Morphing molecule may shine in high-resolution screens


Shape-shifting molecules that emit primary colours have been mixed to create a rainbow of hues for the first time. This morphing ensures that the colours are crisp and clear, potentially giving the molecules a future in high-resolution displays.


Modern displays use bundles of micrometre-sized pixels of each primary colour – red, green and blue – to create a range of colours. But even such small pixels become noticeable on devices that are held close to the user's face, such as smartphones, computer screens and virtual reality headsets. To get round this, researchers are attempting to make pixels the size of a molecule.


All molecules absorb and emit light at certain wavelengths based on their structure. Single molecules that emit red, green or blue light have been made before, but blending them is a challenge. A mixture of blue and red ends up looking red, for example, because the high-energy blue light gets absorbed by red molecules and re-emitted as lower energy red light.


Elegant solution


To fix this, Soo-Young Park of Seoul National University in South Korea and colleagues have made coloured molecules that can each have two structures. Exposing one of these molecules to ultraviolet light boosts its energy level, but this new excited state is unstable so the molecule morphs into its alternate structure. The still-excited molecule then emits a photon at the desired wavelength and relaxes, shifting back to its original form. This duality means light emitted by one molecule won't be absorbed by its neighbours.


By mixing the molecules, the team was able to produce dyes and plastic films that appear clear under normal light but shine in a range of colours under UV light. The films can also fluoresce when a current flows through them, making them suitable for use as organic LEDs, larger versions of which are found in many modern screens.


Since the dyes don't emit colour unless exposed to UV or electricity, they could also prove useful for drawing security marks or even printing hidden photos on credit cards and other objects, says Park.


"It's quite elegant," says John de Mello at Imperial College London, who was not involved in the study. But he believes there is still room for improvement. Red light is at the furthest end of the spectrum from UV, he says, and the current version of the red molecule must absorb 30 times more UV light than the other colours to create equivalent levels of brightness.


Journal reference: Journal of the American Chemical Society, DOI: 10.1021/ja404256s


If you would like to reuse any content from New Scientist, either in print or online, please contact the syndication department first for permission. New Scientist does not own rights to photos, but there are a variety of licensing options available for use of articles and graphics we own the copyright to.



Have your say

Only subscribers may leave comments on this article. Please log in.


Only personal subscribers may leave comments on this article


Subscribe now to comment.




All comments should respect the New Scientist House Rules. If you think a particular comment breaks these rules then please use the "Report" link in that comment to report it to us.


If you are having a technical problem posting a comment, please contact technical support.




NASA's upcoming astronaut capsule has hints of Apollo


A flashback to the space future (Image: NASA/Robert Markowitz)


For an out-of-this-world commute, you need a perfectly tricked-out vehicle. With sky-blue LED lighting and seating for seven, this space capsule certainly fits the bill.


This photo gives a glimpse inside of the CST-100, a commercial crew capsule being built by Boeing with support from NASA, which aims to restore the US's ability to independently launch astronauts into space.


The full-scale mock-up of the capsule recently underwent a day-long series of tests by two NASA astronauts. The purpose of the tests was to see how the astronauts were able to work with the space and equipment available before the design is finalised.


Don't be fooled by its retro, Apollo-like exterior appearance – the CST-100 uses the latest technology, including enhanced thermal protection for that long drop back through the atmosphere and touchscreen tablets to replace the sea of buttons seen in space capsules of yore.


"What you're not going to find is 1100 or 1600 switches," says Chris Ferguson, a former astronaut and director of Boeing's commercial crew development programme. "We don't want to burden [the astronauts] with an inordinate amount of training to fly this vehicle. We want it to be intuitive."


The project is funded by NASA in its bid to get the US back in the astronaut transport business after it retired the shuttle programme in July 2011. Currently, US astronauts are dependent on Russia's Soyuz capsules. The US forks out $71 million (£46 million) per seat to reach the International Space Station.


Boeing has plans to test the CST-100 in 2016 in a crewed, three-day orbital flight, riding an Atlas V rocket into space. The capsule will attempt to dock with the ISS in 2017 – as long as NASA gets the funding from the US Congress.


NASA is also funding the development of Boeing's rivals: the Sierra Nevada Corporation's Dream Chaser spaceplane and SpaceX's Dragon spacecraft. Dragon is already powering ahead, charged with delivering crucial supplies to the ISS, having first successfully docked with it in May 2012.


If you would like to reuse any content from New Scientist, either in print or online, please contact the syndication department first for permission. New Scientist does not own rights to photos, but there are a variety of licensing options available for use of articles and graphics we own the copyright to.



Have your say

Only subscribers may leave comments on this article. Please log in.


Only personal subscribers may leave comments on this article


Subscribe now to comment.




All comments should respect the New Scientist House Rules. If you think a particular comment breaks these rules then please use the "Report" link in that comment to report it to us.


If you are having a technical problem posting a comment, please contact technical support.




Today on New Scientist




Teen jabs to prevent cervical cancer stall in US

Only 33 per cent of eligible US girls are getting all the vaccinations to protect them from human papillomavirus, well short of the 80 per cent target




Wacky spaces: The odd orbits that boost rocket trips

Go direct or take the scenic route? Whether you're taking a trip to the space station or into deep space, it's a dilemma for space travellers too




DNA fails to take off

Even crucial science doesn't necessarily translate into an exciting exhibition, to judge by Genome: Unlocking life's code, an exhibition in Washington DC




Natural chemical boosts organ regeneration

A group of acids found in the body can help heal wounds and boost organs regeneration after surgery




Monogamy evolved to keep baby-killers away

Males and females of most mammal species don't stay together for life, but many primates do. We now have a good idea what drove them to evolve monogamy




Crocodiles may need their fruity five-a-day

At least half of all species of alligator and crocodile supplement their meaty diet with the flesh of fruit, but is it because they eat fruit-loving prey?




Shiny new teeth concocted from mice and human urine

Human stem cells from urine have been coaxed to develop into teeth inside the kidneys of mice




NASA rushes spacesuit repair kit to space station

In the astronaut's answer to ordering from the hardware store, NASA delivered tools and spare parts to help fix a suit that sprang a leak earlier this month




Mummified Inca child sacrifice gives up her secrets

Chemical analysis of the hair of the 13-year-old "Llullaillaco Maiden" reveals that drugs and alcohol played an important role in her last months


If you would like to reuse any content from New Scientist, either in print or online, please contact the syndication department first for permission. New Scientist does not own rights to photos, but there are a variety of licensing options available for use of articles and graphics we own the copyright to.



Have your say

Only subscribers may leave comments on this article. Please log in.


Only personal subscribers may leave comments on this article


Subscribe now to comment.




All comments should respect the New Scientist House Rules. If you think a particular comment breaks these rules then please use the "Report" link in that comment to report it to us.


If you are having a technical problem posting a comment, please contact technical support.




Teen jabs to prevent cervical cancer stall in US


Rwanda doesn't do many things better than the US, but in some ways it protects its teenage girls better. It is more than twice as successful as the US at vaccinating girls against human papillomavirus (HPV), which can lead to cervical cancer.


"Our vaccination rate is stuck at one-third of our teen girls, yet Rwanda has vaccinated more than 80 per cent of its target population," says Tom Frieden, director of the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), which has released new figures on the US vaccination rate.


In 2012, only 33 per cent of eligible girls had all three doses needed for maximum protection, well short of the 80 per cent target. The CDC warns that unless uptake improves, there will be 1400 unnecessary deaths from cervical cancer each year.


Frieden said that a continuing worry among parents is that the jab will tempt their daughters to engage in risky sex. "HPV vaccine does not open the door to sex," he said. "It closes the door to cancer."


Questionnaires to parents and doctors as part of a survey of 19,000 girls showed that parents often misunderstand that to be fully effective, the jab is necessary in girls aged only 11 or 12, before they're sexually active.


And doctors are not proactively offering the jab, even though they have opportunities to do so when girls visit for other routine vaccinations.


Despite this, Frieden said the vaccine is already working. In June, the CDC released results of another study showing that rates of infection with the virus had halved from 11 to 5 per cent since introduction of the vaccine.


If you would like to reuse any content from New Scientist, either in print or online, please contact the syndication department first for permission. New Scientist does not own rights to photos, but there are a variety of licensing options available for use of articles and graphics we own the copyright to.



Have your say

Only subscribers may leave comments on this article. Please log in.


Only personal subscribers may leave comments on this article


Subscribe now to comment.




All comments should respect the New Scientist House Rules. If you think a particular comment breaks these rules then please use the "Report" link in that comment to report it to us.


If you are having a technical problem posting a comment, please contact technical support.




Wacky spaces: The odd orbits that boost rocket trips


ON HER second morning in space, Anousheh Ansari was filled with excitement. She slipped out of her sleeping bag and somersaulted effortlessly through the Soyuz spacecraft. Then it all went horribly wrong.


Her head and back throbbed with pain owing to the effects of weightlessness. Even the slightest movement made her feel sick. The joy of watching Earth spin was replaced with a much stronger emotion. The telecoms entrepreneur, who had paid $20 million to become one of the first space tourists, couldn't wait to get off.


Leaving wasn't an option, of course. Ansari had to tough out the rest of the 50-hour journey rolled up in a sleeping bag with her head pushed against cargo destined for the International Space Station (ISS).


That was back in 2006 when a trip to the ISS took two days and involved 34 laps around Earth. Earlier this year, though, ...


To continue reading this article, subscribe to receive access to all of newscientist.com, including 20 years of archive content.



DNA fails to take off


For every dollar invested in the Human Genome Project, $141 was returned to the US economy (Image: Donald E. Hurlbert and James di Loreto/Smithsonian)


Even crucial science doesn't necessarily translate into an exciting exhibition, to judge by Genome: Unlocking life's code, an exhibition in Washington DC


Genome: Unlocking life's code, National Museum of Natural History, Washington DC, until 1 September 2014, then across North America


WHITE, filamentous and twisted into a 25-millimetre-long glass test tube, the dehydrated DNA is not much to look at. Yet it unites humans, animals, plants, fungi and microorganisms, making them what they are.


The humble jar sits in a corner of the Smithsonian Institution's National Museum of Natural History in Washington DC. It is part of a new exhibition called Genome: Unlocking Life's Code, dedicated to efforts to understand the code in those frail strings.


The timing could hardly be more perfect, according to Eric Green, director of the National Human Genome Research Institute in Bethesda, Maryland, and the scientist behind the exhibition. It is 60 years since James Watson and Francis Crick discovered DNA's structure, and 10 years since the completion of the US's $3.8-billion Human Genome Project (HGP).


But building an engaging show around something that is crucial and yet fundamentally unexciting to look at is a brave and problematic endeavour. The 7 million people who flock annually to the most visited natural history museum on Earth are savvy folk, expecting surprise and sophistication. Even a mannequin imprinted with glowing As, Cs, Ts and Gs – representing the four nucleic acid bases that make up DNA – pales in comparison to a giant squid on another floor.


That said, the organisers try hard to compensate for the visual shortcomings of their subject, offering lessons in how the human genome relates to our health, medicine and ethics, and how the genomes of humans and other creatures compare.


The taxpayer-funded HGP was controversial from its inception in 1990. Scientists promised that mapping the 3.2 billion base pairs that comprise the human genome would help doctors cure disease. Yet people worried about eugenics and designer babies – or that the project would fail to deliver at all.


It is only now that the HGP's leaders can brag about its successes. At the exhibition's opening last month, Francis Collins, director of the National Institutes of Health and leader of the HGP, said that for every dollar invested in the project, $141 was returned to the US economy. He added that we now know the genetic basis for around 5000 disorders, compared with a handful when the project started.


The public can judge whether it was worth the money by watching a series of videos documenting life-changing improvements. For example, one shows a pair of twins and their parents explaining how the twins seemed to have cerebral palsy, until genetic sequencing revealed they had dopa-responsive dystonia, a rare, treatable condition.


Visitors can also use a touchscreen to explore what might happen if a family with a massively overweight baby opts to have the child's genes sequenced. The test reveals a rare, unnamed genetic condition that can only be treated with a tailored diet. If the parents don't opt for the test, the baby will gain weight even on a drastic, sugar-free diet.


With all this potential, the public may want to understand how the human genome actually works. But here the explanations flounder. The genome is presented as a stack of papers with As, Cs, Ts and Gs printed out across them. Below, a drawing shows that a full printout of all the 3.2 billion letters in the genome would approach the height of the Washington Monument – about 169 metres.


And elsewhere, biodiversity is depicted using pillars of sand, with each grain representing a letter of the genetic code. An amoeba's pillar, for example, reaches close to the ceiling, with 670 billion letters, while a far shorter pillar next to it illustrates humanity's 3.2 billion letters. But with no obvious explanation of why size doesn't correlate with complexity, visitors will probably come away mystified.


Taxpayers have a right to hear about research they fund. But in an age of multiple media, curators and outreach specialists ought to worry more about the fit between subject and format. In the case of the genome, might they have done better to make a film, or use virtual or augmented reality to make their points?


Either way, the exhibition's schedule affords plenty of time for changes.


This article appeared in print under the headline "Why DNA is a tough sell"


Issue 2927 of New Scientist magazine


  • New Scientist

  • Not just a website!

  • Subscribe to New Scientist and get:

  • New Scientist magazine delivered every week

  • Unlimited online access to articles from over 500 back issues

  • Subscribe Now and Save




If you would like to reuse any content from New Scientist, either in print or online, please contact the syndication department first for permission. New Scientist does not own rights to photos, but there are a variety of licensing options available for use of articles and graphics we own the copyright to.



Have your say

Only subscribers may leave comments on this article. Please log in.


Only personal subscribers may leave comments on this article


Subscribe now to comment.




All comments should respect the New Scientist House Rules. If you think a particular comment breaks these rules then please use the "Report" link in that comment to report it to us.


If you are having a technical problem posting a comment, please contact technical support.




Natural chemical boosts organ regeneration


Your body naturally contains a chemical that can boost organ regeneration and speed up wound healing.


Epoxyeicosatrienoic acids (EETs) help new blood vessels to form, so Dipak Panigrahy at Harvard Medical School in Boston and colleagues wondered whether they might also accelerate other types of growth. To find out, they injected mice with EETs straight after the surgical removal of a lung or part of their liver.


Four days later, treated mice had 23 per cent more tissue growth in their remaining lung or 46 per cent more liver growth compared with mice that had received a placebo injection. Applying EETs to wounds in mice shortened healing time.


The team also showed that EET concentrations in blood trebled in the week after human liver donors had undergone surgery.


"This looks promising," says Dan Weiss, who studies lung regeneration at the University of Vermont in Burlington.


"EETs have been overlooked in regeneration schemes, so this might provide a window of opportunity."


Journal reference: PNAS, DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1311565110


If you would like to reuse any content from New Scientist, either in print or online, please contact the syndication department first for permission. New Scientist does not own rights to photos, but there are a variety of licensing options available for use of articles and graphics we own the copyright to.



Have your say

Only subscribers may leave comments on this article. Please log in.


Only personal subscribers may leave comments on this article


Subscribe now to comment.




All comments should respect the New Scientist House Rules. If you think a particular comment breaks these rules then please use the "Report" link in that comment to report it to us.


If you are having a technical problem posting a comment, please contact technical support.




Monogamy evolved to keep baby-killers away


Why stick with just one member of the opposite sex when there are so many to choose from?


Love and tax breaks may be the reasons we cite today, but our primate ancestors had other motivations. Preventing a newborn from being killed by an unrelated male was top of the list.


Social monogamy – when a male and female of the species stick together for the long term, although may mate with others – is rare in mammals generally. However, it occurs in over a quarter of primate species, including humans, gibbons and many New World monkeys, such as titis.


To investigate what originally drove us to establish such pair bonds, a team led by Kit Opie of University College London and Susanne Shultz from the University of Manchester, UK, gathered data on the mating behaviour of 230 primate species. They selected behavioural traits associated with several possible evolutionary drivers of monogamy, including the risk of infanticide, the need for paternal care and the potential for guarding female mates.


Using data on the genetic relationships between the species, the team ran millions of computer simulations of the evolution of these traits to work out which came first.


All three were linked to the evolution of monogamy but only behaviours associated with infanticide actually preceded it, suggesting that this was the driver. Suckling infants are most likely to be killed by unrelated males, in order to bring the mother back into ovulation.


With pair-bonding in place, not only would a mother have a male to help protect the infant from marauding males, but there would then be the opportunity for the male to help care for it by providing extra resources. This means the infant can be weaned earlier, again reducing the chance of it being killed.


"Until recently, reconstructing how behaviour evolves has been very tricky as there are few behavioural traces in the fossil record. The statistical approach we have used allows us to bring the fossils to life and to understand the factors that have led to the evolution of monogamy in humans and other primates," says Shultz.


Carel van Schaik, a primatologist at the University of Zurich in Switzerland says the results are solid but questions whether they can be extrapolated to humans. He says evidence suggests that humans were never really monogamous and that the monogamy we see today in many cultures is socially imposed.


Shultz counters that there is fossil evidence pointing to monogamy in australopithecines, the hominin genus from which modern humans descended.


"Although we suggest that infanticide may help explain the evolution of monogamy in humans, we do not argue that it is the only factor nor that monogamy is universal," Shultz says. "I would suggest that where infanticide risk is high, as it would be with our ancestors, having a father provide protection and care would facilitate the evolution of the modern human extended childhood."


Journal reference: PNAS, DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1307903110


If you would like to reuse any content from New Scientist, either in print or online, please contact the syndication department first for permission. New Scientist does not own rights to photos, but there are a variety of licensing options available for use of articles and graphics we own the copyright to.



Have your say

Only subscribers may leave comments on this article. Please log in.


Only personal subscribers may leave comments on this article


Subscribe now to comment.




All comments should respect the New Scientist House Rules. If you think a particular comment breaks these rules then please use the "Report" link in that comment to report it to us.


If you are having a technical problem posting a comment, please contact technical support.




Crocodiles may need their fruity five-a-day


Even crocodiles need their five a day, it seems. At least half of all species of alligator and crocodile supplement their meaty diet with the flesh of fruit.


Reports that crocodiles have a taste for fruit go back decades, says Thomas Rainwater at the US Fish and Wildlife Service in Charleston, South Carolina. "But since these animals were long considered carnivores, no one paid much attention."


In a routine analysis of American alligators (Alligator mississippiensis) living in the Everglades National Park in Florida, Rainwater and his colleagues found fruit including pond apples in the alligators' stomachs. They then turned up reports that at least 13 of the 23 living crocodilian species are fruit eaters.


Whether or not crocodilians actively go after fruit is debatable – especially as the predators are secretive and tend to do most of their foraging at night. A crocodile might simply eat an animal that has itself recently dined on fruit, for example.


Watermelon lover


But there is some evidence that fruit is consumed deliberately, too. Last year a researcher working in south-east Asia reported seeing a wild Siamese crocodile tucking into a watermelon. Perhaps, like grinding stones in a bird's crop, the heavy seeds of some fruits may help the animals digest their meatier meals.


Crocodilians roam and swim over large areas, so could they be important seed dispersal agents? "As far as we can tell, there are no plants that rely exclusively on crocodilians as dispersal agents," says Rainwater. Indeed, saurochory – the act of seed dispersal by reptiles – has largely been ignored by researchers, he says. "But given the number of seeds we have found in some stomachs, we suspect they may be important for some wetland species."


Carlos Herrera at the DoƱana Biological Station in Seville, Spain, who has studied fruit-eating in carnivorous mammals, says the results make sense. "Whenever sufficient attention is paid, nearly all vertebrates are found to ingest seeds of fleshy-fruited plants at one time or another, either deliberately or accidentally," he says.


Journal reference: Journal of Zoology, doi.org/m9x


If you would like to reuse any content from New Scientist, either in print or online, please contact the syndication department first for permission. New Scientist does not own rights to photos, but there are a variety of licensing options available for use of articles and graphics we own the copyright to.



Have your say

Only subscribers may leave comments on this article. Please log in.


Only personal subscribers may leave comments on this article


Subscribe now to comment.




All comments should respect the New Scientist House Rules. If you think a particular comment breaks these rules then please use the "Report" link in that comment to report it to us.


If you are having a technical problem posting a comment, please contact technical support.




Shiny new teeth concocted from mice and human urine


Is a missing tooth ruining your smile? Here's an unlikely recipe for cooking up a replacement – with the help of a mouse and some of your own urine.


Duanqing Pei from the Chinese Academy of Sciences in Guangzhou and colleagues took stem cells from human urine and used them to grow teeth inside mouse kidneys. The stem cells, implanted under the outer layer of the mouse's kidney, transformed into dental epithelial tissue, which develops into the enamel, while the rest of each tooth was formed from mouse cells.


Pei claims that a method for using mice to grow teeth containing only human cells "could be easily designed".


The work is promising but figuring out what governs the size and shape of different teeth is going to be a big problem in making it useful, says Mark Bartold from the University of Adelaide in Australia, who works on regenerative dental medicine. "It doesn't take a genius to figure out there's a big difference between an incisor and a molar tooth," he says. "That's going to be very tricky, because we don't really fully understand what's involved in that development."


Pei agrees, but says having natural replacement teeth available to fit into the right slots in the mouth may be of benefit. He also notes that the teeth his team grew were a bit softer than real teeth, which might be because they were not being used as they grew. "We do not have the physical stimulations found in the mouth," he says.


Bartold says there are already very good titanium dental implants available today, but the work is still useful as it could help us understand the development of teeth, which could in turn boost other areas of regenerative medicine. "The tooth, believe it or not, for decades has been used as a wonderful tool for understanding development biology," he says.


Pei and colleagues agree, writing that the tooth represents "one of the best models in organogensis".


But why did they grow the teeth from cells in urine? "This is the most convenient source," says Pei.


Journal reference: Cell Regeneration, in press


If you would like to reuse any content from New Scientist, either in print or online, please contact the syndication department first for permission. New Scientist does not own rights to photos, but there are a variety of licensing options available for use of articles and graphics we own the copyright to.



Have your say

Only subscribers may leave comments on this article. Please log in.


Only personal subscribers may leave comments on this article


Subscribe now to comment.




All comments should respect the New Scientist House Rules. If you think a particular comment breaks these rules then please use the "Report" link in that comment to report it to us.


If you are having a technical problem posting a comment, please contact technical support.