Recordings of angry bees are enough to send big, tough African elephants running away, a new study says. Beehives (蜂窝)—either recorded or real—may even prevent elephants from damaging farmer's crops.

    In 2002, scientist Lucy King and her team found that elephants avoid certain trees with bees living in them. Today, Lucy wants to see if African honeybees might discourage elephants from eating crops. But before she asked farmer to go to the trouble of setting up beehives on their farms, she needed to find out if the bees would scare elephants away.

    Lucy found a wild beehive inside a tree in northern Kenya and set up a recorder. Then she threw a stone into the beehive, which burst into life. Lucy and her assistant hid in their car until the angry bees had calmed down. Next，Lucy searched out elephant families in Samburu National Reserve in northern Kenya and put a speaker in a tree close to each family.

    From a distance, Lucy switched on the pre-recorded sound of angry bees while at the same time recording the elephants with a video camera. Half the elephant groups left the area within ten seconds. Out of a total of 17 groups, only one group ignored the sound of the angry bees. Lucy reported that all the young elephants immediately ran to their mothers to hide under them. When Lucy played the sound of a waterfall (瀑布) instead of the angry bees to many of the same elephant families, the animals were undisturbed. Even after four minutes, most of the groups stayed in one place.

Lucy is now studying whether the elephants will continue to avoid the sound of angry bees after hearing it several times. She hasn't tested enough groups yet to know, but her initial (最初的) results were promising enough to begin trials with farmers. She has now begun placing speakers in the fields to see if elephants are frightened away.

    How fit are your teeth? Are you lazy about brushing them? Never fear: An inventor is on the case. An electric toothbrush senses how long and how well you brush, and it lets you track your performance on your phone.

    The Kolibree toothbrush was exhibited at the International Consumer Electronics Show in Las Vegas this week. It senses how it is moved and can send the information to an Android phone or iPhone via a Bluetooth wireless connection.

    The toothbrush will be able to teach you to brush right (don't forget the insides of the teeth!) and make sure you're brushing long enough. “It's kind of like having a dentist actually watch your brushing on a day-to-day basis,” says Thomas Serval, the French inventor.

    The toothbrush will also be able to talk to other applications on your phone, so developers could, for instance, create a game controlled by your toothbrush. You could score points for beating monsters among your teeth. “We try to make it smart but also fun,” Several says.

    Serval says he was inspired by his experience as a father. He would come home from work and ask his kids if they had brushed their teeth. They said “yes,” but Serval would find their toothbrush heads dry. He decided he needed a brush that really told him how well his children brushed.

    The company says the Kolibree will go on sale this summer, for $99 to $199, developing on features. The U.S. is the first target market.

    Serval says that one day, it'll be possible to replace the brush on the handle with a brushing unit that also has a camera. The camera can even examine holes in your teeth while you brush.

    Reading makes you a smarter, better leader. But if you've been following the latest science, you'll also know that studies have shown regularly picking up a book might increase your empathy (共鸣) and protect you from feeling lonely, hopeless or suffering from dementia (痴呆) in later life. But obviously, that's not the end of the list. New research has discovered yet another benefit of being a reader who focuses one's mind on reading.

    After following those surveyed based on more than 3,500 adults over age 50 for 12 years, the team from Yale University behind the research found that those who read books for 3.5 hours a week were 23 percent less likely to die. Reading for less than 3.5 hours a week lowered participants' (参加者) risk of death by 17 percent. Put another way, picking up an interesting book could earn you about an extra two years.

    It's worth noticing that the researchers were looking exactly at time spent in reading books, rather than newspapers, magazines, or online media, and that this difference is important for the observed advantages of reading. “We found that reading books provided a greater advantage than reading newspapers or magazines,” said Avni Bavishi of the Yale School of Public Health. “This effect is likely because books attract the readers' mind more — providing more cognitive (认知的) advantages, and therefore increasing the lifespan (寿命). In short, deep slow reading rather than reading quickly and carelessly is best.”

    So how long should you be reading for, and what sort of titles should you pick up? While more reading seems to be better, the researchers suggest that anything more than

    30 minutes a day will be likely to do good to you. As for what exactly to read, the researchers can't yet offer much advice beyond making time for actual books, though they pointed out this was a promising way to future research.

    AHerb Garden

    A delightful walled garden with old varieties of fruit trees and flower borders, Herb Garden is planted with over 200 medical and culinary(烹饪用的)herbs. Dogs on leads(狗链) are welcome to woodland walks. Children's activity sheets are available.

    Open Time: 10:00a. m—5:00p. m, daily except Mon. and Tue.

    Tearoom: 11:00a. m—4:30p. m

    Shop:10:00a. m—5:00p. m

    Price: Adult:￡3 Child: ￡1. 50

    The Beatrix Potter Gallery

    Original sketches(素描) and watercolors by Beatrix Potter for her children's tales. This year's exhibition will feature The Tale of Mrs. Tiggy-Wrinkle and The Tale of the Pie. Also on display is information on Beatrix Potter's life. Children's quiz sheets and goods bags are available.

    Open Time: 10:30a. m—4:30p. m, daily except Thur. and Fri.

    Price: Adult:￡3.50 Child: ￡1.70

    Hill Top

    Beatrix Potter wrote and drew for many of her famous children's stories in this farm house. You can view her personal treasures and step into the garden which is planted with flowers and vegetables, just as it would have been in Beatrix Porter's time.

    Please note that this is a small and popular house, which gets very busy especially on school holidays. At peak time there are queues and by the end of the day not all visitors may be able to visit the house. Please collect a timed ticket from the park for your car parking on your arrival. Tel: 051394 36269

    Open Time: 10:30a. m—4:30p. m, daily except Thur. and Fri.

    Shop and garden: Thur. and Fri. ,10:00a. m—5:00p. m

    Price: Adult:￡5 Child: ￡2

    Some people say summer is the time when teachers should get more pay. But not everyone is grateful to teachers for keeping kids occupied (无空闲的) between August and June: Washington state representative Liz Pike has written a Facebook post, titled "A life in the day of a WA state representative," and responded to teachers' complaints of rising costs of living. The post has received criticism for being anti-teacher. After reading her post, I feel that Liz Pike should rethink her criticism of public school teaching and avoid comparing it to the private school.

    Many of us teachers would certainly like teaching to be more like the private school. We see nothing wrong with fair pay for fair performance. In fact, performance is the name of the game. With standardized testing popular throughout K-12 education, teachers are some of the most analyzed and performance-measured employees in the United States. Liz Pike is very angry that teachers want raises even while test scores are dropping. Well, how are we supposed to have discipline (纪律) in the classroom when our hands are tied and we can hardly do anything with naughty students or fail students who are not prepared to move on to the next grade?

    Teachers would love to be able to turn education around and improve student performance. But we can't, and we should not suffer for it. Unlike private school businesses, public schools cannot turn away "customers". A private school business serves customers who walk through the door of their own free will, while public schools have to educate students who only attend because courts say they must.

    She says those who are "uninspired" by a lack of a cost of living increase should give up teaching. Is this the message that she thinks should be sent to the students whose academic performance she claims (声称) to care so much about? That "if you love it you'll shut up and not stand up for yourself"? I think teachers should stand up for themselves and I also think supporting teachers can make teachers teach children how to stand up for themselves.

The Stanford marshmallow (棉花糖) test was originally conducted by psychologist Walter Mischel in the late 1960s. Children aged four to six at a nursery school were placed in a room. A single sugary treat, selected by the child, was placed on a table. Each child was told if they waited for 15 minutes before eating the treat, they would be given a second treat. Then they were left alone in the room. Follow-up studies with the children later in life showed a connect ion between an ability to wait long enough to obtain a second treat and various forms of success.

As adults, we face a version(版本) of the marshmallow test every day. We're not tempted (诱惑) by sugary treats, but by our computers, phones, and tablets — all the devices that connect us to the global delivery system for various types of information that do to us what marshmallows do to preschoolers.

We are tempted by sugary treats because our ancestors lived in a calorie-poor world, and our brains developed a response mechanism(机制) to these treats that reflected their value — a feeling of reward and satisfaction. But as we've reshaped the world around us, dramatically reducing the cost and effort involved in obtaining (获取) calories, we still have the same brains we had thousands of years ago, and this mismatch(不匹配) is at the heart of why so many of us struggle to resist (抵抗) tempting foods that we know we shouldn't eat.

A similar process is at work in our response to information. Our formative (有重大影响的) environment as a species was information-poor, so our brains developed a mechanism that prized (高度重视) new information. But global connectivity has greatly changed our information environment. We are now endlessly bombarded (轰炸) with new information. Therefore, just as we need to be more thoughtful (深思熟虑的) about our caloric consumption (热量消耗), we also need to be more thoughtful about our information consumption, resisting the temptation of the mental "junk food" in order to manage our time most effectively.