A Jupiter-like planet orbiting a white dwarf hints at our solar system’s future

A glimpse of our solar system’s future has appeared thousands of light-years away in the constellation Sagittarius. There a giant planet like Jupiter orbits a white dwarf, a dim, dense star that once resembled the sun.

In 2010, that star passed in front of a much more distant star. Like a magnifying glass, the white dwarf’s gravity bent the more distant star’s light rays so that they converged on Earth and made the distant star look hundreds of times brighter. A giant planet orbiting the white dwarf star also “microlensed” the distant star’s light, revealing the planet’s presence.

In 2015, 2016 and again in 2018 astrophysicist Joshua Blackman of the University of Tasmania in Hobart, Australia and colleagues pointed the Keck II telescope in Hawaii at the far-off system, which lies some 5,000 to 8,000 light-years from Earth. The team was in search of the giant planet’s star, but saw, well, nothing.

“We expected that we’d see a star similar to the sun,” Blackman says. “And so we spent quite a few years trying to figure out why on Earth we didn’t see the star which we expected to see.”
After failing to detect any light from the spot where the planet’s star should be, Blackman’s team concluded that the object can’t be a typical star like the sun — also known as a main sequence star, which generates energy by converting hydrogen into helium at its center. Instead, the star must be something much fainter. The microlensing data indicate that the star is roughly half as massive as the sun, so the object isn’t massive enough to be a neutron star or black hole. But a white dwarf star fits the bill perfectly, the researchers report online October 13 in Nature.

“They’ve carefully ruled out the other possible lens stars — neutron stars and black holes and main sequence stars and whatnot,” says Ben Zuckerman, an astronomer at UCLA, who was not involved with the work. He notes that only a handful of planets have ever been found orbiting white dwarfs.

The new planet is the first ever discovered that is orbiting a white dwarf and resembles Jupiter in both its mass and its distance from its star. Blackman’s team estimates that the planet is one to two times as massive as Jupiter and probably lies 2.5 to six times farther from the white dwarf star than Earth does from the sun. For comparison, Jupiter is 5.2 times farther out from the sun than Earth is. The white dwarf is somewhat larger than Earth, which means the planet is much bigger than its host star.

The white dwarf formed after a sunlike star expanded and became a red giant star. Then the red giant ejected its outer layers, exposing its hot core. That former core is the white dwarf star.

Our sun will turn into a white dwarf about 7.8 billion years from now, so the new discovery is “a snapshot into the future of our solar system,” Blackman says. As the sun becomes a red giant, it will engulf and destroy its innermost planet, Mercury, and perhaps Venus too. But Mars, Jupiter and more distant planets should survive.

And Earth? No one yet knows what will happen to it.

Huge numbers of fish-eating jaguars prowl Brazil’s wetlands

In a tract of central Brazilian wetlands, jaguars spend their days wading through chest-deep waters searching for fish. When not hunting, the big cats playfully grapple with each other back on land. Their life is unlike any other known jaguar population’s existence in the world.

New findings reveal a degree of flexibility in diet and lifestyle previously unseen among jaguars. The discovery may provide key context on the cats’ role in food webs, helping scientists better understand the effect of environmental changes on the species, researchers report October 6 in Ecology.

Jaguars (Panthera onca), which are usually territorial loners that hunt on land, live in a wide array of habitats, ranging from North American deserts to grasslands and tropical rainforests in Central and South America. The cats are also found in the Pantanal, an immense tropical wetland — the largest of its kind in the world — that sprawls over parts of Brazil, Bolivia and Paraguay.

Ecologists Manoel dos Santos-Filho of the Universidade do Estado de Mato Grosso in Cáceres, Brazil, and Carlos Peres of the University of East Anglia in Norwich, England, knew of rumors of large numbers of jaguars sighted near Brazil’s Taiamã Ecological Station. That large ecological reserve is located in the remote, northern reaches of the Pantanal.
After relaying these anecdotes to Taal Levi, a wildlife ecologist at Oregon State University in Corvallis, the researchers started a project to better understand the jaguars’ biology and population status in the protected area.

Taiamã is seasonally flooded, with no roads or trails, so the team had to access the reserve by boat, setting up motion-activated cameras along waterways to gather data on jaguar numbers. The area’s abundance of jaguars, however, was obvious immediately.

“You set your foot out of the boat, and there’s a jaguar footprint there already,” says Charlotte Eriksson, a wildlife scientist also at Oregon State University. “There are scratches on trees. There are jaguar scats. There’s just an unbelievable presence of this apex predator wherever you go, which is something I’ve never experienced anywhere before.”

The team deployed 59 cameras, which operated from 2014 to 2018, and collected more than 1,500 videos of jaguars. The researchers also captured 13 jaguars and fitted them with GPS or radio-tracking collars to gain insight into the animals’ population density, movements and social interactions.

Based on their data, Eriksson and colleagues estimate that the Taiamã Ecological Station hosts the highest density of jaguars ever recorded: 12.4 animals per 100 square kilometers, nearly triple some of the next highest estimates elsewhere. Jaguars were also the most common mammal spotted on the cameras.

Video footage showed jaguars carrying off large fish. When the team analyzed 138 scat samples, the researchers found 46 percent had fish remains in them and 55 percent contained aquatic reptiles, such as caiman or turtles. Just 11 percent contained mammal remains.
Jaguars are well-documented in taking on challenging prey, including underwater fare (SN: 7/15/16). Eriksson and her team think that the Taiamã felines have not only the most fish-dependent diet among jaguars, but also among all big cats. There are tigers in Bangladesh that live in flooded mangrove forests and sometimes eat fish, but those cats still primarily eat land-based food, the researchers say.

The cameras and tracking collars also showed that the Taiamã jaguars were spending a lot of time near each other, sometimes traveling, fishing and playing together. This is all exceptionally odd behavior for jaguars, at least based on what scientists know about the cats elsewhere in the world.

In terms of social behavior, “what we knew of jaguars from before this study is basically that they are solitary, and they meet up to mate. And that’s about it,” Eriksson says, noting anecdotes of the cats sharing prey carcasses as rare counterexamples.
The profusion of aquatic prey in the flooded preserve — protected from human encroachment — may be responsible for the jaguars’ superlative density and their rich social lives. It’s possible there’s so much food available, Eriksson says, that there is “no real need to fight over it.”

Another idea is that aquatic prey concentrated along the river margins are accessible in only certain areas, Levi says. This may encourage jaguar territories to dissolve, since obtaining access to multiple fishing spots requires getting along with other jaguars. Other animals behave in similar ways. Brown bears, for example, congregate in great numbers to feed at salmon spawning grounds, despite the bears’ typically solitary nature, Levi says.

The abundance of jaguars and their social behavior is not surprising, given the available food resources, says Todd Fuller, a conservation biologist at the University of Massachusetts Amherst. Still, he finds the new information exciting.

Fuller, who was not involved with the research, says the study helps bring researchers’ understanding of jaguars’ ecology and conservation closer to what’s known about most other large cat species, and “that is a very good thing.”

Jaguars in the Pantanal face many threats and are declining within Brazil, Eriksson says, suffering from drought, fire and agricultural expansion. Evaluating how jaguars might respond to such changes is paramount. In 2020, half of the study area burned, so Eriksson is currently assessing the impact of the fires on the jaguars and their periodically submerged home.

She also wants to investigate how the Taiamã jaguars’ taste for fish is affecting how often the animals eat land-living prey and what strategies the cats use to catch fish.

“We think we know a lot about these charismatic, large predators,” she says, “but there are still things to learn.”

How missing data makes it harder to measure racial bias in policing

From 2012 to 2015, a team of researchers collected 2.9 million police officer patrol records in Chicago. The team’s analysis of that data, from nearly 7,000 officers, showed that Black police officers were less likely to arrest civilians than white police officers patrolling the same neighborhood (SN: 2/11/21). Officers arrested on average eight people per shift, with Black officers making 24 percent fewer arrests than white officers. But an alternate analysis, one that excluded shifts where no arrests occurred, flipped the results. That made it appear as if Black officers issued 12 percent more arrests than white officers.

Failing to account for events that don’t happen — police allowing a jaywalker to pass, opting not to make an arrest (usually for minor issues like possessing a small amount of drugs) or never firing a drawn gun — is problematic, says policing expert Dean Knox of the University of Pennsylvania. “Instead of drawing the conclusion that minority officers are engaging in less enforcement,” he says of his Chicago study, “you could mistakenly conclude that they are engaging in more enforcement.” The flip occurred because, compared with white officers, Black officers more often went out on patrols without issuing any arrests.

Nonevents of this nature are commonly excluded in policing data. Though a large body of evidence suggests that police in the United States discriminate against Black people, Knox says, many police departments only collect data on a smattering of the interactions between their officers and civilians. Cell phone videos, like those of Eric Garner in a chokehold and George Floyd struggling to breathe, tend to emerge only when encounters have spiraled out of control. That makes it difficult to measure racial bias in policing or come up with targeted solutions to reduce that bias.

How, though, can researchers studying policing account for nonevents? The laborious Chicago data collection by Knox and his team is not always feasible. And even that rigorous study, reported in Science earlier this year, still had gaps: The team had data on when police stopped, arrested or used force on civilians, but not on minor interactions that didn’t meet the department’s recording requirements.

When research teams accept these problematic datasets at face value, writes Knox in a November 4 essay in Science, they often arrive at contradictory conclusions. Disagreements in the literature allow public officials and the media to cherry-pick studies that support their viewpoint, whether arguing for or against implicit bias training to overcome unconscious stereotypes or prioritizing the recruitment of minority officers.
A long chain of events
Knox wrote the essay following the publication of a controversial, and now retracted, study that appeared in 2019 in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. “White officers are not more likely to shoot minority civilians than non-White officers,” the authors of that study wrote. They concluded that policies aimed at increasing police diversity would do little to stem racial disparities in police killings.

The study gained enormous traction, especially among conservative media outlets and politicians, Knox says. “This was one of the go-to pieces that people use to deny the existence of bias in policing.”

But the authors’ findings were mathematically baseless, says Knox, who along with Jonathan Mummolo, a policing expert at Princeton University, wrote an article debunking the study in Medium. Some 800 academics and researchers signed the piece. The team failed to consider total police encounters and then measure what fraction of those encounters resulted in deadly violence, Knox says.
But that narrow focus on fatal police shootings, a rare occurrence that typically happens at the culmination of a long chain of events, ignores all potential biases earlier in the chain, Knox says. The first potential bias in a chain of events starts with an officer’s decision to approach a civilian or let them pass. Knox acknowledges that a separate layer of research is needed to account for societal level disparities, such as the presence of more officers in Black, often impoverished, neighborhoods and longstanding discriminatory practices that reduce the quality of education and other services in such neighborhoods.

“Even if you can’t see all the things that happened before, just acknowledging they exist is imperative,” Knox says.

Consider this real-life example. On July 10, 2015, Texas state trooper Brian Encinia pulled over Sandra Bland, a Black woman, for failing to signal a lane change. The exchange grew heated and culminated with Encinia arresting Bland for failing to follow orders. Bland’s subsequent death in a county jail caused public outcry.

Focusing solely on Bland’s arrest, and not all that happened before, would provide little information on how Bland wound up in jail for such a minor offense, or how to prevent such an outcome in the future. But because Encinia’s body camera recorded the entire exchange, policing researchers, in this case interested in tone and language, could identify key steps leading up to her arrest. For instance, the researchers reported in Law and Society Review in 2017, Encinia’s language starts off polite but becomes increasingly agitated as Bland refuses to comply with his orders. His once formal commands, such as “step out of the car” become informal and unprofessional: “I’m going to yank you out of here.”

That word “yank” indicates that Encinia is losing control of the situation, says Belén Lowrey-Kinberg, a criminologist at St. Francis College in New York City. Previous research has shown that when officers pivot from formal to informal language, violence can follow.

While this is a case study of a single event, the study provides “a great example of how situations can escalate,” says criminologist Justin Nix of the University of Nebraska Omaha.

Fixing flawed data
Flawed police data does not need to be thrown out, Knox says. His team has developed an algorithm to account for gaps in the data at all points in a police-civilian interaction. The algorithm weights the various possible degrees of discrimination at each point in a chain of events — perhaps race did not factor into Encinia’s decision to pull Bland over because he could not see her face, for example, or maybe race played a large role because most drivers in that area are white. The range of values resulting from the summation of those events suggests the possible amounts of discrimination in any given scenario, Knox says.

The program operates on a very general principle, Knox says. “What are the data that you see?” and “What are the data that you don’t see?”

Thinking about the whole chain of events also points to how to collect better statistics.

Consider a study of police shootings by Nix and policing expert John Shjarback of Rowan University in Glassboro, N.J., that appeared November 10 in PLOS One. The researchers were interested in racial disparities in officers’ use of force against Black and white civilians. National databases include only shootings that result in a civilian’s death. But whether someone lives or dies after being shot hinges on several factors, such as proximity to a trauma center, location of the gunshot wound and access to first aid. So researchers sought to examine all police shootings, including those that resulted in injury but not death. To do so, they relied on records from four states — California, Colorado, Florida and Texas — that have collected this information for years.
The data revealed that some 45 percent of victims suffer nonfatal injuries. Factoring in the relative populations of Black and white civilians showed that for all four states, racial disparities in injuries were higher than racial disparities in fatalities. For example, from 2009 to 2014 in Florida, Black people were roughly three times more likely than whites to be shot and killed by police, but over five times more likely to be injured. Across all four states, and for reasons that are not entirely clear, Black victims are 7 percent less likely to die of their injuries than white victims.

National databases that only include records of civilians who die at the hands of the police underestimate officers’ use of deadly force against Black civilians, Nix says. Death “is the end of a very long sequence of events. In our paper we backed up one link in the chain.” That is, the researchers looked at all instances where officers used deadly force and not just those that resulted in death.

Knox is now working with two police departments to break down police-civilian encounters in more detail. Those departments require officers to turn on their body cameras when they believe an interaction with a civilian will rise to the level of an official interaction. (Officers have discretion at this point in the process, Knox acknowledges, so as with the Chicago study, that first link in the chain remains elusive.) Knox and his team will analyze scripts from each encounter for language and tone, such as normal voice or shouting — a quantitative version of the approach Lowrey-Kinberg used to unpack the encounter between Encinia and Bland. Computer vision techniques will parse out gestures, such as “weapon drawn.” Knox says he hopes the data will help his team get closer to reconstructing entire interactions, including identifying nonevents in any given chain.

“You don’t want just the side of the story as written by an officer,” Knox says. “You want the whole interaction.”

New high-speed video reveals the physics of a finger snap

It all happens in a snap. New high-speed video exposes the blink-and-you’ll-miss-it physics behind snapping your fingers.

The footage reveals the extreme speed at which the gesture occurs, and shows that friction plus the compressibility of the finger pads are key to humans’ ability to snap properly, researchers report November 17 in Journal of the Royal Society Interface.

Finger snaps last only about seven milliseconds — that’s roughly 20 times as fast as the blink of an eye, says biophysicist Saad Bhamla of Georgia Tech in Atlanta. After slipping off the thumb, the middle finger rotates at a rate up to 7.8 degrees per millisecond, nearly what a professional baseball pitcher’s arm can achieve, the team found. And a snapping finger accelerates almost three times as fast as pitchers’ arms.

When covered with high-friction rubber or low-friction lubricant, fingers made snaps that fell flat, the team found, indicating that bare fingers have a level of friction ideal for a speedy snap (SN: 8/1/19). That friction between thumb and middle finger allows energy to be stored before it’s suddenly unleashed. Too little friction means less pent-up energy and a slower snap. But too much friction impedes the finger’s release, also slowing the snap.

Bhamla and colleagues were inspired by a scene in the 2018 movie Avengers: Infinity War. The supervillain Thanos snaps his fingers while wearing a supernatural metal glove, obliterating half of the universe’s life. The team wondered if it would be possible to snap while wearing a rigid glove. Typically, when the fingers press together in a snap, they compress, increasing the contact area and friction between them. So the researchers tested snapping with fingers covered by hard thimbles. Sure enough, the snaps were sluggish.

So Thanos’ snap would have been a dud. No superheroes needed: Physics saves the day.

Earth will warm 2.7 degrees Celsius based on current pledges to cut emissions

This year was supposed to be a turning point in addressing climate change. But the world’s nations are failing to meet the moment, states a new report by the United Nations Environment Programme.

The Emissions Gap Report 2021: The Heat Is On, released October 26, reveals that current pledges to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and rein in global warming still put the world on track to warm by 2.7 degrees Celsius above preindustrial levels by the end of the century.

Aiming for “net-zero emissions” by midcentury — a goal recently announced by China, the United States and other countries, but without clear plans on how to do so — could reduce that warming to 2.2 degrees C. But that still falls short of the mark, U.N. officials stated at a news event for the report’s release.

At a landmark meeting in Paris in 2015, 195 nations pledged to eventually reduce their emissions enough to hold global warming to well below 2 degrees C by 2100 (SN: 12/12/15). Restricting global warming further, to just 1.5 degrees C, would forestall many more devastating consequences of climate change, as the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, or IPCC, reported in 2018 (SN: 12/17/18). In its latest report, released in August, the IPCC noted that extreme weather events, exacerbated by human-caused climate change, now occur in every part of the planet — and warned that the window to reverse some of these effects is closing (SN: 8/9/21).
Despite these dire warnings, “the parties to the Paris Agreement are utterly failing to keep [its] target in reach,” said U.N. Secretary-General António Guterres. “The era of half measures and hollow promises must end.”

The new U.N. report comes at a crucial time, just days before world leaders meet for the 2021 U.N. Climate Change Conference, or COP26, in Glasgow, Scotland. The COP26 meeting — postponed from 2020 to 2021 due to the COVID-19 pandemic — holds particular significance because it is the first COP meeting since the 2015 agreement in which signatories are expected to significantly ramp up their emissions reductions pledges.

The U.N. Environment Programme has kept annual tabs on the still-yawning gap between existing national pledges to reduce emissions and the Paris Agreement target (SN: 11/26/19). Ahead of the COP26 meeting, 120 countries, responsible for emitting just over half of the world’s greenhouse gas emissions, announced their new commitments to address climate change by 2030.

The 2021 report finds that new commitments bring the world only slightly closer to where emissions need to be by 2030 to reach warming targets. With the new pledges, total annual emissions in 2030 would be 7.5 percent lower (about 55 gigatons of carbon dioxide equivalent) than they would have been with pledges as of last year (about 59 gigatons). But to stay on track for 2 degrees C of warming, emissions would have to be about 30 percent lower than the new pledges, or about 39 gigatons each year. To hold warming to 1.5 degrees C requires a roughly 55 percent drop in emissions compared with the latest pledges, to about 25 gigatons a year.

“I’m hoping that the collision of the science and the statistics in the gap analysis, and the voices of the people will promote a greater sense of urgency,” says Gabriel Filippelli, a geochemist at Indiana University–Purdue University Indianapolis.

On October 26, Filippelli, the editor of the American Geophysical Union journal GeoHealth, and editors in chief of other journals published by the organization coauthored a statement in Geophysical Research Letters. Theyurged world leaders at COP26 to keep the “devastating impacts” of climate change in check by immediately reducing global carbon emissions and shifting to a green economy. “We are scientists, but we also have families and loved ones alongside our fellow citizens on this planet,” the letter states. “The time to bridge the divide between scientist and citizen, head and heart, is now.”

Publishing that plea was a departure for some of the scientists, Filippelli says. “We have been publishing papers for the last 20 to 30 years, documenting the train wreck of climate change,” he says. “As you can imagine, behind the scenes there were some people who were a little uncomfortable because it veered away from the true science. But ultimately, we felt it was more powerful to write a true statement that showed our hearts.”

‘Life as We Made It’ charts the past and future of genetic tinkering

With genetic engineering, humans have recently unleashed a surreal fantasia: pigs that excrete less environment-polluting phosphorus, ducklings hatched from chicken eggs, beagles that glow ruby red under ultraviolet light. Biotechnology poses unprecedented power and potential — but also follows a course thousands of years in the making.

In Life as We Made It, evolutionary biologist Beth Shapiro pieces together a palimpsest of human tinkering. From domesticating dogs to hybridizing endangered Florida panthers, people have been bending evolutionary trajectories for millennia. Modern-day technologies capable of swapping, altering and switching genes on and off inspire understandable unease, Shapiro writes. But they also offer opportunities to accelerate adaptation for the better — creating plague-resistant ferrets, for instance, or rendering disease-carrying mosquitoes sterile to reduce their numbers (SN: 5/14/21).

For anyone curious about the past, present and future of human interference in nature, Life as We Made It offers a compelling survey of the possibilities and pitfalls. Shapiro is an engaging, clear-eyed guide, leading readers through the technical tangles and ethical thickets of this not-so-new frontier. Along the way, the book glitters with lively, humorous vignettes from Shapiro’s career in ancient DNA research. Her tales are often rife with awe (and ripe with the stench of thawing mammoths and other Ice Age matter).
The book’s first half punctures the misconception that we “have only just begun to meddle with nature.” Humans have meddled for 50,000 years: hunting, domesticating and conserving. The second half chronicles the advent of recent biotechnologies and their often bumpy rollouts, leading to squeamishness about genetically modified food and a blunder that resulted in accidentally transgenic cattle.

As we teeter on a technological precipice, Shapiro contends we have a choice to make. We can learn to meddle with greater precision, wielding the sharpest tools at our disposal. Or, she writes, “we can reject our new biotechnologies” and continue directing evolutionary fates anyway, “just more slowly and with less success.” Shapiro speculates about what the future may hold if we embrace our role as tinkerers: plastic-gobbling microbes, saber-toothed house cats, agricultural crops optimized for sequestering carbon. Whether these visions will come true is anyone’s guess. But one thing is clear. No matter which route we choose, humans will continue to stir the evolutionary soup. There’s no backing out now.

Ancient human visitors complicate the Falkland Islands wolf’s origin story

The enigmatic, now-extinct Falkland Islands wolf had human visitors on the remote archipelago up to 1,070 years ago. The find suggests that Indigenous people could have originally brought the foxlike creatures, also known as the warrah, to the islands.

Scientists have debated how the islands’ only land mammal journeyed to the region: by a long-ago land bridge or with people. But little evidence of a human presence before Europeans arrived in 1690 had been found. Now, traces of ancient fires and hunting show that Indigenous people arrived on the Falkland Islands centuries prior to Europeans, researchers report October 27 in Science Advances. The Yaghan people — historically fire-wielding seafarers who kept foxes as companions — may have been the visitors.

Abrupt spikes in charcoal levels in sediments offer “telltale signs of human arrival” from 1,070 to 620 years ago on New Island, says Kit Hamley, a paleoecologist and archaeologist at the University of Maine in Orono. Those spikes mirror later traces of Europeans’ fires around 250 years ago.

And massive piles of sea lion and penguin bones imply hunting by humans from 745 to 600 years ago, Hamley says. Before being hunted to extinction by Europeans in 1875, the Falkland Islands wolf (Dusicyon australis) also consumed marine predators such as sea lions and penguins, nitrogen levels in two warrah bones and one tooth show.
The researchers newly dated that tooth and found it to be from 3,860 years ago. That vastly predates the fire-and-bone-pile evidence, leaving a gap “between when the warrah arrives, and when we can definitively say people were there,” Hamley says.

But Indigenous people’s presence up to 1,070 years ago raises new questions about whether the warrah hitchhiked there with earlier human visitors, Hamley says.

Next, Hamley and colleagues plan to partner with the few remaining Yaghan communities in Tierra del Fuego in Argentina to piece together “parts of the story that have been lost or taken away.”

Breaking the one test for one cancer paradigm

Isaac Kinde
Molecular biologist
Thrive Early Detection

Isaac Kinde, featured in 2015, is developing tests to detect cancer early, when treatment is more likely to be successful. In 2019, PapGene, a small biotech start-up where he was chief scientific officer, was acquired by Thrive, cofounded by Kinde. Just this year, it got the backing of the much larger cancer diagnostics firm Exact Sciences.

Could you tell us about Thrive and what spurred this transition?
Thrive basically acquired the predecessor company [PapGene]…. There was a lot more money, there’s a lot more expertise, but the core mission didn’t change, which is to develop cancer diagnostic products that we think will have an impact on the lives of people with cancer. We have essentially turbocharged and focused our efforts, leading with the most promising product, which is CancerSEEK.

The premise is we can reduce cancer morbidity and mortality through earlier detection. CancerSEEK is a blood test, and it is a multi-cancer test. That contrasts with the current paradigm, which is one test, one cancer.… Right now, all of our efforts are on making it commercially available.

CancerSEEK, which is still in testing, picks up on DNA mutations and proteins associated with cancer. How many cancers can it detect at this time?
There’s good evidence for detecting over 60 to 70 percent of the cancers that cause the most deaths per year. That boils down to … colon, breast, lung…. But the [full] range is bigger than those three. There’s esophageal, gastric, kidney, pancreatic. There’s data that support maybe 12 to 13 different cancers.

You published what you’ve referred to as a “landmark study” in Science last year. What did it find?
We call it a landmark study because it was the first demonstration in a prospective setting of how a multicancer blood test could be used in real time to report results to patients with cancer.

We looked at 10,000 women in the Geisinger Health system. It’s primarily women who are in Pennsylvania…. In the study, 24 [women had cancers] detected with standard-of-care screening: colonoscopy, mammography or low-dose CT scan for lung. Then there were 26 cancers in which the CancerSEEK test detected the cancer first…. Sixty-five percent of the cancers we detected were at a stage prior to stage 4. So [the addition of CancerSEEK] doubled the number of cases that were [found before symptoms were reported] — in many, many cases early enough where some effective therapies could be implemented.

And then it was also safe…. There were very few false positives, and we could very quickly resolve the false positives with whole-body PET-CT imaging. At least two patients [who first had detections from CancerSEEK] had their cancers successfully removed and are thriving as of the last time we checked.

Routine cancer screenings fell during the pandemic. Has this affected your work?
It fans the flame, right? The reason why cancer screening went down is not because there was less cancer. It was [just] more difficult for whatever reason to get the appropriate standard-of-care test.… All this did was just strengthen the case that more tools, easier tools are needed for cancer screening. And I think maybe the other feeling is just wishing we could go even faster, but balancing a commercial launch with having all the right pieces in place that will set us up for success.

— Interview by Ashley Braun

Astronomers have found the Milky Way’s first known ‘feather’

The Milky Way has a “feather” in its cap.

A long, thin filament of cold, dense gas extends jauntily from the galactic center, connecting two of the galaxy’s spiral arms, astronomers report November 11 in the Astrophysical Journal Letters. This is the first time that such a structure, which looks like the barb of a feather fanning off the central quill, has been spotted in the Milky Way.

The team that discovered our galaxy’s feather named it the Gangotri wave, after the glacier that is the source of India’s longest river, the Ganges. In Hindi and other Indian languages, the Milky Way is called Akasha Ganga, “the river Ganga in the sky,” says astrophysicist Veena V.S. of the University of Cologne in Germany.

She and colleagues found the Gangotri wave by looking for clouds of cold carbon monoxide gas, which is dense and easy to trace, in data from the APEX telescope in San Pedro de Atacama, Chile. The structure stretches 6,000 to 13,000 light-years from the Norma arm of the Milky Way to a minor arm near the galactic center called the 3-kiloparsec arm. So far, all other known gas tendrils in the Milky Way align with the spiral arms (SN: 12/30/15).

The Gangotri wave has another unusual feature: waviness. The filament appears to wobble up and down like a sine wave over the course of thousands of light-years. Astronomers aren’t sure what could cause that, Veena says.

Other galaxies have gaseous plumage, but when it comes to the Milky Way, “it’s very, very difficult” to map the galaxy’s structure from the inside out, she says. She hopes to find more galactic feathers and other bits of our galaxy’s structure. “One by one, we’ll be able to map the Milky Way.”