Omega-6:3 Ratio More Than Absolute Lipid Level in Diet Affects Associative Learning in Honey Bees

Floral pollen is a major source of honey bee nutrition that provides them with micro- and macro-nutrients, including proteins, fatty acids, vitamins, and minerals. Different pollens vary in composition, including in the essential fatty acids, alpha-linolenic acid (omega-3) and linoleic acid (omega-6). Monocultures, prevalent in modern agriculture, may expose honey bee colonies to unbalanced omega-6:3 diets. The importance of omega-3 in the diet for adequate learning and cognitive function, with a focus on suitable omega-6:3 ratio, is well documented in mammals. We have recently shown, for the first time in invertebrates, the importance of omega-3 in diets for associative learning ability in honey bees. In the current work, we examine the effect of the absolute amount of omega-3 in diet compared to the omega-6:3 ratio on honey bee associative learning. We fed newly emerged bees for 1 week on different artificial diets, which had lipid concentration of 1, 2, 4, or 8%, with omega-6:3 ratios of 0.3, 1, or 5, respectively. We then tested the bees in a proboscis-extension response olfactory conditioning assay. We found that both omega-6:3 ratio and total lipid concentration affected learning. The most detrimental diet for learning was that with a high omega-6:3 ratio of 5, regardless of the absolute amount of omega-3 in the diet. Bees fed an omega-6:3 ratio of 1, with 4% total lipid concentration achieved the best performance. Our results with honey bees are consistent with those found in mammals. Best cognitive performance is achieved by a diet that is sufficiently rich in essential fatty acids, but as long as the omega-6:3 ratio is not high.

Read it here:

file:///C:/Users/Bruno%20Corilano/Downloads/Omega-63_Ratio_More_Than_Absolute_Lipid_Level_in_D.pdf

PORTAL DA LÍNGUA INGLESA has no responsibility for the persistence or accuracy of URLs for external or third-partly internet websites referred to in this post, and does not guarantee that any context on such websites are, or will remain, accurate or appropriate.

In some instances, I have been unable to trace the owners of the pictures used here; therefore, I would appreciate any information that would enable me to do so. Thank you very much.

Is something important missing? Report an error or suggest an improvement. Please, I strive for accuracy and fairness. If you see something that doesn't look right, contact me!

Your feedback is welcome. Please direct comments and questions to me at bruno_coriolano@hotmail.com

Did you spot a typo?

Do you have any tips or examples to improve this page?

Do you disagree with something on this page?

Use one of your social-media accounts to share this page:

The universe is a hologram: Stephen Hawking's final words?

“For a tiny fraction of a second after the Big Bang, the universe expanded incredibly rapidly before settling into its present state.”

Do we live in a matrix? Well, to honest with you, I have absolutely no idea of how I could explain the reason why I’m asking you this crazy question. I don’t even know if there is anything that can be explained in this world. The only thing I know is that reading is one of the most important skills in any language – or at least I believe it is. Taking that into account, I just would like to share this article with you – it has been recently published and brings some food for thought, especially for those who love Stephen Hawking and Physics – so that you may improve your reading skills by reading it.

Stephen Hawking has revealed from beyond the grave his final scientific theory - that the universe is a hologram.

The cosmologist, who died on March 14, has challenged previous theories of cosmic "inflation" and the "multiverse" in a new paper published in the Journal Of High Energy Physics.

Scientists generally believe that for a tiny fraction of a second after the Big Bang, the universe expanded incredibly rapidly before settling into its present state, filled with stars and galaxies - the inflation theory.

But some have proposed that, on a grander global scale, inflation goes on forever, giving rise to a "multiverse" - a number of different universes with their own laws of physics.

Prof Hawking was always troubled by this idea, which at a fundamental level cannot be reconciled with Einstein's theory of General Relativity. In an interview last year he said: "I have never been a fan of the multiverse."

Working with Belgian colleague Professor Thomas Hertog, Prof Hawking extended the weird notion of a holographic reality to explain how the universe came into being from the moment of the Big Bang.

The new theory embraces the strange concept that the universe is like a vast and complex hologram. In other words, 3D reality is an illusion, and that the  apparently "solid" world around us - and the dimension of time - is projected from information stored on a flat 2D surface.

Hawking and Hertog's variation of the holography theory overcomes the problem of combining eternal inflation with General Relativity.

Prof Hertog, from the Katholieke Universiteit Leuven (KT Leuven),  said: "It's a very precise mathematical notion of holography that has come out of string theory in the last few years which is not fully understood but is mind-boggling and changes the scene completely."

Applied to inflation, the newly published theory suggests that time and "the beginning" of the universe arose holographically from an unknowable state outside the Big Bang.

Prof Hawking said before his death: "We are not down to a single, unique universe, but our findings imply a significant reduction of the multiverse, to a much smaller range of possible universes."

From:

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/05/02/professor-stephen-hawkings-final-theory-universe-hologram/

PORTAL DA LÍNGUA INGLESA has no responsibility for the persistence or accuracy of URLs for external or third-partly internet websites referred to in this post, and does not guarantee that any context on such websites are, or will remain, accurate or appropriate.

In some instances, I have been unable to trace the owners of the pictures used here; therefore, I would appreciate any information that would enable me to do so. Thank you very much.

Is something important missing? Report an error or suggest an improvement. Please, I strive for accuracy and fairness. If you see something that doesn't look right, contact me!

Your feedback is welcome. Please direct comments and questions to me at bruno_coriolano@hotmail.com

Did you spot a typo?

Do you have any tips or examples to improve this page?

Do you disagree with something on this page?

Use one of your social-media accounts to share this page:

Cell Phones Sometimes Cause Real Pain

Cell Phones Sometimes Cause Real Pain

People increasingly complain of being "electrosensitive," claiming that the electromagnetic fields emitted from mobile phones cause them real pain. Christie Nicholson reports

Various studies have reassured us that mobile phones will not give us cancer. But cell phones can cause real pain. That’s according to an article in press at the journal NeuroImage.

People are increasingly complaining of being “electrosensitive.” For them, the cell’s electromagnetic fields cause severe pain—and in Sweden sufferers build houses that block the supposed damaging electric fields.

But there’s a glitch. Studies have shown that such victims feel the same discomfort when in the presence of fake phones as they do when they’re near real phones.  So what’s going on?

Research at the University of Regensburg finds one possible source of this pain.  They told 30 participants they’d be exposed to two stimuli:  a heat-emitting thermode and an active cell phone. The thermode was real, but the phone was a phony.

When exposed to heat, the electrosensitive group, as well as the control group, complained of discomfort. But when exposed to the pretend phone, only the allegedly electrosensitive ones reported pain.

And their reports matched their actual physiological response. When exposed to the sham brain scans the control group revealed no effect. But the electrosensitive group showed increased activity in brain areas specific to pain perception.

So the pain is real—even if the phone isn’t. And the real cause lies somewhere in their hurting heads. 

—Christie Nicholson

http://www.scientificamerican.com/podcast/episode.cfm?id=cell-phones-sometimes-cause-real-pa-08-10-13