Study on ecology/evolution papers claims that those containing many equations are 50% less likely to be cited later. This article does mention that increasing mathematical education of scientists is a bloody good idea, but other articles have focussed on this quote from one of the authors: “The ideal solution is… to add more explanatory text to take the reader carefully through the assumptions and implications of the theory.”  I may have to have a rant about maths in science at some stage.

There is a series of species of Formicidae called “crazy ants” because they make seemingly random movements, not following trails. How much fun would their paths be to model?

Why you shouldn’t stomp on cockroaches (I confess that I don’t stomp on cockroaches only because I don’t want anything that gross near my shoe).

It’s like the New York City sewer alligators, but with mosquitoes. And in Sydney.

Why and how to respect your specimens.

Fungus infects insect and consumes its nitrogen. Plant does a nitrogen-carbon swap with the fungus. Everyone wins (except maybe the insect). I also did not know that flesh-eating plants evolved the ability to survive in nitrogen-low areas, but TIL.

Magnaporthe oryzae, which infects up to 30% of the world’s rice supply, punches into plants with a pressure up to 40x that of a car tyre.