Category: 7. Science

Since 1998, when the International Space Station (ISS) launched, there has been a place for astronauts around the world to run experiments in space, from growing food to learning how low-Earth orbit affects the human body.

More recently, the Chinese Tiangong Space Station was fully completed, with its third and final module, the Mengtian, added on Oct. 31, 2022. Tiangong sits at the same height as the ISS.

What is it?

NASA’s SPHEREx space telescope has settled into low-Earth orbit, where it is transmitting data back home and providing a public wellspring of space data for both professional and citizen scientists.

First launched in March of this year, SPHEREx (the Spectro-Photometer for the History of the Universe, Epoch of Reionization, and Ices Explorer) is currently creating all-sky maps of the universe as its primary mission, with secondary goals to support other space observation platforms. While not the first all-sky mission, SPHEREx improves upon previous attempts by boasting 102 infrared wavelength observations, compared to the earlier WISE mission’s four wavelengths.

NASA’s SPHEREx Mission

As astronomers study increasingly distant parts of the universe, spectroscopy has become a crucial tool for understanding the cosmos. This allows researchers to analyze infrared wavelength data from distant celestial bodies and identify the molecules present within them. SPHEREx scientists will utilize this technique to search for essential elements for life, such as water ice and organic molecules, throughout the Milky Way galaxy.

The telescope’s 102 wavelengths will provide precise data for the ongoing search, and the SPHEREx mission will also study universal expansion by measuring the distant light emissions from all galaxies over time.

“Because we’re looking at everything in the whole sky, almost every area of astronomy can be addressed by SPHEREx data,” said Rachel Akeson, the lead for the SPHEREx Science Data Center at IPAC. IPAC is a science and data center for astrophysics and planetary science at Caltech in Pasadena, California.

SPHEREx’s mission is currently scheduled to run for two years, during which it will complete two all-sky surveys annually, resulting in a total of four maps. Halfway through the mission, the SPHEREx team is planning to release a 102-wavelength sky map at the one-year mark.

Transparency and Access to Space Data

SPHEREx is part of NASA’s overall commitment to transparency and data sharing. The data is hosted by the IPAC Infrared Science Archive (IRSA), which also contains data from other NASA infrared and submillimeter missions, such as WISE and 2MASS. By providing public access to their data, the SPHEREx team hopes others will utilize the resource to produce many more studies than what their team can accomplish alone.

“We want enough information in those files that people can do their own research,” Akeson said.

SPHEREx’s observations are available to the public within 60 days of when the readings occurred. During that roughly two-month period, the team performs processing on the data to remove or note questionable data due to artifacts, align images with their astronomical coordinates, and account for potential defects in instrumentation.

The team is also committed to being transparent about how the data is processed, publishing the procedures used in tandem with the data releases. 

“SPHEREx is part of the entire legacy of NASA space surveys,” said IRSA Science Lead Vandana Desai. “People are going to use the data in all kinds of ways that we can’t imagine.”

Supporting Other Discovery Missions

The SPHEREx data will also provide an important supplement to other space telescope missions. Its broad scope will enable astronomers to identify interesting targets for closer observation by the James Webb Space Telescope and refine exoplanet parameters from NASA’s TESS observations.

Additionally, SPHEREx can be directed towards searching for dark matter and energy, working in tandem with the European Space Agency’s Euclid mission and NASA’s forthcoming Nancy Grace Roman Space Telescope, with a targeted May 2027 launch. 

“By making the data public, we enable the whole astronomy community to use SPHEREx data to work on all these other areas of science,” Akeson said.

Ryan Whalen covers science and technology for The Debrief. He holds an MA in History and a Master of Library and Information Science with a certificate in Data Science. He can be contacted at ryan@thedebrief.org, and follow him on Twitter @mdntwvlf.

This photo taken on July 4, 2025 shows the rising sun in Jiamusi City, northeast China’s Heilongjiang Province. The Earth passed the aphelion on July 4, which is the time of year when the Earth is farthest from the sun, and the apparent diameter of the sun is the smallest in the year. (Photo by Zhu Zongqiang/Xinhua)

This photo taken on July 4, 2025 shows the rising sun in Qingzhou City, east China’s Shandong Province. The Earth passed the aphelion on July 4, which is the time of year when the Earth is farthest from the sun, and the apparent diameter of the sun is the smallest in the year. (Photo by Wang Jilin/Xinhua)

This photo taken on July 4, 2025 shows the rising sun in Jiamusi City, northeast China’s Heilongjiang Province. The Earth passed the aphelion on July 4, which is the time of year when the Earth is farthest from the sun, and the apparent diameter of the sun is the smallest in the year. (Photo by Qu Yubao/Xinhua)

A tourist takes photos with the rising sun at Dongji Pavilion in Fuyuan City, northeast China’s Heilongjiang Province, July 4, 2025. The Earth passed the aphelion on July 4, which is the time of year when the Earth is farthest from the sun, and the apparent diameter of the sun is the smallest in the year. (Xinhua/Zhang Tao)

This photo taken on July 4, 2025 shows the rising sun in Yichun City, northeast China’s Heilongjiang Province. The Earth passed the aphelion on July 4, which is the time of year when the Earth is farthest from the sun, and the apparent diameter of the sun is the smallest in the year. (Photo by Li Shaojun/Xinhua)

Tourists take photos of the rising sun at Dongji Pavilion in Fuyuan City, northeast China’s Heilongjiang Province, July 4, 2025. The Earth passed the aphelion on July 4, which is the time of year when the Earth is farthest from the sun, and the apparent diameter of the sun is the smallest in the year. (Xinhua/Zhang Tao)

An aerial drone photo taken on July 4, 2025 shows the rising sun at the Sanjiangkou ecological tourism area in Tongjiang City, northeast China’s Heilongjiang Province. The Earth passed the aphelion on July 4, which is the time of year when the Earth is farthest from the sun, and the apparent diameter of the sun is the smallest in the year. (Photo by Liu Wanping/Xinhua)

Why we’ll have to wait a bit to say yay or nay on a 2024 YR4 lunar impact.

Predicting the precise path of a new asteroid or comet is a complex affair; the more observations you have, the better you know where an object will be, years hence.

Asteroid 2024 YR4 was discovered late last year, and found to have a trajectory passing through the Earth/Moon system in 2032. The world’s telescopes focused on the potential threat and downgraded the chance to negligible for the Earth…but the asteroid still has a non-zero chance of hitting the Moon. As the asteroid became too dim to continue observing, its Moon impact chance stood at 4%. When will we update this number? Not until it does another close flyby in 2028.

The Discovery

Asteroid 2024 YR4 was discovered by the Asteroid Terrestrial-impact Last Alert System (ATLAS) as a +13th magnitude object moving through the constellation Hydra the Sea Serpent on the night of December 27th, 2024. The 60-meter space rock was actually discovered two days after closest Earth approach, which was on Christmas Day at 828,800 kilometers away, just over twice the Earth-Moon distance.

As is the case with lots of asteroids approaching from the sunward direction, 2024 YR4 was outbound on discovery. The Chelyabinsk bolide that exploded over the Russian city of the same name on February 15th, 2013 snuck up on us as well… and just last week, a daytime fireball was seen over central Georgia, and showered an area with recovered fragments.

Anatomy of a (Potential) Impact

The asteroid immediately created a stir, as there seemed to be a slight chance of an Earth impact on December 22nd, 2032. At 60 meters across, the asteroid is smaller than an extinction triggering impact such as the 10 kilometer Chicxulub asteroid which hit off of the Yucatan peninsula 66 million years ago, and was instead dubbed a ‘city killer…’ Maps were even published showing a tentative impact swath across South America, the Atlantic, Africa and the Middle East.

Credit: A risk level comparison for dangerous asteroids. Credit: ESA.

It even briefly held a notable Torino scale rating of 3 during its first month of discovery—one of few new asteroid discoveries to do so. 99942 Apophis had the highest, briefly hitting a rating of 4 for its 2029 pass, after discovery in 2004. As is usually the case, further observations including ones tasked to JWST shrunk the potential for an Earth impact to zero. However, the chances of a lunar impact actually crept upward, and now stand at 4%.

More observations are needed before we’ll know for sure. Unfortunately, we’ll have to wait to refine the orbit of 2024 YR4 further. On a 4 year orbit around the Sun, the asteroid ranges from a perihelion 0.85 AU from the Sun, out to an aphelion in the asteroid belt at 4.18 AU distant. Next aphelion for the asteroid is set for November 22nd, 2026.

Bruno Crater; an impact from 2024 YR4 may produce a similar result. Credit: NASA/LRO

What if asteroid 2024 YR4 actually hit the Moon? The Moon phase at impact will be 70% illuminated, waning gibbous on December 22nd, 2032 around 15:20 Universal Time (UT), the approximate time that 2024 YR4 will be in the vicinity of the Moon. Viewing would favor the Pacific Ocean region… though it’s uncertain at this point just what area of the Moon the asteroid would strike, if it hits the Moon at all. Certainly, the near nighttime side would be favorable for observation. The asteroid will be approaching the Earth from the direction of Sagittarius (the same constellation the Sun crosses in late December).

An impression of a small asteroid striking the gibbous Moon. Credit: Created by the author using ChatGPT.

Protecting the Planet From Sunward Space Rocks

Clearly there’s lots more out there to discover in terms of near-Earth asteroids. Vera Rubin revealed an amazing 2,104 new asteroids on its first run. NASA still plans to launch their NEO Surveyor mission to scout for asteroids in September 2027. The mission survived the current budget FY2026 cuts and passed its Critical Design Review phase earlier this year.

The European Space Agency (ESA) also has plans to hunt for asteroids using space-based assets as well. ESA’s Near Earth Object Mission in the Infrared (NEOMIR) will head to the Sun-Earth L1 point. This location is the home of the Solar Heliospheric Observatory (SOHO), the Deep Space Climate Observatory (DSCOVR) and more. Launching in the 2030s, NEOMIR would use its infrared ‘eyes’ to scour the sky, detecting objects such as 2024 YR4 before they came close to the Earth.

NEOMIR in space. Credit: ESA

“We looked at how NEOMIR would have performed in this situation, and the simulations surprised even us,” says Richard Moissl (Head of ESA’s Defense Office) in a recent press release, referring to the expected performance of NEOMIR. “NEOMIR would have detected asteroid 2024 YR4 about a month earlier than ground-based telescopes did. This would have given astronomers more time to study the asteroid’s trajectory and allowed them to much sooner rule out any chance of Earth impact in 2032.”

A lunar impact would give astronomers a first-ever opportunity to witness such an event first-hand…and study such an event like never before. And heck, it would put on a show for amateur astronomers as well (assuming it doesn’t hit the lunar farside). Is it wrong that I kind of want to see this happen?

Introduction

Dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO) is a highly polar, organic compound that is widely utilized in scientific and medical researches.^1,2 Known for its unique ability to penetrate biological membranes, DMSO is often used as a solvent to facilitate the absorption of a wide variety of chemical compounds, including drugs, toxins, and other substances. This characteristic makes DMSO an invaluable tool in laboratory experiments, particularly in drug delivery systems and pharmacological studies.³ In particular, DMSO’s ability to increase the permeability of biological membranes can influence the pharmacokinetics and biodistribution of co-administered substances, potentially altering their efficacy and safety profiles. This is especially relevant in toxicological studies, where DMSO is frequently used as a vehicle solvent to solubilize poorly water-soluble compounds. However, its capacity to enhance the absorption of compounds into biological tissues also raises concerns about its potential to exacerbate the toxic effects of those compounds, as high concentrations or prolonged exposure may lead to adverse effects such as hemolysis, allergic reactions, and genotoxicity.

One of the critical areas where DMSO’s solvent properties are frequently leveraged is in the use of chemical agents such as alkylating agents, which have been extensively studied for their ability to modify the structure and function of biological molecules, particularly DNA. Alkylating agents, including N-methyl-N-nitrosourea (MNU), one of the most commonly used alkylating agents, has been widely utilized in cancer research and retinitis pigmentosa modeling.^4,5 These agents could covalently bind to DNA, leading to significant alterations in its structure and function. Specifically, they exert their effects by transferring alkyl groups to DNA, which can cause mutations, chromosomal damage, and eventually carcinogenesis or apoptosis of retinal photoreceptors. MNU, in particular, is a powerful mutagen and carcinogen that has been shown to induce a variety of cancers in laboratory animals, including lymphomas, leukemias, and solid tumors in various organs. Its high reactivity and ability to penetrate biological membranes make it an effective agent for inducing genetic damage in a wide range of cell types. Besides, the effectiveness of MNU as a research tool for studying retinitis pigmentosa has made it a cornerstone in many ocular experimental protocols.^6,7 In details, by selectively targeting retinal photoreceptors, MNU allows researchers to mimic the progressive degeneration seen in human retinitis pigmentosa, providing a valuable model for testing potential therapeutic interventions.

While DMSO is often regarded as relatively safe when used at low concentrations, its interaction with other chemicals and the subsequent effects on the health of experimental animals require careful consideration. Low levels of DMSO may interact with cellular processes or metabolic pathways in ways that are not yet fully understood. Studies involving DMSO as a vehicle solvent for chemical agents need to take into account the potential for DMSO to alter the pharmacokinetics and toxicity profiles of the compounds being studied. It may influence absorption rates, distribution within tissues, and elimination half-lives, potentially leading to unexpected outcomes. For example, DMSO was shown to increase the permeability of the blood-brain barrier and enhance the systemic distribution,⁸ which could result in higher concentrations reaching sensitive areas such as the central nervous system, thereby amplifying their therapeutic or toxic effects. However, despite the well-documented uses of DMSO and MNU in research,⁹ the combined effects of these substances on biological systems have not been fully elucidated, particularly in terms of long-term consequences or subtle interactions that may only become apparent after prolonged exposure. The potential of DMSO to enhance the absorption of MNU into biological tissues might lead to a more pronounced toxicological effect than when either agent is administered alone. This could result in increased DNA damage or oxidative stress, which are critical factors in carcinogenesis and tissue injury. Given that alkylating agents like MNU can induce significant DNA damage, it is important to assess the overall toxicity and safety of these compounds of DSMO and MNU, particularly in animal studies, to ensure that experimental protocols adequately account for potential risks and to establish safe dosage ranges for future research applications.

The main goal of this study was to investigate the combined toxicity of DMSO and MNU in a controlled animal model. Specifically, this research aimed to assess the impact of DMSO on the toxicity and mortality associated with MNU exposure in C57BL/6J mice, which are commonly used in ocular researches. By varying the doses of MNU and administering it in combination with DMSO, this study provided preliminary data on the synergistic effects of these two compounds. Additionally, the study assessed whether DMSO, by facilitating the absorption of MNU, exacerbated the toxicological outcomes, including changes in activity levels, health status, and overall survival rates in the mice.

Methods

Animal Models

A total of 12 male SPF C57BL/6J mice, aged 8–10 weeks, with an averaged body weight range of 20–25 grams, were selected for this experiment. These mice were obtained from the Laboratory Animal Center of Fuzong Clinical Medical College of Fujian Medical University (License number.: SYXK2018006) and were allowed to acclimate to the laboratory environment for a period of 3 days before the commencement of the study. The mice were housed in standard laboratory conditions, with a controlled room temperature of 22°C ± 2°C and a relative humidity of 50–60%. The animals were maintained on a 12-hour light/dark cycle, with lights on at 7:00 AM and off at 7:00 PM. The mice were provided with standard rodent chow and clean, filtered water ad libitum throughout the experiment. The cages were kept in an environmentally controlled room to minimize external stressors, and the mice were allowed unrestricted access to their environment in order to reduce potential confounding factors.

After a period of 3 days of accommodation, the mice were randomly assigned to one of three experimental groups, with four mice per group. The groups were: the DMSO control group (D), the low-dose MNU group (L), and the high-dose MNU group (H). We confirmed that ethical and legal approval was obtained from the Experimental Animal Care and Use Committee of Fuzong Clinical Medical College of Fujian Medical University (Ethics committee number: 201923), prior to the commencement of the study. Besides, all animal experiments and procedures were performed in accordance with the ethical guidelines and regulations established by Fuzong Clinical Medical College of Fujian Medical University and our nation. The overall design of our study was showed in the Graphic Abstract of the Study.

Group Design and Treatment Protocol

1. DMSO Control Group (D): The D group, serving as the vehicle control, received intraperitoneal (IP) injections of pure DMSO (100% concentration). Each mouse was administered 12 mL of DMSO per kilogram of body weight. This control treatment was designed to assess the baseline effects of DMSO, ensuring that any observed effects in the other groups could be attributed specifically to the MNU treatment, rather than the vehicle itself.
2. Low-dose MNU Group (L): The L group received a DMSO solution containing 40 mg/kg of MNU,¹⁰ the potent genotoxic agent. MNU was dissolved in DMSO to obtain the desired concentration, and the injection volume for all mice was maintained at 12 mL/kg body weight. In greater details, we firstly calculated the required amount of MNU. For example, for a dose of 40 mg/kg in 3 mice weighing 30 g each, the amount of MNU needed would be MNU = 40×10 × 0.03 = 12 mg. Then, we calculated the corresponding concentration of the MNU solution for injection at a volume of 12 mL/kg. If the MNU was administered at 40 mg/kg and injected at a volume of 12 mL/kg, the corresponding concentration of the MNU solution should be 10/3 mg/mL. Thus, 12 mg of MNU would require a volume of DMSO of 3.6 mL. The solution was then stored at 4°C for later use, and prepared immediately before use. The purpose of this group was to examine the effects of a low-dose MNU exposure on the mice, focusing on toxicological effects and any changes in behavior or general health that could result from this exposure level.
3. High-dose MNU Group (H): The H group received a higher dose of MNU, specifically 60 mg/kg,¹⁰ in the DMSO solution. Similar to the L group, the MNU solution was prepared by dissolving MNU in DMSO, and the injection volume was 12 mL/kg of body weight. This higher dose aimed to assess the potential acute toxicity and mortality associated with a more severe exposure to MNU. This group was expected to show more pronounced toxicological effects, including possible lethality, and served as an extreme comparison for the lower dose.

Injection Procedure

All injections were administered via intraperitoneal injection, a standard route for delivering substances that need to be absorbed into the body quickly. The injections were carefully carried out by an experienced personnel to ensure precise and consistent dosages across all animals. The animals were weighed immediately prior to injection to ensure accurate dosing, and each mouse was handled gently to reduce stress and minimize discomfort.

Monitoring and Observations

Following treatment, the mice were closely monitored for any immediate or delayed signs of distress, toxicity, or adverse effects. The following parameters were tracked throughout the study:

1. Body Weight: Mice were weighed several timepoints (Timepoint 1 (T1): at the time of purchase (ie, before the 3-day pre-adaptation feeding); T2: before injection (ie, after the 3-day pre-adaptation feeding); T3: at 24 hours post-injection; T4: at 48 hours post-injection) to monitor any significant changes in body weight, which could indicate adverse effects such as dehydration, malnutrition, or systemic toxicity. A marked decrease in body weight was considered a key indicator of toxicity,^11,12 and the rate of weight loss was recorded for comparison across groups.
2. Activity Levels and scoring: Activity levels were observed both during the light and dark cycles at several timepoints (T1: before injection; T2: at 2 hours post-injection; T3: at 24 hours post-injection; T4: at 36 hours post-injection; T5: at 48 hours post-injection). General locomotor activity was evaluated through simple observational methods, such as monitoring the frequency of walking, movement across the cage, and exploratory behavior. Mice were also monitored for signs of lethargy or reduced activity, which are common indicators of stress or illness.¹³ Additionally, behaviors like body stretching and body posture were noted, as these could reflect changes in the mice’s physical condition or discomfort.^14,15 Besides, fur condition was examined daily to assess any signs of stress or health decline. Deterioration in fur quality, such as loss of fur, roughness (or called the ruffled fur), or lack of grooming behavior, was considered an important indicator of poor health or systemic effects of the treatment.^15,16 In our study, the activity score was primarily based on three key domains: the mice’s activity alertness (or the locomotor activity), body extension or posture, and the condition of the fur. A total of 9 points were assigned, with 3 points allocated to each domain. The corresponding scores were assessed and recorded by one certain person, and then were stored for later statistical analysis.
3. Mortality and Survival curve: Mortality was monitored at several timepoints (T1: before injection; T2: at 2 hours post-injection; T3: at 24 hours post-injection; T4: at 36 hours post-injection; T5: at 48 hours post-injection). Any deaths within this period were carefully observed and the number of mice in each group were recorded. Furthermore, the surviving time of mice in each group was recorded and the survival curves were created based on the number of surviving mice and their survival time.¹⁷ Further Kaplan-Meier survival curve analysis was then performed.¹⁸

Statistical Analysis

Due to the small sample size of 4 animals (less than 5 animals) per group, the non-parametric statistical method, the Bootstrap test, was employed to compare the groups.¹⁹ This special test was chosen as it does not rely on distributional assumptions, making it more appropriate for small sample sizes.²⁰ The data were presented as mean ± standard deviation. In the Bootstrap method, the calculation of the P-value is based on the distribution of resampled data and does not directly provide a standard P-value. Although there is no direct P-value, the significance can be indirectly assessed through the following approach by examining the confidence interval. If the confidence interval of the Bootstrap results does not include zero, this typically indicates that the difference is significant. The survival analysis was conducted using the Kaplan-Meier survival curves. The statistical analysis was performed using SPSS 27.0 software, and survival curves were generated and analyzed using Log-rank tests. Figures were generated using GraphPad 5.01 software.

Results

Pre-Injection Status and Parameters

Before the injection, the mice in all experimental groups were closely monitored. The 95% confidence interval of difference in the body weight of mice revealed by the Bootstrap analysis between the D and L, D and H, L and H groups, were (−3.16, 2.66), (−3.36, 2.36) and (−2.25, 1.75) respectively. No significant statistical differences were found in terms of body weight, as the confidence interval of the Bootstrap results included zero (Figure 1). The 95% confidence interval of difference in the volume of DMSO injected between the D and L, D and H, L and H groups, were (−0.019,0.012), (−0.025, 0.012) and (−0.016, 0.007) respectively. No significant statistical differences were found as the confidence interval of the Bootstrap results included zero (Figure 2). It suggested that the experimental groups were well-matched at baseline and there was no noticeable variation in these parameters before treatment.

Figure 1 Body Weight of Each Group of Mice Before Injection. Bar graph showed the body weight of mice in the DMSO, low-dose MNU, and high-dose MNU groups before the injection. There were no significant differences in body weight between the groups (The confidence interval of the Bootstrap results included zero). D: the DMSO control group; L: the low-dose MNU group; H: the high-dose MNU group. N.S.: no statistical difference.

Figure 2 Volume of DMSO Injected in Each Group of Mice. Bar graph illustrated the volume of DMSO administered to each group (DMSO, low-dose MNU, high-dose MNU). The injection volume was consistent across all groups, at 12 mL/kg body weight, with no significant differences (The confidence interval of the Bootstrap results included zero). D: the DMSO control group; L: the low-dose MNU group; H: the high-dose MNU group. N.S.: no statistical difference.

Regarding the MNU injection, the dose administered to the mice in the H group was significantly higher than that given to L group (the 95% confidence interval of difference was 0.076–0.096), which was in turn higher than the dose given to the D group (the 95% confidence interval of difference was 0.160–0.166). The statistical analysis confirmed that the differences in MNU doses among the groups were highly significant, as the confidence interval of the Bootstrap results did not include zero (Figure 3). Prior to the injection, all mice in the study exhibited strong mobility, alertness, and a relaxed posture, with their fur appearing glossy and well-groomed, indicating overall good health.

Figure 3 MNU Dose Injected in Each Group of Mice. Bar graph showed the dose of MNU injected in the DMSO (D), low-dose (L) and high-dose (H) MNU groups. The high-dose group (60 mg/kg) received a significantly higher MNU dose compared to the low-dose group (40 mg/kg) and the DMSO group (0 mg/kg) (The confidence interval of the Bootstrap results did not include zero). D: the DMSO control group; L: the low-dose MNU group; H: the high-dose MNU group. None: not any quality of MNU; **: a significant difference existed.

Survival Counts and Survival Curves Analysis

Following the injection, the survival rates varied across the different groups. Two hours after the injection, all mice in all the experimental groups, except for one mouse in the D group, displayed reduced mobility, decreased alertness, and a hunched posture. After 12 hours, mortality of the mice in all groups began to increase, with one mouse in the D group and two mice in the L group being dead. By 24 hours, the mortality rate continued to rise, as another one mouse in the D group, and two mice in both the L and H groups died. After 36 hours, another one mouse in the D group had died, while one mouse in the D group had regained increased activity. The other mice exhibited the poor mobility and the hunched posture. At this point, all mice in the L and H groups had died, leaving only two surviving individuals in D group. After 48 hours, the recovering mouse in the D group showed significant differences in the survival, which remained alive, exhibiting normal walking ability and alertness. Meanwhile the other mice in the D group had died out (Figure 4).

Figure 4 Number of Each Group of Mice at Different Time Points and the Survival Curves. (A) Number of each group of mice at different time points. (B) The survival curves of each group of mice at different time points. The number of mice in each group with the survival curve displayed the number of surviving mice at various time points after injection in the DMSO, low-dose MNU, and high-dose MNU groups. Mortality increased over time, with the low-dose and high-dose groups experiencing complete mortality by 36 hours. The DMSO group displayed a smaller mortality, with one mouse surviving at 48 hours. T1: before injection; T2: at 12 hours post-injection; T3: at 24 hours post-injection; T4: at 36 hours post-injection; T5: at 48 hours post-injection. D: the DMSO control group; L: the low-dose MNU group; H: the high-dose MNU group.

Body Weight Changes

Throughout the course of the study, no significant differences in the changes of body weight were found in the surviving mice across all groups in all the timepoints of observation. Despite the varying mortality rates and changes in activity levels among all groups, the body weight of the surviving mice remained stable in the D, L and H groups. This might suggest that the physiological effects of the treatment did not result in substantial weight loss among the survivors during the observation period (Figure 5).

Figure 5 Changes in Body Weight of Each Group of Mice After Injection. Line graph showed the changes in body weight over time in the DMSO, low-dose MNU, and high-dose MNU groups after injection. No significant differences in body weight changes were observed among the groups during the observation period. Timepoint 1 (T1): at the time of purchase (ie, before the 3-day pre-adaptation feeding).; T2: before injection (i.e., after the 3-day pre-adaptation feeding); T3: at 24 hours post-injection; T4: at 48 hours post-injection. D: the DMSO control group; L: the low-dose MNU group; H: the high-dose MNU group.

Activity Levels Changes

In terms of activity, two hours after the injection, all mice in the experimental groups showed a marked decline in activity levels. They appeared less alert, displayed a hunched posture, and had reduced physical activity compared to their pre-injection status. As the hours passed, the decline in activity became more pronounced. By 24 hours, some mice in all the groups exhibited trembling, and their activity levels were further reduced. At 36 hours, one mouse in the D group managed to regain increased activity, while others showed signs of poor mobility and distress. No significant differences in activity levels scores were found in the surviving mice across all groups. By the 48-hour mark, the only surviving mouse in the D group displayed the normal walking ability and alertness, while all the other mice in the D, L, and H groups had died out (Figures 6 and 7).

Figure 6 Changes in Activity Scores of Each Group of Mice After Injection. Line graph illustrated the changes in activity scores (measuring mobility, posture, and alertness) over time in each group after injection. Significant reductions in activity were observed in the low-dose and high-dose MNU groups, with severe declines noted by 24 hours. The DMSO group showed some recovery by 36 hours, though further decline was observed at 48 hours. T1: before injection; T2: at 2 hours post-injection; T3: at 24 hours post-injection; T4: at 36 hours post-injection; T5: at 48 hours post-injection. D: the DMSO control group; L: the low-dose MNU group; H: the high-dose MNU group.

Figure 7 Representative Images of the Activity Levels and Mental Status of Mice at Different Time Points in Each Group. Red arrows indicated mice with reduced activity and a hunched posture, while blue arrows highlighted mice with a good mental status, increased activity, high alertness, and the ability to move freely. Black arrows indicated the dead mice. T1: at 2 hours post-injection; T2: at 24 hours post-injection; T3: at 36 hours post-injection; T4: at 48 hours post-injection. D: the DMSO control group; L: the low-dose MNU group; H: the high-dose MNU group.

Discussion

In our study, male C57BL/6J mice were divided into three groups, the D, L and H groups. Mice were monitored for changes in body weight, activity levels, and mortality. Our results showed no significant differences in body weight among the groups prior to injection. Mortality rate was relative increased with injection of DMSO and MNU combination, while the DMSO alone could also led to a high mortality. All mice in the L and H groups had died out by 36 hours, while only one mouse in the D group survived, regaining a normal activity by 48 hours. All mice exhibited a reduced mobility and a hunched posture, with the activity declining progressively, after injection of either the DMSO or the DMSO-MNU combination.

In greater details, the mice with only the DMSO injection showed a noticeable decline in activity, reduced alertness, and signs of physical distress such as, a hunched posture, the limb curling and dull fur within two hours after injection. These symptoms indicated the presence of toxic effects. Subsequently, the animal deaths were observed, with only one mouse managed to recover and regain normal vitality at the end. The above results suggested that DMSO had a clear toxic effect on animals, with the potential for lethality or mortality. The toxicity of DMSO observed in this study were consistent with findings reported in other researches.²¹ DMSO was shown to provoke toxic reactions in the body, which might include a variety of adverse effects.²² Several studies also highlighted the toxicological risks associated with DMSO, indicating that it could significantly alter physiological processes and lead to behavioral changes.²³ In particular, the impact of 0.1–10% DMSO concentrations on behavior of aquatic model species has also been noted.²⁴ The DMSO concentrations under 1% did not cause statistically significant mortality, but did induce clear signs of stress, reduced locomotion, and impaired responses to stimuli. Given all these observed effects, it is essential for researchers to be cautious when using DMSO in experimental settings, ensuring that proper controls and safety protocols are in place to safeguard the well-being of animal subjects. It is critical that appropriate dilution of DMSO concentrations is conducted in related studies to minimize potential harm. Interestingly, the observation that one mouse with only the DMSO injection showed activity recovery at 36 hours post-injection was noteworthy. While the DMSO solution itself at high concentration is generally considered toxic, the occurrence of such a recovery in an individual animal may point to inherent variability in the response of mice to the DMSO. It was plausible that the special mouse had a stronger immune or repair response, which allowed it to gradually recover from the toxic effects of the DMSO injection. However, this singular recovery did not diminish the overall trend of severe toxicity observed in the DMSO group, which highlighted the potent and rapid toxicity of DMSO exposure.²⁵

In mice with injection of the DMSO and MNU combination, the DMSO and MNU combination did not exhibit significantly aggravated toxic reactions or increased mortality in mice during the early stages. From the survival curves, it was apparent that there were no noticeable differences in the early stages compared to the DMSO injection. However, as time progressed, the mortality rate in the DMSO and MNU combination groups began to increase significantly. Upon further analysis, it was found that in the DMSO and MNU combination groups with different doses of MNU, there was no clear MNU-dose dependent increase in toxicity at the early stages. Surprisingly, the early mortality rate in the L group was slightly higher compared to H group. As the observation period extended, however, the mortality rates between the two groups became similar. The results might suggest that the relationship between the MNU dosage and the related toxicity may not always follow a straightforward, dose-dependent pattern. It implied that other factors, such as the rate of absorption, metabolism, or individual genetic responses, might influence the observed outcomes of possible toxicity. The early increased mortality in the L group might be attributed to a higher sensitivity of certain physiological systems or an accelerated onset of toxicity in those mice. As time went on, however, the toxic effects of MNU probably reached a threshold, and the overall mortality rate stabilized in both L and H groups.

MNU was initially recognized as a potent carcinogenic agent and has been widely used to induce various types of cancer in animal models.²⁶ Subsequent studies demonstrated that MNU at the dose 60 mg/kg could selectively induce apoptosis in retinal photoreceptor cells, which led to its use in research on retinal pigment degeneration and retinal degeneration-related diseases.^7,27 However, there has been limited researches on the effects of MNU in increasing animal mortality and lethality. Some studies reported that higher doses of MNU (80, 160 or 240 mg/kg) could lead to tumor formation, leukemia, and even an increase in early mortality in mice^26,28. MNU exposure was showed to impair hippocampal neurogenesis in rats,²⁸ which might lead to toxic behaviors. Our study utilized a relatively low dose of MNU, ranging from 40 to 60 mg/kg, and the results suggested that MNU could, to some extent, enhance the toxic effects of DMSO in mice. This enhancement may be due to an increased inherent toxicity of MNU itself, or a result of MNU-mediated potentiation of the DMSO toxicity.

Several limitations existed in our study. One limitation of this study was the relatively small sample size, which may reduce the statistical power and generalizability of the findings. As our research involved potentially severe toxicological effects and mortality endpoints of mice, we adhered to the principle of minimizing animal use while maintaining scientific validity. This approach aligned with the 3Rs (Replacement, Reduction, and Refinement) principle in animal research. Although we applied the Bootstrap method due to the small sample size, the results should be interpreted with caution and considered as preliminary observations that provided the foundation for more robust studies. Additionally, the short observation period of 48 hours post-injection in our study did not account for potential long-term toxic effects or delayed pathological changes, limiting our understanding of DMSO and MNUinduced chronic toxicity. Besides, the current study did not consider the impact of gender and age variations, which could influence the results. Furthermore, while the study focused on acute toxicity, it did not explore the underlying molecular mechanisms, such as DNA damage repair or oxidative stress. In addition, we did harvest the blood or organs for future enzymatic assays, which might extract the maximum amount of information on the toxicity mechanism. Finally, the use of mice as model organisms, though standard, might not fully represent the human responses. This limitation underscored the necessity for future studies to incorporate other animal models, cell models or human data for broader applicability.

In conclusion, our study demonstrated that DMSO exhibited a notable toxicity, particularly when used in combination with MNU, the alkylating agents. This combination was shown to significantly reduce the activity levels and increase the mortality rate in mice. These findings highlighted the importance of closely monitoring animal’ reactions during experiments involving DMSO and similar reagents. To mitigate potential adverse effects, it is crucial to establish comprehensive research observation protocols that ensure the health and well-being of the animals. Further studies are needed to explore the underlying mechanisms of DMSO and MNU toxicity and to determine the safest concentrations and guidelines for its application in scientific research. Besides, we would include enzymatic assays of relevant serum and organs, including the heart, liver, spleen, lungs, and kidneys of mice, to further explore the possible toxicity mechanism. By advancing the understanding of DMSO and MNU toxicity, it could better inform safety practices and contribute to the broader field of chemical toxicity assessment.

Data Sharing Statement

The datasets used and/or analyzed during the current study were available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Acknowledgments

We are grateful to our families for their constant support and encouragement throughout this study.

Weiming Yan, Qiurui He and Lin Xiao are Co-first author.

Funding

This work was supported by the grants from the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant number: 82301245), the Natural Science Foundation of Fujian Province, China (Grant number: 2024J011148), the Joint Funds for the innovation of science and Technology, Fujian province (Grant number: 2024Y9653), the Postdoctoral Science Foundation of the Fuzhou General Hospital (Grant number: 48678) and the Natural Science Foundation of Zhangzhou City, China (Grant number: ZZ2024J57).

Disclosure

The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest regarding the research, authorship, or publication of this article.

References

1. Kumar S, Islam R, O’Connor W, et al. A metabolomic analysis on the toxicological effects of the universal solvent, dimethyl sulfoxide. Comp Biochem Physiol C Toxicol Pharmacol. 2025;287:110073. doi:10.1016/j.cbpc.2024.110073

2. Kligman AM. Dimethyl Sulfoxide. 2. JAMA. 1965;193:923–928. doi:10.1001/jama.1965.03090110061015

3. Kaczor-Kaminska M, Kaszuba K, Bilska-Wilkosz A, et al. Dimethyl Sulfoxide (DMSO) as a potential source of interference in research related to sulfur metabolism-a preliminary study. Antioxidants. 2024;13(5):582. doi:10.3390/antiox13050582

4. Sasatani M, Xi Y, Daino K, et al. Rev1 overexpression accelerates N -methyl- N -nitrosourea (MNU)-induced thymic lymphoma by increasing mutagenesis. Cancer Sci. 2024;115(6):1808–1819. doi:10.1111/cas.16159

5. Kong Q, Han X, Cheng H, et al. Lycium barbarum glycopeptide (wolfberry extract) slows N-methyl-N-nitrosourea-induced degradation of photoreceptors. Neural Regen Res. 2024;19(10):2290–2298. doi:10.4103/1673-5374.390958

6. Tawarayama H, Uchida K, Hasegawa H, et al. Estrogen, via ESR2 receptor, prevents oxidative stress-induced Muller cell death and stimulates FGF2 production independently of NRF2, attenuating retinal degeneration. Exp Eye Res. 2024;248:110103. doi:10.1016/j.exer.2024.110103

7. Zhu Y, Zhao X, Japhet TJ, Chen J, Zhao Q. Sampling of N-methyl-N-nitrosourea-induced rat’s retina damage and multi-index evaluation of pathological changes. J Vis Exp. 2024;(211).

8. Delgado-Goni T, Martín‐Sitjar J, Simões RV, et al. Dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO) as a potential contrast agent for brain tumors. NMR Biomed. 2013;26(2):173–184. doi:10.1002/nbm.2832

9. Rosch S, Werner C, Müller F, et al. Photoreceptor degeneration by intravitreal injection of N-methyl-N-nitrosourea (MNU) in rabbits: a pilot study. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2017;255(2):317–331. doi:10.1007/s00417-016-3531-7

10. Yan W, He Q, Long P, et al. A novelly-spatiotemporal characterization of the disease course in the MNU-induced retinitis pigmentosa model. J Inflamm Res. 2024;17:9243–9254. doi:10.2147/JIR.S474102

11. Tanaka M, Abe S. Augmented anti-tumour effect of lipopolysaccharide with G-CSF without enhancing body weight loss in mice bearing MH134 hepatoma. Eur J Pharmacol. 2022;934:175206. doi:10.1016/j.ejphar.2022.175206

12. Zhan J, Ma X, Liu D, et al. Gut microbiome alterations induced by tributyltin exposure are associated with increased body weight, impaired glucose and insulin homeostasis and endocrine disruption in mice. Environ Pollut. 2020;266(Pt 3):115276. doi:10.1016/j.envpol.2020.115276

13. Jarrar Q, Ayoub R, Jarrar Y, et al. Flumazenil pretreatment reduces mefenamic acid-induced central nervous system toxicity in mice. J Integr Neurosci. 2023;22(4):104. doi:10.31083/j.jin2204104

14. Mohamad Shalan NAA, Mustapha NM, Mohamed S. Chronic toxicity evaluation of Morinda citrifolia fruit and leaf in mice. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol. 2017;83:46–53. doi:10.1016/j.yrtph.2016.11.022

15. Nguyen KC, Zhang Y, Todd J, et al. Biodistribution and systemic effects in mice following intravenous administration of cadmium telluride quantum dot nanoparticles. Chem Res Toxicol. 2019;32(8):1491–1503. doi:10.1021/acs.chemrestox.8b00397

16. Chadalavada D, Adamson TW, Burnett JC, et al. Irradiated compared with nonirradiated NSG mice for the development of a human B-cell lymphoma model. Comp Med. 2014;64(3):179–185.

17. Suzuki H, Okada Y. Comparative toxicity of dinophysistoxin-1 and okadaic acid in mice. J Vet Med Sci. 2018;80(4):616–619. doi:10.1292/jvms.17-0377

18. Uttekar PS, Yadav VD, Bhagwat DA. 1, 2-Dihexadecanoyl-sn-glycero-3-phosphoethanolamin (DPPE), doxorubicin and folic acid conjugated micelles for cancer management in tumor bearing BALB/c mice. Bioorg Med Chem Lett. 2021;50:128337. doi:10.1016/j.bmcl.2021.128337

19. Dwivedi AK, Mallawaarachchi I, Alvarado LA. Analysis of small sample size studies using nonparametric bootstrap test with pooled resampling method. Stat Med. 2017;36(14):2187–2205. doi:10.1002/sim.7263

20. Neuhauser M, Jockel K. A bootstrap test for the analysis of microarray experiments with a very small number of replications. Appl Bioinformatics. 2006;5(3):173–179. doi:10.2165/00822942-200605030-00005

21. Swiecilo A, Januś E, Krzepiłko A, et al. The effect of DMSO on Saccharomyces cerevisiae yeast with different energy metabolism and antioxidant status. Sci Rep. 2024;14(1):21974. doi:10.1038/s41598-024-72400-4

22. Kim K, Lee S. Combined toxicity of dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO) and vanadium towards zebrafish embryos (Danio rerio): unexpected synergistic effect by DMSO. Chemosphere. 2021;270:129405. doi:10.1016/j.chemosphere.2020.129405

23. Haschek WM, Baer KE, Rutherford JE. Effects of dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO) on pulmonary fibrosis in rats and mice. Toxicology. 1989;54(2):197–205. doi:10.1016/0300-483X(89)90045-0

24. Huang Y, Cartlidge R, Walpitagama M, et al. Unsuitable use of DMSO for assessing behavioral endpoints in aquatic model species. Sci Total Environ. 2018;615:107–114. doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.09.260

25. Fry LJ, Querol S, Gomez SG, et al. Assessing the toxic effects of DMSO on cord blood to determine exposure time limits and the optimum concentration for cryopreservation. Vox Sang. 2015;109(2):181–190. doi:10.1111/vox.12267

26. Da Silva Franchi CA, Bacchi MM, Padovani CR, et al. Thymic lymphomas in Wistar rats exposed to N-methyl-N-nitrosourea (MNU). Cancer Sci. 2003;94(3):240–243. doi:10.1111/j.1349-7006.2003.tb01427.x

27. Guo D, Sun Y, Wu J, et al. Photoreceptor-targeted extracellular vesicles-mediated delivery of Cul7 siRNA for retinal degeneration therapy. Theranostics. 2024;14(13):4916–4932. doi:10.7150/thno.99484

28. Song P, Li X, Chen S, et al. YTHDF1 mediates N -methyl- N -nitrosourea-induced gastric carcinogenesis by controlling HSPH1 translation. Cell Prolif. 2024;57(7):e13619. doi:10.1111/cpr.13619

In 2022, scientists in China (Yan et al.) published a structural model describing exactly how this domain works. It should have been a tremendous boon for drug developers.

But the model was wrong.

“Their work contains critical errors,” says Gabriel Small, a graduate fellow in the laboratories of Seth A. Darst and Elizabeth Campbell at Rockefeller. “The data does not support their conclusions.”

Now, in a new study published in Cell, Small and colleagues demonstrate exactly why scientists still don’t know how the NiRAN domain works. The findings could have sweeping implications for drug developers already working to design antivirals based on flawed assumptions, and underscore the importance of rigorous validation.

“It is absolutely important that structures be accurate for medicinal chemistry, especially when we’re talking about a critical target for antivirals that is the subject of such intense interest in industry,” says Campbell, head of the Laboratory of Molecular Pathogenesis. “We hope that our work will prevent developers from futilely trying to optimize a drug around an incorrect structure.”

A promising lead

By the time the original paper was published in Cell, the Campbell and Darst labs were already quite familiar with the NiRAN domain and its importance as a therapeutic target. Both laboratories study gene expression in pathogens, and their work on SARS-CoV-2 focuses in part on characterizing the molecular interactions that coordinate viral replication.

The NiRAN domain is essential for helping SARS-CoV-2 and other coronaviruses cap their RNA, a step that allows these viruses to replicate and survive. In one version of this process, the NiRAN domain uses a molecule called GDP to attach a protective cap to the beginning of the virus’s RNA. Small previously described that process in detail, and its structure is considered solved. But the NiRAN domain can also use a related molecule, GTP, to form a protective cap. Determined to develop antivirals that comprehensively shut down the NiRAN domain, scientists were keen to discover the particulars of the latter GTP-related mechanism.

In the 2022 paper, researchers described a chain of chemical steps, beginning with a water molecule breaking a bond to release the RNA’s 5′ phosphate end. That end then attaches to the beta-phosphate end of the GTP molecule, which removes another phosphate and, with the help of a magnesium ion, transfers the remaining portion of the GTP molecule to the RNA, forming a protective cap that allows the virus to replicate and thrive.

The team’s evidence? A cryo-electron microscopy image that showed the process caught in action. To freeze this catalytic intermediate, the team used a GTP mimic called GMPPNP.

Small read the paper with interest. “As soon as they published, I went to download their data,” he says. It wasn’t there. This raised a red flag — data is generally available upon release of a structural biology paper. Months later, however, when Small was finally able to access the data, he began to uncover significant flaws. “I tried to make a figure using their data, and realized that there were serious issues,” he says. Small brought his concerns to Campbell and Darst.

They agreed. “Something was clearly wrong,” Campbell says. “But we decided to give the other team the benefit of the doubt, and reprocess all of their data ourselves.”

An uphill battle

It was painstaking work, with Small leading the charge. Working frame by frame, he compared the published atomic model to the actual cryo-EM map and found something striking: the key molecules that Yan and colleagues claimed to have seen — specifically, the GTP mimic GMPPNP and a magnesium ion in the NiRAN domain’s active site — simply were not there.

Not only was there no supporting image data, but the placement of these molecules in the original model also violated basic rules of chemistry, causing severe atomic clashes and unrealistic charge interactions. Small ran additional tests, but even advanced methods designed to pick out rare particles turned up empty. He could find no evidence to support the model previously produced by Yan and colleagues.

Once the Rockefeller researchers validated their results, they submitted their findings to Cell. “It was very important that we publish our corrective manuscript in the same journal that published the original model,” Campbell says, noting that corrections to high-profile papers are often overlooked when published in lower tier journals.

Otherwise, this confusion in the field could cause problems that reach far beyond the lab bench, Campbell adds — a costly reminder that rigorous basic biomedical research is not just academic, but essential to real-world progress. “Companies keep their cards close to their chests, but we know that several industry groups are studying this,” she says. “Efforts based on a flawed structural model could result in years of wasted time and resources.”

While the tectonic plates on Earth are constantly moving, it is very difficult to observe a slow earthquake in real time. In fact, the earthquakes that are recorded are those resulting from a sudden break or slip between two distinct plates. However, scientists have managed to record this type of phenomenon for the first time ever. 

It is important to note that this type of event is still poorly understood by science. What’s more, it is quite difficult to record. A slow earthquake can take days, weeks, or months to occur, without any apparent signals. 

A team from the University of Texas at Austin achieved this feat by recording the propagation of the earthquake when tectonic pressure was released along the tsunami-generating fault in Nankai, Japan. To achieve this, the researchers used drilling sensors capable of detecting the slightest movements, placed in the critical area offshore. This is where the fault is closest to the seabed. 

As a result, the first observation took place in 2015, when a slow-slip earthquake ran along the tail of the fault. Subsequently, in 2020, a second earthquake occurred, following the same trajectory. In the journal Science, researchers explain the following: “Slip initiates ~30 kilometers landward of the trench; migrates seaward at 1 to 2 kilometers per day to within a few kilometers of, and possibly breaching, the trench; and coincides with the onset and migration of tremor and/or very-low-frequency earthquakes. The SSE source region lies in a zone of high pore fluid pressure and low stress, which provides clear observational evidence linking these factors to shallow slow earthquakes.“

These two events correspond to decompression movements of the fault. But that’s not all, as researchers also point out that this discovery suggests that this deep part of the fault acts more like a shock absorber, relieving pressure without generating sudden tremors. Furthermore, they occurred in areas where geological fluid pressure was higher than normal, indicating that these fluids play a major role in slow earthquakes. Thus, this discovery could help researchers better understand the functioning of seismic faults and slow-slip earthquakes, which are still poorly understood.

I’ve been working in the field of web writing for several years, and I’m passionate about keeping readers up to date with the latest news on astronomy, technology, the world of video games and other exciting subjects. In particular, I’ve had the opportunity to work on a number of websites, which has enabled me to cover a wide range of subjects. In my personal life, I’m passionate about a wide range of subjects, including astronomy, video games, history and science. I’m also drawn to psychology, which is a subject that deserves greater documentation and recognition.

Whale Valley is a region of the Egyptian Sahara desert that is peppered with archaic whale skeletons, some of which have feet and toes preserved.

These skeletons and other marine fossils date to the late Eocene epoch (55.8 million to 33.9 million years ago), when present-day Egypt was submerged beneath the Tethys Ocean and whales had just evolved into sea creatures, according to UNESCO.

The Expedition 73 crew threw out their trash, prepared for the arrival of new cargo and played host to an international team of scientists, all while conducting science and maintaining their home away home during their week aboard the International Space Station.

Orbital observation

On Thursday (July 3), NASA astronaut Nichole Ayers saw a firework, of sorts, in space.