Comment

Comment by Dr. Krishna Kumari Challa 14 minutes ago

In their experiments, the researchers found 522 instances—about 7% of epigenetic inheritance patterns—in which methylation was inherited on non-sex chromosomes in a variety of ways that broke Mendel's laws.

Some 54 of those instances represented rare or "emergent" types of epigenetic inheritance not present in either parent. For example, a cross between two mice with no methylation on the same allele, which should have resulted in a mouse that inherited no methylation on the allele, could instead result in a mouse with methylation on both alleles. "The methylation seemingly appeared out of nowhere" .
The scientists also found another rare type of inheritance called paramutation in a gene called Capn11, which encodes a calcium-dependent gene that regulates normal sperm development. Alterations in the human version of the gene cause infertility and problems with sperm.

Paramutation occurs when methylation in one allele leads to methylation in another allele. The paramutation was located in an area of the gene associated with a repetitive element of a type known to be influenced by environmental exposure. It's almost like the methylation is transferred to another allele. Epigenetic influences on the genome have been tied to environmental pressures such as environmental stress, trauma and diet.

This work may convince scientists to integrate both genomics and epigenomics more often for a complete understanding of how traits that produce disease and healthy states are inherited.

Adam Davidovich et al, Non-Mendelian inheritance of DNA methylation patterns in mice, Nature Genetics (2026). DOI: 10.1038/s41588-026-02604-z

Part 2

Comment by Dr. Krishna Kumari Challa 16 minutes ago

When Mendel's rules don't apply: Mouse study reveals hidden epigenetic inheritance

The well-studied rules of genetic inheritance—known as Mendel's Laws—cover how genetic materials known as alleles sort themselves, are dominant or recessive, and in what ways they get passed down to new generations. Alleles are variations in genes that lead to a specific trait or disease state. In mammals, one allele is inherited from each parent, and either of those alleles can be dominant or recessive.
The rules state, for example, that alleles in offspring are inherited from each parent, and the traits of dominant alleles prevail over recessive ones, which are silenced.
Analysis of three generations of mice revealed that approximately 7% of DNA methylation patterns are inherited in ways that violate Mendel's laws, including novel forms of epigenetic inheritance such as paramutation and emergent methylation not present in either parent. These findings indicate that non-Mendelian epigenetic inheritance is more frequent and diverse than previously recognized, potentially enabling rapid trait variation in response to environmental factors.

Scientists have long known that the DNA code in genes is not the only way to pass genetic traits from parents to offspring. "Epigenetic" marks—chemical modifications to DNA that don't change the DNA code itself—can also be passed down.
Now, a new study using mice reveals that some of those marks—about 7% of them—can be inherited in ways that break the century-long understanding of the rules of inheritance explored and recorded by Gregor Mendel's work with pea plants. The study also reveals new, unexpected examples of inheritance patterns that defy Mendel's law—such as a naturally occurring paramutation, seen previously in plants and flies, and not in mammals.
Non-Mendelian patterns of inheriting epigenetics could be a faster way to acquire diverse or new traits than alterations in the genomic sequence itself, especially in response to environmental pressures.
Several previous studies have already shown that some patterns of epigenetic inheritance, such as genomic imprinting, can break the guiding principles established by the Austrian-born friar. The new study also found examples of genomic imprinting, but also other types of non-Mendelian patterns of epigenetic inheritance that surprised the scientists.

In examples of genomic imprinting, an allele in either parent can be labeled as coming from sperm or an egg and silenced by methylation. Such imprinted alleles are passed down to offspring and are silenced not because they are recessive but based on which parent contributes the imprinted allele. The new research found imprinting examples in five additional genes.

In addition to the new examples of genetic imprinting, results of the current study suggest that epigenetic patterns of inheritance that defy Mendel's rules may be more frequent than described in other studies. In addition, the research team found epigenetic patterns passed down to offspring that were not present in either parent.
Part 1

Comment by Dr. Krishna Kumari Challa 1 hour ago

Understanding how spin, magnetism, and molecular structure interact could open new doors in:

Isotope separation technologies
Advanced materials design
Analytical chemistry
And even quantum biology, an emerging field exploring how quantum effects influence living systems
In the end, the study reveals something both simple and profound: even at the smallest scales, direction matters.

A magnet pointing north or south can change how molecules move, interact, and separate. And those tiny differences may hold clues to the very origins of life.

Ofek Vardi et al, Spin-dependent isotopic fractionation of L-methionine, Chem (2026). DOI: 10.1016/j.chempr.2026.102993

Part 2

Comment by Dr. Krishna Kumari Challa 1 hour ago

The direction of a magnet could shape the building blocks of life

In a new discovery, researchers have found that something in the direction of a magnetic field can influence how molecules of life behave at the most fundamental level and how early chemical processes linked to life may have unfolded.

The study, published in Chem  shows that tiny differences between atoms (different isotopes) can lead to measurable changes in molecular behaviour when combined with an invisible quantum property known as electron spin. Separation of the different isotopes can be achieved by magnetic surfaces.

At the center of the story is L-methionine, an amino acid, a basic building block of life. Like other biological molecules, methionine has a specific "handedness," meaning it exists in a form that is not identical to its mirror image. This property, called chirality, is a mystery: why did nature choose one "hand" over the other? Now, the team's findings suggest that magnetism and the spin of electrons may have played a role.

The answer lies in a subtle quantum property: electron and nuclear spin. Particles behave a bit like tiny spinning tops, and their "spin direction" can influence how they interact with materials, especially when those materials are magnetic.
Chiral molecules like methionine are known to interact with electron spin in a special way, a phenomenon called chiral-induced spin selectivity (CISS). This means that the molecule's shape can "filter" electrons based on their spin.

What this new research shows is that this same effect can extend to isotopes atoms that differ only slightly in mass and nuclear spin. In other words, spin and magnetism can influence not just how molecules react, but which versions of those molecules are favoured.

Part 1

Comment by Dr. Krishna Kumari Challa yesterday

• Teyton A, et al. Examining the relationship between extreme temperature, microclimat.... Environ Epidemiol. 2023;7(3):e252.
• Ratter-Rieck JM, et al. Diabetes and climate change: current evidence and implications for .... Diabetologia. 2023;66:1003-1015.
• Argano C, et al. The role of vitamin D and its molecular bases in insulin resistance.... Int J Mol Sci. 2023;24(20):15485.
• Hanssen MJW, et al. Short-term cold acclimation improves insulin sensitivity in patient... Nat Med. 2015;21:863-865.
• Booth GL, et al. Influence of environmental temperature on risk of gestational diabetes. CMAJ. 2017;189(19):E682-E689.
• Mbepera SM, et al. Heat stress induces oxidative stress and predisposes rats to gestat.... J Biol Life Sci. 2023;14(2):90-102.
• Horcas-Martín M, et al. Polyhydramnios at term in gestational diabetes: Should we be concer... Children. 2025;12(7):920.
• Part 3

Comment by Dr. Krishna Kumari Challa yesterday

1. Plows JF, et al. The pathophysiology of gestational diabetes mellitus. Int J Mol Sci. 2018;19(11):3342.
2. Sweeting A, et al. Epidemiology and management of gestational diabetes.Lancet. 2024;404(10448):336-348.
3. Mohan V, et al. Prevalence of gestational diabetes mellitus in India: The ICMR-INDI.... Indian J Med Res. 2025.
4. Chakraborty A, Yadav S. Prevalence and determinants of gestational diabetes mellitus among .... BMC Women’s Health. 2024;24(1):147.
5. Granés L, et al. Cumulative daily exposure to high temperature increases gestational.... Nat Health. 2026.
6. Zhang J, et al. The effect of ambient temperature in pregnancy on the risk of gesta.... Int J Biometeorol. 2026;70(64).
7. Part 2

Comment by Dr. Krishna Kumari Challa yesterday

Extreme Heat May Be Raising the Risk of Gestational Diabetes

Gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM), a condition in which hormones produced by the placenta make the body less responsive to insulin, which leads to an inability to control blood sugar levels during pregnancy. When GDM goes unmanaged, it can increase the risk of complications such as preterm birth, preeclampsia, and stillbirth
Studies from around the world suggest prolonged heat exposure during pregnancy can disrupt blood sugar regulation, increasing the risk of gestational diabetes.
A growing body of research shows that climate change-driven extreme heat may be increasing the risk of GDM. Studies from around the world are also pointing to critical windows of vulnerability, suggesting that rising temperatures may be shaping maternal health in overlooked ways. Emerging evidence suggests GDM may be shaped not just by biology, but by the environment too.
Recent studies suggest that prolonged heat exposure during pregnancy can carry an increased risk of developing GDM.
Some studies suggest that the timing of heat exposure during pregnancy also matters. In eastern China, an analysis of over 3,000 pregnancies revealed that when temperatures climbed above 25°C, the risk of GDM increased most sharply between the 13th and 18th weeks of pregnancy, with a clear peak around week 16.6 Wider gaps between daytime and night time temperatures further raised the risk.

Researchers have observed similar patterns in larger populations. In southern California, they analyzed almost 396,000 health records over more than a decade. Extreme heat between the 11th and 16th weeks of pregnancy was associated with a higher GDM risk, while extreme low temperatures between the 20th and 24th weeks also increased the risk. The team found that these effects varied by location, with local factors such as greenness, tree cover, built surfaces, and land temperature either amplifying or reducing the risk.

As the evidence builds around the link between heat and GDM, scientists are also identifying the biological mechanisms behind this association.
High temperatures may make the body less responsive to insulin, which can lead to insulin resistance.”8 This makes it difficult for the body to move sugar out of the bloodstream and into cells, causing blood sugar levels to rise. In hot conditions, the body also sends more blood toward the skin to release heat. This can affect how the body regulates glucose, though the exact mechanisms are still being studied.

Some effects may be indirect. During extreme heat, people tend to stay indoors, which can reduce their vitamin D levels. Vitamin D supports the body’s response to insulin, helping cells take up glucose from the bloodstream and regulate blood sugar levels. Heat exposure can also stress the body, triggering low-grade inflammation, which can interfere with how the body responds to insulin.
Epidemiological studies have also linked higher temperatures to increased rates of prediabetes, diabetes, and insulin resistance.
Part 1

Comment by Dr. Krishna Kumari Challa yesterday

The arXiv announcement doesn't come out against AI use, but rather says, "If a submission contains incontrovertible evidence that the authors did not check the results of LLM generation, this means we can't trust anything in the paper."

This may be true as far as it goes. But the penalty—a year-long ban for all authors listed on a paper—may be out of keeping with current research practices.

In the past, research was often carried out by people working alone or in groups of two or three. In these circumstances, it seems reasonable to expect each author to take responsibility for the whole.

But research is now more collaborative than ever before. Many papers have four or five authors, and in a growing number of extreme cases papers may be credited to groups of hundreds of scientists working together, each working on their own specialty and trusting their colleagues to be doing the same.

In a case where one author of dozens or hundreds included an AI-hallucinated reference in their part of the paper, banning the lot seems harsh.

And there are no equivalent sanctions for publishing other problematic material. There's no ban for pushing fringe or discredited theories, or using poor quality evidence and illogical arguments, for example.
The rise of AI produces problems for publishers and quality assurance. And the idea of some kind of sanctions for reckless use of AI, such as included hallucinated references, is a good one.

original article.

Part 2

Comment by Dr. Krishna Kumari Challa yesterday

A key science publishing platform is cracking down on AI slop

AI-generated text is on the rise everywhere. A study released last week suggests half of new articles published online are now "primarily AI-generated."
Science is not immune to this trend. Last month, the journal Organization Science published a study of how the rise of AI has affected submissions and peer reviews since the release of ChatGPT in 2022. Reporting a dramatic rise in submitted papers and a drop in quality, the authors conclude that "the current state of AI tools, amplified by existing publish-or-perish incentives, appears to be pushing the system toward an equilibrium of more rather than better research."
A common problem in AI-generated research writing is hallucinated citations: references to other research that does not exist.

The traditional safeguard against poor quality in scholarly publishing is peer review: another expert in the subject at hand reads the research paper and interrogates the work behind it before it can be published.

However, the peer review system was already struggling before AI. Pressured researchers often have little time or incentive to do the unpaid work of peer review.

And on arXiv, which publishes preprints—articles which have most often not been peer-reviewed—even this system is not available. Last year, flooded with AI-generated submissions, the site stopped accepting certain types of article.

A study published in January (itself a preprint) estimated around 1 in 8 papers in biomedical science now contain AI-generated text.

Most researchers would agree that AI-generated text is not a problem in itself. The problem is the lower-quality work that AI can make easy to produce.
Part 1

The pre-print website arXiv has announced that researchers who put their names to papers which included errors clearly generated by artificial intelligence (AI) will face a year-long ban and ongoing restrictions.

arXiv has implemented a year-long ban for authors submitting papers with clear, unchecked AI-generated errors, responding to a surge in low-quality, AI-generated research. While AI-generated text itself is not inherently problematic, its ease of use has led to increased submission volume and decreased quality, including issues like hallucinated citations. Critics argue that blanket penalties may be disproportionate, especially in large collaborations, and suggest that AI tools could instead be leveraged to enhance quality control and peer review processes.
The move is a response to a growing influx of AI-generated papers faced by scholarly journals as well as sites such as arXiv, which serve as unofficial platforms for research publication ahead of peer review.

However, not everyone agrees that arXiv's response to the problem is appropriate—and the solution to the flood of AI slop research may involve more AI, not less.

Comment by Dr. Krishna Kumari Challa yesterday

A mop, a broom and a calmer mind. Why some find mental health benefits in everyday tasks

It can be tempting to dismiss housework as drudgery, so dreaded or anxiety-inducing that it's best delegated to others if at all possible.
But experts from Zen monks to psychologists say there are mental health benefits to be found in such manual chores as sweeping, mopping and clearing away clutter. These tasks can encourage mindfulness or permit the mind to wander, all while producing a concrete sense of achievement in accomplishing the basic tasks of daily life.

As one famous Zen saying goes:

"Before enlightenment, chop wood, carry water. After enlightenment, chop wood, carry water."
Zen apprentices, or "unsui" monks, spend much of their time cleaning and tidying.

The monks sweep dust to remove worldly desires. They scrub dirt to free themselves of attachments!
A clinical psychologist based in Greenwich, Connecticut, agrees and confirms that the process of cleaning can be calming and almost meditative.
There is a link between mental health and the act of cleaning!
Repetitive, physical activities like cleaning can be regulating for the nervous system because they're predictable, structured and give a clear sense of completion. That gives people a feeling of control and grounding.
Plus, you can immediately see the result of what you've done, which can be satisfying in a way that many cognitive or emotional tasks aren't.

In a clean space, even if the person who cleaned it is not there, you can feel their consideration and awareness. This awareness creates a sense of peace and safety, similar to why sacred spaces feel different from the busy streets.

Source: News agencies

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• 3
• …
• 1235
• Next ›
• Page