Texans shaken as thousands of fire ants seen forming rafts on river using their bodies
Thousands of fire ants have been spotted floating on floodwaters through the Texas city and forming rafts using their bodies with residents now reporting the gross behavior.
KXAN Austin took to X to post a video taken by Austinite David Todd of the little critters, seen nestled into a large cluster in the waters of Lake Travis.
X users weighed in on the scary sight.
'A floating ball of pure hate,' one observed.
'I've done more than seen them. I've run into them at night wading out to the ramp on my dock when the lake is rapidly rising,' another wrote. 'Sucks.'
'Bring out the torch,' someone else suggested.
The pesky bugs, which can cause painful stings, are rife in Texas. But when their underground nests flood, they sink their teeth into each other, interlock their limbs and create rafts to stay alive.
'It's called a self-organizing or self-assembling process. And it's something only social insects do,' Ed LeBrun, a research scientist at the University of Texas' Brackenridge Field Lab, told the outlet.
'There are a lot of other structures that ants make in a similar way. For example, army ants will make bridges across rivers.'
Solve the daily Crossword
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
11 minutes ago
- Yahoo
A science journal pulled a controversial study about a bizarre life form against the authors' wishes
NEW YORK (AP) — A microscopic discovery in a California lake sparked buzz and controversy more than a decade ago when it was first revealed. Scientists said they'd discovered bacteria that used the element arsenic — poisonous to life as we know it — to grow. If true, it expanded the possibilities for where life could exist on Earth — or on other worlds. Several research groups failed to replicate the results, and argue it's not possible for a living thing to use something so toxic to make DNA and proteins. Some scientists have suggested the results of the original experiments may have been skewed by undetected contaminants. On Thursday, the journal Science, which first published the research, retracted it, though not because of misconduct on the researchers' part. 'If the editors determine that a paper's reported experiments do not support its key conclusions, even if no fraud or manipulation occurred, a retraction is considered appropriate,' the journal's editor-in-chief Holden Thorp wrote in the statement announcing the retraction. The researchers disagree with the journal's decision and stand by their data. It's reasonable to pull a paper for major errors or suspected misconduct — but debates and disagreements over the findings are part of the scientific process, said study co-author Ariel Anbar of Arizona State University. 'One doesn't retract a paper because the interpretation is controversial, or even because most disagree with the interpretation,' wrote Anbar in an email. 'At least, that hasn't been the case until now.' Science has more frequently retracted papers for reasons beside fraud in recent years, said Thorp and Vada Vinson, Science's executive editor, wrote in a blog post. NASA helped fund the original work. The space agency's science mission chief Nicky Fox said in a statement that NASA does not support the retraction and encourages Science to reconsider. —- The Associated Press Health and Science Department receives support from the Howard Hughes Medical Institute's Department of Science Education and the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. The AP is solely responsible for all content. Solve the daily Crossword
USA Today
12 minutes ago
- USA Today
Could this California company challenge SpaceX's Falcon 9? What to know about Rocket Lab
Rocket Lab has increasingly been in the news over mounting anticipation for the first launch of its upcoming Neutron rocket. Rocket Lab, a spaceflight company based in California, has spent years building up a reputation as a reliable launch service provider for small satellites. Now, though, the venture has its sights set on bigger targets: Procuring some of those lucrative government and commercial contracts that have long been the domain of Elon Musk's Texas-based SpaceX. Maybe you've heard about Rocket Lab's diminutive Electron launch vehicle, which the company bills as the second-most active rocket in the U.S. Or maybe you've heard about its next-generation Neutron spacecraft, which could soon be making its inaugural flight from Virginia. Whichever may be the case, here's everything to know for those interested in Rocket Lab and its future plans for spaceflight. What is Rocket Lab? Rocket Lab is a launch service provider and spaceflight company founded in 2006 and based in Long Beach, California. The company operates out of three launch pads at two launch sites, including one in New Zealand and two in Virginia at the Mid-Atlantic Regional Spaceport within NASA's Wallops Flight Facility. Rocket Lab Neutron launch date Rocket Lab has increasingly been in the news over mounting anticipation for the first launch of its upcoming Neutron rocket. The satellite launch vehicle is central to Rocket Lab's plans to shift from small satellite deployments to missions with heavier payloads. But when exactly the Neutron rocket could make its orbital debut has yet to be determined. Rocket Lab continues to work through a checklist of requirements before Neutron can get off the ground for its maiden flight. That includes integrating – or stacking – the rocket stages and getting its commercial launch license from the Federal Aviation Administration, according to the company's first-quarter earnings presentation provided to the USA TODAY Network. The good news? Construction on infrastructure at the launch pad is on schedule, according to the report. Earlier in July, Rocket Lab also announced that the company had awarded a contract to shipbuilder Bollinger Shipyards to support the build of a 400-foot ocean landing platform named "Return On Investment." But the challenge for Rocket Lab will be in transporting the components of the Neutron to the facility, according to the website TechCrunch. The vehicle must be shipped in segments to Rocket Lab's Launch Complex 3 in Virginia, where it will be fully mated as a rocket. Could Neutron challenge SpaceX, Falcon 9? Many space industry analysts have said that Neutron could emerge as a credible challenger to SpaceX's Falcon 9 in the medium-lift launch market. Rocket Lab is developing the Neutron rocket – which already has contracts with the Department of Defense – for commercial, civil and military space operations. That includes satellite constellation deployments, cargo resupply missions to the International Space Station and interplanetary missions. The arena is one that SpaceX, founded by billionaire Elon Musk in 2002, has dominated for years with its Falcon 9 rocket – one of the most active rockets in the world. The Falcon 9 is routinely the rocket of choice to launch NASA astronaut missions to the International Space Station and is the exclusive launch provider for Musk's Starlink satellite deliveries. At 141-feet-tall, Neutron is smaller in stature than SpaceX's two-stage, 230-foot Falcon 9. But like the Falcon 9, Neutron is designed to be reusable so that it can launch more frequently. Its design features an integrated system that brings Neutron's first stage and payload fairings back to Earth as a single stage. Capable of delivering about a 14-ton (more than 28,600 pounds) payload to low-Earth before landing, Neutron is powered by Rocket Lab's newly developed Archimedes engine. Rocket Lab's emergence also comes at a time of mounting public discord between Musk and President Donald Trump. What is Rocket Lab's Electron rocket? Rocket Lab has already spent years reliably launching its smaller Electron rocket to deliver small satellites and other payloads to orbit for civil and commercial contractors. At 59 feet tall, Electron is capable of carrying just 661 pounds of cargo to space, according to Rocket Lab. A version of the rocket is also tailored for Rocket Lab's hypersonic HASTE launches. One of the two launch complexes where Electron can launch is right next door to the Neutron's new launch complex. Since its first orbital launch in January 2018, the Electron has delivered more than 200 satellites to orbit and become one of the most frequently launched U.S. rockets, second only to the Falcon 9, according to Rocket Lab. In June alone, the Electron launched four times on both government and commercial missions, according to Rocket Lab. The most recent mission came June 28 when the Electron launched a single satellite to space for "a confidential commercial customer," Rocket Lab announced in a press release. The mission was the second of two launches from the same launch site in less than 48 hours, a new launch record for the company. Is Rocket Lab a good stock to buy? Whether to invest Unlike SpaceX, Rocket Lab is publicly traded. While Rocket Lab's stock is up 800% over the past year, according to Forbes, the company is not yet profitable. "A lot hinges on Rocket Lab's ability to evolve its revenue model and reach sustained profitability," Sasirekha Subramanian, an equity research content expert, wrote for Forbes. Eric Lagatta is the Space Connect reporter for the USA TODAY Network. Reach him at elagatta@
Medscape
12 minutes ago
- Medscape
CATALYST: A Novel Approach to Treating Diabetes
This transcript has been edited for clarity. Akshay B. Jain, MD:Welcome, from the ADA 85th Annual Sessions in Chicago. I'm endocrinologist Akshay Jain, from University of British Columbia in Vancouver. With us today is Dr Vivian Fonseca, professor of medicine at Tulane. Welcome, Dr Fonseca. Vivian Fonseca, MD: Hi there. Thank you for asking me to join you. Jain: Dr Fonseca, you're presenting the results of the CATALYST study. Tell us a little bit more about the study. Fonseca: The CATALYST study is a very novel approach to treating diabetes. We took people with uncontrolled diabetes despite taking many medications, including insulin, GLP-1 receptor agonists, dual agonists, SGLT2 inhibitors, and metformin. They also had many medications for hypertension. We asked the question as to whether cortisol was elevated and nonsuppressed in this population. We did a very simple overnight, 1-mg dexamethasone suppression test in a little over 1000 people. We were very surprised to find that 24% of them had a cortisol that did not fully suppress. They met the criteria for hypercortisolism as recommended by the European and the US endocrine societies today, at more than 1.8. Jain: That's a staggering number. Fonseca: That is a staggering number. It was quite a surprise to me and my colleagues. Jain: Once you identify these individuals, what's the next step for them? Fonseca: For the next steps, there is a range of things to do. If you identify hypercortisolism, you want to see whether there's an adrenal tumor or something like that. We did CT scans of the abdomen in that population, and one third of them had some abnormality. Not all of them had a tumor that was surgically resectable. Some had bilateral disease, and some just had thickening, which you would just wait and watch. Here, you have a population with hypercortisolemia at a higher rate than expected, with or without an abnormality on imaging. Some of them were surgically treatable, but for this particular study, we chose to take that group of people and treat them medically. There is a wide variety of medicines available for treating elevated cortisol, which have mainly been tested in Cushing syndrome. Mifepristone is a nonspecific steroid hormone receptor blocker that's known to block cortisol action and is approved for treating hyperglycemia in people with hypercortisolism. It was okay to actually test it in this population, so we did a randomized trial, randomizing those people with hypercortisolemia in a 2:1 ratio to mifepristone or placebo and following them for 24 weeks. Jain: What were the results? Fonseca: Again, another very surprising result. The A1c fell by 1.47%, almost 1.5% from the baseline of 8.5%. That is a very, very robust response. What I like about it is that this is not giving it to everybody with diabetes. You're using what I would call precision medicine. You find an abnormality, you treat that abnormality, and you get a very good result. There were a few other spinoff things. The weight fell significantly. The waist circumference declined significantly. There were also side effects that are consistent with the mifepristone side effect profile. The potassium fell. You get hypokalemia because the cortisol levels don't fall. They rise because you're blocking the receptor and you stimulate the mineralocorticoid receptor. The blood pressure went up a little bit, but it was still mostly at goal in most of the patients. You can treat that hypokalemia, so I won't go into that. We also had what we call glucocorticoid withdrawal syndrome. People on steroids who just stop, when you treat Cushing syndrome, or any of the medications for hypercortisolemia will give you a feeling of withdrawal of the steroid that you're used to. Those are to be expected. The side effect profile shows expected side effects in many people. But still, we can get around it and get a very good result on diabetes treatment. Jain: This is fascinating. We are unmasking hypercortisolemia as an underlying reason for insulin resistance. Fonseca: I wouldn't say unmasking. We are recognizing it in a novel way for the first time, and are able to treat people who we were throwing many drugs at [the problem] — wasting those drugs, if you ask me — when we were not treating the fundamental problem. Jain: When should clinicians think about this as an underlying issue? Fonseca: The way I translate every clinical trial, you do it for what the trial was done for. You have people who are uncontrolled, or you may say difficult to control, uncontrolled or on many medications. Often, you find comorbidities. They have had this problem for a while. Many of them have complications of diabetes, and a significant number had heart disease. You treat them with a very specific treatment, and you get a good result. Now, in some people the treatment may be surgical. You could use this drug or other drugs, and there are some new ones. This has become an important target for therapy, so we will see this approach. That also leaves the question as to [the fact that] there were 24% with this abnormality. What's happening in the other 75%? Maybe there are other abnormalities that we haven't recognized. I think you and I still have a large amount of work to do. Jain: We do indeed. Your target population was individuals with type 2 diabetes. Fonseca: Type 2 diabetes that was not controlled. Jain: Do you think this could be an underlying problem in type 1 diabetes as well? Fonseca: Hypercortisolism can occur in anybody. If you're finding many challenges in type 1 diabetes, you could do it. Obviously, people who are not doing well in their general health without diabetes could have hypercortisolism. This is not what we recognize as the textbook Cushing syndrome. These people did not have those features. The obesity was mild and low central. They had little features, but not the full-blown textbook description, which comes after many years of having very severe hypercortisolism. Jain: For those individuals who, say, are on birth control, would you then recommend doing a urine test? Fonseca: That's a very important question. We excluded those people from the study because you get a false elevation due to raising cortisol-binding globulin with estrogen. We did it in people who had a probability based on some anecdotal things and studies in Europe that were done before, and also excluding people who would have a false positive or a false negative, such as [those with] estrogen use. We don't know how to really identify those people well, without stopping the therapy. Jain: Any final key pearls of wisdom from this trial? Fonseca: I think, like anything that's new, it's exciting. Many of these people were very glad that we found an abnormality. I mean, it sounds bad, but they were blaming themselves, they were being labeled as noncompliant, and they were very frustrated with this. Jain: And the medication burden that they were facing. Fonseca: We actually withdrew a number of medications on several people. Jain: Great. Those are the results of the CATALYST trial. Thank you so much, Dr Fonseca, for joining. Fonseca: Thank you. It's a pleasure to be here.
