That’s why we’ve decided to give them their own space.

Discoblog will be retiring, and NCBI ROFL will be taking on a new identity: “Seriously, Science?” Because it’s not just ROFL science in their sights, but interesting, crazy and weird science that gets you thinking, blushing, or scratching your head. The new-and-improved version is already up and running with a post about how the sound of vomiting affects your moral judgements—so click over and check it out now! And while you’re at it, update your bookmark and your RSS feed so you can stay on top of their daily posts.

Because—seriously—you don’t want to miss this science.

Photo: flickr/jessicafm

Identification of the characteristics that drive consumer liking of butter.

“This study identified and explored the sensory characteristics that drive consumer liking of butter. A trained descriptive panel evaluated 27 commercial butters using a defined sensory language. Two focus groups were conducted with butter consumers to gain an understanding of consumer use and consumption habits. Six representative butters and 2 vegetable oil spreads were selected for consumer acceptance testing. Both internal and external preference mapping techniques were applied to interpret consumer data. Key discriminating sensory characteristics of butters included color intensity; diacetyl, cooked, grassy, and milk fat flavors; and salty taste. From focus groups and quantitative consumer testing, the key butter features were a desirable flavor and a natural image. Negative aspects included price and cholesterol. Five consumer clusters with distinct butter and spread flavor likes and dislikes were identified. Butter is a desirable product to consumers. Sensory expectations of butter vary among consumers, and butters with specific sensory characteristics could be marketed to specific target market segments.”

Bonus quote from the full text:

“The sensory language identified differentiated the butters and spreads (Table 3). Principal components plots of butters are shown in Figures 1 and 2. Principal component 1 (28% variability) was composed of waxy, fruity, and methyl ketone flavors, whereas PC2 (21% variability) differentiated the butters on grassy and mothball flavors and yellow color intensity. Principal component 3 (16% variability) differentiated the butters on cooked, milk fat, and salty taste (positively loaded) and stale flavor (negatively loaded). Principal component 4 (10% variability) was composed of cultured butter flavors (diacetyl flavor and sour taste). Two terms, painty and prickle, were identified in the butters used for language generation but were not identified in the samples used in this study.”

Related content:
Discoblog: NCBI ROFL: How a scientist eats a Reese’s peanut butter cup.
Discoblog: NCBI ROFL: Oh, the irony!
Discoblog: NCBI ROFL: Sword swallowing and its side effects.

NCBI ROFL. Real articles. Funny subjects.
Read our FAQ!

Photo: flickr/Rob Hogeslag

If you want to do a scientific study of sexual function (in this case, how orgasm changes genital sensitivity), it’s usually necessary to perform it under carefully controlled conditions. So how do you do that in the context of studying female orgasms? Check out the [probably NSFW] description below.

“INTRODUCTION:
The effect of sexual arousal and orgasm on genital sensitivity has received little research attention, and no study has assessed sensation pleasurableness as well as painfulness.
AIM:
To clarify the relationship between sexual arousal, orgasm, and sensitivity in a healthy female sample.
METHODS:
Twenty-six women privately masturbated to orgasm and almost to orgasm at two separate sessions, during which standardized pressure stimulation was applied to the glans clitoris, vulvar vestibule, and volar forearm at three testing times: (i) baseline; (ii) immediately following masturbation; and (iii) following a subsequent 15-minute rest period.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES:
Touch thresholds (tactile detection sensitivity), sensation pleasurableness ratings (pleasurable sensitivity), and pain thresholds (pain sensitivity).
RESULTS:
Pleasurableness ratings were higher on the glans clitoris than the vulvar vestibule, and at most testing times on the vulvar vestibule than the volar forearm; and at baseline and immediately after masturbation than 15 minutes later, mainly on the genital locations only. Pain thresholds were lower on the genital locations than the volar forearm, and immediately and 15 minutes after masturbation than at baseline. After orgasm, genital pleasurableness ratings and vulvar vestibular pain thresholds were lower than after masturbation almost to orgasm. Post-masturbation pleasurableness ratings were positively correlated with pain thresholds but only on the glans clitoris. Hormonal contraception users had lower pleasurableness ratings and pain thresholds on all locations than nonusers. There were no significant effects for touch thresholds.
CONCLUSIONS:
Masturbation appears to maintain pleasurable genital sensitivity but increase pain sensitivity, with lower genital pleasurable sensitivity and higher vulvar vestibular pain sensitivity when orgasm occurs. Findings suggest that enhancing stimulation pleasurableness, psychological sexual arousal and lubrication mitigate normative increases in pain sensitivity during sexual activity, and underscore the importance of measuring both pleasure and pain in sensation research.”

Bonus excerpt from the materials and methods:

“The participant was instructed to undress from the waist down and lay at the foot of the bed underneath a sheet, after which the researchers returned to the room and conducted the baseline sensory testing. The first author then reminded the participant to take her time getting relaxed and comfortable in the room before privately masturbating using her preferred technique until reaching orgasm or “almost-orgasm.” She was instructed to immediately notify the researchers over intercom when she stopped masturbating. The first author timed the approximate duration of the participant’s masturbation (time until notification), then conducted the post-masturbation sensory testing immediately afterwards. This was followed by a 15-minute rest period during which the participant was asked not to masturbate more, and the final sensory testing. The participant dressed, completed the masturbation and orgasm questionnaire, and was then debriefed [Ed note: really? *that's* the word you pick?] and compensated $40 per session for any inconvenience due to study participation.”

Related content:
Discoblog: The economics of faking ecstasy.
Discoblog: NCBI ROFL: And the most pornographic abstract of all time award goes to…
Discoblog: NCBI ROFL: Are there different types of female orgasm?

NCBI ROFL. Real articles. Funny subjects.
Read our FAQ!

Photo: flickr/A.Sparrow

What happens to a body buried in cement? How long does it take to decompose? In this study, the (Italian) scientists set out to answer these questions using (what else? ) piglet corpses. Don’t worry, the authors assure us that they died of “natural causes”…

Burial of piglet carcasses in cement: a study of macroscopic and microscopic alterations on an animal model.

“Scarce experimental data exist describing postmortem effects of burial in cement. The scanty literature presents several case reports, but no experimental study. To perform a pilot study, the following experimental system was designed: 4 piglet corpses, who died of natural causes, were encased in concrete. After 1, 2, 3, and 6 months, a block was opened, and autopsy and microscopic analyses were performed. At the first month, initial putrefaction had started, and hindlegs were partly skeletonized. At the second month, both forelegs and hindlegs were partly skeletonized, and the abdomen and back showed advanced putrefaction. At the third month, the samples showed areas of mummification at the abdomen within a general context of initial putrefaction. At the sixth month, the sample showed wide adipocere formation. Histological findings revealed in some analyzed tissues (epithelium, dermis, adipose, and subcutaneous muscular tissues) a well-defined histological pattern even at 3 months after encasement in concrete: this means that microscopic changes may be delayed in concrete and that it may be worth performing histological analyses even in such kind of decomposed material.”

Related content:
Discoblog: NCBI ROFL: The chemistry of pig sh*t.
Discoblog: NCBI ROFL: This little piggy went “Wee! Wee! Wee!” all while conducting electricity.
Discoblog: NCBI ROFL: The best use of CAT scans to date: bacon quality prediction.

NCBI ROFL. Real articles. Funny subjects.
Read our FAQ!

Photo: flickr/AZAdam

Researcher: “C’mon elephant, the peanuts are right there. I’m pointing right at them!”
Elephant: *blank stare*
Researcher: “The dogs, goats, and horses can find them.”
Elephant: *blank stare*
Researcher: *sigh* “Fine. Just use your trunk then.”

“Recent research suggests that domesticated species – due to artificial selection by humans for specific, preferred behavioral traits – are better than wild animals at responding to visual cues given by humans about the location of hidden food. Although this seems to be supported by studies on a range of domesticated (including dogs, goats and horses) and wild (including wolves and chimpanzees) animals, there is also evidence that exposure to humans positively influences the ability of both wild and domesticated animals to follow these same cues. Here, we test the performance of Asian elephants (Elephas maximus) on an object choice task that provides them with visual-only cues given by humans about the location of hidden food. Captive elephants are interesting candidates for investigating how both domestication and human exposure may impact cue-following as they represent a non-domesticated species with almost constant human interaction. As a group, the elephants (n = 7) in our study were unable to follow pointing, body orientation or a combination of both as honest signals of food location. They were, however, able to follow vocal commands with which they were already familiar in a novel context, suggesting the elephants are able to follow cues if they are sufficiently salient. Although the elephants’ inability to follow the visual cues provides partial support for the domestication hypothesis, an alternative explanation is that elephants may rely more heavily on other sensory modalities, specifically olfaction and audition. Further research will be needed to rule out this alternative explanation.”

Bonus figure from the main text:

Figure 1. Diagrams of apparatus and elephant testing. A) The experimenter gives the “point” cue to the bucket to the elephant’s right. B). The elephant makes the correct choice after the table is pushed forward. Drawings by A. Hennessy.

Related content:
Discoblog: NCBI ROFL: Does having a long trunk help elephants’ sense of smell?
Discoblog: NCBI ROFL: Heat loss in Dumbo: a theoretical approach.
Discoblog: NCBI ROFL: Two Cute: Research that would make grad school snugglier

NCBI ROFL. Real articles. Funny subjects.
Read our FAQ!

Photo: flickr/mae.noelle

OK, we admit it, we just picked this one because of the title. But the method for removing objects from the rectum using a cluster of balloons is actually pretty inventive.

“Removal of a rectal foreign body (FB) has become increasingly common in the recent times. Nature of rectal FB is limited only by the imagination of the patient concerned. Many techniques have been described for removal and various theories have been put forward to explain the mechanics of the procedure. We report a case where a new technique had been employed.”

Bonus excerpt and figure from the main text:
“Techniques for the safe extraction of a rectal foreign body require ingenuity, but few authors have considered the mechanics of this surprisingly common procedure [1]. The technique chosen usually depends on the size, shape and contour of the foreign body [2]. We describe a new technique for per anal, nonoperative removal of an inadvertently retained foreign body that offered no edges to hold.

An embarrassed man presented to the emergency department having inserted a device into the rectum that he had been unable to retrieve. There was no perineal trauma on inspection. Attempts to retrieve the device without anaesthetic failed, so the patient was transferred to the theatre and underwent the following procedure under general anaesthesia.

Under sigmoidoscopic control, three standard 14 Fr urinary catheters were passed gently beyond the retained foreign body. Each balloon was then inflated with 20 ml of normal saline. Serial inflation of the balloons allowed them to mould to the shape of the device circumferentially and minimized the chances of sliding on attempted traction (Fig. 1).

Two of the catheters were clamped and traction was applied to all the three catheters. The colon proximal to the retained device was gently inflated with air via the unclamped catheter using a 50-ml syringe. These insufflations negated any suction force produced by the colon as traction was applied to catheter balloons, and overcame one of the forces opposing delivery of the foreign body.”

Figure 1: [Use of three balloons to retrieve a rectal foreign body]

Related content:
Discoblog: NCBI ROFL: Rectal foreign bodies: eggplant edition.
Discoblog: NCBI ROFL: What does the Tea Party movement have to do with anal eroticism?
Discoblog: NCBI ROFL: FECOM: a new artificial stool for evaluating defecation.

NCBI ROFL. Real articles. Funny subjects.
Read our FAQ!

Photo: flickr/Ollie Crafoord

Do you have tasks that need doing but can’t afford to buy a robot? Look no further! Remote-controlled turtles can do your bidding, from… um … swimming in shallow waters? to … uh … walking really slowly on the land? Look, the point is that these scientists figured out how to make turtles do what they want simply by attaching a movable blinder to the turtle’s shell. This apparatus allows the scientists to control the turtles’ movements by activating their instinct to avoid obstacles (see it in action in the movie clip below). Turtle army!

Remote Guidance of Untrained Turtles by Controlling Voluntary Instinct Behavior

“Recently, several studies have been carried out on the direct control of behavior in insects and other lower animals in order to apply these behaviors to the performance of specialized tasks in an attempt to find more efficient means of carrying out these tasks than artificial intelligence agents. While most of the current methods cause involuntary behavior in animals by electronically stimulating the corresponding brain area or muscle, we show that, in turtles, it is also possible to control certain types of behavior, such as movement trajectory, by evoking an appropriate voluntary instinctive behavior. We have found that causing a particular behavior, such as obstacle avoidance, by providing a specific visual stimulus results in effective control of the turtle’s movement. We propose that this principle may be adapted and expanded into a general framework to control any animal behavior as an alternative to robotic probes.”

Bonus video from the full text!

Related content:
Discoblog: NCBI ROFL: Phase 1: build an army of land-echolocating dolphins. Phase 2: take over the world.
Discoblog: NCBI ROFL: Bionic insect cyborgs: 90% insect, 10% robot, 100% terrifying.
Discoblog: NCBI ROFL: Phase 1: Build army of alligators that can run on land. Phase 2: Take over the world!

NCBI ROFL. Real articles. Funny subjects.
Read our FAQ!

Cunnilingus Apparently Increases Duration of Copulation in the Indian Flying Fox, Pteropus giganteus.

“We observed a total of 57 incidences of copulation in a colony of the Indian flying fox, Pteropus giganteus, over 13 months under natural conditions. The colony consisted of about 420 individuals, roosting in a Ficus religiosa tree. Copulations occurred between 07.00 h and 09.30 h from July to January, with more occurring in October and November. Initially males groomed their penis before approaching a nearby female. Females typically moved away and males followed. When the female stopped moving, the male started licking her vagina (cunnilingus). Typically each bout of cunnilingus lasted for about 50 s. In 57 out of 69 observations, the male mounted the female and copulated. The duration of copulation varied from 10 to 20 sec. After completion of copulation, the male continued cunnilingus for 94 to 188 sec. The duration of pre-copulatory cunnilingus and copulation was positively correlated whereas, the duration of pre- and post-copulatory cunnilingus was negatively correlated. Apart from humans, oral sex as foreplay prior to copulation is uncommon in mammals. Another pteropodid bat, Cynopterus sphinx exhibits fellatio with females licking the penis of males during copulation. It appears that bats, especially pteropodids perform oral sex, either cunnilingus or fellatio, possibly for achieving longer copulation.”

Related content:
Discoblog: NCBI ROFL: I vaaaant to suuuuck your…
Discoblog: NCBI ROFL: Boys and girls, please open your textbooks to page 69…
Discoblog: NCBI ROFL: Bats eavesdrop on the sound of copulating flies.

NCBI ROFL. Real articles. Funny subjects.
Read our FAQ!

Power increases hypocrisy: moralizing in reasoning, immorality in behavior.

“In five studies, we explored whether power increases moral hypocrisy (i.e., imposing strict moral standards on other people but practicing less strict moral behavior oneself). In Experiment 1, compared with the powerless, the powerful condemned other people’s cheating more, but also cheated more themselves. In Experiments 2 through 4, the powerful were more strict in judging other people’s moral transgressions than in judging their own transgressions. A final study found that the effect of power on moral hypocrisy depends on the legitimacy of the power: When power was illegitimate, the moral-hypocrisy effect was reversed, with the illegitimately powerful becoming stricter in judging their own behavior than in judging other people’s behavior. This pattern, which might be dubbed hypercrisy, was also found among low-power participants in Experiments 3 and 4. We discuss how patterns of hypocrisy and hypercrisy among the powerful and powerless can help perpetuate social inequality.”

Photo:Know Your Meme

Related content:
Discoblog: NCBI ROFL: Macbeth and the Joystick: Evidence for moral cleansing after playing a violent video game.
Discoblog: NCBI ROFL: Measuring the distribution of spitefulness.
Discoblog: NCBI ROFL: Dirty liberals! Reminders of physical cleanliness influence moral and political attitudes.

NCBI ROFL. Real articles. Funny subjects.
Read our FAQ!

The effects of self-administered alcohol-induced ‘hangover’ in a naturalistic setting on psychomotor and cognitive performance and subjective state.

“AIMS: To examine in as naturalistic a setting as possible whether having an alcohol-induced ‘hangover’ impairs psychomotor and cognitive performance. PARTICIPANTS AND DESIGN: The sample consisted of 71 male and female social drinkers who were tested twice, once at baseline and once after exposure to the study condition. They were randomized into a control group who returned for testing on a prearranged date (n = 33), and a group who were instructed to make arrangements to return the day after a self-determined heavy drinking session (n = 38). Of the ‘hangover’ group, 13 participants still had a blood alcohol concentration of >1 mg/100 ml at the time of testing and these were analysed separately. All participants were students. MEASUREMENTS: Psychomotor performance was assessed by means of a battery of psychomotor tasks, rate of information processing was tested by the Speed and Capacity of Language Processing Test (SCOLP) and subjective state was assessed by questionnaire measures. FINDINGS: All participants in the ‘hangover’ group reported subjective and physical symptoms of hangover on the second testing session. Performance was significantly impaired on the hits-key components of the vigilance task, was less accurate on the primary and secondary reaction time tasks and showed greater dispersion in range of ability for participants in the ‘acute and hangover’ compared to ‘control’. Probe memory revealed no significant group effect. Ratings of subjective state revealed significant group differences for the variables ‘ability to drive’, ‘concentrate’ and ‘react quickly’ as well as ‘tiredness’. There were no group differences for performance on the SCOLP. CONCLUSION: Hangover had negative effects on self-reported subjective and physical state and subtle effects on performance.”

Photo: quickmeme

Related content:
Discoblog: NCBI ROFL: Alcohol consumption and handwriting: a kinematic analysis.
Discoblog: NCBI ROFL: Effects of heavy drinking by maritime academy cadets on hangover, perceived sleep, and next-day ship power plant operation.
Discoblog: NCBI ROFL: Want worse hangovers? Drink bourbon!

NCBI ROFL. Real articles. Funny subjects.
Read our FAQ!