Birds listen in on prairie dog calls to stay safe
Prairie dogs are hunted by a long list of predators from birds of prey to foxes and even large snakes.Long-billed curlews are vulnerable to some of these predators too. Research, which was published in the journal Animal Behaviour, found the birds listen to the sounds of the rodents to find out if predators are on the way.It gives them more time to react to the nearby danger.
Long-billed curlews nest their eggs in short grass on the ground, and when they hear the prairie dog call, they get as low as possible and try to camouflage themselves.As part of the research, a team made a fake predator, in the form of a stuffed badger on a remote controlled car.This was then driven towards nests in Montana in the US, sometimes while playing the calls of prairie dogs, sometimes in silence. When the birds could hear the fake barks from the remote-controlled badger, theyducked down into the grass to hide when it was more than three times the distance away, compared to when no barks were played.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Mail
an hour ago
- Daily Mail
Now that's a sprite for sore eyes! Nasa astronaut captures rare electrical event from above the clouds in stunning image
A Nasa astronaut has captured a stunning image of an electrical event where a brilliant red light flashed through the atmosphere. Nichole 'Vapor' Ayers shared the photo of what is known as a Transient Luminous Event (TLE) seen above a thunderstorm over Mexico and the US earlier in the week. It is thought the phenomenon was triggered by positive cloud-to-ground lightning strikes which produce an electric field that extends miles above a thunderstorm into the upper atmosphere. Ms Ayers captioned the image: 'Just. Wow. As we went over Mexico and the U.S. this morning, I caught this sprite. 'Sprites are TLEs or Transient Luminous Events, that happen above the clouds and are triggered by intense electrical activity in the thunderstorms below. 'We have a great view above the clouds, so scientists can use these types of pictures to better understand the formation, characteristics, and relationship of TLEs to thunderstorms.' There is some debate over whether Ms Ayers captured a sprite or what is known as a gigantic jet - both TLEs. Gigantic jets start inside the anvil and reach through the cloud up to the ionosphere. Sprites are difficult to observe from the ground and it is still not known exactly why some lightning bolts trigger them while others do not. The striking TLE in Ms Ayers' photo appears mostly red in colour - most of the phenomena last only a fraction of a second and can rarely be seen unless the observer is orbiting some 250 miles above the Earth's surface. Other forms of TLEs include elves, blue jets and ghosts - all of which occur well above the Earth's surface in the stratosphere, mesophere and even the thermosphere. Ayers is currently aboard the International Space Station as part of NASA's SpaceX Crew-10 mission which launched in March and is expected to remain in outer space through at least August. The purpose of the mission is to conduct hundreds of scientific experiments, including testing the flammability of material as well as studies examining physiological and psychological effects of space on the human body.
Daily Mail
an hour ago
- Daily Mail
'Masterpiece' sci-fi film lauded as 'ahead of its time' with 'breathtaking action' finally lands on Netflix 23 years after its release
A 'masterpiece' film that was lauded as 'ahead of its time' has finally landed on Netflix 23 years after its release. The sci-fi hit, Minority Report, premiered on screens back in 2002 and stars movie legend Tom Cruise as the lead. Based on Philip K Dick's novel that shares the same name, the film is set in 2054 and was added to the streaming platform on July 1. The futuristic tale delves into a world where crimes are seen before they even happen. Precrime chief John Anderton, played by Cruise, flees after facing accusations of an 'imminent homicide,' according to the synopsis. Minority Report also stars Colin Farrell and Samantha Morton, amongst others, and boasts an impressive 89% score on Rotten Tomatoes where viewers have left their verdicts over the years. According to Metro, one fan gushed: 'This movie was amazing and way ahead of its time. I was very impressed. Tom Cruise had an incredible performance. 'The story was unique and captivating. Very thought provoking. All the future tech displayed in this movie is still impressive today in 2020 even to a seasoned Sci-Fi fan. 'A must see film, one of the best Sci-Fi movies out there.' While another said: 'On the short list of my all-time favorite movies, Minority Report is the rare film that has everything: breathtaking action and suspense, philosophical and ethical dilemmas, real emotion and well-placed plot twists. 'In fact, it has so much going on that it might have gone off the rails in lesser hands; but Spielberg's veteran direction shapes it into a masterpiece.' Someone else penned: 'This movie is just about 20 years old and still holds up from all aspects. 'Still looks great, has an amazing script and grabbed my attention the whole time even though I had already seen it. Amazing.' Minority Report also stars Colin Farrell and Samantha Morton, amongst others, and boasts an impressive 89% score on Rotten Tomatoes and viewers have left their verdicts on the site over the years Another fan commented: 'A cool and creative sci-fi action film with great acting from Tom Cruise and great directing from Stephen Spielberg.' 'I thought this was an awesome Sci-Fi film. One of Tom Cruise's best films,' someone else said. Though not everyone has loved the film and one viewer penned: 'What a mess of storyline. This is a waste of talent.'
The Guardian
2 hours ago
- The Guardian
Can you see circles or rectangles? And does the answer depend on where you grew up?
Do people from different cultures and environments see the world differently? Two recent studies have different takes on this decades-long controversy. The answer might be more complicated, and more interesting, than either study suggests. One study, led by Ivan Kroupin at the London School of Economics, asked how people from different cultures perceived a visual illusion known as the Coffer illusion. They discovered that people in the UK and US saw it mainly in one way, as comprising rectangles – while people from rural communities in Namibia typically saw it another way: as containing circles. To explain these differences, Kroupin and colleagues appeal to a hypothesis raised more than 60 years ago and argued about ever since. The idea is that people in western industrialised countries (these days known by the acronym 'weird' – for western, educated, industrialised, rich and democratic – a summary that is increasingly questionable) see things in a specific way because they are generally exposed to highly 'carpentered' environments, with lots of straight lines, right angles – visual features common in western architecture. By contrast, people from non-'weird' societies – like those in rural Namibia – inhabit environments with fewer sharp lines and angular geometric forms, so their visual abilities will be tuned differently. The study argues that the tendency of rural Namibians to see circles rather than rectangles in the Coffer illusion is due to their environments being dominated by structures such as round huts instead of angular environments. They back up this conclusion with similar results from several other visual illusions, all supposedly tapping into basic brain mechanisms involved in visual perception. So far, so good for the cross-cultural perceptual psychologists, and for the 'carpentered world' hypothesis. The second study, by Dorsa Amir and Chaz Firestone, takes a sledgehammer to this hypothesis, but for the much better-known illusion: the Müller-Lyer illusion. Two lines of equal length seem to be different lengths because of the context provided by inward-pointing, compared with outward-pointing, arrowheads. It's a very powerful illusion. I've seen it on thousands of occasions and it works every time for me. There are many explanations for why the Müller-Lyer illusion is so effective. One of the more popular is that the arrowheads are interpreted by the brain as cues about three-dimensional depth, so our brains implicitly interpret the illusion as representing an object of some kind, with right angles and straight lines. This explanation fits neatly with the 'carpentered world' hypothesis – and indeed a lot of early support for this hypothesis relied on apparent cultural variability in how the Müller-Lyer illusion is perceived. In their study, Amir and Firestone carefully and convincingly dismantle this explanation. They point out that non-human animals experience the illusion, as shown in a range of studies in which animals (including guppies, pigeons and bearded dragons) are trained to prefer the longer of two lines, and then presented with the Müller-Lyer image. They show that it works without straight lines, and for touch as well as vision. They note that it even works for people who until recently have been blind, referencing an astonishing experiment in which nine children, blind from birth because of dense cataracts, were shown the illusion immediately after the cataracts were surgically removed. Not only had these children not seen highly carpentered environments – they hadn't seen anything at all. After you absorb their analysis, it's pretty clear that the Müller-Lyer illusion is not due to culturally specific exposure to carpentry. Why the discrepancy? There are several possibilities. Perhaps there are reasons why cross-cultural variability should be expected for the Coffer but not the Müller-Lyer illusion (one possibility here is that the Coffer illusion is based on how people pay attention to things, rather than on some more basic aspect of perception). It could also be that there are systematic differences in perception between cultures, but that the 'carpentered world' hypothesis is not the correct explanation. It's also worth noting that the Kroupin study has some potential weaknesses. For example, the UK/US and Namibian participants were exposed to the illusions using very different methods. All in all, the jury remains out and – favourite scientist punt coming up – 'more research is needed'. The notion that people from different cultures vary in how they experience things is certainly plausible. There's a wealth of evidence that as we grow up our brains are shaped, at least to some extent, by features of our environments. And just as we all differ in our externally visible characteristics – height, body shape and so on – we will all differ on the inside too. As the author Anaïs Nin put it in quoting the Talmud: 'We do not see things as they are, we see them as we are.' For me, an important implication of this line of thought is that there are likely to be substantial differences in perception within 'groups' as well as between them. This will probably hold however these 'groups' are defined, whether as different cultures or as a contrast between 'neurotypical' and 'neurodivergent' people. I believe that paying more attention to within-group perceptual diversity will help us to better interpret the differences we do find between groups, and equip us with the tools needed to resist relying on simple cultural stereotypes as explanations. More research is needed here too. But it's on the way. In the Perception Census, a project led by my research group at the University of Sussex together with professor Fiona Macpherson at the University of Glasgow, we are studying how perception differs in a large sample of about 40,000 people from more than 100 countries. Our experiment includes not just one or two visual illusions but more than 50 different experiments probing many different aspects of perception. When we're done analysing the data, we hope to deliver a uniquely detailed picture of how people experience their world, both within and between cultures. We'll also make the data openly available for other researchers to explore new ideas in this important area. One critical insight lies behind all these questions. How things seem is not how they are. For each of us, it might seem as though we see the world exactly as it is; as if our senses are transparent windows through with the world pours itself directly into our mind. But how things are is very different. The objective world no doubt exists, but the world we experience is always an active construction, a kind of 'controlled hallucination' in which the brain uses sensory signals to update and calibrate its best interpretation of what's going on. What we experience is this interpretation, not a 'readout' of the sensory information. For me, this is the key insight that underlies any claim about perceptual diversity. When we take it fully on board, it encourages a much-needed humility about our own ways of seeing. We live in perceptual echo chambers, just as we do in those of social media, and the first step to escaping any echo chamber is to realise that you're in one. Anil Seth is a professor of cognitive and computational neuroscience at the University of Sussex, and author of the Sunday Times bestseller Being You: A New Science of Consciousness
