Simon Maechling

A sea slug that can perform photosynthesis?


Discovered in 1993 off the coast of the Japanese island Kuroshima.

Costasiella kuroshimae have been found in the waters near Japan, the Philippines, and Indonesia.

They have two dark eyes and two rhinophores that emerge from the tops of their heads.

Costasiella kuroshimae are capable of a physiological process called kleptoplasty.

This means they retain the chloroplasts from the algae they feed on.

Absorbing the chloroplasts from algae then enables them to indirectly perform photosynthesis.

#science #innovation #photosynthesis

I want to tackle a nonsense claim.
“Natural is Safer“

Sounds comforting, right?

But it’s based on fear, not facts.

It’s tempting to think that because natural substances have been around for billions of years, they’re inherently safe, while synthetic chemicals are not. But this reasoning doesn’t hold up under scrutiny.

Let’s break it down:
→ It implies that “natural” = “safe.”
→ That synthetic chemicals are harmful because they’re “new“.

The truth?

→ Nature doesn’t care about your safety.
Arsenic, cyanide, and botulinum toxin are 100% natural. And deadly.

Meanwhile, many synthetic chemicals are inspired by nature, like life-saving insulin or penicillin.

Here’s a perfect example:

Natural and synthetic vitamin C are chemically identical.
↳ Whether from an orange or a lab, both are ascorbic acid.
↳ Your body can’t tell the difference - processed exact same way.

What actually matters?
↳ The dose makes the poison.

→ It’s not about whether a substance is “natural” or “synthetic.”
→ It’s about how it’s used and how much you’re exposed to.

Whether a substance is ancient or newly created doesn’t determine its safety.
↳ Science, testing, and proper use do.

Modern farming enables farmers to leave the soil undisturbed and promote soil health.

Practices such as no-till, reduced-till, and conservation tillage allow farmers to reduce or eliminate plowing a field, churning up the soil.

When soil is broken up and turned over in the tilling process it releases carbon stored in the soil and increases the possibilities that the soil will erode via wind or rain.

Reduced tillage practices allow valuable nutrients and moisture to remain in the soil, limit soil erosion, reduce water run-off, and enable farmers to make better use of rainwater.

These practices have the potential to decrease the need for irrigation and allow farmers to protect freshwater sources.

No-till methods can also help sequester carbon in the soil.

With minimal or zero tillage, farmers help prevent greenhouse gases from building up in the atmosphere and help in the fight against climate change.

Another advantage of no-till is that farmers are able to better preserve the ecosystem for earthworms, nematodes, mites, insects, fungi, bacteria, and over 1,000 different species of invertebrates.

Every decision to leave the soil undisturbed is a commitment to healthier ecosystems.