【推荐1】According to a recent report published in Nature, the threats tigers face are habitat loss, illegal hunting, and above all, the widening of transportation networks.

Different from other threats, the threat caused by transportation networks has been poorly studied, but the few studies that exist show strong effects. In Russia, vehicle accidents caused one in every 12 deaths of tigers from 1992 to 2005. In India, one study assumed that widening highways would increase tiger extinction risk by 56 percent over 100 years. The growing networks of transportation could therefore be a serious disaster for tigers.

In Nepal, GPS collars (项圈) are reported to be placed on tigers living near roads to better understand the influence of transportation. By using modern tracking technology, the collars connect to GPS satellites, providing detailed information on tiger locations. The data shows how tigers move before and after crossing the road, where and how they hunt near roads, how they respond to vehicle traffic at different times of the day, and what their behavior patterns are near roads as compared with far away from roads.

With these findings, we can predict (预言) a range of impacts on tiger habitat and population from new transportation projects. We can rebuild tiger habitat in areas that are important to tiger reproduction (繁殖). Planners can design and locate wildlife crossings to help tigers cross roads and railways. And we can put up speed limit signs to reduce the risk of tigers being killed in traffic.

Over time, this technology will provide solutions that can ensure roads work for humans while reducing damage to tigers and other species at risk.

【推荐3】Robin Hood famously stole from the rich and gave to the poor. Newly hatched young barn owls (仓鸮) do something similar.

On average, barn owls raise six chicks at once — and sometimes as many as nine. But they don’t all hatch at the same time, which means the older owls are generally larger and healthier than their younger brothers and sisters. As long as the little owls remain in the nest, they’re completely dependent on their parents for food. In many birds, the oldest would simply out compete the youngest, but barn owls are different. It turns out that the older, healthier birds sometimes share their meals with their hungry siblings (兄弟姐妹).

“In chicks, it is really rarely observed. So it’s quite impressive that in this group, there is behavior showing they work together,” added evolutionary biologist Pauline Ducouret from the University of Lausanne in Switzerland. She and her team wanted to know how this unique behavior evolved. It could be explained by the direct benefits gained through group work, such as sharing food for grooming (梳毛). Or it could be explained by the indirect benefits gained from helping others that are closely related — also known as “kin selection”.

They found that the answer was both. Younger birds groomed older ones more often than older ones groomed the youngsters. And in return, the older birds fed their younger siblings. In addition, older owls would offer food to their hungry siblings rather than eat themselves, even in the absence of grooming. Ducouret said that evolutionary biologists usually characterize sibling relationships as competitive or even opposed. But remarkably complex examples of group work can still he found among animal brothers and sisters.

It seems that even newly hatched barn owls know that sharing is caring. So think twice before doing something selfish. After all, you don’t want to be defeated by a newly hatched bird.

【推荐1】Raising livestock (牲畜) is a big part of the carbon emission from agriculture. But it is hard to change people’s habits and get them to give up their hamburgers, especially since more than one-third of Americans eat fast food every day. We previously called for carbon labels on everything from buildings to burgers. Now, a new study from the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health found that labels on fast food affected people's choices.

The study said shifting current dietary patterns to more sustainable diets with less red meat could reduce food-related greenhouse gas emissions by 55% and have health benefits.

The 5,000 participants in the study were shown fake menus. One group got menus with high climate impact labels on red meat items and another had low climate impact labels on fish or plant-based burgers. Both menus were effective in reducing the orders for red meat. But interestingly, the high-impact labels were far more effective, with 23% of the participants choosing a more environmentally sustainable selection, while menus listing low-impact choices encouraged only 10% participants to change.

“We found that labeling red meat items with high-climate impact labels was more effective in increasing sustainable selections than labeling non-red meat items with low-climate impact labels,” wrote the authors of the study.

Lead author, Julia Wolfson, said, “These results suggest that menu labeling, particularly labels warning that an item has high climate impact, can be an effective strategy for encouraging more sustainable food choices in a fast food setting.”

The study points out negative labels might be unpopular: “It is unlikely that the industry would voluntarily adopt a negative label approach; such an approach needs to be carried out via law.   However, high climate impact labels may easily be adopted in settings like universities and hospitals.”

They have a point that this label is aggressively negative, more like a cigarette warning than a food label. In the study, the authors note that future research should test more label designs using qualitative and quantitative research on how people understand different climate impact labels.

【推荐2】When storms come rolling in across the ocean, they struck coastlines with tremendous force. Luckily, for thousands of miles of tropical coastlines, nature has provided a remarkable form of protection: coral reefs.

These colorful wonders are best known for their diversity of life, their plentiful seafood, and their draw to scuba-diving tourists. But they are also astonishingly durable and firm structures, built by tiny animals with calcium carbonate skeletons (碳酸钙骨架), which provide an important service to the coastlines standing behind them — they can absorb up to 97% of wave energy.

A new study estimates that reefs offer protection to up to 5.3 million people and $109 billion in gross domestic product (GDP) per decade. The maps in the study scientists generated are at a much finer resolution (分辨率) than previous analyses, which allows users to view coral reefs with more details and see where reefs provide the highest degree of protection for people, GDP and infrastructure (基础设施). “This level of detail means we can use this information in practical ways, like in the marine spacial planning we do to inform conservation strategies around the world,” says Dr. Spalding, the co-author of the study. More accurate data on where reefs protect people and infrastructure from destructive waves can help improve decision-making about which reefs to protect.

We have already lost half of the world’s reefs, and scientists predict we could lose up to 90% if actions are not taken to protect them. Effective management strategies are vital to supporting reef health and recovery.

Coral reefs are often selected for conservation based on their ecological significance, which may mean they are located in remote places, away from the more direct effects of human pressures like development and pollution. “We are failing ourselves as well as nature if we don’t also consider protecting the reefs that are located closer to humans,” says Spalding. “These are the reefs that protect us and provide for us in abundance. Let’s look after them.”

【推荐3】According to a new USDA(the U.S.Department of Agriculture)report,U.S.forests could worsen global warming because they are being destroyed by natural disasters and are losing their ability to absorb planet-warming gases as they get older.The report predicts that the ability of forests to absorb carbon will start declining after 2025 and that forests could release up to 100 million metric tons of carbon a year as their emissions from decaying(腐烂)trees go above their carbon absorption.Forests could become a“substantial carbon source”by 2070,the USDA report says.

The loss of carbon absorption is driven in part by natural disasters such as wildfires, tornadoes and hurricanes,which are increasing in frequency and strength as global temperatures rise.The disasters destroy forestland,destroying its ecosystem and decreasing its ability to absorb carbon,according to Lynn Riley,a senior manager of climate science at the American Forest Foundation.Aging forests also contribute.The report found that older,mature trees absorb less carbon than younger trees of the same species,and U.S.forests are rapidly aging.

This trend is likely to continue,as forests come under increasing threat from climate change and exploitation(开采).The typical tropical forest may become a carbon source by the 2060s,according to Simon Lewis,professor in the school of geography at Leeds University. “Humans have been lucky so far,as tropical forests are cleaning up lots of our pollution,but they can’t keep doing that indefinitely,”he said.“We need to cut down fossil fuel emissions before the global carbon cycle starts working against us.”

U.S.forests currently absorb 11 percent of U.S.carbon emissions,or 150 million metric tons of carbon a year,equal to the combined emissions from 40 coal power plants,according to there port.The loss of forests as natural carbon absorbers will require the U.S.to cut emissions more rapidly to reach net zero.“As we work to decarbonize(碳减排),forests are one of the greatest tools.If we were to lose that tool,it means we will contribute that much more in emissions,”Riley said.