Rewritten Article:

In a groundbreaking study, wild chimpanzees have been observed eating and sharing fruit that contains alcohol. Researchers from the University of Exeter set up motion-activated cameras in Guinea-Bissau’s Cantanhez National Park to capture footage of these fascinating creatures.

For the first time, scientists have confirmed that chimps are consuming fermented African breadfruit, which contains ethanol (alcohol). This raises intriguing questions about whether and why our closest relatives deliberately seek out alcohol.

In humans, drinking alcohol leads to a release of dopamine and endorphins, resulting in feelings of happiness and relaxation. Sharing alcohol through traditions like feasting helps form and strengthen social bonds. Could wild chimpanzees be getting similar benefits from eating fermented fruits?

The researchers used cameras to film chimps sharing fermented breadfruits on 10 separate occasions. The fruit was tested for alcohol content, with the highest level found being equivalent to 0.61% ABV (Alcohol By Volume). While this is relatively low, the scientists suggest it may be just the tip of the iceberg, as 60-85% of chimps’ diet consists of fruit, which could lead to significant consumption.

The researchers emphasize that chimps are unlikely to get “drunk,” as this would clearly not improve their survival chances. However, recent discoveries about a molecular adaptation that increased ethanol metabolism in the common ancestor of African apes suggest eating fermented fruits may have ancient origins in species including humans and chimps.

Dr Kimberley Hockings from the University of Exeter notes, “Chimps don’t share food all the time, so this behavior with fermented fruit might be important. We need to find out more about whether they deliberately seek out ethanolic fruits and how they metabolize it.” If so, it suggests the human tradition of feasting may have its origins deep in our evolutionary history.

Anna Bowland’s work was funded by the Primate Society of Great Britain, providing a fascinating glimpse into the behavior and biology of our closest relatives.

The Australian fruit fly has a constant companion in its nightmarish existence – the blood-sucking parasite Gamasodes queenslandicus. These mites are as big as a basset hound and stalk their prey while they sleep, attached themselves like ticks. For fruit flies living in Queensland’s fruit orchards and rainforests, this is a reality that can be deadly if not avoided.

Biologists at the University of Cincinnati have studied the benefits and costs of avoiding these parasites in a study published in the Nature journal Biological Timing and Sleep. According to Professor Michal Polak, co-author of the study, the parasite poses a potentially deadly threat to fruit flies. “If they have too many mites, they can get ripped apart. It’s very detrimental to them,” he said.

To understand how fruit flies avoid these parasites, researchers captured wild flies in Queensland and bred 16 generations in their lab, selecting only males that were able to survive a night’s close exposure to the mites unscathed. The results showed that the flies that were adroit at evading the mites’ efforts did so at the expense of losing valuable sleep.

“This is not the first study to observe behavioral adjustments in animals exposed to external parasites,” said UC Professor Joshua Benoit, the study’s lead author. “Researchers have found that parasitism also affects the sleep patterns of bats and birds.”

The researchers examined changes in gene expression relating to the flies’ metabolism in the mite-resistance population. They found that mite-resistant flies were more prone to starvation and leaned more on their nutrient reserves than other flies.

“These hypervigilant flies were more active, slept less and consumed more oxygen at night,” Benoit said. “When we measured it, we found that more than 30 metabolism genes were differently expressed in these flies suggesting they were burning their energy a little faster than you’d expect.”

The study’s findings highlight the importance of sleep in all higher animals. As Benoit noted, “Sleep is usually beneficial to animals infected with internal parasites such as those that cause malaria.” However, when it comes to external parasites like mites, the picture changes.

“It behooves the fly to avoid getting parasitized in the first place,” Polak said. “The mites cause a massive up-regulation or down-regulation of hundreds of genes. These defense mechanisms can be very costly to the fly.”

In conclusion, the study shows that fruit flies sacrifice sleep for survival when facing the threat of parasites. This high cost of avoidance has consequences of its own, affecting the flies’ metabolism and behavior. The findings offer valuable insights into the complex relationships between animals and their parasites, highlighting the importance of understanding these interactions to better protect vulnerable species.

The article’s original findings have been rewritten to improve clarity, structure, and style while maintaining its core ideas. Here’s the rewritten version:

Researchers at the University of Bristol recently conducted a groundbreaking study on medical detection dogs, uncovering statistical links between their performance in scent detection tasks and their emotional states. The study, published in PLOS One, found that “optimistic” dogs tended to perform better overall on detection tasks, while “pessimistic” dogs had higher specificity in scent detection.

To assess the dogs’ emotional states, researchers used a behavioral test called judgment bias testing. In this test, dogs are first trained to associate specific locations with treats and others without treats. When presented with intermediate locations where a treat may or may not be present, the dogs’ responses are evaluated as a proxy for their emotional states.

More “optimistic” dogs, characterized by quicker approaches to intermediate locations in hopes of a treat, tended to score higher on detection tasks. These dogs also showed higher confidence, food orientation, and playfulness scores. In contrast, more “pessimistic” dogs achieved a higher degree of specificity in scent detection tasks among the fully trained medical detection dogs.

This study does not establish cause-effect relationships, but it suggests that differences in dogs’ searching styles and performance in detection tasks could be influenced by underlying differences in affective or cognitive processes. The researchers propose that judgment bias testing might hold promise as a screening tool for potential detection dogs.

The findings have significant implications for training and selection methods in medical detection dogs. Understanding the link between emotional states and performance can help trainers select and support successful dogs. The study’s insights could also be relevant to the welfare of companion dogs, highlighting the importance of considering their emotional well-being in their care and management.