5 ms·
Scientists uncover extreme life inside the Arctic ice
- whyandgrowth 1y agoWho would have thought that they had been found before, but only now did they undertake a more detailed study.
- htek 1y agoI've seen this movie before. I hope the researchers are safe and checked their flamethrowers for fuel.
- freedomben 1y agoIndeed. The Borg are in there. Not to be messed around with
- LargoLasskhyfv 1y agoNo No, that was AVP ...err... antarctic video performances...
- jajko 1y agoAssistant Vice... Predator
- LargoLasskhyfv 1y agoWhich one? 1951? 1982? 2011?
- jihadjihad 1y ago'82, for sure
- sunrunner 1y agoI've seen Fortitude (https://www.imdb.com/title/tt3498622/ https://www.imdb.com/title/tt3498622/), I know how this ends (not well).
- LargoLasskhyfv 1y agoWhat about Alien Hunter? https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0327409/ https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0327409/
- garrickvanburen 1y agoFortitude is amazing. Cinematography, soundtrack, creepiness all top notch.
- NoMoreNicksLeft 1y agoAgent Mulder figured out what to do about these in less than 42 minutes. Well, maybe Scully helped a little...
- searine 1y agoFunded primarily by US taxpayers via multiple NSF grants and additional grants from the Human Frontier Science Program, Moore Foundation, Schmidt Foundation, and Dalio Foundation.
- mrweasel 1y agoExtreme life - Sponsored by Red Bull.
- jandrewrogers 1y agoReminds me of the ice worms[0] that live exclusively in the glacier ice of the Pacific Northwest. Also mild nightmare fuel. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mesenchytraeus_solifugus https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mesenchytraeus_solifugus
- gus_massa 1y agoThey look like earthworm that like to live near ice and eat algae. What is the nightmare fuel?
- mumbisChungo 1y agoclear scoleciphobia if I've ever seen it
- nkrisc 1y agoWell, yeah, they're worms. People are irrationally afraid of all sorts of stuff, that doesn't make everything "nightmare fuel". They're just worms that look like worms.
- omnicognate 1y ago> worms that look like worms Those are the worst kind of worms.
- jandrewrogers 1y agoSome people don't like the idea of worms and actively avoid them. I'm not one of them but I know several people that are. The idea of chilling on a pristine glacier somewhere and suddenly finding yourself surrounded by thousands of worms is pretty unsettling to the worm avoidant. Naturally I introduce these people to the existence of the Giant Palouse Earthworm [0], also in the Pacific Northwest, though these are so rare that it would be of scientific interest if you came across one. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Giant_Palouse_earthworm https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Giant_Palouse_earthworm
- DaveZale 1y agoI brought a sample of "pink snow" back to the lab- common at high altitudes in California. Under the scope, the algae were pink spheres. Extremophiles are so interesting
- cassepipe 1y agoDo they have a wikipedia page ? EDIT: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Watermelon_snow https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Watermelon_snow
- DaveZale 1y agoOh how cool. They are motile. Flagella to move upwards. It does not get any cooler than that. Thanks
- contingencies 1y agoWhich type of microscope and what level of magnification? Any images? I'm designing one at the moment.
- DaveZale 1y agoSorry, can't tell you that, I let the microbiologists do it for me. They were very possessive about their instruments, like I was with mine. So... how are you doing it? I bought a $29 microscope from China last week to look at the backside of leaves we thought were infected with bindweed mites. Saw circular yellow and red spots on leaves that looked to the naked eye, to have white powdery residue. Under a scope, it's a whole different world.
- contingencies 1y agoFor normal brightfield microscopy industrial cameras are very good (the internal sensor chipset is the important component, and there are only a few manufacturers globally) and usually offer both USB UVC and HDMI output. Monocular optics are very cheap and offer free-zoom (so-called 'zoomtube', great for video) and configurable magnification. In terms of reflected light microscopy, you are going to get very good results with off the shelf ~$100 systems (camera+monocular zoomtube) and LED ring lighting (preferably anti-glare with configurable polarized filters). You get a solid upgrade switching to transmitted light microscopy. This requires some sort of transparent stage with underside lighting. This can be as simple as placing an unprepared sample on a slide and shining any light (like a phone LED) through it. But it works better if the light is even, the light is collimated, the light is focused, the light is controllable (ie. light source + collimator lens + condenser, at precise relative distances). At high magnifications the focal plane is very thin. You will need focus stacking for many unprocessed specimens, which can be achieved in software but requires a rigid platform and a steady hand. Around this level you get some good upgrades from taking thin sections with a razorblade. You can buy mini microtomes but they're basically razorblades. Just buy razorblades. Staining also helps, read for example http://digitalcommons.mtu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1134&context=bryo-ecol-subchapters http://digitalcommons.mtu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=11... If you are serious about your images, you can buy a cheap calibration tool for measurement purposes and synchronize it to software for markup and addition of digital scale purposes. Beyond these you certainly need a rigid platform. To this point things are quite cheap, depending upon your requirements you could be only $200 in and happy with a range of stains, thin sections, configurable lighting, aperture, precision movable stage, etc. Once you're in this territory you probably want a better turret and oil objectives. This is expensive. Motorized stages, focus, filters/polarization, etc. are all options, often hard to retrofit to existing scopes, but of great utility depending upon what you're looking to achieve. I am sort of designing around this area. I am interested in structured light microscopy, which has recently been achieved for 10K EUR by academics in Europe. I may offer something cheaper if I can get it working. Beyond that the next steps are precision methods like darkfield, phase contrast, DIC, fluorescence, etc. These get expensive quickly, requiring additional matched hardware and dedicated objectives. I know little about these techniques yet.