【推荐3】With the availability of easy-to-use at-home kits, DNA testing for dogs has become increasingly popular among dog owners in recent years. It can provide invaluable insights into a dog’s breed, health risks, and even behaviors.

DNA testing typically works by analyzing the genetic material found in a sample of cells taken from the inside of your dog’s cheek. This sample is then compared to a database of known breeds and genetic markers associated with certain traits or health conditions.

The first step in obtaining a DNA test kit is selecting which type you want. Most companies offer several different types of tests that vary in cost and complexity. For instance, some tests just analyze your dog’s breed composition, while others can assess additional genetic markers associated with certain diseases or behaviors.

Then it’s time to collect your dog’s sample using the provided swab (拭子) kit or saliva-collection tube included with most kits. The swab should be gently rubbed inside your pet’s cheek according to the kit’s directions before being placed into the collection container provided by the company. After collecting the sample, it should be mailed back to the laboratory for processing according to instructions given by the company providing the service. Once received by the lab, it typically takes 1-2 weeks for results to be processed and sent back via email or mail. Results will vary depending on which type of test was purchased, but they generally include detailed information about your pet’s breed composition as well as any potential health risks or behavioral traits associated with their genetics that could affect their overall well-being and quality of life.

If you’re looking for an easy way to learn more about your pup’s background without spending too much money, then DNA testing might just be right up your alley.

【推荐2】CLIMATE CHANGE REQUIRES THE WORLD’S ATTENTION

We have known about climate change for decades. There is little doubt that Earth is getting warmer and warmer (see the graph). A warming ocean and atmosphere along with melting ice and rising sea levels provide evidence of a dramatic change in the global climate.

In 2013, a lot of people were shocked by a news photo of a dead polar bear that was found on Norway’s Arctic island of Svalbard. According to the scientists who found its dead body, all that remained of the polar bear was “skin and bones”. An expert who has studied polar bears for many years said that from the position of its dead body, the bear appeared to have starved and died. Experts claimed that low sea-ice levels caused by climate change meant the bear could not hunt seals as before, so it had to travel greater distances in order to find food. This alarming case showed how the increase in temperature had an impact on Earth’s ecology.

Then what is causing the increase in the global average surface temperature? Climate scientists often mention a key climate process called the “greenhouse effect”, which has two common meanings: the “natural” greenhouse effect and the “man-made” greenhouse effect. The “natural” greenhouse effect refers to the fact that heat from the sun enters the atmosphere and warms Earth’s surface as short-wave radiation. The heat is released back into space at longer wave lengths. Greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, such as methane and carbon dioxide, trap some of the heat, keeping Earth’s climate warm and habitable. Without this process, Earth could not sustain life. However, the “man-made” greenhouse effect has now become a big problem. When people produce huge amounts of extra greenhouse gases by burning fossil fuels, more heat energy is trapped in the atmosphere and causes Earth’s surface temperature to rise quickly.

There is strong and comprehensive evidence that the rise in temperature has led to an increase in extreme weather and natural disasters worldwide, not only causing serious damage, but also costing human lives. Climate scientists have warned that if we do not take appropriate actions, this warming trend will probably continue and there will be a higher price to pay. In fact, news reports are frequently broadcast about extreme rainstorms and heatwaves causing deaths and economic losses.

Continued greenhouse gas emissions will result in further warming and long-lasting changes to the global climate. This requires the attention of people all over the world. Governments need to consider making policies and taking appropriate actions and measures to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. We as individuals can also reduce our “carbon footprint” by restricting the amount of carbon dioxide our lifestyles produce. It is our responsibility to seize every opportunity to educate everyone about global warming, along with its causes and impacts, because this is the most serious issue affecting all of us on this planet. So what will you do to help?

【推荐1】These days you'd be hard pressed to find anyone in Australia over the age of 15 who doesn't own a mobile phone. In fact plenty of younger kids have one in their pocket. Practically everyone can make and receive calls anywhere, anytime.

What does Paragraph 2 mainly tell us about mobile phones?

【推荐2】When almost everyone has a mobile phone, why are more than half of Australian homes still paying for a landline (座机)?

These days you’d be hard pressed to find anyone in Australia over the age of 15 who doesn’t own a mobile phone. In fact plenty of younger kids have one in their pocket. Practically everyone can make and receive calls anywhere, anytime.

Still, 55 percent of Australians have a landline phone at home and only just over a quarter (29%) rely only on their smartphones according to a survey (调查). Of those Australians who still have a landline, a third concede that it’s not really necessary and they’re keeping it as a security blanket — 19 percent say they never use it while a further 13 percent keep it in case of emergencies. I think my home falls into that category.

More than half of Australian homes are still choosing to stick with their home phone. Age is naturally a factor (因素)— only 58 percent of Generation Ys still use landlines now and then, compared to 84 percent of Baby Boomers who’ve perhaps had the same home number for 50 years. Age isn’t the only factor; I’d say it’s also to do with the makeup of your household.

Generation Xers with young families, like my wife and I, can still find it convenient to have a home phone rather than providing a mobile phone for every family member. That said, to be honest the only people who ever ring our home phone are our Baby Boomers parents, to the point where we play a game and guess who is calling before we pick up the phone (using Caller ID would take the fun out of it).

How attached are you to your landline? How long until they go the way of gas street lamps and morning milk deliveries?

【推荐3】Research has found that using wood for construction instead of concrete and steel can reduce emissions. But Tim Searchinger at Princeton University says many of these studies are based on the false foundation that harvesting wood is carbon neutral (碳中和). “Only a small percentage of the wood gets into a timber (木料) product, and a part of that gets into a timber product that can replace concrete and steel in a building,” he says. Efficiencies vary in different countries, but large amounts of a harvested tree are left to be divided into parts, used in short-lived products like paper or burned for energy, all of which generate emissions.

In a report for the World Resources Institute, Searchinger and his colleagues have modelled how using more wood for construction would affect emissions between 2010 and 2050, accounting for the emissions from harvesting the wood. They considered various types of forests and parts of wood going towards construction. They also factored in the emissions savings from replacing concrete and steel.

Under some circumstances, the researchers found significant emissions reductions. But each case required what they considered an unrealistically high portion of the wood going towards construction, as well as rapid growth only seen in warmer places, like Brazil. In general, they found a large increase in global demand for wood would probably lead to rising emissions for decades. Accounting for emissions in this way, the researchers reported in a related paper that increasing forest harvests between 2010 and 2050 would add emissions equal to roughly 10 percent of total annual emissions.

Ali Amiri at Aalto University in Finland says the report’s conclusions about emissions from rising demand are probably correct, but the story is different for wood we already harvest. “Boosting the efficiency of current harvests and using more wood for longer lived purposes than paper would cut emissions,” he says. “We cannot just say we should stop using wood.”