Category: The Conversation – UK

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Jack Ashby, Assistant Director of the University Museum of Zoology, Cambridge, University of Cambridge

One day in August, 1875, a greyish-blue parrot was shot on a small island in the Indian Ocean near Mauritius. It was the last time a Rodrigues parakeet was known to be seen alive.

That bird was one of only two ever preserved. Exactly 150 years on, both rest under our care at the University Museum of Zoology in Cambridge, England. Aside from a few fossilised fragments, they represent the only physical evidence the species ever existed.

For many extinct animals, museums are now their last remaining habitat. Without these collections, we wouldn’t just have lost the creatures themselves – we’d have lost the very knowledge that they existed at all. This can be thought of as double extinction.

As I explore in my recent book, Nature’s Memory: Behind the Scenes at the World’s Natural History Museums, those of us working in museums take seriously the responsibility of safeguarding the proof of what species we have shared our planet with, and how that diversity has changed over time. Our collections are constantly being used to learn lessons from past losses and this role has only ever increased over time.

Extinction and sex bias

There are a few enigmatic accounts of green and blue parrots by sailors marooned on Rodrigues in the 1700s, but a specimen wasn’t collected until 1871. That was when the British colonial administrator on Mauritius, Edward Newton, received a female bird that had never before been scientifically described. (Scientists must write a formal “description” of a new species for it to be officially recognised).

Newton sent the preserved parakeet on to his brother Alfred Newton – 19th century Britain’s most eminent ornithologist and the University of Cambridge’s first professor of zoology – who described the new species in print.

This makes it something of a rarity: only a quarter of bird species are described using female specimens, meaning that in most cases the male form is effectively considered the standard representation of its species, while the female is considered the “other”.

Incidentally, although women have always played a major role in natural history, only 8% of birds named after people are named after women. This is one of the reasons why I refer to this species as “Rodrigues parakeet”, named after its home island, in preference over its other name, Newton’s parakeet (though ironically in this specific case the island also happens to be named after a man).

In a further display of the human social gender biases underlying much of natural history, having been offered the opportunity to publish an illustration of the specimen alongside his description, Alfred Newton wrote that “as it is unluckily that of a female bird, I refrain from giving one”. He was holding out for a male.

Due mainly to deforestation for agriculture on Rodrigues, over the course of a century, the once common parakeet’s population had crashed. When further searches for the bird were unsuccessful, Newton eventually provided an illustration of the species – still based on that lone female.

That same year, when one was shot on August 14, 1875, Edward Newton was finally able to send his brother the male he desired. None was ever seen again, and it is quite possible that it was the true endling: the last living member of its species.

Precious little remains

Many extinction tales, and indeed the natural history museums that tell them, are intertwined with colonialism. Dodos, from nearby Mauritius, became the ultimate icons of extinction partly because they are relatively common in museums worldwide.

Edward Newton again played a role: he was the islands’s colonial official in 1865 – almost 200 years after the dodo’s extinction – when Indian indentured labourers were ordered to extract hundreds of dodo bones from a Mauritian swamp, feeling for them in the mud with their bare feet. This is the origin of almost all dodo bones in museums today.

However, countless other lost species, like the Rodrigues parakeet, are represented only by one or two specimens. Without museums preserving these precious remains, we could never comprehend what has been lost. Beyond scientific research, these specimens provide museum visitors with a tangible connection to the permanent reality of extinction.

Found, lost, described

This isn’t just a 19th century story. In 2000, for instance, a single snake-eyed lizard was collected during fieldwork on a wooded plateau in northwest India. It was preserved in the vast collections of the Bombay Natural History Society, before being described as a new species 20 years later: Ophisops agarwali.

But when researchers returned to its habitat, they could not find the lizard again. They have concluded that it is probably extinct, most likely because of traditional forest burning practices.

The lizard was caught just in time to be recognised – but not in time to be saved.

Why these losses matter now

Like the lizard, the Rodrigues parakeet’s story isn’t just a quirk of natural history – it’s a warning. Across the world, species are being lost far faster than we can name them. It’s a sad truth that there are undescribed species in museum storerooms which can no longer be found in their wild habitats. Some become extinct in the window between collection and description.

When we preserve those fragments, we keep more than a specimen. We keep a record of what the planet once held.

If that single lizard had not been caught in 2000, or if those parakeets had not been stored in 1875, the existence of their species would never have been recognised and nor would its loss. We are both richer and poorer for that knowledge.

Jack Ashby is affiliated with the Natural Sciences Collections Association.

– ref. The Rodrigues parakeet’s last day: what one extinct bird tells us about the role of museums – https://theconversation.com/the-rodrigues-parakeets-last-day-what-one-extinct-bird-tells-us-about-the-role-of-museums-263086

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Laura Roden, Professor in Chronobiology, Coventry University

Many people find that their sleep and moods are linked to the seasons. Those living in temperate zones may feel like hibernating in winter and staying out all night in summer, though even those in the tropics can be affected by changing seasons. That’s because we are seasonal animals and adjust our behaviour according to cues from the environment.

Now, it turns out that our ancient adaptation to the seasons also affects our ability to adjust to modern lifestyle factors such as shiftwork – and probably jet lag, too.

This is the conclusion of a recent paper studying about 3,000 US medical interns wearing health trackers on their wrists for a year. The study also found significant differences between participants, which it linked to variations in a specific gene called SLC20A2.

On average, the medical interns’ daily step count and the time they spent awake were both higher in summer than in winter. Yet some participants showed little to no difference in their step counts between summer and winter, while some even showed opposite patterns to the main group.

The authors used heart-rate data collected via the health trackers to calculate each person’s internal time, in other words what time it “feels like” to their body. This is determined by our circadian rhythm, the “body clock” which also affects everything from body temperature to hormone levels. The authors then compared this to participants’ activity patterns to look at to what extent their bodies were disrupted by night shifts.

Participants who showed the greatest seasonal difference in step count also showed the most disruption from winter night shifts to their sleep-wake cycle – when and how long they sleep. They were not disrupted in the same way after summer night shifts.

The researchers then looked at how these findings related to the SLC20A2 gene, since previous work had shown that the gene is involved in seasonality in mice. This gene is responsible for encoding a protein embedded in our cell membranes that allows the movement of ions (electrically charged atoms or molecules) in and out of cells. The protein is very active in neurons in the brain, where this movement of ions is important in generating the electrical signals which form the basis of all brain functions.

The researchers found thousands of differences in the sequence of the SLC20A2 gene in the participants they studied. They focused on five differences called single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) and how different combinations of those SNPs (or genotypes) influenced participants’ behaviour in summer and winter. Using mathemetical modelling, they were able to show that having a particular genotype influenced participants’ circadian rhythms, physical activity and adaptability to shiftwork in winter.

Circadian rhythms and the seasons

The most reliable feature of seasons, at least in temperate countries, is the change in the proportion of light in a day (the photoperiod). Seasonal changes in plants and animals such as when they mate and migrate are thought to be a way of responding to changes in the availability of food to increase their chances of surviving and reproducing. Even humans, particularly males, demonstrate seasonality in reproductive hormones, with higher levels of testosterone in spring and summer. This is despite the fact that we do not tend to reproduce seasonally.

Light exposure via our eyes synchronises our circadian rhythms to the environment every day. A model proposed by biologists Colin Pittendrigh and Serge Daan almost 50 years ago suggests that humans’ and many other animals’ circadian rhythms are governed by two internal clocks which are coupled to each other: one that responds to dawn and one that responds to dusk. The idea is that these separately control the transitions into daytime (active phase) and into nighttime (resting phase). Biologists still use the model as a framework to explain how living things adjust to the changing length of days across the seasons.

Light signals are transmitted from the eyes to a collection of neurons in the brain called the suprachiasmatic nuclei (SCN) which communicate that information to the rest of the brain and body. The cells in the SCN are arranged in clusters that co-operate differently in response to different day lengths. Research has shown that in mice and rats, SCNs signal in synchrony in shorter days (winter), and out of phase with one another in longer days (summer).

The intensity of how synchronised these cells are leads to differences in how they transmit information about light. This contributes to individual differences in our body’s response to changes in day length, as well as to other things like shiftwork and jet lag. Also, we also all experience different amounts of natural sunlight and indoor electrical light. The amount of light you’ve been exposed to recently can affect how you adapt to the changing seasons. This is another reason not to expect yourself to adapt to these changes in the same way as other people

Night-shiftwork is also associated with poor health such as weight gain and low quality sleep. Understanding the biological basis of people’s adaptation to shiftwork will help us to mitigate this by developing personalised strategies to shift-workers’ health. And it could help people understand whether they need more rest when jet-lagged or as the seasons change.

Laura Roden receives funding from the Wellcome Trust.

– ref. Can’t sleep? Your ability to adapt to shiftwork and the changing seasons may be determined by your genes – https://theconversation.com/cant-sleep-your-ability-to-adapt-to-shiftwork-and-the-changing-seasons-may-be-determined-by-your-genes-257749

Source: The Conversation – UK – By David Benton, Professor Emeritus (Human & Health Sciences), Medicine Health and Life Science, Swansea University

Robert F. Kennedy Jr has spent years railing against food additives, framing them as part of a broader threat to public health. Now, as the US health secretary, his views have taken on new weight.

Plans are now afoot to start phasing out eight synthetic food dyes in the American food supply, with claims they are harmful and are linked to ADHD (attention deficit hyperactivity disorder). This has reignited a long-running debate around this subject.

Food additives have been treated with suspicion for years. Nearly 20 years ago in the UK, the Daily Mail ran a “ban the food additives” campaign. In 2017, research by the Food Standards Agency found that 29% of people in the UK thought that synthetic chemicals posed a risk to health.

Earlier this year, Arizona and New York state already went as far as removing additives from school meals. But is there convincing evidence to support this, or should we be looking elsewhere?

ADHD is a developmental condition whose symptoms include inattention, hyperactivity and impulsivity. There’s no single cause of ADHD. Risk factors include genetics, prenatal substance exposure, toxins like lead, low birth weight and early neglect.

Hyperactivity itself isn’t exclusive to ADHD. It can also be a response to anxiety, excitement, sleep problems or sensory overload. In 2021 the Californian Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment concluded that food dyes can also stimulate hyperactivity in sensitive children. That is, not all children were affected, but it may aggravate symptoms in those with a pre-existing problem or biological predisposition.

The effects tend to be small, often only observed through subjective reporting (such as observations by parents), rather than more objective measures. Some experts question whether these findings are clinically significant.

Having a high intake of additives correlates with a high intake of ultra-processed food – usually a diet high in sugar and fat, while low in fibre, protein, vitamins and minerals. So, why assume that additives are the problem, and not the rest of the diet?

Eating ultra-processed food – and therefore additives – is more common among low-income families, who are also at greater risk of ADHD. To some extent ADHD may be an indication of poverty, and a generally poor diet, reflecting the financial need to eat cheaper ultra-processed foods.

Studying people with ADHD also tells us little about the rest of the population. One of the largest UK studies to look at children more broadly was carried out in 2007, on the Isle of Wight off the south coast of England. Researchers gave a mix of additives to a range of children.

The European Food Safety Authority examined the findings and concluded there was only “limited evidence of a small effect on activity and attention in some children” from eating additives. The effects were inconsistent, and individual additives couldn’t be identified as harmful.

An Irish study in 2009 found that the doses of additives used in the Isle of Wight study had been much greater than are consumed in normal diets. This was an important observation, as consuming some substances in too high a dose can have an adverse reaction. Water and oxygen are examples of this.

Some experts argue that there is sufficient evidence to justify regulation of some additives, or at least adding details to food labels to help children with ADHD, although other experts disagree.

Out of precaution, since 2010 any food or drink in both the UK and EU containing any of the colour additives has had to carry a warning. Even though there was no scientific justification, it was considered better to be safe than sorry – especially when the colours have no nutritional value.

Natural = good?

There’s a common assumption that natural chemicals are good, while synthetic ones are bad. But what matters isn’t how a chemical is made but how the body responds.

Morphine and cocaine come from plants, for instance, and their dangers are well known. Recently in Australia, three people were fatally poisoned by death cap mushrooms that had been added to their meal. It’s estimated that 5% to 20% of all plants are toxic to humans. So, while “natural” sounds wholesome, it’s no guarantee of safety.

The total number of unique chemicals in the human diet exceeds 26,000, but our present understanding of how diet influences health reflects only 150 of these. The remainder are “nutritional dark matter” which have unknown effects.

To better understand the link between diet and hyperactivity, researchers have experimented with what’s known as the oligoantigenic diet (or a “few foods” diet). Children are given a very limited menu, then foods are gradually reintroduced to see what triggers a reaction.

The first study using this method was carried out in London in 1985. It found that at least one of the children reacted adversely to 48 of the foods in their diet with signs of hyperactivity.

With cows’ milk this was true for 64% of children in the study. For grapes it was 49%, hens’ eggs 29%, fish 23%, apples 13% and tea 10%. These are not ultra-processed foods, but we need to explore whether they contain chemicals that influence the biology of some individuals.

As many as 79% of children reacted to a preservative and a colouring, although the doses used were greater than would be normally consumed. And as no child reacted only to these additives, and different children reacted to different foods, only removing additives wouldn’t eliminate symptoms.

All the children in the study also had a history of allergic reactions, so their responses to food may reflect a biological predisposition. This is important, as it has been found consistently that a reaction to an additive occurs in a minority of children.

A 2017 review concluded “there is convincing evidence for the beneficial effect of a few-foods diet on ADHD”. It suggested the diet offered a “treatment for those with ADHD not responding to, or too young for, medication”.

For parents concerned about their child’s ADHD, it’s worth remembering that food additives are unlikely to be the sole cause. If a child’s behaviour seems linked to diet, keeping a food diary can help identify patterns. But any elimination diet should be approached with care and expert advice, to avoid doing more harm than good. Ultimately, every child is different, and what works for one may not work for another.

David Benton does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Do food additives cause symptoms of ADHD? It’s more complicated than you think – https://theconversation.com/do-food-additives-cause-symptoms-of-adhd-its-more-complicated-than-you-think-261431

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Zoe Wimshurst, Senior Lecturer of Sport Psychology, Health Sciences University

As the Premier League season kicks off, fans will debate their new kits almost as much as new signings. But could shirt colour actually give teams a performance edge? Science suggests they can.

One of the most studied colour effects in sport is that of red kits leading to greater success. In the Premier League era, more than half of all champions have worn red home kits, and a study looking at the 2004 Olympic Games found that in combat sports, where the colours of red and blue are randomly assigned, athletes wearing red were more likely to win.

These effects have also been shown in Rugby League and esports (video game competitions).

But why is this? It has been suggested that from both a cultural and biological perspective, red is associated with dominance and aggression. Wearing red has been shown to boost players feelings of dominance whereas an opponent who is wearing red is perceived as more threatening.

Research has also shown that taekwondo referees award more points to fighters in red than blue – even when digital manipulation allows them to view exactly the same fight with just the colours reversed. Studies on football players have also found that strikers score fewer goals when facing a goalkeeper wearing red.

There are other useful colours, too. The gold selected by Crystal Palace is a strong contender as it offers high visibility under both daylight and flood lights. Lighter colours which will offer a high contrast against the pitch, such as the whites chosen by Chelsea and Nottingham Forest, will also stand out.

Psychologists call these “colour singletons”, hues that are unique in the visual scene. Studies show that our attention is automatically drawn to them. Unusual colours that are unlikely to match those found on the pitch or advertising boarding will make players easier to detect at a glance.

Patterns matter too. High-contrast blocking or stripes can help separate a moving object from its background. Bournemouth’s striped away kit should be more visible than a plain mid-tone shirt. The contrast between the luminous top half of Fulham’s away shirt and the relatively dark shorts should also enhance detection.

Camouflage effect

Despite this evidence, not a single Premier League club has chosen red for an away kit this season. Instead, there are some novel choices such as lilac, cream and turquoise. A previous example of a novel kit choice not working so well was in 1996 when Manchester United’s infamous grey away kit was scrapped mid-game after gong 3-0 down to Southampton.

The manager, Alex Ferguson, claimed players couldn’t see each other clearly. It wasn’t just an excuse, the grey was a near perfect match for the concrete of the stadium and blended into the blur of the crowd.

Camouflage effects like this are well documented in biology. Indeed, animals depend on them to make detection by predators harder. In a stadium, muted greys or browns can do the same. Brentford’s new brown away kit risks a similar problem, especially in overcast conditions or with concrete-backed stands. Black kits can also fade into the background, particularly in low light conditions where there is reduced contrast.

This season, Tottenham Hotspur*, Manchester City and Aston Villa have all selected black away shirts which could lead to lower visibility of teammates.

Camouflage is not limited to dull colours. Newcastle’s green away kit, while bright, is likely to merge with the turf, particularly in players peripheral awareness where the human visual system is not designed to see colours clearly.

Another subtle visual trap is “countershading”, a gradient that goes from dark to light found in many animals to make them less detectable. In football, a dark shirt with pale shorts could break up a players outline in bright sunlight. This is great for a deer-avoiding predators, less helpful if you are trying to spot your striker in space.

So why don’t clubs use this science to select kits? The answer is most likely commercial. Away kits are as much about selling shirts as improving performance. Novelty colours create buzz, drive sales and help clubs stand out on the high street, even if they blend in on the pitch.

Colour is not just fashion. It is also linked to psychology, perception and physics. The right shade can make you unmissable, the wrong one can make you disappear. In elite sport, with such fine margins between success and failure, kit colour is an area which should not be overlooked.

Zoe Wimshurst is the owner of Performance Vision Ltd, a company specialising in visual training and consultancy services.

– ref. Premier League: from red success to grey failure – how kit colours appears to impact performance – https://theconversation.com/premier-league-from-red-success-to-grey-failure-how-kit-colours-appears-to-impact-performance-263062

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Zoe Wimshurst, Senior Lecturer of Sport Psychology, Health Sciences University

As the Premier League season kicks off, fans will debate their new kits almost as much as new signings. But could shirt colour actually give teams a performance edge? Science suggests they can.

One of the most studied colour effects in sport is that of red kits leading to greater success. In the Premier League era, more than half of all champions have worn red home kits, and a study looking at the 2004 Olympic Games found that in combat sports, where the colours of red and blue are randomly assigned, athletes wearing red were more likely to win.

These effects have also been shown in Rugby League and esports (video game competitions).

But why is this? It has been suggested that from both a cultural and biological perspective, red is associated with dominance and aggression. Wearing red has been shown to boost players feelings of dominance whereas an opponent who is wearing red is perceived as more threatening.

Research has also shown that taekwondo referees award more points to fighters in red than blue – even when digital manipulation allows them to view exactly the same fight with just the colours reversed. Studies on football players have also found that strikers score fewer goals when facing a goalkeeper wearing red.

There are other useful colours, too. The gold selected by Crystal Palace is a strong contender as it offers high visibility under both daylight and flood lights. Lighter colours which will offer a high contrast against the pitch, such as the whites chosen by Chelsea and Nottingham Forest, will also stand out.

Psychologists call these “colour singletons”, hues that are unique in the visual scene. Studies show that our attention is automatically drawn to them. Unusual colours that are unlikely to match those found on the pitch or advertising boarding will make players easier to detect at a glance.

Patterns matter too. High-contrast blocking or stripes can help separate a moving object from its background. Bournemouth’s striped away kit should be more visible than a plain mid-tone shirt. The contrast between the luminous top half of Fulham’s away shirt and the relatively dark shorts should also enhance detection.

Camouflage effect

Despite this evidence, not a single Premier League club has chosen red for an away kit this season. Instead, there are some novel choices such as lilac, cream and turquoise. A previous example of a novel kit choice not working so well was in 1996 when Manchester United’s infamous grey away kit was scrapped mid-game after gong 3-0 down to Southampton.

The manager, Alex Ferguson, claimed players couldn’t see each other clearly. It wasn’t just an excuse, the grey was a near perfect match for the concrete of the stadium and blended into the blur of the crowd.

Camouflage effects like this are well documented in biology. Indeed, animals depend on them to make detection by predators harder. In a stadium, muted greys or browns can do the same. Brentford’s new brown away kit risks a similar problem, especially in overcast conditions or with concrete-backed stands. Black kits can also fade into the background, particularly in low light conditions where there is reduced contrast.

This season, Tottenham Hotspur*, Manchester City and Aston Villa have all selected black away shirts which could lead to lower visibility of teammates.

Camouflage is not limited to dull colours. Newcastle’s green away kit, while bright, is likely to merge with the turf, particularly in players peripheral awareness where the human visual system is not designed to see colours clearly.

Another subtle visual trap is “countershading”, a gradient that goes from dark to light found in many animals to make them less detectable. In football, a dark shirt with pale shorts could break up a players outline in bright sunlight. This is great for a deer-avoiding predators, less helpful if you are trying to spot your striker in space.

So why don’t clubs use this science to select kits? The answer is most likely commercial. Away kits are as much about selling shirts as improving performance. Novelty colours create buzz, drive sales and help clubs stand out on the high street, even if they blend in on the pitch.

Colour is not just fashion. It is also linked to psychology, perception and physics. The right shade can make you unmissable, the wrong one can make you disappear. In elite sport, with such fine margins between success and failure, kit colour is an area which should not be overlooked.

Zoe Wimshurst is the owner of Performance Vision Ltd, a company specialising in visual training and consultancy services.

– ref. Premier League: from red success to grey failure – can kit colours really impact performance? – https://theconversation.com/premier-league-from-red-success-to-grey-failure-can-kit-colours-really-impact-performance-263062

Source: The Conversation – UK – By James Vigus, Senior Lecturer in English, Queen Mary University of London

To mark the 250th anniversary of her birth, we’re pitting Jane Austen’s much-loved novels against each other in a battle of wit, charm and romance. Seven leading Austen experts have made their case for her ultimate leading man, but the winner is down to you. Cast your vote in the poll at the end of the article, and let us know the reason for your choice in the comments. It’s breeches at dawn.

Edward Ferrars, Sense and Sensibility

Championed by James Vigus, senior lecturer in English, Queen Mary University of London

Edward Ferrars, supposedly “idle and depressed”, gets a bad press. Even Elinor, who loves him, struggles to decipher his reserve. The explanation – his secret engagement to scheming Lucy Steele – seems discreditable. Yet among Sense and Sensibility’s showy, inadequate men, reticent Edward (alongside Colonel Brandon) is a hero.

Unlike Willoughby, who jilts Marianne to marry for money, Edward dutifully sticks with Lucy, wanting her to avoid penury. Significantly, Elinor approves. Edward has an “open affectionate heart”, this inwardness contrasting Willoughby’s more superficial “open affectionate manners”. And his “saucy” teasing of Marianne’s fashionable love of picturesque landscapes elicits her first-name-terms affection for him.

Edward, though, is serious – a Christian stoic like Elinor. Resistant to family pressure, he “always preferred” the church, an understated vocation. No orator, Edward speaks plainly: “I am grown neither humble nor penitent by what has passed. – I am grown very happy.” This happiness, the moral luck of gaining Elinor and a clergyman’s living, is credible because it’s deserved.

Henry Tilney, Northanger Abbey

Championed by Sarah Annes Brown, professor of English literature, Anglia Ruskin University

There are many reasons why I love Jane Austen, but the charm of her leading men isn’t high on the list. In Austen’s novels, a witty and charming male should be approached with extreme caution. He is likely to prove an unsuitable suitor who must be rejected in favour of someone worthier – and duller.

But Northanger Abbey’s Henry Tilney is the exception. This is particularly true of the earlier part of the novel. There, he teases Catherine by imagining how she’ll describe her first meeting with him at the Lower Rooms in Bath in her diary.

He then goes on to gossip about ladies’ fashions with chaperone Mrs Allen. She asks for his opinion on Catherine’s own gown: “It is very pretty, madam,” said he, gravely examining it; “but I do not think it will wash well; I am afraid it will fray.”

It is very difficult to imagine Mr Darcy concerning himself with such trifles.
Admittedly Henry becomes a bit more finger-wagging in the second half of the novel – but then, he has been saddled with Austen’s silliest heroine.

---

This article is part of a series commemorating the 250th anniversary of Jane Austen’s birth. Despite having published only six books, she is one of the best-known authors in history. These articles explore the legacy and life of this incredible writer.

---

Colonel Brandon, Sense and Sensibility

Championed by Michael Meeuwis, associate professor of literature, University of Warwick

Austen wrote Colonel Brandon’s background to reflect the violence and seductions of the 18th-century novel. He nearly elopes with his brother’s wife Eliza, then he rescues Eliza and her daughter (also named Eliza) after seduction by someone else. Finally, he fights a duel with Willoughby over Eliza junior.

Here, Austen suggests that women in the 18th-century novel were generally so interchangeable they didn’t even need separate names. Sense and Sensibility’s heroine, Elinor, is magnificently unimpressed by his story. She “sighed over the fancied necessity of this; but to a man and a soldier she presumed not to censure it.”

Such wry commentary is only possible in a novel where quieter life prevails – and Brandon becomes a romantic hero of that world too. In marrying him, Marianne gains access to his library, where she may read – and perhaps even write – the kinds of books where women have names.

Edmund Bertram, Mansfield Park

Championed by Jane E. Wright, senior lecturer in English literature, University of Bristol

Edmund Bertram, the older cousin of Austen’s heroine, Fanny Price, in Mansfield Park, isn’t as dashing, wildly rich, or immediately appealing as some of Austen’s other leading men. A second son with a compromised inheritance, he is a matter-of-fact character training to be clergyman. He also exhibits misjudgment in falling in love (or infatuation) with the unsuitable Mary Crawford.

However, in addition to his seriousness about the church and responsibility in managing his father’s estate, he is the only one of Austen’s leading men who – against his family’s unkindness – is not only consistently caring towards the leading lady, but both notices her intelligence and takes trouble to support it.

In the fluctuations of the novel’s plot, he and Fanny offer care, caution, and comfort to each other, so that, in some respects, they might be said to come to their eventual marriage on slightly more equal terms.

Fitzwilliam Darcy, Pride and Prejudice

Championed by Penny Bradshaw, associate professor of English literature, University of Cumbria

On one level, Mr Darcy needs no championing. Cultural evidence (from branded tea-towels and other merchandise, to multiple portrayals on screen) suggests that he remains the most popular of Austen’s heroes.

His “fine, tall person” and “handsome features” are clearly important factors here, but his chilly reserve and initial dismissal of Elizabeth Bennet as merely “tolerable” do not immediately endear him to the reader.

The source of Darcy’s very great appeal lies partly in the fact that he begins to love her in spite of his own prejudices and because, while Darcy does undoubtedly admire Lizzie’s appearance (including her “fine eyes”), his admiration extends to qualities which, at this point in time, were hardly typical of the fictional heroines of romance.

Lizzie bears little resemblance to the usually rather passive and often victimised heroines encountered in countless popular novels of the late-18th and early-19th century. Crucially, Darcy is drawn to the “liveliness” of Lizzie’s mind and as a hero he therefore validates a new kind of heroine: a woman whose wit and intelligence is as much a part of her attraction as physical appearance.

Captain Wentworth, Persuasion

Championed by Emrys D. Jones, senior lecturer in 18th-century literature and culture, King’s College London

Frederick Wentworth isn’t meant to be admired from a distance like certain other Austen love interests. At various points in Persuasion, his thoughts are relayed to us through the free indirect discourse that more usually channels the inner lives of Austen’s heroines. And then, in the extraordinary penultimate chapter of the novel, we get his longing and his frustration straight from the source, in probably the most beautiful love letter in the history of literary fiction.

“Tell me not that I am too late,” he implores Anne Elliot. Notwithstanding his illustrious naval career, Wentworth is more vulnerable in that moment than any of the leading men before him. He writes of his soul being pierced, of his feelings overpowering him, using language that would, anywhere else in Austen, be mocked as excessive or indulgent. Wentworth carries it off, and in doing so proves that he’s a different kind of hero.

George Knightley, Emma

Championed by Christine Hawkins, teaching associate in school of the arts, Queen Mary University of London

George Knightley is underappreciated. “A sensible man about seven or eight and thirty” of a “cheerful manner” he is often undemonstrative, unshowy and cool. Not the classic dreamboat. But Knightley shows his worth through his honesty, trustworthiness and reliability.

Unlike the ostentatious Darcy, Knightley doesn’t offend and alienate everyone he meets. He is thoughtful and kind to others, championing the derided farmer Mr Martin, covering Harriet’s social embarrassment, and soothing the wounded feelings of Miss Bates. Knightley shows his sense of social responsibility. He is intelligent, practical and grounded.

Knightley is also Emma’s devoted lover: “I have not a fault to find with her … I love to look at her”. He sees her best qualities. But crucially, he questions her behaviour when he must (“I will tell you truths”) offering guidance and support when she acts wrongfully. Knightley is a secure, confident man, and his happy union with Emma is based on what every woman surely wants – equality and respect.

Now the experts have made their case, it’s your turn to decide which of Austen’s seven leading men is her best. Click the image below to vote in our poll, and see if other readers agree with you.

This article features references to books that have been included for editorial reasons, and may contain links to bookshop.org. If you click on one of the links and go on to buy something from bookshop.org The Conversation UK may earn a commission.

The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Jane Austen fight club: experts go head-to-head arguing for her best leading man – https://theconversation.com/jane-austen-fight-club-experts-go-head-to-head-arguing-for-her-best-leading-man-252756

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Sarah Allinson, Professor, Department of Biomedical and Life Sciences, Lancaster University

Skin cancer is typically caused by damage to the skin’s cells from ultraviolet radiation. But a recent case study has just shed light on another potential cause: human papillomavirus.

The report, which was published in the New England Journal of Medicine, focused on the case of a 34-year-old woman who had been diagnosed with over 40 squamous cell carcinomas (SCC). This is the second most common type of skin cancer.

The woman also had many wart-like growths in her mouth and on her skin. These were attributed to a human papillomavirus (HPV) infection.

Human papillomavirus is a common group of viruses that can infect skin and other parts of the body. While HPV often does not cause any problems or symptoms in most people, in some cases it can cause warts and is even linked to certain types of cancer – such as cervical cancer.

The woman in the latest report was referred by her doctor to the team of researchers who conducted the case study. She had already undergone multiple surgeries and rounds of immunotherapy to remove a large squamous cell carcinoma that repeatedly grew back on her forehead. The patient’s doctor believed this might be due to a condition that made it more difficult for her immune cells to fight off the tumours.

The researchers performed a genetic analysis on this recurrent tumour to understand why it continued to grow back. Under normal circumstances, SCC tumours have a genetic signature that shows their mutations were caused by ultraviolet radiation. These mutations usually drive their growth.

However, this patient’s cancer didn’t have these signature mutations. Instead, the researchers found that the HPV infection living on her skin had integrated itself into the DNA of the tumour on her forehead. It seemed that it was the virus that was actually driving the cancerous growth.

There are more than 200 different types of HPV viruses, only a few of which have been associated with cancers. HPV19, which infects skin, had not previously been linked to cancer. But in this case, it had gone rogue and caused the carcinoma.

Unique case

This recent case study is unique, it should be said. There were many factors that made it possible for the HPV infection to drive the recurrent growth of skin cancer.

The patient had a long history of health problems beginning in early childhood. This had brought her to the attention of researchers who were studying people who had problems with their immune system. A 2017 case report on her revealed that she had inherited mutations in two genes that play a role in immune function.

One of the mutated genes was ZAP70, which is involved in the normal function of a type of immune cell called a T-cell. This cell plays an essential role in helping the body successfully fight infections.

Inherited changes in ZAP70 that prevent it from working were previously known to cause a condition called severe combined immunodeficiency. This condition is usually diagnosed in infancy and, if not treated with a stem cell transplant, leads to death within the first couple of years of life. Being in her late 20s at that time, the woman became the oldest patient ever to be diagnosed with a ZAP70 immune condition.

The second mutated gene, RNF168, is involved in repairing damage to DNA.

The new team decided to investigate whether it was the unique combination of mutations in both genes that was allowing the HPV infection to cause cancer. However they concluded that the mutated RNF168 gene was a red herring.

The research team found that the patient’s RNF168 mutation was relatively common in the wider American population and wasn’t linked to any health issues. Further investigation of her cells also revealed that her DNA repair processes were functioning normally.

They then moved on to the ZAP70 gene. Here they found that although the patient’s ZAP70 gene was mutated, it still partly worked. This explained why she hadn’t succumbed to severe combined immunodeficiency in childhood. However, the mutation still made her immune system less effective. So because her T-cell response wasn’t fully functional, her body was unable to recognise and eliminate HPV-infected cells.

After receiving a stem cell transplant that replaced her immune cells with fully functioning ones from a donor, the woman made a complete recovery. The new T-cells were able to recognise and destroy the HPV-infected cells, including the skin cancer. Hopefully she will now remain cancer-free for years to come.

Immune health and cancer

This story highlights how important our immune system is in protecting us against cancer. Without it, even innocuous viruses that usually harmlessly co-exist on our skin can drive the formation of aggressive cancers.

It also demonstrates how modern genomic technology is transforming our understanding of disease. Without genetic sequencing, doctors would still be none the wiser about why this unfortunate woman had so many aggressive skin tumours.

But this study also raises questions about whether HPV-driven skin cancer could be a wider, previously unrecognised problem. The authors suggest that in the future, patients with aggressive and recurrent squamous cell carcinomas should be profiled for T-cell function and the presence of HPV infections. Like the woman in this story, they too might benefit from immune boosting therapies to treat their cancers.

Sarah Allinson does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Skin cancer: is HPV also a potential cause? – https://theconversation.com/skin-cancer-is-hpv-also-a-potential-cause-262450

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Zoe Wimshurst, Senior Lecturer of Sport Psychology, Health Sciences University

As the Premier League season kicks off, fans will debate their new kits almost as much as new signings. But could shirt colour actually give teams a performance edge? Science suggests they can.

One of the most studied colour effects in sport is that of red kits leading to greater success. In the Premier League era, more than half of all champions have worn red home kits, and a study looking at the 2004 Olympic Games found that in combat sports, where the colours of red and blue are randomly assigned, athletes wearing red were more likely to win.

These effects have also been shown in Rugby League and esports (video game competitions).

But why is this? It has been suggested that from both a cultural and biological perspective, red is associated with dominance and aggression. Wearing red has been shown to boost players feelings of dominance whereas an opponent who is wearing red is perceived as more threatening.

Research has also shown that taekwondo referees award more points to fighters in red than blue – even when digital manipulation allows them to view exactly the same fight with just the colours reversed. Studies on football players have also found that strikers score fewer goals when facing a goalkeeper wearing red.

There are other useful colours, too. The gold selected by Crystal Palace is a strong contender as it offers high visibility under both daylight and flood lights. Lighter colours which will offer a high contrast against the pitch, such as the whites chosen by Chelsea and Nottingham Forest, will also stand out.

Psychologists call these “colour singletons”, hues that are unique in the visual scene. Studies show that our attention is automatically drawn to them. Unusual colours that are unlikely to match those found on the pitch or advertising boarding will make players easier to detect at a glance.

Patterns matter too. High-contrast blocking or stripes can help separate a moving object from its background. Bournemouth’s striped away kit should be more visible than a plain mid-tone shirt. The contrast between the luminous top half of Fulham’s away shirt and the relatively dark shorts should also enhance detection.

Camouflage effect

Despite this evidence, not a single Premier League club has chosen red for an away kit this season. Instead, there are some novel choices such as lilac, cream and turquoise. A previous example of a novel kit choice not working so well was in 1996 when Manchester United’s infamous grey away kit was scrapped mid-game after gong 3-0 down to Southampton.

The manager, Alex Ferguson, claimed players couldn’t see each other clearly. It wasn’t just an excuse, the grey was a near perfect match for the concrete of the stadium and blended into the blur of the crowd.

Camouflage effects like this are well documented in biology. Indeed, animals depend on them to make detection by predators harder. In a stadium, muted greys or browns can do the same. Brentford’s new brown away kit risks a similar problem, especially in overcast conditions or with concrete-backed stands. Black kits can also fade into the background, particularly in low light conditions where there is reduced contrast.

This season, Tottenham Hotspur*, Manchester City and Aston Villa have all selected black away shirts which could lead to lower visibility of teammates.

Camouflage is not limited to dull colours. Newcastle’s green away kit, while bright, is likely to merge with the turf, particularly in players peripheral awareness where the human visual system is not designed to see colours clearly.

Another subtle visual trap is “countershading”, a gradient that goes from dark to light found in many animals to make them less detectable. In football, a dark shirt with pale shorts could break up a players outline in bright sunlight. This is great for a deer-avoiding predators, less helpful if you are trying to spot your striker in space.

So why don’t clubs use this science to select kits? The answer is most likely commercial. Away kits are as much about selling shirts as improving performance. Novelty colours create buzz, drive sales and help clubs stand out on the high street, even if they blend in on the pitch.

Colour is not just fashion. It is also linked to psychology, perception and physics. The right shade can make you unmissable, the wrong one can make you disappear. In elite sport, with such fine margins between success and failure, kit colour is an area which should not be overlooked.

Zoe Wimshurst is the owner of Performance Vision Ltd, a company specialising in visual training and consultancy services.

– ref. Premier League: from red success to grey failure – how kit colours impact performance – https://theconversation.com/premier-league-from-red-success-to-grey-failure-how-kit-colours-impact-performance-263062

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Gaby Harris, Lecturer, Manchester Metropolitan University

If you’re a parent, the summer holidays and approaching new school year might have you questioning your children’s access to pocket money – how much they get, how much they’re spending and what they’re spending money on.

How pocket money is provided varies. So be reassured there is no right, wrong or normal way to give your kids money. For some households, it will be weekly small amounts simply for kids to use at their leisure. For others, it will include forms of payment for work done around the house.

According to recent data from NatWest, children get an average of £3.85 a week, and £9.13 if you factor in income for chores.

While around one in three households give regular allowances, many households give pocket money flexibly. Much of this flexibility depends on how much children contribute to the household.

The language used in recent years in reports from banks such as NatWest and GoHenry on pocket money describe “entrepreneurial”, “determined” and “industrious” children who are earning more and spending responsibly. NatWest claims children are learning “great money management” and “positive behaviours”.

This positions pocket money as more than just disposable income – as a learning opportunity. But it’s worth looking closely at what money teaches children, and what it is we want them to learn.

On the face of it, teaching children to be hardworking, and rewarding that hard work, sounds alright. But we need to consider this carefully in a time of work precarity, debt and declining welfare.

This kind of financial literacy encourages an individualised idea of what money is and how it is valued. The consequence of this is that inequalities in income and finances become linked with personal failures of “not working hard enough”, rather than systemic problems.

In reality, a lack of access to money is not often a reflection of how hard someone works, but based on background, race, gender or disability.

Banks’ advice for parents also suggest that pocket money can be used to reward good behaviour. But what good behaviour means is up for debate. For one thing, it likely varies between parents and children, so becomes a tool for what parents think good behaviour is.

Money has a social power that children understand. My research demonstrates how they can use this to negotiate with each other, interpret parent rules and most importantly rework for their own purposes. I document the example of the teenage girl who knew her parents would give her more money if she went out with people they approved of. While the girl saw this as something she could negotiate for her own benefit, we must also ask what this teaches kids about coercion and control.

The risk is that parents will inadvertently encourage their children to associate money with control and a need to conform to access money. The effect of this can be far reaching.

Forthcoming research by my colleague at the London School of Economics, Liz Mann, explores how witnessing controlling behaviour over money in childhood may increase women’s desires for independence in adulthood, even if this leaves them economically disadvantaged in their relationships.

Building a better future

If we are going to make connections between money and behaviour, it would be far better to think about traits such as kindness, generosity, inclusivity. The evidence is there to suggest this is much more in line with how children think about and use money.

Children are very aware of their families’ financial situations and often adjust their spending around this. They are also savvy and communal with how they think about money. They create their own little economies based on sharing, borrowing and bartering with each other. These are much better skills of responsibility centred around sharing and caring.

NatWest’s recent report also suggests that, while kids might be feeling the cost-of-living squeeze every bit as much as adults, they remain steadfast in their generosity. They donate to causes important to them, including social, medical and environmental issues. Given the inclination for donations, there is scope to encourage a new generation of socially minded spenders.

This can include conversations with children on where their money comes from and where goes when they spend it. Think about how their money can support local, small businesses which sustain and develop local communities, rather than big business. Think too, about their awareness of differences in household income, and use this as a tool to discuss inequality in income and wealth and the benefits of redistribution.

Rather than focusing on ideas of “good” behaviour, or that their own industriousness is all they need to sustain them, we should be taking the lead from kids and encouraging discussions of money in ways which can include topics of fairness, redistribution and ethical spending. That is the kind of social power pocket money should encourage.

Gaby Harris has received funding from the Economic and Social Research Council.

– ref. What does pocket money teach children? It can offer social as well as financial education – https://theconversation.com/what-does-pocket-money-teach-children-it-can-offer-social-as-well-as-financial-education-262377

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Karolina Pawlik, Assistant Professor, AFCT Faculty, Xi’an Jiaotong-Liverpool University

Many of us would struggle to recall the last time we wrote anything substantial by hand. Digital devices often feel more convenient and efficient. But research shows that the intricate motor skills and visual processing required for handwriting encourages more extensive brain activity than typing.

The tools we use and our daily writing habits can influence our thinking and creativity. Because of this, I think we should reconsider the importance of hands-on ways of expressing ourselves and generating new ideas.

One of the oldest handwriting practices still in use today is Chinese calligraphy, which enables self-expression through skilful use of brushstrokes and composition. Chinese calligraphy gives equal value to the parts of the scroll that are blackened with the ink, and to those parts left unfilled.

For centuries, calligraphy was shaped by cultural, philosophical and artistic concepts. It established itself as one of the most significant forms of traditional and modern art in China. Perhaps more importantly, it served as a prominent medium for daily cultivation of the human mind and character.

Its basic tools are a soft brush, Xuan paper (traditionally made from tree bark and rice straw) and ink. But true artists would argue that a good piece of calligraphy cannot be accomplished without a clear mind, sincerity, humility and self-restraint.

As generative AI takes on more writing tasks, humans are turning from writers into prompting masters and editors of machine-generated content. This brings the risk of us becoming disconnected from our own creative ideas.

While the quality of AI-generated text may often be sufficient, the writing process is significantly different. As American historian Timothy Snyder argued in the “ninth lesson” from his book On Tyranny, poor use of words make us more susceptible to manipulation and suppression.

The multi-sensory experience of handwritten calligraphy fosters a deeper connection with the writer’s insights, emotions and surroundings. Writing with a brush requires slowing down and patient introspection. Because it demands attentiveness to posture and movements, a calligrapher’s body is grounded in the physical world – and such moments can have lasting benefits for our sometimes overwhelmed, restless minds.

Writers like Nicholas Carr and Aden Evens bring attention to the ongoing rewiring of our minds and reshaping of our abilities, caused by the excessive amount of time we spend online. They claim that while technology can enhance certain skills, it may also alter fundamental aspects of our thinking, behaviour and relationships.

For instance, constant engagement with technology can diminish our attention spans and deep-reading abilities, leading to superficial information processing.

And according to artist and author James Bridle, our tech-dependency and over-reliance on automated systems easily blinds us to bias, simplification and bad data generated by machines.

Reinvention of the brush

Through deep concentration and focus on the transient present moment, calligraphy allows practitioners to let go of distractions and cultivate a sense of inner peace.

Ink artist Pan Jianfeng, born in Rui’an, China and now living in Porvoo, Finland, embraced handwriting with a brush as a modern pursuit of self-cultivation, creative freedom and intimate human communication. For the past decade, he has committed to rediscovering the soft brush as a tool that knows no boundaries in culture, language or time.

Pan’s unique strategies of letting artworks grow through experimental use of paper and brush invite us to reconsider meaning of the “content generation”, “human creativity” and “communication”.

By generating largely unpredictable images using only traditional organic materials (water, ink, brush and paper) and his body, he shows us possibilities to engage with concepts beyond our expectations and imagination – without adding to the burden on the environment, as generative AI does.

And by creating playful artworks that value ambiguity and understatement, and – contrary to the mindset fostered by computational thinking – reject any single, inviolable answer, Pan seeks to open spaces of conversation, creative confusion and shared negotiation of meaning.

Both in his art and the “One Breath Workshops” he occasionally holds, Pan advocates for mindful handwriting which does not generate more content in an age already saturated with information and misinformation – but rather, removes the superfluity and brings a sense of stillness and peace.

Machines would struggle with text or image recognition in Pan’s ink scrolls such as Northern Ocean (2023) or Unregistered Calligraphy (2024). But human audiences enjoy the game of imagination and discovery.

In the ongoing exhibition Ink Roamings, curated by Shao-Lan Hertel in the Museum of East Asian Art in Cologne, visitors take time to discuss and guess the possible meanings together. Or they quietly contemplate Pan’s artworks in search of own truth.

“People have little trust in themselves and believe too much in technology, so they easily get lost,” Pan told me in an interview for my upcoming book on his work. “I don’t think we need more content – we need a better understanding of the world with all its challenges, and of each other. Through my writing, I try to craft more time and space for this understanding – not less.”

---

This article features references to books that have been included for editorial reasons, and may contain links to bookshop.org. If you click on one of the links and go on to buy something from bookshop.org The Conversation UK may earn a commission.

---

Looking for something good? Cut through the noise with a carefully curated selection of the latest releases, live events and exhibitions, straight to your inbox every fortnight, on Fridays. Sign up here.

---

Karolina Pawlik received research funding from Xi’an Jiaotong-Liverpool University for her project “Soft Brush, Creativity and Cross-Cultural Communication” (2023-2025).

– ref. How the art of Chinese calligraphy can bring creative freedom in the age of AI – https://theconversation.com/how-the-art-of-chinese-calligraphy-can-bring-creative-freedom-in-the-age-of-ai-262466