More Like this

1. Interferometer response to geontropic fluctuations

   https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.107.024002  

   Li, Dongjun; Lee, Vincent S. H.; Chen, Yanbei; Zurek, Kathryn M. (January 2023, Physical Review D)
2. Emotional Response to Vibrothermal Stimuli

   https://doi.org/10.3390/app11198905  

   Shetty, Yatiraj; Mehta, Shubham; Tran, Diep; Soni, Bhavica; McDaniel, Troy (October 2021, Applied Sciences)

   Emotional response to haptic stimuli is a widely researched topic, but the combination of vibrotactile and thermal stimuli requires more attention. The purpose of this study is to investigate emotional response to vibrothermal stimulation by combining spatiotemporal vibrotactile stimulus with dynamic thermal stimulus (hot or cold). The vibrotactile and thermal stimuli were produced using the Haptic Chair and the Embr wave thermal bracelet, respectively. The results show that spatiotemporal vibrotactile patterns and their duration, and dynamic thermal stimulation, have an independent effect on the emotional response. Increasing duration generally increases the valence and arousal of emotional response. Shifting the dynamic temperature from cold to hot generally decreases the valence of emotional response but has no significant effect on arousal. Nevertheless, certain spatiotemporal patterns do exhibit unique responses to changes in dynamic temperature, although no interaction effects were found. The results show the potential of designing affective haptic interfaces using multimodal vibrothermal feedback. 

   more » « less
3. Streamflow response to forest management

   https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-020-1940-6  

   Kirchner, James W.; Berghuijs, Wouter R.; Allen, Scott T.; Hrachowitz, Markus; Hut, Rolf; Rizzo, Donna M. (February 2020, Nature)

   null (Ed.)
4. Response and adaptation of the transcriptional heat shock response to pressure

   https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2024.1470617  

   Coffin, Carleton H; Fisher, Luke A; Crippen, Sara; Demers, Phoebe; Bartlett, Douglas H; Royer, Catherine A (November 2024, Frontiers in Microbiology)

   IntroductionThe molecular mechanisms underlying pressure adaptation remain largely unexplored, despite their significance for understanding biological adaptation and improving sterilization methods in the food and beverage industry. The heat shock response leads to a global stabilization of the proteome. Prior research suggested that the heat shock regulon may exhibit a transcriptional response to high-pressure stress. MethodsIn this study, we investigated the pressure-dependent heat shock response inE. colistrains using plasmid-borne green fluorescent protein (GFP) promoter fusions and fluorescence fluctuation microscopy. ResultsWe quantitatively confirm that key heat shock genes-rpoH,rpoE,dnaK, andgroEL- are transcriptionally upregulated following pressure shock in both piezosensitiveEscherichia coliand a more piezotolerant laboratory-evolved strain, AN62. Our quantitative imaging results provide the first single cell resolution measurements for both the heat shock and pressure shock transcriptional responses, revealing not only the magnitude of the responses, but also the biological variance involved. Moreover, our results demonstrate distinct responses in the pressure-adapted strain. Specifically,P_groELis upregulated more thanP_dnaKin AN62, while the reverse is true in the parental strain. Furthermore, unlike in the parental strain, the pressure-induced upregulation ofP_rpoEis highly stochastic in strain AN62, consistent with a strong feedback mechanism and suggesting that RpoE could act as a pressure sensor. DiscussionDespite its capacity to grow at pressures up to 62 MPa, the AN62 genome shows minimal mutations, with notable single nucleotide substitutions in genes of the transcriptionally importantbsubunit of RNA polymerase and the Rho terminator. In particular, the mutation in RNAP is one of a cluster of mutations known to confer rifampicin resistance toE. colivia modification of RNAP pausing and termination efficiency. The observed differences in the pressure and heat shock responses between the parental MG1655 strain and the pressure-adapted strain AN62 could arise in part from functional differences in their RNAP molecules. 

   more » « less
5. A species’ response to spatial climatic variation does not predict its response to climate change

   https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2304404120  

   Perret, Daniel L; Evans, Margaret_E K; Sax, Dov F (January 2024, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences)

   The dominant paradigm for assessing ecological responses to climate change assumes that future states of individuals and populations can be predicted by current, species-wide performance variation across spatial climatic gradients. However, if the fates of ecological systems are better predicted by past responses to in situ climatic variation through time, this current analytical paradigm may be severely misleading. Empirically testing whether spatial or temporal climate responses better predict how species respond to climate change has been elusive, largely due to restrictive data requirements. Here, we leverage a newly collected network of ponderosa pine tree-ring time series to test whether statistically inferred responses to spatial versus temporal climatic variation better predict how trees have responded to recent climate change. When compared to observed tree growth responses to climate change since 1980, predictions derived from spatial climatic variation were wrong in both magnitude and direction. This was not the case for predictions derived from climatic variation through time, which were able to replicate observed responses well. Future climate scenarios through the end of the 21st century exacerbated these disparities. These results suggest that the currently dominant paradigm of forecasting the ecological impacts of climate change based on spatial climatic variation may be severely misleading over decadal to centennial timescales. 

   more » « less