurricane-induced selection on the morphology of an island lizard]To figure out these counterintuitive findings, the researchers conducted an experiment in a hotel room. They rounded up some lizards, gave them a perch, and used a leafblower to mimic the effects of high winds. They set up a net to catch any lizards that lost their grip. As the artificial wind blew, the lizards moved so the perch took most of the air flow. But their hind legs would stick out—and if those rear limbs stuck out too far, they acted as sails. "Eventually those back legs were blown off the perch, and the lizards were just holding on with their front two legs. And they could only hold on like that for so long as the wind speed increased further and further, until they were blown off the perch and into the nets."So shorter back legs gave a survival advantage. A trait that might be passed on to the next lizard generation. —Jason G. Goldman (The above text is a transcript of this podcast) 

When Hurricane Irma blew through the Turks and Caicos, lizards with shorter hindlimbs lucked out. Jason G. Goldman reports. 

Not too long ago we thought that only humans could make and use tools. Then Jane Goodall watched a chimpanzee called David take a small twig, snap the leaves off, stick it into a termite mound, and lick the insects off the stick. Seems some animals were also made and used tools. That observation was in 1960. Since then the club of tool users has expanded to include a wide range of primates, birds, marine mammals, and others. And now: an insect. Maybe. Tree crickets use sound to attract mates. And they also fashion and use "baffles"—sound controllers—made of leaves to produce sound more efficiently. It's a behavior that's been known since at least 1975, but nobody ever really tried to figure out out how and why the bugs use the baffles."The way that tree crickets sing is to raise their wings and vibrate their wings back and forth. This causes sound to come off each surface of the wing, the front face of the wing and the back face of the wing."University of Toronto biologist Natasha Mhatre.But sound waves coming off the front of the wings and the sound waves coming off the back of the wings are out of phase with each other. The two sounds interfere with each other, making the call quieter.To make a baffle, the cricket carves a small hole in the center of a leaf and sticks its body halfway through. The baffle absorbs sound coming from the back of the wings, and therefore lets the sounds coming from the front sides to come through loud and clear. "And this prevents what we call acoustic short-circuiting, and therefore they make more sound."But do these structures count as tools?Mhatre weighed the behavior against the most recent definition for tool use described in the scientific literature. And based upon the requirements of that definition, it would seem that tree crickets do indeed make and use tools. The findings are in the journal Ethology. [Natasha Mhatre, Tree cricket baffles are manufactured tools]So what does this discovery mean for the link between tool use and animal smarts? “I don't know if I want to say it exactly this way but it actually takes tool use down a notch. Because if you see tool use in an animal, you can't immediately say the animal is smart. Even if you see optimal tool use in the animal, you can't say, well that's a really clever animal. Because actually that could be an inherited behavior."—Jason G. Goldman  (The above text is a transcript of this podcast) 

Not too long ago we thought that only humans could make and use tools. Then Jane Goodall watched a chimpanzee called David take a small twig, snap the leaves off, stick it into a termite mound, and lick the insects off the stick. Seems some animals were also made and used tools. That observation was in 1960. Since then the club of tool users has expanded to include a wide range of primates, birds, marine mammals, and others. And now: an insect. Maybe. Tree crickets use sound to attract mates. And they also fashion and use "baffles"—sound controllers—made of leaves to produce sound more efficiently. It's a behavior that's been known since at least 1975, but nobody ever really tried to figure out out how and why the bugs use the baffles."The way that tree crickets sing is to raise their wings and vibrate their wings back and forth. This causes sound to come off each surface of the wing, the front face of the wing and the back face of the wing."University of Toronto biologist Natasha Mhatre.But sound waves coming off the front of the wings and the sound waves coming off the back of the wings are out of phase with each other. The two sounds interfere with each other, making the call quieter.To make a baffle, the cricket carves a small hole in the center of a leaf and sticks its body halfway through. The baffle absorbs sound coming from the back of the wings, and therefore lets the sounds coming from the front sides to come through loud and clear. "And this prevents what we call acoustic short-circuiting, and therefore they make more sound."But do these structures count as tools?Mhatre weighed the behavior against the most recent definition for tool use described in the scientific literature. And based upon the requirements of that definition, it would seem that tree crickets do indeed make and use tools. The findings are in the journal Ethology. [Natasha Mhatre, Tree cricket baffles are manufactured tools]So what does this discovery mean for the link between tool use and animal smarts? “I don't know if I want to say it exactly this way but it actually takes tool use down a notch. Because if you see tool use in an animal, you can't immediately say the animal is smart. Even if you see optimal tool use in the animal, you can't say, well that's a really clever animal. Because actually that could be an inherited behavior."—Jason G. Goldman  (The above text is a transcript of this podcast) 

The insects fashion and use "baffles"—sound controllers—made of leaves to produce sound more efficiently. Jason G. Goldman reports.

The insects fashion and use "baffles"—sound controllers—made of leaves to produce sound more efficiently. Jason G. Goldman reports.

Homo sapiens has an outsized influence on the behavior of other animals. We have long hunted them. More recently, we destroy habitats to build housing and coffee shops, and we build roads to drive from our houses to those coffee shops. But some of our influences are far more subtle."My collaborators and I had noticed a striking pattern in some of our own data from far-flung places like Tanzania, Canada, Nepal…where animals we were studying seemed to be more active at night when they were around people.University of California, Berkeley wildlife ecologist Kaitlyn Gaynor.To see if animals really were changing their activity schedules, Gaynor and her team rounded up 141 studies of 62 kinds of mammals from across six continents. And they found that mammals near people across the globe have settled on a new strategy for survival: they take to the night, when most of us are comfortably tucked into our beds counting sheep. The finding is in the journal Science. [Kaitlyn M. Gaynor, et al. The influence of human disturbance on wildlife nocturnality.]For example, an animal that would ordinarily prefer to spend half of its active time during the daytime and half at night shifts to two-thirds of its active time under darkness.And our particular human behaviors do not seem to matter: "Something that surprised me in the study was just how consistent the shift towards nocturnality was across types of human disturbance. We expected to see animals being a little bit more discerning, and perhaps responding more strongly to activities like hunting, that actually do a pose a risk to the animal. But what we found is whether it is infrastructure development, or hunting, or just hiking through wilderness areas, all of these human activities elicit a response in wildlife, suggesting that they're playing it safe around us."In a way, this reaction is a good thing. The night shift allows animals to more safely coexist with us in shared spaces. But what's not yet clear is any long-term physiological changes animals may go through from adjusting their daily schedules because many can't simply run away from us. Nor is it obvious what impacts these changes might have on broader ecological communities, and on the food web. "Even if we think we're leaving no trace in the outdoors, our presence can have pretty lasting consequences."—Jason G. Goldman (The above text is a transcript of this podcast)

A study of human–mammal interaction across the globe found animals are more prone to take to the night around humans. Jason G. Goldman reports. 

Most critters seem better able to survive big cities if they're smaller than usual. But a few others are better adapted to urban areas if they're larger. That's the result of a study of more than 700 types of invertebrates from across 10 different taxonomic groups living in a variety of habitats in northern Belgium.European ecologists were interested in understanding how animals adapt to urbanization. So they set up a variety of traps in both urban and rural areas, and assessed the body size of more than 95,000 individual critters.They measured butterflies, beetles, weevils, ground spiders, web-building spiders, moths and grasshoppers. They also tested a handful of more obscure invertebrates, like a group of microscopic shrimp-like critters called ostracods, and a group of aquatic crustaceans known as water fleas.On average, urban communities contained smaller individuals than rural ones. It's not that cities are causing animals to evolve smaller bodies, at least not necessarily. What this study found is that animals that are already smaller seem better suited to city living. The researchers think that has to do with what's called the urban heat island effect. Animals expend more energy going about their daily lives in warmer areas, and cities tend to be warmer than more natural areas. Smaller body sizes can compensate for that heat effect.But some groups of city dwellers were actually bigger than were their countryside counterparts."For three of our groups, for butterflies, moths, and for grasshoppers, we actually saw a completely reversed pattern…these three groups, out of the 10 groups that we tested, these were the only groups where large species are also the most mobile ones."Catholic University of Louvain ecologist Thomas Merckx.These are animals that need wide spaces, something that's in short supply in cities, where roads and housing developments easily fragment natural habitats. Being bigger helps them move from one habitat patch to another more easily than their diminutive relatives. The results are in the journal Nature. [Thomas Merckx, et al. Body-size shifts in aquatic and terrestrial urban communities]“As humans, we have become urban animals. So this is our new habitat. It wasn't the case a hundred years ago. Only a tiny minority of the human population was living in cities. But urbanization really is taking off. So now more than half of humans are already living in cities, and this is only going to increase."And humans are part of a wildlife community, even in cities. We need lots of other animals, including ones we might not always think about, like moths and spiders, to thrive in cities as well. Understanding how animals are adapting—or not—to urban areas today can help us build better, more wildlife-friendly cities in the future.—Jason G. Goldman(The above text is a transcript of this podcast)

They weigh about 3000 pounds and eat about 100 pounds of plants each day. So your average adult hippo produces quite a lot of poop. By some estimates, a single hippo blasts out more than 10 pounds of waste each day. And all that hippo dung gets mixed into the ponds and streams where they spend most of their time. We generally think of this process as beneficial, an ecosystem service, a way for nutrients to flow from terrestrial, streamside ecosystems into the water itself. Their dung is a sort of fertilizer for aquatic life.And all of that is true—at least when water moves from pond to pond. At one time, many African waterways continued to flow even during the dry season. But people have diverted lots of that water for agriculture. So now, Tanzania's Great Ruaha River stops flowing during the dry season, leaving behind a serious of stagnant pools—in which the hippos keep on pooping. "Especially in these high density pools at the peak the dry season, there's a huge buildup of dung. So we ended up pulling up these nets that have no fish but are just filled with hippo dung."University of California, Santa Barbara ecologist Keenan Stears. Unable to wash downriver, the nutrients build up while dissolved oxygen in the water decreases. "Changes in the chemistry can influence biodiversity within these pools as well. Specifically, fish as well as aquatic invertebrates."Only a few types of fish can survive in these oxygen-poor aquatic environments for more than a few weeks. It's bad news for biodiversity, but it's also deleterious for the dinnerplate. Tilapia are an important source of protein for communities that rely on the rivers for their food. Hippos reduced tilapia abundance by 41% across the watershed the researchers studied. The results were published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. [Keenan Stears, et al. Effects of the hippopotamus on the chemistry and ecology of a changing watershed.]There is some hope, though. When the wet season returns and the rivers start to flow again, things can return to normal—if we're careful."But what our results do show is its not all doom and gloom. This resetting of the system when flow resumes shows that there is some kind of resilience within the system. And if we are able to manage the offtake of water from these rivers, the system is able to actually recover in terms of repopulating these pools in terms of biodiversity and abundance."—Jason G. Goldman  (The above text is a transcript of this podcast) 

They weigh about 3000 pounds and eat about 100 pounds of plants each day. So your average adult hippo produces quite a lot of poop. By some estimates, a single hippo blasts out more than 10 pounds of waste each day. And all that hippo dung gets mixed into the ponds and streams where they spend most of their time. We generally think of this process as beneficial, an ecosystem service, a way for nutrients to flow from terrestrial, streamside ecosystems into the water itself. Their dung is a sort of fertilizer for aquatic life.And all of that is true—at least when water moves from pond to pond. At one time, many African waterways continued to flow even during the dry season. But people have diverted lots of that water for agriculture. So now, Tanzania's Great Ruaha River stops flowing during the dry season, leaving behind a serious of stagnant pools—in which the hippos keep on pooping. "Especially in these high density pools at the peak the dry season, there's a huge buildup of dung. So we ended up pulling up these nets that have no fish but are just filled with hippo dung."University of California, Santa Barbara ecologist Keenan Stears. Unable to wash downriver, the nutrients build up while dissolved oxygen in the water decreases. "Changes in the chemistry can influence biodiversity within these pools as well. Specifically, fish as well as aquatic invertebrates."Only a few types of fish can survive in these oxygen-poor aquatic environments for more than a few weeks. It's bad news for biodiversity, but it's also deleterious for the dinnerplate. Tilapia are an important source of protein for communities that rely on the rivers for their food. Hippos reduced tilapia abundance by 41% across the watershed the researchers studied. The results were published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. [Keenan Stears, et al. Effects of the hippopotamus on the chemistry and ecology of a changing watershed.]There is some hope, though. When the wet season returns and the rivers start to flow again, things can return to normal—if we're careful."But what our results do show is its not all doom and gloom. This resetting of the system when flow resumes shows that there is some kind of resilience within the system. And if we are able to manage the offtake of water from these rivers, the system is able to actually recover in terms of repopulating these pools in terms of biodiversity and abundance."—Jason G. Goldman  (The above text is a transcript of this podcast) 

Hippo poop is piling up in Tanzania’s freshwater fisheries—which is bad news for biodiversity, and deleterious for the dinner plate. Jason G. Goldman reports. 

Hippo poop is piling up in Tanzania's freshwater fisheries—which is bad news for biodiversity, and deleterious for the dinner plate. Jason G. Goldman reports. 

Cabo Polonio is a small seaside village on Uruguay's Atlantic coast. The permanent, year-round population is just 95 people living in around 50 homes. Another 350 homes are used between December and February—by tourists hoping to see pinnipeds—[Sea lion sounds]—fur seals and sea lions that haul out on the town's rocky cape. In January alone, more than 30,000 tourists visit. What are the impacts of so many tourists on these marine mammals? Between 1996 and 2014, European and South American biologists monitored both the animals and the people to find out. Over that time span, the pinnipeds' tolerance for human disturbance declined. When annoyed, they move further away from the tourist viewing area or even dive back in the water to swim away. Those responses are contrary to the common assumption that wildlife becomes habituated to human activities. The study is in the journal Applied Animal Behaviour Science. [Carme Tuneu Corral, et al. Short- and long-term changes in the intensity of responses of pinnipeds to tourist approaches in Cabo Polonio, Uruguay.]The researchers think that a fence, initially constructed in the late 1990s, is to blame. It was built with good intentions, to keep people a safe distance from the colony. But the fence isn't long enough to keep people away from the most critical part of the habitat. It might even funnel people towards that area, as they try to find viewing spots closer than the fence would allow.Or it could be that the fence actually does its job keeping people away. But as a result, they are just far enough away that the animals never really get used to them.The truth is that pinnipeds seem to be doing well in Uruguay. While the amount of animals in the rookery varies day by day, the best estimate is there's now around a thousand of them—more than there were 20 years ago. But it's hard to say whether tourism has played any role in that increase. The animals have also become protected from hunting under Uruguayan law. And there are environmental factors at play in governing their population, like prey availability and climate change.Still, the study tells us two things. First, photographic wildlife tourism may not always be as low-impact as assumed. Second, ecotourism developers should get input from social psychologists: who can help anticipate the behaviors of the visiting humans, as they observe the behaviors of the native wildlife. —Jason G. Goldman  (The above text is a transcript of this podcast) 

Cabo Polonio is a small seaside village on Uruguay's Atlantic coast. The permanent, year-round population is just 95 people living in around 50 homes. Another 350 homes are used between December and February—by tourists hoping to see pinnipeds—[Sea lion sounds]—fur seals and sea lions that haul out on the town's rocky cape. In January alone, more than 30,000 tourists visit. What are the impacts of so many tourists on these marine mammals? Between 1996 and 2014, European and South American biologists monitored both the animals and the people to find out. Over that time span, the pinnipeds' tolerance for human disturbance declined. When annoyed, they move further away from the tourist viewing area or even dive back in the water to swim away. Those responses are contrary to the common assumption that wildlife becomes habituated to human activities. The study is in the journal Applied Animal Behaviour Science. [Carme Tuneu Corral, et al. Short- and long-term changes in the intensity of responses of pinnipeds to tourist approaches in Cabo Polonio, Uruguay.]The researchers think that a fence, initially constructed in the late 1990s, is to blame. It was built with good intentions, to keep people a safe distance from the colony. But the fence isn't long enough to keep people away from the most critical part of the habitat. It might even funnel people towards that area, as they try to find viewing spots closer than the fence would allow.Or it could be that the fence actually does its job keeping people away. But as a result, they are just far enough away that the animals never really get used to them.The truth is that pinnipeds seem to be doing well in Uruguay. While the amount of animals in the rookery varies day by day, the best estimate is there's now around a thousand of them—more than there were 20 years ago. But it's hard to say whether tourism has played any role in that increase. The animals have also become protected from hunting under Uruguayan law. And there are environmental factors at play in governing their population, like prey availability and climate change.Still, the study tells us two things. First, photographic wildlife tourism may not always be as low-impact as assumed. Second, ecotourism developers should get input from social psychologists: who can help anticipate the behaviors of the visiting humans, as they observe the behaviors of the native wildlife. —Jason G. Goldman  (The above text is a transcript of this podcast) 

Sea lions and fur seals in Uruguay have become a tourist attraction—but the animals have become less, not more, accepting of humans. Jason G. Goldman reports. 

Sea lions and fur seals in Uruguay have become a tourist attraction—but the animals have become less, not more, accepting of humans. Jason G. Goldman reports. 

In North America, many critters commonly encountered today—like wild turkeys or white-tailed deer—were brought back from near oblivion through conservation efforts led by hunters. Meanwhile, in Africa, some of the most charismatic species are now being hunted into extinction. But hunting can also have impacts that are far more subtle.Take the brown bear, known here in the U.S. as the grizzly. When large mammals like grizzlies are hunted, evolution might select for speedier lifecycles. That is, in order to successfully reproduce before they risk getting shot, bears might begin having cubs at a younger age. That change also allows them to reproduce more times throughout their lives. But that's not the only possible reaction to being hunted."The brown bear population in Sweden has been monitored for about 30 years. And researchers in Scandinavia have noticed that females started to change their reproductive strategies. They would observe that females would keep their cubs for longer periods of time nowadays."University of Sherbrooke biologist Joanie Van de Walle."Usually females give birth in January while in their den… But some females, rather than weaning their cubs after one year and a half, continue to care for them for an extra year."So some brown bear mothers in this population began to spend more time, not less, caring for their cubs."And we have seen that since 2005, the proportion of females that keep their cubs for two years and a half has increased dramatically. Nowadays, its about 36 percent of females that use that tactic, whereas before 2005, it was about only 7 percent or so."But that increased investment comes at a cost: by spending more time with their cubs, it takes longer before the mothers reproduce again. It seems as if evolution settled on a tradeoff: have fewer offspring, but invest more energy in their care. The finding is in the journal Nature Communications. [Joanie Van de Walle, et al. Hunting regulation favors slow life histories in a large carnivore.]And the change can be traced to Swedish hunting regulations. The law prohibits killing females if they are accompanied by cubs. So females that happen to have the urge for extra maternal care don't get shot—and this also gives the youngsters protection and guaranteed nutrition.The study underscores how different kinds of hunting regulations can lead to different outcomes for wild animals. This kind of knowledge helps wildlife managers ensure the long-term viability of wildlife populations, while also allowing for sustainable hunting—which itself can be a conservation tool.—Jason G. Goldman (The above text is a transcript of this podcast)

In North America, many critters commonly encountered today—like wild turkeys or white-tailed deer—were brought back from near oblivion through conservation efforts led by hunters. Meanwhile, in Africa, some of the most charismatic species are now being hunted into extinction. But hunting can also have impacts that are far more subtle.Take the brown bear, known here in the U.S. as the grizzly. When large mammals like grizzlies are hunted, evolution might select for speedier lifecycles. That is, in order to successfully reproduce before they risk getting shot, bears might begin having cubs at a younger age. That change also allows them to reproduce more times throughout their lives. But that's not the only possible reaction to being hunted."The brown bear population in Sweden has been monitored for about 30 years. And researchers in Scandinavia have noticed that females started to change their reproductive strategies. They would observe that females would keep their cubs for longer periods of time nowadays."University of Sherbrooke biologist Joanie Van de Walle."Usually females give birth in January while in their den… But some females, rather than weaning their cubs after one year and a half, continue to care for them for an extra year."So some brown bear mothers in this population began to spend more time, not less, caring for their cubs."And we have seen that since 2005, the proportion of females that keep their cubs for two years and a half has increased dramatically. Nowadays, its about 36 percent of females that use that tactic, whereas before 2005, it was about only 7 percent or so."But that increased investment comes at a cost: by spending more time with their cubs, it takes longer before the mothers reproduce again. It seems as if evolution settled on a tradeoff: have fewer offspring, but invest more energy in their care. The finding is in the journal Nature Communications. [Joanie Van de Walle, et al. Hunting regulation favors slow life histories in a large carnivore.]And the change can be traced to Swedish hunting regulations. The law prohibits killing females if they are accompanied by cubs. So females that happen to have the urge for extra maternal care don't get shot—and this also gives the youngsters protection and guaranteed nutrition.The study underscores how different kinds of hunting regulations can lead to different outcomes for wild animals. This kind of knowledge helps wildlife managers ensure the long-term viability of wildlife populations, while also allowing for sustainable hunting—which itself can be a conservation tool.—Jason G. Goldman (The above text is a transcript of this podcast)

Hunting regulations in Sweden prohibit killing brown bear mothers in company of cubs—causing mama bears to care for their young longer. Jason G. Goldman reports.

Add up every golf course, athletic field, industrial park, and yard in the U.S. and you have an area nearly the size of Florida. Upon first glance, all that lawn might seem a biological wasteland—a monoculture of grass. But while natural areas in the US continue to decrease thanks to urbanization, urban green spaces—including lawns—could become more important reservoirs of biodiversity. "What happens if we mow our lawns less? Do we get more lawn flowers? And if we get more lawn flowers, can we get more bees?"US Forest Service ecologist Susannah B. Lerman.She and her colleagues devised an experiment to see if front lawns could in theory provide decent habitat for bees – and if so, how to do it. So they recruited 16 homeowners from a Massachusetts suburb and monitored for flowers and bees throughout the summer for two years. Each of the homeowners agreed not to use any kind of pesticide or herbicide. And none had cultivated any sort of pollinator or vegetable garden that could skew the results. Some of the lawns were mowed weekly, some every other week, and others were mowed every three weeks."When we mowed the lawns less, we got more flowers, roughly two and a half times more. But it was those that we mowed every two weeks that had the most bees."No surprise, flowers were most abundant on the lawns mowed least often. But why do bees like a bit more frequent mowing? Lerman thinks that's because most of the bees she found were tiny native sweat bees, roughly the size of a grain of rice. Critters that small could find it difficult to navigate through the taller grasses.In all the researchers found 111 types of bees over the course of the study. That represents a quarter of all bee species known to occur in Massachusetts. "When you get down on your hands and knees, there's a lot going on in these lawns."So not only do lawns hold more biodiversity than it might seem, but it turns out that one way to manage them for wildlife is to be lazy—but not too lazy."A lot of people have been telling me that they feel vindicated now. That they have a realize to tell their neighbors why they're not mowing, it's for the bees…By mowing your lawns every two weeks or so, you're letting these flowers grow and bloom and they seem to be having a positive impact for bees."—Jason G. Goldman  (The above text is a transcript of this podcast) [Susanna B. Lerman, et al. To mow or to mow less: Lawn mowing frequency affects bee abundance and diversity in suburban yards.]

Lawns mowed every two weeks hosted more bees than lawns mowed every three weeks. Jason G. Goldman reports. 

Monarch butterflies depend on milkweed. They lay their eggs on milkweed, and their caterpillars eat only the leaves of the plant. No milkweed means no monarchs. So the best way to help declining monarch populations—and to preserve their epic, multi-generational migration—is to plant milkweed.Seems simple, right? But the reality is far more complicated.Milkweed is slightly toxic—the plant evolved its noxious substances to keep herbivores from chowing down on the leaves. But monarch butterflies evolved tolerance. In fact, they arm themselves with the stuff."Monarchs sequester these toxins as an anti-predator defense and anti-parasite defense."Louisiana State University biologist Matt Faldyn.So, by ingesting the toxin, the caterpillars become toxic themselves. That keeps them safe—as long as they don't ingest too much of the poison. The problem is there are different types of milkweed. And one that's native to the tropics is now growing in the southern U.S. As these plants sense warming temperatures, they produce more of the toxin—so much more that the monarch butterflies begin to suffer.To gauge the threat, Faldyn and his team raised monarchs on either the non-native tropical milkweed or on a native milkweed. And they also tested the effects of current environmental conditions as well as temperatures expected for the southern U.S. by the year 2080.Monarchs that ate native milkweed had comparable survival rates at both current and higher temperatures. But under those future warmer conditions, monarchs raised on the tropical milkweed survived at only one-fifth the rate of butterflies raised under current conditions.The monarchs could thus find themselves in what's known as an ecological trap. The butterflies seek out milkweed, but what is already the most common type of milkweed in the southern US will eventually kill them.The tropical species is prettier than the native ones, which is why many people prefer to plant it. But there's still time to change that."What we show is that maybe there should be more of a focus on having native species to your area preferentially planted in your gardens."By switching to the native species, home gardeners across the country can each do their part to ensure that monarch butterflies will avoid fluttering their way into the ecological trap—which could be fatal.—Jason G. Goldman(The above text is a transcript of this podcast)

Non-native milkweed species planted in the southern U.S. could harm monarch butterflies as temperatures rise. Jason G. Goldman reports.

听力原稿： As animals grow, the sounds they make change. But some sounds continue to change, even after an animal matures. That's true for humans, and now it turns out to be true for North Atlantic right whales, too.A member of the baleen family of whales, the endangered North Atlantic right whales spend most of their time along the eastern coast of North America from Canada's Bay of Fundy south to Florida.Syracuse University biologist Holly Root-Gutteridge analyzed recordings of whale calls to see if researchers could use those sounds to identify individual whales. In an audio program on a computer screen, a call has a particular shape."Staring at these calls all day, I started to notice they were changing. And then we looked a little bit harder at the data, and realized that they weren't just changing from being a little tiny baby to being a fair sized adult…but that they kept changing over time."Root-Gutteridge and her colleagues rounded up seventeen years' worth of whale recordings. In all, they gathered nearly a thousand calls from 49 individual whales between the ages of one month and 37 years.Like many other animals, the calls of the infants were both shorter and less structured than those of the adults. Mature whales produced calls that were clearer, longer, and more structurally complex. But the researchers also found that the calls continued to develop long after the whales reached sexual and physical maturity."Instead of just changing from the age of 0 to 15 when they're pretty much full-grown, they kept changing after the age of 15 and just kept going throughout their whole lives. Compared to say, a bird, where usually they get to their full-grown state and then they don't change these calls."The results were published in the journal Animal Behaviour. [Holly Root-Gutteridge, et al., A lifetime of changing calls: North Atlantic right whales, Eubalaena glacialis, refine call production as they age]"Well, it means that instead of having a completely instinctive reaction where they always make the same call in response to the same stimuli—a reflex, basically—that the whales are capable of changing what they're calling and how they're communicating. Which means that they may be thinking about what they call."In other words, understanding the calls of North Atlantic right whales might shed some light on the minds of North Atlantic right whales.In the meantime, scientists announced recently that they did not observe any newly born North Atlantic right whales this year—bad news for an already imperiled species. With luck, the work of biologists like Root-Gutteridge might offer insights that help us we try to help them survive.—Jason G. Goldman[The above text is a transcript of this podcast.][Final whale audio from Susan Parks, Syracuse University]

Ravens produce different types of calls depending on their age and sex—which might help ravens size up other individuals. Jason G. Goldman reports.

Ravens produce different types of calls depending on their age and sex—which might help ravens size up other individuals. Jason G. Goldman reports.

Areas of Kenya without large wildlife saw tick populations rise as much as 370 percent—meaning more danger to humans. Jason G. Goldman reports.

It takes months for members of a mongoose breeding society to trust newcomers with important tasks like watching for predators. Jason G. Goldman reports.

When sharks prowl shallow waters, fish quit foraging and hide—sparing seaweed from being grazed in those areas. Jason G. Goldman reports.

When sharks prowl shallow waters, fish quit foraging and hide—sparing seaweed from being grazed in those areas. Jason G. Goldman reports.

Coquí frogs are invasive species in Hawaii. But they don't seem to bug the islands' native and nonnative birds. Jason G. Goldman reports.

Coquí frogs are invasive species in Hawaii. But they don’t seem to bug the islands’ native and nonnative birds. Jason G. Goldman reports.

Guppies exposed to predators tend to aggregate into smaller, more tightly knit groups, which may allow them to coordinate their predator avoidance strategies. Jason G. Goldman reports.

Guppies exposed to predators tend to aggregate into smaller, more tightly knit groups, which may allow them to coordinate their predator avoidance strategies. Jason G. Goldman reports.

The critically endangered birds have done well in captive breeding, meaning they may be ready once more for wild living, and the repertoire of calls associated with it. Jason G. Goldman reports. 

The critically endangered birds have done well in captive breeding, meaning they may be ready once more for wild living, and the repertoire of calls associated with it. Jason G. Goldman reports. 

The cichlid, a small fish, has one of the most incredible visual systems known—which allows it to adapt to differently colored environments. Jason G. Goldman reports.

The cichlid, a small fish, has one of the most incredible visual systems known—which allows it to adapt to differently colored environments. Jason G. Goldman reports.

Some predators are attracted to the food in bird feeders, and end up targeting nestlings, too. Jason G. Goldman reports. 

Some predators are attracted to the food in bird feeders, and end up targeting nestlings, too. Jason G. Goldman reports. 

Alaskan river otters can gain valuable information about one another by sniffing around their latrines. Jason G. Goldman reports.

Alaskan river otters can gain valuable information about one another by sniffing around their latrines. Jason G. Goldman reports.

A new study suggests the best predictor of wildlife abundance in public lands is not human activity, but factors like forest connectivity and nearby housing density. Jason G. Goldman reports.

A new study suggests the best predictor of wildlife abundance in public lands is not human activity, but factors like forest connectivity and nearby housing density. Jason G. Goldman reports.

Science communicator Dr. Jason G. Goldman joins Cara to talk about the new discovery of an insect with a female "penis," how animals think and feel, and what it means to be both jewish and atheist. Follow Jason: @jgold85.

Dr. Jason G. Goldman is a cognitive scientist and science writer based in Los Angeles. He received his Ph.D. at the University of Southern California, where he conducted research at the intersection of developmental psychology and animal cognition. Subscribe at chrisryan.substack.com

Dr. Jason G. Goldman is a cognitive scientist and science writer based in Los Angeles. He received his Ph.D. at the University of Southern California, where he conducted research at the intersection of developmental psychology and animal cognition.