New Delhi, As tuberculosis (TB) continues as the deadliest infectious cause of deaths globally, a new study has shown that artificial intelligence (AI)-enabled digital stethoscopes can help fill critical screening gaps, especially in hard-to-reach areas.
AI-powered digital stethoscopes show promise in bridging screening gaps
New Delhi, As tuberculosis (TB) continues as the deadliest infectious cause of deaths globally, a new study has shown that artificial intelligence (AI)-enabled digital stethoscopes can help fill critical screening gaps, especially in hard-to-reach areas.
Surgeons Perform First-Ever Surgery for Critically-Endangered Monkey Weeks Before She Gave Birth


Masaya at the Liverpool Vet. Hospital where she underwent surgery – credit, Chester Zoo via SWNSHe Made a Battery Pack Using Disposable Vapes to Power His Electric Car (WATCH)
Chris Doel powers electric car with disposable vape batteries – SWNS
Credit: Pablo Merchán Montes for Unsplash+Elusive Nightjar Populations Doubled in 5 Years, a ‘Remarkable Comeback’ Conservationists Say

EV Charging Answer: Quantum Technology Will Cut Time it Takes to Charge Electric Cars to Just 9 Seconds
Institute for Basic ScienceGreat Lakes Otters Are a Conservation Success Story with Populations Flourishing in US and Ontario

Chimps’ Love for Crystals Could Help Us Understand Our Own Ancestors’ Fascination with These Stones


The future remains bleak for corals – but not all reefs are doomed
A recent report on global tipping points warned that coral reefs face widespread dieback and have reached a point from which they cannot recover.
But in our new research, we show this might not be the case for some reefs if corals can gain tolerance to rising temperatures, or if we can cut greenhouse gas emissions and restore reefs with heat-tolerant corals at scale.
Nevertheless, the outlook likely remains bleak.
Coral reefs provide habitat for thousands of other species in tropical oceans. They deliver economic value through fisheries and tourism and provide shoreline protection from storm surges and extreme weather by dampening the impact of waves.
However, coral reefs are vulnerable to the effects of climate change. Our study combines previously published assessments of climate impacts on different coral reefs and reviews the scientific consensus to examine how long reef structures could persist as climate change intensifies.
Ocean warming, acidification, darkening and deoxygenation all threaten the persistence of coral reefs. Ocean warming brings marine heatwaves, which are the leading cause of mass coral bleaching that has led to a global decline in coral cover.
Corals are animals that house microalgae within their tissues that provide sugar in exchange for nitrogen. When temperatures become too hot, corals expel these symbiotic microalgae, leaving behind white skeletons.
Ocean acidification reduces the ability of corals to build their skeletons through a process called calcification. Warming, darkening and deoxygenation can also reduce calcification.
Coral reefs are built by adding calcium carbonate, coming mostly from corals but also coralline algae and other calcareous seaweeds. But as the ocean’s pH (a measure of acidity) is reduced, processes called bio-erosion and dissolution act to remove calcium carbonate.
Our meta-analysis examined how climate change affects the calcification and bio-erosion of coral reefs and we then applied these results to a global data set of reef growth.
There is no scientific consensus on which organisms will build future coral reefs. We explore four most likely scenarios:
1. Present-day extreme reefs represent the future of coral reefs. These are locations where temperatures are already warmer, waters are becoming more acidic and oxygen has dropped to conditions similar to those expected at the end of the century. These reefs are dominated by coralline algae and slow-growing heat-resistant corals.
Some reefs already experience conditions expected at the end of the century. Steeve Comeau, CC BY-NC-ND2. Presently degraded reefs take over future reefs. These reefs are dominated by bio-eroders such as sponges and sea urchins and have low coral cover.
3. Corals can gain heat tolerance to an extent that keeps pace with low to moderate greenhouse gas emissions scenarios. Under these scenarios, only about 36% of global corals would be lost and there would be a moderate reduction in growth. These heat-tolerant reefs are dominated by faster growing corals with symbiotic microalgae that can evolve heat tolerance.
4. Reefs where restoration practices include using heat-tolerant corals that can then disperse to other regions. These restored reefs would have lower coral cover in remote regions lacking restoration or with unsuccessful restoration practices. This kind of reef restoration would need to cover half of global coral reefs to maintain net growth – an unlikely scenario.
We found coral reefs transition to net erosion under all scenarios, even under low to moderate greenhouse gas emissions, meaning they are dissolving or being eaten faster than they can grow. Only reefs with heat-tolerant corals could prevent this from occurring.
The next step for the scientific community is to determine which reefs can persist in the future using global efforts to combine information. The major issues is that we are missing measurements from large parts of the Pacific, and we do not know how deoxygenation or coastal darkening will impact coral reefs. The processes of reef bioerosion and dissolution are also poorly described.
Although the climate has been altered to the point of threatening the future survival of coral reefs, their fate is not doomed yet if we act now.
Another question is how long reef structures will persist after living corals are removed. We do not have an answer yet. It will take global efforts to rapidly obtain these measurements to better manage and protect coral reefs before climate change intensifies.
It is up to governments everywhere, including New Zealand, to better support these initiatives before it is too late.![]()
Christopher Cornwall, Lecturer in Marine Biology, Te Herenga Waka — Victoria University of Wellington and Orlando Timmerman, Doctoral Candidate in Earth Sciences, University of Cambridge
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
Animals can talk over huge distances – but humans might be changing their range
Animals are noisy. And their noises can travel a long way.
But making sounds can be a double-edged sword: it can help them communicate, sometimes over long distances, but it can also reveal them to predators.
In new research published in the Journal of Mammalian Evolution, my colleague and I studied how far the sounds of 103 different mammal species travel, and discovered some surprising patterns.
What’s more, these patterns hint at an overlooked impact humans may be having on our fellow creatures: not only changing their sonic landscapes through our own noise, but also changing the world their sounds are travelling through, with unknown effects.
What’s happening in the water?
In aquatic mammals, the relationship between the size of an animal and the farthest distance its call travels is simple. Bigger animals can be heard farther away.
On a perfect day in perfect conditions, the call of a blue whale (the largest animal in history) can travel up to 1,600 kilometres. Its (slightly smaller) cousin the fin whale can be heard over a similar distance.
These are the longest-travelling animal sounds ever reported.
What’s happening on land?
On land, the story is very different. Environmental factors are crucial to how far the sound of a terrestrial mammal travels.
Things that matter include the size of an animal’s home range (the area in which it lives and defends resources), whether a call is territorial (to defend against other animals), whether the environment is open versus densely vegetated, and if the animal is very social or solitary.
Lions call to announce their presence in the landscape and to defend territories. Ben JJ Walker / UNSW Sydney, CC BY-NC-ND
How does this work?
Our research is centred around the idea that your sound reveals you to predators, and that revelation leads to a higher risk of injury and death (potentially before you pass on your genes, and hence reducing what evolutionary biologists call “fitness”). This would be because the predator can more quickly locate its calling prey.
There is a delicate balance between using sounds to communicate and using sounds in the wrong place and at the wrong time.
If sound is revealed at the wrong distance, it may mess up the reason an animal uses the sound in the first place.
Animals that cannot adapt to changes in the sound environment may reveal themselves and be eaten, or may be unable to find their friends.
Where does this fit?
In the midst of human-induced environmental and species change, understanding how animals use sounds to communicate and find each other has become valuable to conservation. Many ecosystems are being cleared on land to make way for development and agriculture.
Our finding that land mammals in closed habitats have evolved to have relatively farther sound distances is important because of what happens when the environment changes.
If a possum has evolved in a eucalyptus forest, for example, and the forest is cleared, its sounds will travel farther (because there are fewer trees to muffle it). As a result, the possum may reveal itself to a predator when it doesn’t mean to.
This in turn means the animal’s call leaves it more exposed than it “should” in evolutionary terms. The animal may not have the same tools to escape predators that animals evolved for open environments do, and so may be more easily eaten.
What are humans doing?
Many species have reduced in body size due to things like harvesting activities and climate change.
It’s a well documented fact that many whale species have been getting smaller as a result of human whaling activities and environmental impacts.
Since 1981, for example, the length of northern right whales has become about 7% smaller. Among gray whales, animals born in 2020 are estimated to be 1.65 metres shorter than animals born in the 1980s.
Given our finding that larger body sizes mean farther-travelling sounds in aquatic mammals, smaller whales may not be able to be heard as far away.
This means that when smaller whales call to their friends or family members, their calls may not reach these individuals over the enormous distances the species travel.
What can humans change?
Our findings add a new dimension to our understanding of how humans are affecting animals, and may help inform future conservation decisions.
Do they mean anything in our everyday lives?
For one thing, they remind us to take a moment to listen to the world around us.
We might find out where an animal is. We might observe a new species.
We might even find a quiet space in the landscapes around us to sit and connect again with the world and ourselves.![]()
Ben JJ Walker, Researcher, UNSW Sydney
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
Triceratops Had Huge Nose to Control its Body Temperature, Suggests Curious Scientist
Seishiro Tada with fossilized Triceratops – SWNS
SWNSMicrobes in Antarctica survive the freezing and dark winter by living on air
Ry Holland, Monash University
Winter in Antarctica is long and dark. Temperatures remain well below freezing. In many places, the Sun sets in April and does not rise above the horizon again until August. Without sunlight, photosynthetic life such as plants, mosses and algae cannot make energy.
But that’s not to say all life stops.
In a new study published in The ISME Journal, my colleagues and I show that Antarctic microbes make energy from the air at temperatures as low as –20°C. This finding improves our understanding of how life survives at temperature extremes in Antarctica – and how climate change will affect this important process.
How to make energy from air
In 2017, scientists showed that a large number of Antarctic microbes can generate energy from atmospheric gases present at very low concentrations.
This process is called “aerotrophy”. By using enzymes that are very finely tuned to “sniff out” the hydrogen and carbon monoxide in the atmosphere, these microbes have found a way to make energy from the air itself – a huge advantage in Antarctica’s nutrient-poor desert soils.
What remained unknown until now was the temperature limits of this process. Could aerotrophy be a way to power the continent’s soil communities through the winter?
Measuring how quickly these microbes consume such a small amount of fuel can be difficult.
From 2022–24, we collected surface soil samples from different areas across East Antarctica and analysed them in our lab.
We measured how quickly they can use the atmospheric gases. We also extracted all the DNA from the soil microbes and sequenced it. This tells us what microbes are present, what genes they have, and what they are capable of using as energy sources.
We showed aerotrophy happening in the lab at representative summer (4°C) and winter (–20°C) temperatures. This means hydrogen and carbon monoxide are a viable food source not just over the summer months, but year-round. What was even more surprising though, was the upper temperature limit.
Soil temperatures in Antarctica rarely rise above 20°C. Yet we found microbes in these soils that continued to generate energy from hydrogen up to a staggering 75°C. It seems as though microbes in Antarctic soils are well adapted to the continent’s cold temperatures, but not restricted to them. It’s a bit like seeing a penguin thrive in a tropical jungle.
We also wanted to see this process occurring in Antarctica itself, so two years ago we brought the lab down south. We collected fresh soil samples, sealed them in the glass vials, and took gas samples.
For the first time, it was clear that under real-world conditions these soil microbes were still munching their way through hydrogen.
DNA sequencing has showed us that the vast majority of microbes in Antarctic soils encode the genes to gain energy from hydrogen. Many of these bacteria also have genes to take carbon from the atmosphere.
These aerotrophs are “primary producers”, generating new biomass from the air itself.
In most land-based ecosystems, photosynthesis is thought to be the bottom of the food chain. Photosynthesis takes energy from sunlight and carbon from the atmosphere and turns it into yummy organic compounds.
It’s what makes plants grow. Plants are primary producers that are eaten by herbivores, which are then eaten by carnivores.
In Antarctica’s desert soils, photosynthesis is relatively rare. Instead, we hypothesise that aerotrophy fulfils the primary producer role in many places.
This makes sense because, unlike sunlight-dependent photosythesis, we now know that aerotrophy can happen year-round. Another benefit is that it doesn’t require liquid water, whereas photosynthesis does.
Aerotrophy clearly has an important role in Antarctic ecosystems. So next, we wanted to determine how global warming might affect this process.
Under low-emissions scenarios, we predict a 4% increase in how quickly aerotrophs use atmospheric hydrogen. Under very high-emissions scenarios, this increase rises to 35%. The numbers are similar for carbon monoxide.
Although hydrogen isn’t a greenhouse gas itself, it is important because it affects how long some greenhouse gases, including methane, hang around in the atmosphere.
Soils (including the microbes that live in them) are responsible for 82% of all hydrogen consumed on Earth globally. In other words, they are a hydrogen sink. This is a crucial component in the global hydrogen cycle.
There are a lot of factors that determine how microorganisms will respond to climate change. Temperature is just one of them. This study is an important piece of the puzzle as scientists figure out how resilient Antarctica’s unique microbal ecosystems are.![]()
Ry Holland, Research Fellow in Microbial Ecology, Monash University
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
Multiple Types of Plastic Are Turned into Vinegar Using Sunlight-Powered Process Without Emissions

AI could help us more accurately screen for breast cancer – new research
Sasun Bughdaryan/Unsplash
Carolyn Nickson, University of Sydney; The University of Melbourne and Bruce Mann, The University of MelbourneAt least 20,000 Australian women are diagnosed with breast cancer each year. And more than 3,300 die from the disease.
To save women’s lives, we need to detect breast cancer early. Breast screening, which halves women’s risk of dying from breast cancer, is key to that.
A new Australian study published today in The Lancet Digital Health suggests AI could help improve how we screen for breast cancer.
How do we currently screen for breast cancer?
Since 1992, Australia has offered free breast X-rays, known as mammograms, every two years to women aged between 50 and 74. Just over half of eligible women participate.
Of the women found to have cancer, about 25% are diagnosed between the biennial screens. These “interval cancers” are often aggressive and, unfortunately, more likely to be fatal.
In some cases, a more sensitive screening test may have detected them earlier.
The role of AI
Australia’s BreastScreen program was established in response to several major clinical trials conducted between the 1960s and 1980s. The screening technology used by the program has not substantially changed since then.
Researchers are now exploring risk-adjusted screening, which tailors screening to women based on their risk, as a way to detect more cancers earlier. This may include programs offering different technologies for women at higher risk of developing breast cancer.
Currently, we generally assess cancer risk via questionnaires that help identify if a woman has any risk factors associated with breast cancer.
One risk factor is breast density which refers to how much glandular tissue is in the breast. As well as being a risk factor for breast cancer, the higher a woman’s breast density, the harder it is to detect cancer on a mammogram.
We can also use one-off genetic testing to identify women with a higher lifetime risk of developing breast cancer. This involves looking for high-risk gene mutations such as BRCA1 and BRCA2, which are associated with increased breast and ovarian cancer risk. Genetic testing can also help us estimate a person’s lifetime risk of developing breast cancer.
More recently, researchers have been investigating artificial intelligence (AI) as a new approach to assess breast cancer risk. A new Australian study, published in The Lancet Digital Health today, focused on a specific AI tool known as BRAIx.
What did the study involve? And what did it find?
This study used an AI tool, known as BRAIx, trained using BreastScreen Australia data to help radiologists assess mammograms.
The study assessed how well BRAIx predicted women’s risk of developing breast cancer in the next four years, among women who had a clear mammogram.
Of the 95,823 Australian women assessed, 1.1% (1,098) had developed breast cancer in the four years after they received a clear mammogram. Of the 4,430 Swedish women assessed, 6.9% had developed breast cancer within two years of a clear screen.
The study findings show that BRAIx scores were very useful for identifying women who were more likely to develop cancer one to two years after having a clear screen. Findings from the Australian dataset suggest BRAIx scores identified cancers found three to four years later, but with less accuracy.
These findings suggest BRAIx could help identify women who might benefit from additional tests. This may include an MRI (which uses a magnetic field to produce images of organs and tissue) or contrast-enhanced mammography (which uses an iodine dye to improve the visibility of a regular mammogram).
These findings reinforce a 2024 Swedish study that used an AI-based risk assessment to select women for additional testing. The researchers referred 7% of women to have a follow-up MRI, and 6.5% of were found to have cancers missed by mammograms.
Does the study have any limitations?
As with most studies, yes. Here are two.
it’s difficult to compare BRAIx to genetic testing. This is because BRAIx is trained to find missed or emerging cancers over a four year period. In contrast, genetic testing identifies a person’s risk of developing cancer over their lifetime
it might not use the best breast density data. This study found BRAIx more accurately predicts breast cancer risk compared to assessments based on breast density. But this breast density data was collected using a different tool to those used by the Breastscreen program. So this finding should be interpreted carefully.
So, where to from here?
The study adds to a growing body of evidence that AI risk assessment could help breast screening programs find cancers earlier.
BRAIx is now being trialled as part of the BreastScreen Victoria program, to help read mammograms. And other states are already using and evaluating different AI tools for reading mammograms.
So it may be time for Australia to conduct a national, independent review of these new tools. As part of a more risk-adjusted approach to breast screening, they could save lives.![]()
Carolyn Nickson, Principal Research Fellow, Cancer Elimination Collaboration, University of Sydney; The University of Melbourne and Bruce Mann, Professor of Surgery, Specialist Breast Surgeon, The University of Melbourne
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
Planting Billions of Trees Turned Barren Desert into a Carbon Sink That Lowers CO2


Here’s why you might want to clean your headphones
Whether it’s enjoying a podcast, listening to music or chatting on the phone, many of us spend hours a day using our headphones. One 2017 study of 4,185 Australians showed they used headphones on average 47–88 hours a month.
Health advice about headphones tends to focus on how loud sounds might affect our hearing. For example, to avoid hearing loss, the World Health Organization advises people to keep the volume at below 60% their device’s maximum and to use devices that monitor sound exposure and limit volume.
But apart from sound, what else is going in our ears? Using headphones – particularly in-ear versions such as earbuds – blocks the ear canal and puts the skin in contact with any dirt or bacteria they may be carrying.
Here’s what you need to know about keeping your ears clean and safe.
First, let’s take a look at your ear
Over-ear headphones cover the entire external ear – the elastic cartilage covered by skin that’s shaped to trap soundwaves. In-ear headphones (as well as hearing aids) are shaped to fit and cover the entrance to the external ear canal, which is called the concha.
Sound vibrations travel through the ear canal – which is S-shaped and a few centimetres long – to reach your ear drum.
Deeper parts of the ear canal produce earwax and oils. These help keep your skin healthy, hydrated and less vulnerable to infection.
Tiny hairs in the ear canal also help regulate temperature and keep foreign debris out. These hairs and earwax help trap and move small particles, shed skin and bacteria out of the ear canal.
Earwax is the ear’s self-cleaning method and we only tend to notice it when there’s too much.
Excessive buildup can block your hearing or even clog the mesh of your earpods. But don’t try to dig earwax out of your ears yourself. If you’re concerned, speak to a pharmacist or GP for advice.
Healthy ear canals host a range of non-harmful microbes – mainly bacteria, but fungi and viruses too. They compete for space and nutrients, and this diversity makes it trickier for any potential pathogens (disease-causing microorganisms) to take hold.
But wearing headphones (and other in-ear devices such as hearing aids or ear plugs) may upset the balance between “good” and “bad” bacteria.
One 2024 study compared bacteria in the external ear canals of 50 people who used hearing aids and 80 who didn’t. The researchers found hearing-aid users – whose external ear canals are blocked for extended periods – had fewer types of bacteria than those who didn’t.
Another 2025 study looked at how using headphones (including over-ear, in-ear and on-ear) affected fungi and bacteria in the ear canal. It found using headphones was linked to a greater risk of ear infections, especially if people shared them.
This may because wearing headphones – especially in-ear devices – makes the external ear canal hotter and more humid. Trapped moisture is especially likely if you exercise and sweat while wearing headphones.
Higher humidity increases your risk of ear infection and discharge, including pus.
Wearing in-ear devices such as hearing aids or headphones for extended periods can also interfere with the ear’s natural “self-cleaning” function, aided by earwax.
So, what should I do?
Most of us need – or like – to wear headphones in our day-to-day routines. But for good ear health, it’s important to give your ears a break.
Allow your ear canals to “breathe” at different points throughout the day so they’re not constantly blocked and growing humid and hot.
You could also try bone conduction headphones. These don’t block the ear canal, because they transmit sound through your skull directly into the inner ear, without needing to block the ear canal. These can be expensive though. And while they allow our ears to breathe, high-intensity vibrations (high volume) can still damage hearing, so as with all headphones caution is required.
Other tips
Clean your devices regularly
Recommendations range from once a week to daily to after a physical workout.
For example, you can wipe them with a cloth or use a soft-bristled children’s toothbrush dampened with mildly soapy water. Blot dry with a paper towel and allow a few hours of drying before recharging or reuse.
But it’s best to follow your manufacturer’s guidelines. And don’t forget to clean the case and the body of your earbuds too.
Don’t use headphones when sick
If you have an ear infection, avoid using earphones as they may increase the temperature and humidity in your ear and slow recovery.
Watch for symptoms
If your ears become itchy, red or have discharge, stop using in-ear devices and seek medical advice.![]()
Rina Wong (Fu), Research Fellow, Health Sciences, Curtin University
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
Rare Species of Pink 'Fairy Club' Fungus Discovered in UK for First Time

