clgkhkrf54 posted a photo:
Maya Classic Period (550-900 AD) rare polychrome pottery from the Jay I. Kislak collection, Library of Congress, Geography and Map Division. See long file names for additional information.
clgkhkrf54 posted a photo:
Maya Classic Period (550-900 AD) rare polychrome pottery from the Jay I. Kislak collection, Library of Congress, Geography and Map Division. See long file names for additional information.
Researchers in the United Kingdom found that people who engage with the arts biologically age more slowly than those who do not. These results echo others over the years that show a correlation between exercising creative muscles and improved health outcomes.
Female mud snails are developing male reproductive organs near marinas. In Florida, alligators living in lakes contaminated with pesticides are being born with smaller genitals and disrupted hormones. Sea turtle populations are becoming almost entirely female as nesting sands get warmer. The same types of chemicals responsible for these wildlife changes are now found in human placentas, testes, and semen. A new peer-reviewed review brings all of this evidence together for the first time.
A cross-species review published April 23 in npj Emerging Contaminants, led by Oregon State University toxicologist Susanne Brander and Mount Sinai researcher Shanna Swan, brings together evidence from many animal groups, including invertebrates, fish, birds, reptiles, amphibians, marine mammals, rodents, and humans. The main finding is that pollution and climate change together are now the biggest single cause of biodiversity loss. The chemicals at the heart of this problem—phthalates, bisphenols, PFAS, and microplastics—are lowering fertility and reproductive success in many species, including humans.
Of more than 140,000 synthetic chemicals registered under the EU’s REACH chemical safety regulation, only about 1% have been properly tested for safety, and over 1,000 are known endocrine-disrupting chemicals (EDCs). Each year, more than 2,000 new chemicals are introduced worldwide. The review’s authors say these chemicals can be effective at concentrations so low they are “analogous to a whisper that is powerful enough to redirect a hurricane.” Because the endocrine system is very similar across vertebrates, scientists have used fish to predict effects in mammals. This is why the human findings in the review are not surprising when compared to what has happened in wildlife.
The article provides new clarity on how climate change and chemical exposure interact. Warmer temperatures have been shown to worsen endocrine disruption. In some fish, heat combined with EDCs changes sex ratios more than either factor alone. At the world’s largest green turtle rookery, almost all hatchlings are now female. In humans, an 80-year study of U.S. birth data found that hotter weather is linked to fewer conceptions. Other studies show that higher temperatures are connected to lower semen volume, sperm count, and sperm quality.
The article pays special attention to microplastics and nanoplastics, which were only recently recognized as reproductive toxicants. In 2021, researchers found microplastics in human placentas. In 2023, another study found microplastics in human testis and semen samples. A follow-up study found microplastics in every canine and human testis examined, with higher levels in humans. Several studies in the review show that polystyrene microplastics lower fertility, fertilization, and hatching rates in fish, and these effects can last for generations.
The issue of chemical substitution is important here as well. Older PFAS chemicals like PFOA have mostly been replaced, but their substitutes, such as GenX chemicals and other similar compounds, show equal or even stronger estrogen-like effects in lab tests. BPA substitutes like BPS and BPF act almost the same way on hormones. The review also points out that bio-based plastics like polylactic acid (PLA) caused reproductive harm in earthworms, similar to regular polyethylene. This pattern of “regrettable substitution,” where a banned chemical is swapped for a similar, unregulated one that causes the same harm, is now well documented.
PFAS deserve their own paragraph because the regulatory ground is shifting. EPA’s most recent water testing data shows about 176 million Americans drink tap water contaminated with at least one PFAS compound. The CDC has detected PFAS in the blood of 99% of Americans tested, including newborns. PFAS are now linked to abnormal sperm in Arctic seabirds, in dogs, and in human cohort studies, with a recent systematic review of 30 studies covering nearly 28,000 participants finding moderately elevated odds of PCOS- and endometriosis-related infertility associated with PFAS exposure.
The federal regulatory response is the focus of much controversy. EPA finalized the first national drinking water limits for six PFAS in 2024, setting PFOA and PFOS at 4 parts per trillion. In May 2025, the agency announced it would keep those two limits but extend the compliance deadline to 2031, and eliminate limits on four other PFAS. In January 2026, the D.C. Circuit denied EPA’s request to summarily vacate those four limits; final briefs are due this spring, and a decision is expected in the second half of 2026. While that plays out, individual filtration is the only consumer-side lever that actually removes PFAS from the water already in the tap.
Individual actions alone cannot solve a problem this big. The review’s main point is that we need broad regulatory changes for whole classes of chemicals, not just one at a time. Still, you can lower your own exposure, and the most effective changes come from a few key steps. The list below is ordered by impact, not by how easy the steps are.
The authors of the review make it clear that consumer choices alone are not enough. These chemicals are found even in Arctic rainwater, can cross the placenta, and last for centuries in the environment. The solution they propose is coordinated regulatory action: a strong Global Plastics Treaty that targets harmful chemicals, not just plastics in general; regulations that cover whole classes of chemicals rather than one at a time; and rules that make polluters responsible for cleanup costs, rather than passing those costs to utilities and customers.
The reason the review looks at different species is to show that what happens to snails, alligators, and seabirds also happens to humans, just at a different pace. Wildlife data have been warning us for 40 years, and now human data are starting to show the same patterns.
The post Researchers Find The Same Chemicals Wrecking Wildlife Fertility In Humans appeared first on Earth911.
“How about doing a moth survey at Sydenham?”
“A moss survey?” Asked Roberta Buchanan, local property steward for Sydenham River Nature Reserve, who didn’t quite hear me while we were walking outside.
“No, moths. Like a nocturnal equivalent to the butterfly survey. Who knows what we’ll find?”
It was 2023. I knew how unique the reserve was through my involvement with the annual butterfly and breeding bird surveys, and I suspected this oasis of biodiversity had fantastic potential for moths.
Compared to their diurnal counterparts, moths are relatively under-surveyed. Most species are nocturnal and inconspicuous, and documenting them requires specialized survey techniques – sheets and live traps baited with light or food. It also requires dedicated surveyors willing to stay up all night!
On the evening of June 24, 2024, a team of volunteers (Roberta Buchanan, Mark Buchanan, Paul Carter, Pete Chapman, Scott Connop, Deryl Nethercott, Dale Buchner, and myself) from Lambton Wildlife set up two light sheets and two traps across the Sydenham River Nature Reserve property. We documented hundreds of individual moths well into the night, and even more when we opened the traps the following morning. Then came the real fun: sorting through thousands of photos and identifying every moth.
Identifying all these moths is no trivial task. There are over 3,000 species of moths in Ontario, so field guides include only the most common species. Encountering moths that aren’t in the guide is common, and several groups of moths are notoriously hard to identify, even for experienced moth-ers. My approach is to photograph every moth, upload these photos to iNaturalist with my tentative ID, and wait for confirmation by a moth expert. For those who don’t know, iNaturalist is an online platform where you can post photos or recordings of an organism and crowdsource identifications from experts all over the world.
To keep track of the growing species list, I created an iNaturalist project which automatically consolidates all the moth observations from the property. The strength of this approach is that it stays current, as taxonomic changes and revised identifications will update the species list automatically. This makes it more reliable over time than a static checklist, which inevitably becomes outdated. As of 2026, we have documented 196 species of moth that first night, 13 of which are considered vulnerable at some level. After a second survey in May 2025, the total moth species count at Sydenham River Nature Reserve stands at 328, including 30 vulnerable species.
Fast forward to July 2025. I was checking my iNaturalist and saw there was a comment on one of my moth observations from the 2024 survey. Someone disagreed with my identification of what I believed to be a common white-fringed emerald, suggesting instead a species I hadn’t heard of – a Tuscarora emerald.
I quickly checked the range map, and my excitement spiked: this was a very rare moth, with only about fifty observations, all from the eastern United States – mostly localized populations in the Appalachians. If this was actually a Tuscarora emerald, it would likely represent the first record for Canada.
The identifier, Daniel Kluza (d_kluza on iNaturalist), a New Zealand-based biologist and iNaturalist taxonomy curator, pointed out a critical detail: our moth lacked the pure white spot on top of the abdomen which is present on the white-fringed emerald. This was a subtle difference, but potentially a decisive one. I needed a second opinion.
I reached out to Seabrooke Leckie, co-author of the Peterson Field Guide to Moths of Northeastern North America, and asked what she thought of it. Her response was unequivocal:
“I pulled out the Moths Of North America fascicle for this group to have a look at the official description of both species, Tuscarora and White-fringed, and I agree that this is Tuscarora. What a find!… Besides the presence/absence of the white spot at the base of the abdomen, the fascicle also says the white costa is very narrowly bordered inwardly by an apricot colour, and the AM and PM lines are wider than in White-fringed, both of which appear present here. There are no other eastern species that have both the white fringe and no markings on the abdomen.”
What makes this record especially meaningful is not just the rarity of Tuscarora emerald, but the way in which it was found. It was the result of methodical work by a team of volunteer community scientists, combined with the expertise of moth specialists. Not too long ago, access to such expertise was a significant roadblock, but it’s now easily facilitated through platforms such as iNaturalist.
We don’t know if this observation represents a previously overlooked population, a vagrant individual, or a northern range expansion driven by climate change. What is clear, however, is that protected places like Sydenham River Nature Reserve continue to demonstrate their conservation value in unexpected ways. When we take the time to look closely and collaboratively at under-surveyed groups like moths, we reveal hidden layers of biodiversity, uncovering the true richness of landscapes we thought we already knew.
clgkhkrf54 posted a photo:
Maya Classic Period (550-900 AD) rare polychrome pottery from the Jay I. Kislak collection, Library of Congress, Geography and Map Division. See long file names for additional information.
Login