Latest news with #Sheik
Yahoo
14-07-2025
- Science
- Yahoo
Mysterious ‘ship goo' contains new life forms
It came from the deep: a viscous black gunk oozing from the rudder shaft of a ship. At the end of August 2024, the crew of the Great Lakes research vessel R/V Blue Heron, first spotted the substance when the boat was brought to a Cleveland shipyard for propeller repairs. From the outset, no one was sure what to make of it, according to Doug Ricketts, Marine Superintendent at the University of Minnesota Duluth, Large Lakes Observatory. The muck looked like thick grease or oil, Ricketts tells Popular Science, but the rudder shaft wasn't supposed to be lubricated by anything more than lake water. Instead of a strong petroleum odor, the goop had a metallic smell. It also didn't leave a sheen on water, nor burn up in a blowtorch flame, during informal tests conducted by Blue Heron Captain Rual Lee. So, what was it? On the quest for answers, Ricketts brought a paper coffee cup half-filled with the mystery goop (labeled 'ship goo' in haphazard marker strokes) to university scientists. Laboratory analysis has prompted more questions than clarity, but the initial assessment of the 'ship goo' yielded at least one startling discovery. The mysterious tar-like material contained previously unidentified forms of life. 'I really didn't think we'd get anything, to be honest,' Cody Sheik, a microbial ecologist at the University of Minnesota Duluth tells Popular Science. 'Usually, when you're given a cup of tar,' you don't expect much, he adds. Under that assumption, he 'handed it off to a graduate student and said 'good luck'.' The graduate student successfully extracted DNA from the goo, defying Sheik's initial expectations– but still, he thought it might be routine sample contamination. It was only after the lab sent the extracted DNA off for preliminary, single-gene sequencing that Sheik realized he was in uncharted territory. When the results came back, he was shocked. 'A lot of the sequences came out really novel. I was like, 'oh, oh no, okay– this is a whole different story',' he says. [ Related: Pollution-eating microbes are thriving in infamous NYC canal. ] For a deeper look into the goo's microbial makeup, Sheik and his colleagues sent the sample for a second round of sequencing. This time, they examined the whole genomes inside of the goo, instead of just a single key gene region. The analysis confirmed that, though the goop microbes weren't especially diverse, they were unique. They reconstructed the genomes of more than 20 microbes, and compared them to comprehensive databases of previously identified organisms. According to Sheik, they found several novel archaea– members of a domain of single-celled, prokaryotic life that are distinguished from bacteria by their cell membrane composition. One of the microbes they found represents, not just a new species, but an entirely new order of archaea. For now, the scientists are officially referring to it as ShipGoo01. Another promising, oddball microbe could be a whole new bacterial phylum, Sheik says. If confirmed, that would probably be christened ShipGoo002. Others, too, might prove new to science. 'There's several of them that may be new genus, may be new families, for sure,' he notes. ShipGoo01 seems to be anaerobic, meaning it prefers an oxygen-free environment. Other microbes in the goo seem to gobble oxygen up and Sheik suggests that it's possible these exist in a mutually beneficial balance. Of the more familiar microbes and genetic markers, database comparison indicates that the bulk of the teeny tiny organisms are similar to those associated with oil wells, tar pits, and other hydrocarbon systems. Several seem to be related to microorganisms with international origins– from places like Germany. 'That's been kind of fun– trying to figure out where [it's from] and why it's in the rudder system here. It's becoming quite baffling,' Sheik says. In part, again, because the Blue Heron's rudder isn't regularly greased with oil, and because it sails on the Great Lakes in the Midwest. The ship hasn't always been in University of Minnesota custody. It was purchased pre-owned in 1997, Ricketts says, so it's entirely possible that the prior owners of the vessel did apply some sort of petroleum-based lubricant to the rudder shaft. But generally microbes need a steady food supply. Without any additional influx of grease in over 25 years, it's hard to know what the oil-associated microbes might be eating after all this time. Perhaps they're subsisting off of the metal itself, though Ricketts notes that the rudder shaft didn't look particularly damaged. Maybe organic matter from the lake water feeds the micro-beasts. Or maybe some secret third thing is going on. 'The more we start getting into this, the more I'm kind of clueless here,' Sheik says. 'We're doing a lot of sleuthing to try to figure this thing out.' He's hoping to get better answers on what the microbes are floating around in, and all of the microbial metabolic pathways present in the goop. Sheik also imagines using chemical isotope analysis down the line to establish where the atoms in the system are coming from. The carbon and nitrogen in algae, for instance, have a very different profile from the equivalent molecules in motor lube. 'It's like a 1,000 piece puzzle that we're trying to put together,' without any picture on the box to go off of, Sheik says. Once more of the image becomes clear, his lab plans to publish their findings in a peer-reviewed scientific journal. [Related: Can microbes that devour plastic waste be transformed into food for humans?] But there's one big challenge the scientists might not be able to overcome. The cup of goo (comprising about 100 milliliters of gunk) was the only sample taken, and getting more could be difficult–nigh impossible. The ship would have to be put in dry dock, with the rudder, once again, disassembled. And 'unfortunately, they did a really good job cleaning it last time before they put it back,' Sheik says. The rest of the ship goo 'may be lost forever.' Or maybe not. 'I don't think this ship is unique. I really strongly suspect that if you took the rudder post of any ship anywhere, there's a possibility of finding some organism–maybe a new organism–in that space,' Ricketts says. Before this, it would've been easy for him to imagine strange microorganisms popping up in a ship galley or on a fuel filter. But of all the places for something like this to be found, the mechanical rudder shaft at the far end of a ship is among the weirdest, Ricketts says. It just goes to prove, 'microbes are everywhere.' To better understand more of those undiscovered lifeforms, hiding in plain sight, Sheik says his lab would need secure funding and resources. Like many university science labs that rely, in large part, on taxpayer dollars, the future of his work is up in the air. 'Right now we're in this weird spot where we're just trying to struggle to keep our labs open,' he says. He worries that, moving forward, we'll miss out on ShipGoo3– but also on all the would-be advances that might come from it. Many prior microbe discoveries have proved useful in fields as varied as waste management and pollution remediation to life-saving drug development. 'As these dollars go away, our ability to do this primary research that can drive innovation goes away and could be lost for a very long time.'
NDTV
11-07-2025
- Science
- NDTV
Mysterious Goo-Like Life Form Found On Ship In US: "Venom Showing Up Wasn't On My Bingo Card"
Scientists have discovered a mysterious new life form aboard a ship that docked in Cleveland, Ohio, last September. The strange "goo" like lifeform was present on the research vessel Blue Heron when it was pulled out of Lake Erie into the Great Lakes Shipyard, Cleveland, to fix a noisy propeller shaft. During the maintenance check, Captain Rual Lee noticed a previously unknown microorganism, thriving in the warm, oxygen-free environment of the rudder shaft. The colour and consistency of the tar-like substance surprised Mr Lee, who plopped it in water to see if it left a sheen. It didn't, prompting Mr Lee to use a blowtorch to see if the slimy substance would burn. It didn't do that either, Baffled by the alien material, Doug Ricketts, marine superintendent for the Blue Heron, collected the goo in a sample bag and shipped it for the experts at the University of Minnesota Duluth to investigate, according to a report in Cody Sheik, an associate professor at the university and an expert in microbial ecology, used chemicals to crack open the cells of the goo and the microscopic inner workings. The substance, which is thought to be a single-celled organism, is now being temporarily called ShipGoo1. "The biggest surprise was that the ship goo had life in it at all," said Mr Sheik, adding: "We thought we'd find nothing. But surprisingly, we found DNA and it wasn't too destroyed, nor was the biomass too low." Sequencing the DNA and comparing it to global databases, the team found that the goo contained a species unknown to science. "It's fun science. By calling it ship goo for now, it brings some joy to our science. We can find novelty wherever we look." Mr Sheik initially thought the goo was old grease, until learning that the rudder post, where it was oozing from, is only lubricated with water from the lake. It's possible ShipGoo001 is carbon-based and derived from stuff floating in the water, he added. Social media reacts As the news of the discovery went viral, a section of social media users said it was a bad idea to explore the material, while others drew similarities between the goo and the Venom symbiote. "A mysterious living black could go wrong?" said one user while another added: "We don't have time for venom to run around Cleveland." A fourth said: "Venom showing up was not on my 2025 bingo card."
Fox News
11-07-2025
- Business
- Fox News
Restaurant surcharge stirs up controversy: 'Business owner should be embarrassed'
An extra fee added to a check at a restaurant left one diner shocked and fired up people on the internet, too. A Georgia man shared a photo of his receipt to Instagram Threads, asking, "WTF is a living wage fee?" following dinner in mid-June. On the bill was a $13 Reuben sandwich, a $12 burger, two sides of fries for $4 each and an 18% "living wage fee" that tacked on an additional $5.94 — bringing his total, with $1.81 in tax, to $40.75. Below the total was a disclaimer from the unnamed restaurant saying, "Living wage fee of 18% added to each dine-in check. This fee goes directly to staff payroll and provides a living wage to our team." The notice also said that any tips given would be pooled and distributed among the "entire team." The post received over 500 comments and was shared across the internet, including on Reddit. People debated the levy and brought up similarly controversial policies, such as "kitchen appreciation" fees and health and safety surcharges during the COVID-19 pandemic. Fox News Digital reached out to the original poster for comment. "The business owner should be embarrassed to even have that on the bill," one person on Reddit said. "If they can't pay the staff, don't do business. Your business skills are clearly not good to not be able to pay the workers sufficiently." One woman on Threads said, "It means the business owner is too cheap to pay his employees adequately, so he's making you pay it." "It means I'm never eating at that restaurant again," added another man. Salar Sheik, a restaurant consultant based in Los Angeles, understood the frustration and said it's important to consider the guest's perspective as well as the profitability goal of restaurants. "Guests should feel they're receiving value. Underpricing menu items and then adding a service charge or percentage on top can leave them feeling misled or cheated." "Guests should feel they're receiving value," Sheik told Fox News Digital. "Underpricing menu items and then adding a service charge or percentage on top can leave them feeling misled or cheated." It's also not a long-term solution, he said. "A better approach is to reassess your menu pricing and cost of goods to ensure your staff can earn a living wage," Sheik said. "Unfortunately, many restaurants avoid that hard work and use these fees as a shortcut." Many servers also weighed in with thoughts on the system. One former server said, "The living wage and pooled tips would've boiled my blood." "I had no trouble earning $200-$300 in tips per shift by providing excellent customer service, meaning I was already earning WELL ABOVE a living wage just by doing my job," the person commented on Reddit. Others argued the customers would be covering the cost of payroll either way and said it didn't matter to them whether food prices were raised or a surcharge was added. "I don't care where the money goes." "I don't care where the money goes," one Redditor wrote. "To pay the staff, to pay the electric bill, to pay rent – none of that is my business," the person added. "I'm a customer, not a restaurant manager." One woman on Threads said the surcharge was actually more transparent than if the restaurant simply raised food prices. "Y'all been asking for no tipping, this is what it looks like," she added, referring to a recent push to eliminate tips and raise the minimum hourly wage for restaurant workers. In some states, tipped workers make as little as $2.13 an hour. "The customer always pays the wages," another Instagram user said. "Either in tips, service fee, or in increased food prices. At least this way you know you don't have to tip extra." Many said they wouldn't tip at all if they saw the living wage charge on their bill. Others noted the fee must be made clear before customers sit down to eat — which the restaurant did, according to another comment on the original Threads post. A woman shared what she said was the establishment's menu. It read: "100% of living wage fees are used for payroll. Rather than just increasing prices to pay staff more, this increase is guaranteed to go fully toward the staff and provides a wage to all employees that they can rely on for a steady income." It continued, "We value each employee as part of our team and genuinely believe this newly implemented system is the future of our industry's survival, or at least ours."
Spectator
18-06-2025
- Entertainment
- Spectator
2708: On the shelf
Two of the eight unclued entries, appropriately placed, were likened to two others by a name hidden in the grid. The other four unclued entries are thematic. Unchecked letters could be arranged to spell 'NO VAIN OAP MISBELIEVER, HIM'. Across 1 Treated ATMs etc like cash cows (4,7) 7 Tailless parasite twitching (3) 13 In France you rent by day, as instructed (7) 15 Shy cat leaving second small rodent (5) 17 Deliver German plough (6) 18 Absolute maniacs shedding clothes (5) 20 Reportedly conceal girl in hotels (6) 21 Tiny creature, part of agamid genus (5) 22 Cleanse thoroughly and prevent case of gangrene (7) 27 Finish work corralling wildebeest from the east (4,3) 29 Last of three cycling hit road (5) 30 Losing heart, Sheik and Nigerian bishop go downhill in winter (6) 32 Redesign chart for mechanical device (5) 34 Tempted American with sex in the sack (6) 38 Somali worried about right way to communicate with the deaf (7) 39 Tower said to be thing of great beauty (6) 40 Triumphed without compunction, essentially (3) 41 Unoriginal finding: rally infiltrated by detectives (11) Down 3 Colour of country wine (6,3) 4 Guy finally made waves in The Bletchley Circle, perhaps (4-8) 5 Support English drunkard, drinking quietly (7) 6 Time to stop annoying sleeping partner perhaps inhaling drug (8) 7 Herb season announced (5) 8 Some idyllic Russian vineyards (4) 9 Perhaps howling wind up Nile? (6) 10 Clear throat in company? That's disgusting (5) 12 Wet, copper-coated penny (6) 14 Doctor outing cousin, not close (12) 19 Mum yells angrily about Bill's trick (4,1,5) 21 Chap loves to engage a fellow in single combat (4,1,4) 23 Hearing row about husband being less inhibited (8) 25 Silence over upturned anchor, cause of trip (6) 26 Led you and me to this place on delta (7) 28 Real monster I raised to lead (2,4) 33 Absolutely unimpressed at first by fashionable hormone (5) 35 Stuck-up softies sweat (4) Download a printable version here. A first prize of a £30 John Lewis voucher and two runners-up prizes of £20 vouchers for the first correct solutions opened on 7 July. Please scan or photograph entries and email them (including the crossword number in the subject field) to crosswords@ or post to: Crossword 2708, The Spectator, 22 Old Queen Street, London SW1H 9HP.
New York Post
03-06-2025
- Entertainment
- New York Post
I'm a restaurant consultant — here's what you should never do when dining out
When it comes to dining out, there are some unwritten rules of etiquette between server and customer that are important to know. Salar Sheik, a Los Angeles-based restaurant consultant and founder of Savory Hospitality, told Fox News Digital that the rudest thing a customer can do is 'one-timing' a server. That's when a customer asks for something like a glass of water, for example — but when the server returns, the customer then asks for something else, Sheik said. 'You're just running them in circles,' Sheik pointed out. 'Try to bulk up on your order. Let them know right at the same time.' What if you're in a hurry and need to place your order quickly? There's a polite way to ask your server to put your food order in right away, Sheik said. 'I think a little explaining goes a long way for your waiter,' Sheik told Fox News Digital. 'It doesn't have to be in detail, but you can just tell them, 'I'm in a bit of a hurry.'' Sometimes servers seem to disappear after your meal is done, leaving customers antsy about getting the bill. There is a proper way to get your server's attention, Sheik said. A restaurant consultant revealed the rudest things a customer can do to a server while dining out. Jose Calsina – 'It's trying to make eye contact and kind of do a wave,' he said. Snapping your fingers at your server might work in the movies — but in real life, that comes off as rude, Sheik said. 'I think a wave is pretty lighthearted, you know?' A common concern among customers is when a waiter or waitress doesn't write down their order. If the meal comes to the table and isn't correct, it's natural for the customer to blame the server. 'I think a patron has to understand, even though that was a scenario, you can't assume it was just their fault,' Sheik said. In a standard restaurant kitchen, 'there's a lot of room for error,' he noted. 'Obviously, the only point of contact you have between your food and who made it is the waiter,' Sheik said, meaning the server is the one who takes the brunt of the criticism. 'You can kind of approach it softer,' he said. 'Some people tend to be aggressive and take personal offense.' Another area of frustration from a server's perspective can involve the length of time customers remain at a table after the meal has concluded and the bill has been paid. How long is too long? It depends on if it's a casual or fine-dining experience, Sheik told Fox News Digital. 'Fine dining, you're looking at two to two-and-a-half hours of appropriate dining time,' Sheik said. 'Casual, you are probably looking at an hour to an hour and 45 minutes. Two hours is pretty much the limit.' Start and end your day informed with our newsletters Morning Report and Evening Update: Your source for today's top stories Thanks for signing up! Enter your email address Please provide a valid email address. By clicking above you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Never miss a story. Check out more newsletters Another factor to consider is the speed of service and how quickly the food arrived when you were seated. It's courteous to place your first order shortly after being seated, Sheik said. 'But a lot of times we get tables that talk for an hour and then order,' he said. 'I think that's just inappropriate.' It's a server's job to set the pace of a customer's dining experience, whether that's refilling drinks or checking with the kitchen staff on the status of a table's order, Sheik said. 'You should have your first appetizer order within 10 to 15 minutes max,' he said. 'And your entrées — in a perfect world, you should [receive] them within 20 to 25 minutes max.'
