After California, it is New Jersey that has become the second U.S. state to legalize embryonic stem-cell research, giving a blow to anti-abortion advocates among which Roman Catholic were most prominent, since, it requires human embryos destruction. Moreover, legalization of this stem cell research work has also approved $270 million.

As all we know that legalization of stem cell research had to pass through many fits and starts. That is the reason why advocates of stem cell research are considering it as a huge victory for them.

Moreover, we must not forget that stem cell research is the need of the hour and nations who are not giving it a priority it requires will see its real power very soon and repent. Recently, news stating that researchers in UK are much worried, since government of UK is not paying adequate heed to their stem cell research work, has worried stem cell advocates all round the world. But this move by New Jersey is really going to sooth those people who are enthusiastic about this stem cell research work.

I have always wondered why different animals behave the way they do because they seem to differ strikingly in character and temperament. Not just that, animals within a single population also seem to act differently from one another. Thanks to scientific studies, I will soon find answers to my barrage of questions. Just recently, it has become evident that personalities are a widespread phenomenon in the animal kingdom. Animals as diverse as spiders, mice and squids appear to have personalities. Personality differences have been described in more than 60 species, including primates, rodents, birds, fish, insects and mollusks.

Why do different personality types exist within a single population given that, at first sight, one would expect one type to be more successful than another? Why are individuals not more flexible considering that personality rigidity sometimes leads to seemingly inefficient behaviour? Why do we find the same types of traits correlated with each other in very different kinds of animals?

Current Research

New work by Max Wolf (University of Groningen; currently at the Santa Fe Institute), Santa Fe Institute Postdoctoral Fellow Sander van Doorn, Franz Weissing (University of Groningen), and Olof Leimar (Stockholm University) offers an explanation for the evolution of animal personalities.

Max Wolf et al argue that in many cases, personalities are shaped by a simple underlying principle: the more an individual stands to lose (in terms of future reproduction) the more cautiously it is likely to behave, in all kinds of situations and consistently over time.

They begin with two basic observations. Firstly, variation in personalities is often structured according to differences in the overall willingness to take risks. Secondly, individuals are often confronted with a trade-off between current and future reproduction: the more an individual currently invests in reproduction, the less the resources left to invest in future opportunities, and vice versa.

Method

The authors use a mathematical model to demonstrate that this fundamental trade-off can give rise to populations where some individuals put more emphasis on future reproduction than others. Individuals who invest in future reproductive success eventually evolve into risk-aversive beings in different behavioural contexts (e.g. encounters with predators and aggressive interactions), whereas individuals who put emphasis on current reproductive success evolve a more risk-prone personality.

Scientists developing medical implants should rethink their decision of making implants that do not interfere with the body of the person in which it is implanted.

According to a new research, medical implants should not be developed in a manner as previously thought. Rather than preventing them from interfering with the body, implants should be made in a manner by which they can deliberately interfere with the body of the patient.

Currently researchers use the so called Biomaterials because they are good in hiding from the body’s immune system and thus are not rejected by the immune system of the body. After a month of the implanting surgery, the body isolates implants by covering them in a collagenous, avascular sac. Materials in which this sac is not too thick are classified as “Biocompatible”.

Researchers have stated that this technique demands some more work and it’s high time that they should look for something much better than this. They are now looking to design materials that can specifically interfere with the biological processes of the body. Such materials should be made with specifically sized pores so that it can encourage the development of small blood vessels in the implant. A much easier alternative is to cover the implant with a layer of DNA that prevents the formation of the collagenous layer.

Such a technique allows the body and the implant to coexist in a better way. They can actively work together, rather than simply trying to prevent them fighting against each other. By using such techniques researchers hope that a new generation of implants can be developed and they are looking forward for a better and exciting future.