1 . For decades, scientists thought of the brain as the most closely guarded organ. Locked safely behind a biological barrier, away from the disorder of the rest of the body, it was broadly free of destruction of germs (病菌) and the battles started by the immune system.
Then, 20-odd years ago, some researchers began to ask a question: is the brain really so separate? The answer, according to a growing body of evidence, is no — and has important effects on both science and health care.
The list of brain conditions that have been associated with changes elsewhere in the body is long and growing. Changes in the make-up of the microorganisms resident in the gut (肠道), for example, have been linked to disorders like Parkinson’s disease. Some researchers think that certain infections could provoke Alzheimer’s disease and some could lead to emotional disorder in babies.
The effect is two-way. There is a lengthening list of symptoms (症状) not typically viewed as disorders of the nervous system in which the brain and the neural processes that connect it to the body play a large part. For example, the development of a fever is influenced by a population of neurons (神经元) that control body temperature and appetite. The effect of brain on body is underlined by the finding that stimulating a particular brain region in mice can ‘remind’ the body of previous inflammation (炎症) — and reproduce them.
These findings and others mark a complete shift in our view of the interconnectedness of brain and body, and could help us both understand and treat illness. If some brain conditions start outside the brain, then perhaps cures for them could also reach in from outside. Treatments that take effect through the digestive system, heart or other organs, for instance, would be much easier and less striking to give than those that must cross the blood-brain barrier, the brain’s first line of defence.
In the opposite direction, the effects of our emotions or mood on our capacity to recover from illness could also be used. There is an opening work under way testing whether stimulating certain areas of the brain that respond to reward and produce feelings of positivity could enhance recovery from conditions such as heart attacks. Perhaps even more exciting is the possibility that making changes to our behaviour — to reduce stress, say — could have similar benefits.
For neuroscientists, it’s time to look beyond the brain. And clinicians treating the body mustn’t assume the brain is above getting involved — its activity could be influencing a wide range of conditions, from mild infections to long-time fatness.
1. The author writes paragraph 1 mainly to ______.| A．evaluate an argument |
| B．present an assumption |
| C．summarize the structure |
| D．provide the background |
| A．Delay. | B．Cure. | C．Cause. | D．Disturb. |
| A．Treatments that cross brain-blood barrier are less used. |
| B．Previous diseases could cause the production of new ones. |
| C．Emotions could affect the capacity to fight against diseases. |
| D．Treatment of the brain takes priority over other treatments. |
I: Introduction P: Point Sp: Sub-point (次要点) C: Conclusion
A． | B． |
C． | D． |
2 . When I teach research methods, a major focus is peer review. As a process, peer review evaluates academic papers for their quality, integrity and impact on a field, largely shaping what scientists accept as “knowledge”- By instinct, any academic follows up a new idea with the question, “Was that peer reviewed?”
Although I believe in the importance of peer review and I help do peer reviews for several academic journals-I know how vulnerable the process can be.
I had my first encounter with peer review during my first year as a Ph. D student. One day, my adviser handed me an essay and told me to have my -written review back to him in a week. But at the time, I certainly was not a “peer”-I was too new in my field. Manipulated data (不实的数据) or substandard methods could easily have gone undetected. Knowledge is not self-evident. Only experts would be able to notice them, and even then, experts do not always agree on what they notice.
Let’s say in my life I only see white swans. Maybe I write an essay, concluding that all swans are white. And a “peer” says, “Wait a minute, I’ve seen black swans.” I would have to refine my knowledge.
The peer plays a key role evaluating observations with the overall goal of advancing knowledge. For example, if the above story were reversed, and peer reviewers who all believed that all swans were white came across the first study observing a black swan, the study would receive a lot of attention.
So why was a first-year graduate student getting to stand in for an expert? Why would my review count the same as an expert’s review? One answer: The process relies almost entirely on unpaid labor.
Despite the fact that peers are professionals, peer review is not a profession. As a result, the same over-worked scholars often receive masses of the peer review requests. Besides the labor inequity, a small pool of experts can lead to a narrowed process of what is publishable or what counts as knowledge, directly threatening diversity of perspectives and scholars. Without a large enough reviewer pool, the process can easily fall victim to biases, arising from a small community recognizing each other’s work and compromising conflicts of interest.
Despite these challenges, I still tell my students that peer review offers the best method for evaluating studies aird advancing knowledge. As a process, peer review theoretically works. The question is whether the issues with peer review can be addressed by professionalizing the field.
1. What can we learn about peer review in the first paragraph?| A．It generates knowledge. | B．It is commonly practiced. |
| C．It is a major research method. | D．It is questioned by some scientists. |
| A．Complexity of peer review ensures its reliability. |
| B．Contradictions between scientists may be balanced. |
| C．Individuals can be limited by personal experiences. |
| D．Experts should detect unscientific observation methods. |
| A．Workload for scholars. | B．Toughness of the process. |
| C．Diversification of publications. | D．Financial support to reviewers. |
| A．what fuels peer review | B．why peer review is imperfect |
| C．how new hands advance peer review | D．whether peer reviewers are underrated |
3 . While some allergies (过敏症) disappear over time or with treatment, others last a lifetime. For decades, scientists have been searching for the source of these lifetime allergies.
Recently, researchers found that memory B cells may be involved. These cells produce a different class of antibodies known as IgG, which ward off viral infections. But no one had identified exactly which of those cells were recalling allergens or how they switched to making the IgE antibodies responsible for allergies. To uncover the mysterious cells, two research teams took a deep dive into the immune (免疫的) cells of people with allergies and some without.
Immunologist Joshua Koenig and colleagues examined more than 90, 000 memory B cells from six people with birch allergies, four people allergic to dust mites and five people with no allergies. Using a technique called RNA sequencing, the team identified specific memory B cells, which they named MBC2s that make antibodies and proteins associated with the immune response that causes allergies.
In another experiment, Koenig and colleagues used a peanut protein to go fishing for memory B cells from people with peanut allergies. The team pulled out the same type of cells found in people with birch and dust mite allergies. In people with peanut allergies, those cells increased in number and produced IgE antibodies as the people started treatment to desensitize them to peanut allergens.
Another group led by Maria Curotto de Lafaille, an immunologist at the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai in New York City, also found that similar cells were more plentiful in 58 children allergic to peanuts than in 13 kids without allergies. The team found that the cells are ready to switch from making protective IgG antibodies to allergy-causing IgE antibodies. Even before the switch, the cells were making RNA for IgE but didn’t produce the protein. Making that RNA enables the cells to switch the type of antibodies they make when they encounter allergens. The signal to switch partially depends on a protein called JAK, the group discovered. “Stopping JAK from sending the signal could help prevent the memory cells from switching to IgE production,” Lafaille says. She also predicts that allergists may be able to examine aspects of these memory cells to forecast whether a patient's allergy is likely to last or disappear with time or treatment.
“Knowing which population of cells store allergies in long-term memory may eventually help scientists identify other ways to kill the allergy cells,” says Cecilia Berin, an immunologist at Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine. “You could potentially get rid of not only your peanut allergy but also all of your allergies.”
1. Why did scientists investigate the immune cells of individuals with and without allergies?| A．To explore the distinctions between IgG and IgE. |
| B．To uncover new antibodies known as IgG and IgE. |
| C．To identify cells responsible for defending against allergies. |
| D．To reveal cells associated with the development of allergies. |
| A．Make. . . less destructive. | B．Make. . . less responsive. |
| C．Make. . . less protective. | D．Make. . . less effective. |
| A．MBC2s make antibodies and proteins that prevent allergies. |
| B．Memory B cells generate both RNA for IgE and the corresponding protein. |
| C．JAK plays a role in controlling antibody production when exposed to allergens. |
| D．Allergists are capable of predicting whether an allergy will last or disappear. |
| A．RNA Sequencing Is Applied in Immunology Research |
| B．Specific Cells Related to Peanut Allergies Are Identified |
| C．Unmasking Cells’ Identities Helps Diagnose and Treat Allergies |
| D．Newfound Immune Cells Are Responsible for Long-lasting Allergies |
4 . In the story A Christmas Carol, the wealthy miser (吝啬鬼) Ebenezer Scrooge has a magical, life-changing epiphany (顿悟). Scrooge’s eyes are opened as to how his behavior affects other people — and he goes from a selfish grump to a generous benefactor overnight, thanks to visits from ghosts.
Scrooge’s transformation comes down to knowledge. But do people really want to know how their actions affect others? As behavioral scientists, we wanted to understand just how common willful ignorance is — as well as why people engage in it.
Experiments were carried out to find answers. Researchers asked one member of each pair to choose between two options (选择) in one of two settings, determining the earnings for themselves and their partner.
In the transparent setting, if they chose $5 for themselves, they knew their partner would also receive $5. If, however, they chose $6 for themselves, they knew their partner would receive only $1 in return.
In the ambiguous setting, there were two possible situations. In one, if the decision-maker selected $6 for themselves, their partner would receive $1, and if the decision-maker chose $5, their partner would receive $5. But in the other situation, the decision-maker could pick $6 and their partner would receive $5, or the decision-maker could select $5 and their partner would receive $1. The decision-maker knew these two systems — but they were not initially aware of which situation they were in. Interestingly, the decision-maker had the opportunity to resolve that ambiguity by clicking a button.
Across all studies, we found in the transparent setting 55% chose the altruistic option. In the ambiguous setting, however, 40% of participants chose to remain ignorant. 60% of people in the ignorant group chose a higher personal payout in situations where this choice came at the expense of their partner. Among those who requested more information, 36% knowingly kept a higher payout at a cost to their partner. Only 39% of people in the ambiguous setting made the choice that ultimately benefited their partner — a significant drop from 55% in the transparent condition.
But how do we know if ignorance in the ambiguous setting was willful? We conducted a second analysis focused on what motivates people to seek information.
In this analysis we looked at how people who obtained additional information behaved in comparison with those who were given information. We found that people who chose to receive information in the ambiguous setting were seven percentage points more likely to make the altruistic choice than people in the transparent setting. By the same token, the finding also suggests ignorance prevents people from knowing how their actions harm others.
If we can avoid putting a strong moral emphasis on decisions, it may make people feel less threatened and, as a result, less willfully ignorant. We may not have Dickensian ghosts to guide us — but there are still steps we can take.
1. The author mentions Scrooge’s change mainly to ______.| A．draw a comparison | B．introduce a topic |
| C．evaluate a character | D．give an example |
| A．drop out of the experiment | B．know the situation they are in |
| C．receive the additional earnings | D．switch to the other situation they prefer |
| A．Inadvisable. | B．Selfless. | C．Fair-minded. | D．Unrealistic. |
| A．The ignorant group tend to sacrifice their own interest. |
| B．Moral evaluation might lead to more intentional ignorance. |
| C．There is no common payout system shared by both settings. |
| D．Avoiding information might make people feel like bad persons. |
5 . We often think of fingerprints as the tiny arched patterns on the tip of each finger. They are regarded as special markers of human identity, even more individualized than DNA. But new research suggests our brains have “fingerprints” that are equally unchanging and unique to each person.
With modern neuroimaging (神经影像) techniques, scientists can track your brain’s distinct signature composed of tens of thousands of electrical signals that communicate across the brain. The final product is a picture of brain’s electrical activity that is detailed, distinct and difficult to change. According to Zack Y. Shan, head of the neuroimaging platform at the Thompson Institute, “The brain is a symphony orchestra (交响乐团).” Each region plays a unique instrument and adapts to work with nearby tunes at the same time. This cooperation leads to our thoughts and actions. “And no two symphonies sound exactly alike,” Shan adds.
A recent study published in Sleep maps the extent of this neurodiversity through EEG snapshots (脑电图快照), which describe the sleeping brain’s electrical activity as wavy lines. Led by Michael Prerau, a professor of medicine at Harvard Medical School, the researchers analyzed brainwave data of sleep spindles, one to two seconds evident neural activity associated with our ability to turn short-term memories into long-term memories.
For Dara S. Manoach, a co-author of the Sleep study and professor of psychology at Harvard Medical School, the sleeping brain is a “new frontier” for studying the treatment of memory problems in neurological disorders. She notes that lack of sleep spindle activities has been linked to different mental diseases like epilepsy and Alzheimer’s disease. So, the researchers compared two nights of sleep recordings from healthy participants to those with Alzheimer’s disease. Their analysis revealed that their broadened approach to analyzing sleep spindles also could unearth new biological indicators for Alzheimer’s disease. “It’s a first step to better understanding how the disorder operates and developing targeted treatments,” Manoach says.
Moreover, brain fingerprints may offer inspirations that traditional therapeutic (治疗性的) observation can’t. Patients with different diseases can have similar symptoms. “That’s where neuroimaging comes into play. Brain fingerprints are windows into distinguishing between two patients who seem identical,” explains Dan Hermens, a professor of neurobiology at the Thompson Institute.
In the wake of increasing reports of mental disorders, there is therapeutic promise. Brain fingerprinting could offer a potential way out of the dark chapter and provide new possibilities for the mental health crisis using best evidence-based practices to overcome it.
1. What can we learn about the brain’s “fingerprint”?| A．It can track electrical signals in the brain. |
| B．It refers to the pattern of the surface of the brain. |
| C．It constructs an individualized map of brain structure. |
| D．It shows the unique image of the brain’s electrical activity. |
| A．recording brain fingerprints enhances memory |
| B．brainwave data can identify specific mental illnesses |
| C．EEG can form biological indicators for human identity |
| D．neuroimaging prevents the development of mental disorders |
| A．Sleep Fingerprints Predict Disease Occurrence |
| B．Sleeping Brains: Ideas and Actions Controlled |
| C．Sleep Fingerprints: Brain Identity Revealed |
| D．Sleeping Brains Uncover Memory Codes |
6 . Frozen in time, a 125-million-year-old mammal attacking a dinosaur. A 39-million-year-old whale, the heaviest animal that ever lived. The oldest known jellyfish, from 505 million years ago. Paleontology (古生物学) produces newsworthy discoveries.
Fossils (化石), moreover, provide direct evidence for the long history of life, allowing paleontologists to test hypotheses (假设) about evolution with data only they provide. They allow investigation of present and past life on Earth. Flows of biological diversity, appearances of new life forms and the extinctions of long existing ones, would go undiscovered without these efforts. But the headlines over exciting new fossils greatly underestimate the true importance of paleontology. Its real significance lies in how such discoveries brighten the grand history of life on Earth. From its beginnings, more than three billion years ago, to the present day, fossils record how life adapted or disappeared in the face of major environmental challenges.
Paleontologists provide us with a unique vantage on modern climate change. They play an essential role in interpreting ancient environments, in reconstructing ancient oceans, continents and climates. Fossils provide key limitation on the climate models that are essential for predicting future climate change. And the fossil record gives important insights into how life will respond to predicted future climate conditions, because these have occurred before in Earth’s history.
In addition, paleontology has provided a fundamental contribution to human thought: the reality of species extinction and thus of a world that has dramatically changed over time. In documenting the history of life, paleontologists recognized that many extinction episodes could occur suddenly, such as the event 66 million years ago that ended the dinosaurs. The search for the causes of past mass extinctions started pioneering studies from across the scientific spectrum (科学界), focusing on potential future threats to humanity.
Not only do paleontologists know what happens to life when things go bad, they also know how long it takes for ecosystems and biodiversity to recover from these disasters, which can take far longer than modern humans have existed.
Paleontologists thus provide a unique perspective on the nature and future long-term ecological impact of the current human-produced biodiversity crisis, the so-called Sixth Extinction, and therefore the importance of protecting modern biodiversity. The very concept of a Sixth Extinction would not exist without paleontologists documenting the first five.
Paleontologists know that understanding life’s past is critical to anticipating and adapting to life’s and humanity’s future. Paleontology is important because it brings its unique and critical perspective to current challenges in climate change, biodiversity loss and the environment. Paleontologists can predict the future because they know the past.
1. The first two paragraphs are written to _______.| A．describe an event | B．raise a question |
| C．present an opinion | D．make a comparison |
| A．A positive effect. | B．A valuable suggestion. |
| C．A quick decision. | D．A comprehensive view. |
| A．Ecological recovery takes shorter than imagined. |
| B．Past lessons can help to predict the future threats. |
| C．Paleontologists can handle the biodiversity crisis. |
| D．Fossil studies focus on the causes of mass extinctions. |
| A．Paleontology: A Pioneering Study |
| B．Paleontology: A History Recorder |
| C．Paleontology Tells More About Nature Than Humans |
| D．Paleontology Is Far More Than New Fossil Discoveries |
7 . 
Climate change influences how organisms live and function in their environment. Investigating how organisms adapt is essential for accurately predicting their survival, and tracking genomic(基因组的) changes helps researchers determine the lasting effects of the changing environment. Copepods, a dominant coastal species, are particularly useful for studying genetic changes in response to shifting marine environments. By studying copepods, researchers can get an idea of how the ocean food chain might react to changes in the Earth’s climate.
Tracking a copepod’s evolving genome in the wild, however, can be time-consuming and laborious. To circumvent this challenge, Pespeni and her team used an evolve-and-resequence approach in the lab. They exposed a copepod population to three stressors—water warming, acidification via high CO₂ levels, and combinations of the two ocean warming and acidification (OWA) conditions in the laboratory, and tracked their adaptations to these conditions over 25generations. Previously, they tracked reproductive fitness traits such as egg-hatching success under these conditions. They found that the fitness of the population exposed to OWA conditions initially decreased, but then adapted to the stressors over several generations.
In the current study, the researchers sequenced the genomes of animals in each experimental group at generation 0 and 25 to quantify how allele (等位基因) frequencies changed in response to experimental selective pressures. The researchers found adaptive alleles related to development were unique to the multiple stressor experiment, providing a possible explanation for the observed selection of hatching success.
“We showed that the warming alone was a much strong er selective pressure than CO₂. But when you combine them, you get a unique synergy. So, it’s not just one plus one equals two; it’s one plus one equals something totally different,” said Pespeni. Whereas previous studies observed the effects of single stressors on evolving organisms, Pespeni’s study demonstrated that multiple stressors result in a unique response to selection in a non-additive manner. This is important because human-induced environmental changes are multifaceted(多方面的), and additional stressors are still needed to further mimic natural environmental changes, and this study reveals the complexity of the genomic adaptive response.
According to Morgan Kelly, a professor who was not involved in the study, the insights presented by the researchers in this study call into question the previous single stressor studies and will influence future experimental design. “There’s this big question of the role that evolutionary change will play in response to climate change, and the way the researchers integrate genomic information is the best of its kind in the world of marine experimental evolution,” said Kelly.
According to Pespeni, there is reason to maintain hope in the face of climate change because her work revealed that the copepods eventually fully regained their ability to reproduce following the combined environmental changes.
1. What can we learn about Pespeni’s previous and current studies?| A．The previous study tried new ways to quantify the response of copepods. |
| B．The current study may explain the success of hatching in the previous one. |
| C．The previous study reveals the complexity of the genomic adaptive response. |
| D．The current study sequenced copepods’ genes of 25 generations in each group. |
| A．study how other species adapt to global warming |
| B．include additional stressors in their experiments |
| C．track a copepod’s evolving genome in the wild |
| D．compare Pespeni’s study with previous ones |
| A．It integrates genomic information in the research. |
| B．It shows most species can easily adapt to climate changes. |
| C．It confirms the effectiveness of previous single stressor studies. |
| D．It demonstrates multiple stressors produce an additive response. |
| A．Scientists Edit Genomes to Help Copepods Survive |
| B．Research Removes People’s Worries about Climate Change |
| C．Combining Climate Stressors Leads to Unique Genomic Changes |
| D．The Evolve-and-resequence Approach Helps Fight Climate Change |
8 . How We Talk about Fear Matters
Lately, there seems to be plenty to fear in the world. How we talk about what we fear might offer clues to how we perceive that emotion socially and culturally.
Get the root of fear.
Figure out the emotional meaning of fear.
Whether emotions are viewed positively or negatively varies from culture to culture.
Find out a fearful pattern.
In looking at such patterns across the major language families, researchers found that the word “fear” was often associated with anxiety, envy and grief in Indo-European languages. But in Austronesian languages, “fear” more often was associated with surprise.
How we talk about fear changes how we react to it. When we talk about what frightens us, it may be useful to disrupt associated meanings. In addition, how our language categorizes an emotion seems to impact whether we perceive those emotions negatively or positively.
In conclusion, fear is something that can be changed by cultural and linguistic experience.
| A．Talk more about fears |
| B．Change our perception of fear |
| C．The word fear has a long history in English |
| D．There seemed a fearful pattern across the major language families |
| E．This is based on what people have learned to associate with emotion words |
| F．It opens the door to potential ways to change how we talk about and react to it |
| G．This makes speakers of the latter languages associate this emotion with a less negative sense |
9 . “When I stopped in at our local tourism office in Montreal to ask where they would recommend visitors to go to smell, taste, and listen to the city, I just received blank stares. They only know about things to see, not about the city’s other sensory attractions, its soundmarks and smellmarks,” says Howes, the director of Sensory Studies, a growing field often referred to as “sensory urbanism”.
Around the world, researchers like Howes are investigating how non-visual information defines the character of a city and affects its livability. Using methods ranging from low-tech sound walks to data collecting, wearables (clothing or glasses that contain computer technology), and virtual reality, they’re fighting what they see as a limiting visual preference in urban planning.
“Just being able to close your eyes for 10 minutes gives you a totally different feeling about a place,” says Oguz Öner, an academic and musician. He has spent years organizing sound walks in Istanbul where participants describe what they hear at different spots with their eyes covered. His research has identified locations where a wave organ could be constructed to strengthen the sounds of the sea, something he was surprised to realize people could hardly hear, even along the waterfront.
Although his findings have not been considered into local urban plans yet, this kind of individual feedback (反馈) about the sensory environment is already being put to use in Berlin, where quiet areas identified by citizens using a free mobile app have been included in the city’s latest noise action plan.
The best way to determine how people react to different sensory environments is a subject of some debate within the field. Howes and his colleagues are using observation and interviews to develop a set of best practices for good sensory design in public spaces. Other researchers are going more high-tech, using wearables to track biological data like heart-rate variability to reveal different sensory experiences.
As data collection about people’s sensory experiences becomes more widespread, many of these experts warn that concerns about privacy and surveillance (监视) need to be taken into account. Issues of fairness and inclusion also come into play when determining whose sensory experiences are factored into planning. “Sensory awareness is not independent or simply biological; whether we find something pleasant or not has been shaped culturally and socially,” says Monica Degen, an urban cultural sociologist at Brunel University London.
Degen cites the example of a London neighborhood where inexpensive restaurants for local youth were replaced by trendy cafes. “It used to smell like fried chicken,” she says, but newer residents found that smell annoying rather than welcoming. “Now it smells like the popular Italian coffee, cappuccinos.”
1. The underlined phrase “blank stares” in Paragraph 1 implies that______.| A．Montreal is lacking in visual appeal |
| B．Montreal’s non-visual information is ignored |
| C．the tourism officers object to sensory urbanism |
| D．there are too many tourist attractions to recommend |
| A．Many methods are used to limit the visual preference. |
| B．Potential concerns about collecting data can be relieved. |
| C．People may fail to notice sound attractions even in better locations. |
| D．Individual feedback restricts the development of sensory environment. |
| A．People’s perceptions of their sensory surroundings are subjective. |
| B．Sensory urbanism needs to focus on developing sensory facilities. |
| C．Sensory experience is dominant in shaping the character of a city. |
| D．Choices of sensory attractions in urban planning depend on tourists. |
10 . “Flying insects don’t fly directly to lights from far away because they’re attracted to them, but appear to change course toward a light if they happen to be passing by due to a strange inborn biological response,” writes Samuel Fabian, a bioengineer, in a research paper.
Until now, the leading scientific hypothesis has been that insects use the moon’s light to direct the way at night and mistake artificial lights for the moon. But this idea doesn’t explain why insects that only fly during the day also gather around lights.
To find out what really happens, Samuel’s team track the precise movements of insects in the wild around lights using a high-speed camera. This revealed two notable behaviours. First, when insects fly above lights, they often invert (转向) themselves and try to fly upside down, causing them to fall very fast. Just after insects pass under a light, they start doing a ring road. As their climb angle becomes too steep, they suddenly stop and start to fall. Second, when insects approach a light from the side, they may circle or “orbit” the light.
The videos show that the inversions sometimes result in insects falling on lights. It can appear to the naked eye as though they are flying at the lights. “Instead, insects turn their dorsum toward the light, generating flight perpendicular(垂直) to the source,” the team write. It is common to the two behaviours that the insects are keeping their backs to the light, known as the dorsal light response (DLR). This DLR is a shortcut for insects to work out which way is up and keep their bodies upright, as the moon or sun is usually more or less directly above them, and this direction allows them to maintain proper flight attitude and control. They also find that the insects fly at right angles to a light source, leading to orbiting and unstable flights as the light’s location relative to them changes as they move.
Samuel’s team suggest that a possible outcome of the research could help the construction industry to avoid the types of light that most attract insects.
1. What does the research focus on?| A．Why insects gather around lights. |
| B．Where artificial lights lead insects to. |
| C．What biological response insects are born with. |
| D．How to design environment friendly artificial lights. |
| A．They fly directly to lights. | B．They circle close to lights. |
| C．Their flying speed is steady. | D．Their inversions can be controlled. |
| A．balance their flying | B．keep their route straight |
| C．decide their body positon | D．shorten their flight distance |
