While the discovery could have implications for improving the safety of repurposed ‘surge wards’, the researchers say it also opens up the possibility of being able to set standards for cleaner air to reduce the risk of airborne transmission of infections.

Over the duration of the pandemic there has been a steady rise in the evidence that the SARS-CoV-2 virus can be transmitted through the air in small droplets (aerosols). But as hospitals have seen their capacity overwhelmed, they have been forced to manage many of their COVID-19 patients in repurposed ‘surge’ wards, which often lack the ability to change the air with a high frequency. While the use of appropriate personal protective equipment (PPE) protects staff and patients significantly reduces the risk of transmission, there are still reports of patient-to-healthcare worker transmission of the virus, potentially through the inhalation of viral particles.

A team at the University of Cambridge and Cambridge University Hospitals (CUH) NHS Foundation Trust investigated whether portable air filtration/UV sterilisation devices could reduce airborne SARS- CoV-2 in general wards that had been repurposed as a COVID ward and a COVID Intensive Care Unit (ICU). The results are published in Clinical Infectious Diseases.

Dr Vilas Navapurkar, a Consultant in Intensive Care Medicine at CUH, who led the study, said: “Reducing airborne transmission of the coronavirus is extremely important for the safety of both patients and staff. Effective PPE has made a huge difference, but anything we can do to reduce the risk further is important.”

“Because of the numbers of patients being admitted with COVID-19, hospitals have had to use wards not designed for managing respiratory infections. During an intensely busy time, we were able to pull together a team from across the hospital and University to test whether portable air filtration devices, which are relatively inexpensive, might remove airborne SARS-CoV-2 and make these wards safer.”

The team performed their study in two repurposed COVID-19 units in Addenbrooke’s Hospital. One area was a surge ward managing patients who required simple oxygen treatment or no respiratory support; the second was a surge ICU managing patients who required ventilation either through non-invasive mask ventilation or invasive respiratory support, such as involving the use of an invasive tube and tracheostomy.

The team installed a High Efficiency Particulate Air (HEPA) air filter/UV steriliser. HEPA filters are made up of thousands of fibres knitted together to form a material that filters out particles above a certain size. The machines were placed in fixed positions and operated continuously for seven days, filtering the full volume of air in each room between five and ten times per hour.

In the surge ward, during the first week prior to the air filter being activated, the researchers were able to detect SARS-CoV-2 on all sampling days. Once the air filter was switched on and run continuously, the team were unable to detect SARS-CoV-2 on any of the five testing days. They then switched off the machine and repeated the sampling – once again, they were able to detect SARS-CoV-2 on three of the five sampling days.

On the ICU, the team found limited evidence of airborne SARS-CoV-2 in the weeks when the machine was switched off and traces of the virus on one sampling day when the machine was active.

Additionally, the air filters significantly reduced levels of bacterial, fungal and other viral bioaerosols on the both the surge ward and the ICU, highlighting an added benefit of the system. 

First author Dr Andrew Conway Morris, from the Department of Medicine at the University of Cambridge, said: “We were really surprised by quite how effect air filters were at removing airborne SARS-CoV-2 on the wards. Although it was only a small study, it highlights their potential to improve the safety of wards, particularly in areas not designed for managing highly infectious diseases such as COVID-19.”

Crucially, the research team developed a robust technique for assessing the quality of air, involving placing air samplers at various points in the room and then testing the samples using PCR assays similar those used in the ‘gold standard’ COVID-19 tests.

Professor Stephen Baker, from the Cambridge Institute of Therapeutic Immunology and Infectious Disease at the University of Cambridge, said: “Cleaner air will reduce the risk of airborne disease transmission, but it’s unlikely to be the case that just installing an air filter will be enough to guarantee the air is clean enough. Every room and every situation will be different. A key part of our work has been developing a robust way of measuring air quality.”

Dr Navapurkar added: “We’re all familiar with the idea of having standards for clean water and of hygiene standards for food. We need now to agree standards for what is acceptable air quality and how we meet and monitor those standards.”

The research was supported by Wellcome, the Medical Research Council and the National Institute for Health Research Cambridge Biomedical Research Centre.

Reference
Conway Morris, A, et al. The removal of airborne SARS-CoV-2 and other microbial bioaerosols by air filtration on COVID-19 surge units. Clin Inf Dis; 30 Oct 2021; DOI: 10.1093/cid/ciab933

Image: Dr Vilas Navapurkar in ICU beside an air filter

You’ve spoken recently about the need to think carefully about how and why a university engages with the world. What brought about this reflection?

If you look at the tectonic shifts taking place in geopolitics, and their profound implications for interstate relations, you have to start asking serious questions about your partnerships around the world. For example, how do we make sure we are attuned to potential risks, and then find ways to address them? It’s not about retreating into silos of national academic culture – I think that would be disastrous. But we do need to make sure we are on the front foot, so that we don’t get pressured by political forces into taking decisions that would be profoundly negative for international academic collaboration.

Are you thinking of a particular political situation?

Obviously, the US-China relationship, and frankly the UK-China relationship, have been very much called into question. But it isn’t just about China. If you look around the world, there are risks in relationships in the Middle East, in India, in Brazil, and dare I say it in parts of Europe, in Hungary and Poland.

What kind of risks are universities experiencing?

One is the basic physical security of students and researchers. We had the horrible circumstance of one of our PhD students, Giulio Regeni, being murdered in Egypt. He was working on questions that many other people, from many countries, had worked on for many years, yet all of a sudden it became a heightened political risk. So, we have to consider situations like that very carefully.

Are there also broader threats to research?

Not everywhere we work in the world has the same commitment to academic freedom as do we, so we have to ask how we manage relationships when the partnership is based on quite different values. There is also the potential for the theft or hostile use of intellectual property, or gaining access to security-sensitive data. This is clearly an issue that governments are very preoccupied with, all around the world.

Does this make some partnerships impossible?

It’s not that we want to say that we cannot collaborate, but there have to be fences around certain areas of collaboration, so that we don’t get ourselves into damaging circumstances.

How can European universities approach this challenge?

We have to be clear with both political and public actors, and the media, that we are not naive – although we are often accused of that – and that we are thinking very carefully about these issues. We must keep our minds open, but also show people that our eyes are open, as we engage in these partnerships.

What practical steps can you take?

The most important thing we can do is help develop a more risk-literate culture in our universities. A lot of partnerships are discussed at the level of departments, or even individual professors or researchers, so I think we have a duty to help our colleagues understand that there are real risks, and that they have to attend to them. At Cambridge, we’ve established a set of international principles, which we are using to develop educational opportunities and online resources so that staff across the university think about these questions when they are discussing and negotiating potential partnerships.

Companies are also increasingly powerful global actors, for example controlling the circulation of data and knowledge...

This is complicated, because we are highly dependent on legal structures created by governments and through intergovernmental negotiation. So, the most obvious thing we can do is try to influence the policy and legal framework around how those companies operate. Some of that has to do with trying to resist the overweening power of single publishing companies, for example, and a lot of work has been done through LERU and other organisations on that issue. But we also have technology platforms that potentially can be the source of both disinformation and abuse of information produced by universities. We can’t easily attack that directly, as institutions, but I think we can do so obliquely by trying to influence public policy.

Do all these risks affect the rationale for international collaboration?

Why we collaborate has not changed in any profound way: we collaborate because it is essential to knowledge creation. There are so many areas that cannot be addressed, even including fundamental scientific discovery, if you don’t have proper international collaboration.

For example?

Universities have a fundamental role to play in helping to create resilient, sustainable societies, and I think we’ve seen that clearly in the Covid crisis. Politically, there’s been rather weak international collaboration, in my view. If you look at access to vaccines, for example, in low-income countries less than 5% of populations are inoculated, even with one dose. But at the university level we’ve done remarkably well, working together and rapidly sharing knowledge. That kind of collaboration is crucial to generating social resilience in relation to the pandemic. And if we are going to have resilience around climate change, we absolutely need to be sharing the best knowledge we can.

Universities also have an influence on sustainability as investors. Is that role changing?

There is now much more expectation that we will be active social actors in relation to sustainability. At Cambridge, we are moving towards the lowest possible carbon relationships in our endowment fund, but that’s not enough. We’ve also promised to use the endowment fund as an educational mechanism for other investors, with whom we partner, around questions of sustainability, to help them understand why it is so important that they too make the transition. I think that shows the kind of expectations that universities will be under: it’s not enough to just declare things, we’re increasingly going to be asked to show, through our own actions, how we promote sustainability.

Cambridge is hosting the LERU Rectors’ Assembly this month. What does this occasion mean to the university?

I see it as a great moment to be able to reaffirm our very strong links with European partners. That’s really important in the post-Brexit environment. It’s also an opportunity to say thank you, because LERU and the extended university network have been forceful in working with the EU to try to affirm our future participation in Horizon Europe. I’m very grateful for that.

***

This interview first appeared on the League of European Research Universities (LERU) website on 16 November 2021. Reproduced by permission.

Perseverance has been looked up more than 243,000 times on the website in 2021, the first time it has made a noticeable appearance. 

Defined by the dictionary as ‘continued effort to do or achieve something, even when this is difficult or takes a long time’, the word’s stellar performance this year may have as much to do with NASA as the pandemic. A spike of 30,487 searches for perseverance occurred between 19–25 February 2021, after NASA’s Perseverance Rover made its final descent to Mars on 18 February. 

Wendalyn Nichols, Cambridge Dictionary Publishing Manager, said: “It made sense that lookups of 'perseverance' spiked at this time. Cambridge Dictionary is the top website in the world for learners of English, and perseverance is not a common word for students of English to have in their vocabulary. We often see spikes in lookups of words associated with current events when those words are less familiar.”

In the following months, however, perseverance continued to be looked up more frequently on the site than ever before. Nichols said: “Just as it takes perseverance to land a rover on Mars, it takes perseverance to face the challenges and disruption to our lives from COVID-19, climate disasters, political instability and conflict. We appreciated that connection, and we think Cambridge Dictionary users do, too.”

Further evidence that words looked up on Cambridge Dictionary often reflect world events is that in January searches for insurrection, impeachment, inauguration and acquit all spiked as the world closely followed the US presidential election. 

In 2020, ‘quarantine’ defeated 'lockdown' and 'pandemic' to be crowned Word of the Year, attracting more than 183,000 views. 

People use Cambridge Dictionary to develop their English language skills, and those who look up perseverance will find more than just the definition of the word. A new Cambridge Thesaurus article on perseverance goes beyond listing synonyms to explain the nuanced differences in meaning between perseverance, determination, persistence, doggedness, single-mindedness, tenacity, resolve, will, and the US term stick-to-it-iveness.

The Cambridge team have also created a new list of words about being determined for English learners on Cambridge Dictionary +Plus. Research shows that many people learn new vocabulary more effectively when they have a record of it, so they can go back to study and test themselves. This word list includes vocabulary related to perseverance, so English language learners can easily find out more about the word of the year while simultaneously expanding their vocabulary.

Cambridge University Press has been publishing dictionaries for learners of English since 1995. Cambridge Dictionary began offering these dictionaries completely free of charge online in 1999 and is now the top learner dictionary website in the world, serving 2.6 billion page views a year.

Find out more about Cambridge Dictionary Word of the Year 2021

The Justinianic Plague is the first known outbreak of bubonic plague in west Eurasian history and struck the Mediterranean world at a pivotal moment in its historical development, when the Emperor Justinian was trying to restore Roman imperial power.
 
For decades, historians have argued about the lethality of the disease; its social and economic impact; and the routes by which it spread. In 2019-20, several studies, widely publicised in the media, argued that historians had massively exaggerated the impact of the Justinianic Plague and described it as an ‘inconsequential pandemic’. In a subsequent piece of journalism, written just before COVID-19 took hold in the West, two researchers suggested that the Justinianic Plague was ‘not unlike our flu outbreaks’.

In a new study, published in Past & Present, Cambridge historian Professor Peter Sarris argues that these studies ignored or downplayed new genetic findings, offered misleading statistical analysis and misrepresented the evidence provided by ancient texts. 

Sarris says: “Some historians remain deeply hostile to regarding external factors such as disease as having a major impact on the development of human society, and ‘plague scepticism’ has had a lot of attention in recent years.”

Sarris, a Fellow of Trinity College, is critical of the way that some studies have used search engines to calculate that only a small percentage of ancient literature discusses the plague and then crudely argue that this proves the disease was considered insignificant at the time.

Sarris says: “Witnessing the plague first-hand obliged the contemporary historian Procopius to break away from his vast military narrative to write a harrowing account of the arrival of the plague in Constantinople that would leave a deep impression on subsequent generations of Byzantine readers. That is far more telling than the number of plague-related words he wrote. Different authors, writing different types of text, concentrated on different themes, and their works must be read accordingly.”

Sarris also refutes the suggestion that laws, coins and papyri provide little evidence that the plague had a significant impact on the early Byzantine state or society. He points to a major reduction in imperial law-making between the year 546, by which point the plague had taken hold, and the end of Justinian’s reign in 565. But he also argues that the flurry of significant legislation that was made between 542 and 545 reveals a series of crisis-driven measures issued in the face of plague-induced depopulation, and to limit the damage inflicted by the plague on landowning institutions. 

In March 542, in a law that Justinian described as having been written amid the ‘encircling presence of death’, which had ‘spread to every region’, the emperor attempted to prop up the banking sector of the imperial economy. 

In another law of 544, the emperor attempted to impose price and wage controls, as workers tried to take advantage of labour shortages. Alluding to the plague, Justinian declared that the ‘chastening which has been sent by God’s goodness’ should have made workers ‘better people’ but instead ‘they have turned to avarice’.

That bubonic plague exacerbated the East Roman Empire’s existing fiscal and administrative difficulties is also reflected in changes to coinage in this period, Sarris argues. A series of light-weight gold coins were issued, the first such reduction in the gold currency since its introduction in the 4th century and the weight of the heavy copper coinage of Constantinople was also reduced significantly around the same time as the emperor’s emergency banking legislation.

Sarris says: “The significance of a historical pandemic should never be judged primarily on the basis of whether it leads to the ‘collapse’ of the societies concerned. Equally, the resilience of the East Roman state in the face of the plague does not signify that the challenge posed by the plague was not real.”

“What is most striking about the governmental response to the Justinianic Plague in the Byzantine or Roman world is how rational and carefully targeted it was, despite the bewilderingly unfamiliar circumstances in which the authorities found themselves. 

“We have a lot to learn from how our forebears responded to epidemic disease, and how pandemics impacted on social structures, the distribution of wealth, and modes of thought.”

Bubonic plague in England 

Until the early 2000s, the identification of the Justinianic Plague as ‘bubonic’ rested entirely upon ancient texts which described the appearance of buboes or swellings in the groins or armpits of victims. But then rapid advances in genomics enabled archaeologists and genetic scientists to discover traces of the ancient DNA of Yersinia pestis in Early Medieval skeletal remains. Such finds have been made in Germany, Spain, France and England.

In 2018, a study of DNA preserved in remains found in an early Anglo-Saxon burial site known as Edix Hill in Cambridgeshire revealed that many of the interred had died carrying the disease. Further analysis revealed that the strain of Y. pestis found was the earliest identified lineage of the bacterium involved in the 6th-century pandemic. 

Sarris says: “We have tended to start with the literary sources, which describe the plague arriving at Pelusium in Egypt before spreading out from there, and then fitted the archaeological and genetic evidence into a framework and narrative based on those sources. That approach will no longer do. The arrival of bubonic plague in the Mediterranean around 541 and its initial arrival in England possibly somewhat earlier may have been the result of two separate but related routes, occurring some time apart.”

The study suggests that the plague may have reached the Mediterranean via the Red Sea, and reached England perhaps via the Baltic and Scandanavia, and from there onto parts of the continent.

The study emphasises that despite being called the ‘Justinianic Plague’, it was “never a purely or even primarily Roman phenomenon” and as recent genetic discoveries have proven, it reached remote and rural sites such as Edix Hill, as well as heavily populated cities.

It is widely accepted that the lethal and virulent strain of bubonic plague from which the Justinianic Plague and later the Black Death would descend had emerged in Central Asia by the Bronze Age before evolving further there in antiquity. 

Sarris suggests that it may be significant that the advent of both the Justinianic Plague and the Black Death were preceded by the expansion of nomadic empires across Eurasia: the Huns in the 4th and 5th centuries, and the Mongols in the 13th.

Sarris says: “Increasing genetic evidence will lead in directions we can scarcely yet anticipate, and historians need to be able to respond positively and imaginatively, rather than with a defensive shrug.”

Reference
P Sarris, ‘New Approaches to the ‘Plague of Justinian’, Past & Present (2021); DOI: 10.1093/pastj/gtab024.

The most commonly used material for producing solar panels is crystalline silicon, but achieving efficient energy conversion requires an energy-intensive and time-consuming production process to create a highly ordered wafer structure.

In the last decade, perovskite materials have emerged as promising alternatives to silicon.

The lead salts used to make perovskites are much more abundant and cheaper to produce than crystalline silicon, and they can be prepared in liquid ink that is simply printed to produce a film of the material. They also show great potential for other applications, such as energy-efficient light-emitting diodes (LEDs) and X-ray detectors.

The performance of perovskites is surprising. The typical model for an excellent semiconductor is a highly ordered structure, but the array of different chemical elements in perovskites creates a much ‘messier’ landscape.

This messiness causes defects in the material that lead to tiny ‘traps’, which typically reduce performance. But despite the presence of these defects, perovskite materials still show efficiency levels comparable to their silicon alternatives.   

In fact, earlier research by the same team behind the current work showed the disordered structure can actually increase the performance of perovskite optoelectronics, and their latest work seeks to explain why.  

Combining a series of new microscopy techniques, the group present a complete picture of the nanoscale chemical, structural and optoelectronic landscape of these materials, that reveals the complex interactions between these competing factors and ultimately, shows which comes out on top.

“What we see is that we have two forms of disorder happening in parallel,” said first author Kyle Frohna from Cambridge’s Department of Chemical Engineering and Biotechnology (CEB). “The electronic disorder associated with the defects that reduce performance, and then the spatial chemical disorder that seems to improve it.

“And what we’ve found is that the chemical disorder – the ‘good’ disorder in this case – mitigates the ‘bad’ disorder from the defects by funnelling the charge carriers away from these traps that they might otherwise get caught in.” 

In collaboration with researchers from the Cavendish Laboratory, the Diamond Light Source synchrotron facility in Didcot, and the Okinawa Institute of Science and Technology in Japan, the researchers used several different microscopic techniques to look at the same regions in the perovskite film. They could then compare the results from all these methods to present the full picture of what’s happening at a nanoscale level in these materials.

The findings will allow researchers to further refine how perovskite solar cells are made in order to maximise efficiency.

“We have visualised and given reasons why we can call these materials defect tolerant,” said co-author Miguel Anaya, also from CEB. “This methodology enables new routes to optimise them at the nanoscale to perform better for a targeted application. Now, we can look at other types of perovskites that are not only good for solar cells but also for LEDs or detectors and understand their working principles.”

“Through these visualisations, we now much better understand the nanoscale landscape in these fascinating semiconductors – the good, the bad and the ugly,” said Dr Sam Stranks from CEB, who led the research. “These results explain how the empirical optimisation of these materials by the field has driven these mixed composition perovskites to such high performances. But it has also revealed blueprints for design of new semiconductors that may have similar attributes – where disorder can be exploited to tailor performance.”

Reference:
Kyle Frohna et al ‘Nanoscale chemical heterogeneity dominates the optoelectronic response of alloyed perovskite solar cells.’ Nature Nanotechnology (2021) DOI: 10.1038/s41565-021-01019-7

The University of Cambridge has engaged in countless collaborations with international partners throughout our history. We have always believed that the best way to tackle seemingly intractable global issues is to work in shared research endeavours across international borders. Today, as we recover from the ravages of a pandemic and continue to focus on global challenges such as combating climate change, and ensuring food security, that approach seems more important than ever.

Global research organisations like Cambridge must always be aware that there are risks in dealing with countries that might not share some of our values. These include risks to staff or student safety, or more pernicious risks such as the theft or misuse of research for, say, military purposes. In today’s rapidly changing geo-political world there must be unprecedented focus on managing these risks.  

Cambridge has long-established and robust systems for approving, rejecting and scrutinising proposed international partnerships. All projects go through a strict due diligence process, which is now enhanced by our new Principles for managing risks in international engagements. These principles, and the practical guidance that sits under them, focus on fostering a risk-aware culture and empowering our academic community to promote academic freedom and uphold our institutional values in everything we do.  We also work closely with the Government’s Export Control Joint Unit and the Investment Security Unit to ensure that any national security issues are appropriately addressed.

As a global university we do not shy away from rigorous discussions about the merits of engagement with other countries that might not share our values. One current and high profile example is China. We view collaboration with Chinese academics and funders as an important part of our mission. We also believe it is essential to be open and honest about the nature and scale of this collaboration. 

Over the last five years income from China has represented less than 1 percent of research grant income, less than 9 percent of fundraising income and Chinese nationals make up around 8 percent of our student body. While not insignificant these figures do not suggest a dependency.

Breaking down these figures, our research grant income (based on expenditure) from mainland China and Hong Kong averaged £3.8m, of which an average of £2.2m per year came from Huawei (including its subsidiaries). This is against a total average research income over the same period of £539m per year. Research income from China therefore amounts to 0.7 percent of our annual research grant income over the last five years. Within that, income from Huawei represents 0.5 percent. If we were to look at the data for 20/21 only, income from China was £6.1m out of a total research grant income of £586m, this represents 1 percent of our research grant income in the last financial year.

By way of comparison, Cambridge’s research grant income from the United States of America averaged £27.9m over the past five years.

We also receive philanthropic funding from China. Since 2016/17 the University has raised £626m in philanthropic income which supports scholarships, teaching and research. Of that £54m came from donors in mainland China and Hong Kong, which represents under 9 percent. Of the £54m in philanthropic income from China since 2016/17 £7.5m was committed by Huawei.

Academic freedom is maintained at all times in every research project the University conducts. No funder has the right to direct or steer research at Cambridge. In relation to Huawei, we will not engage in any research in relation to 5G and we do not use their technology platforms.

Importantly, funding from China, as with funding from around the world, allows Cambridge to undertake exceptional research. For example, Cambridge engineers have developed a new augmented reality (AR) head-mounted display (HMD) that can deliver high quality clear images directly on the retina, even if the user is wearing glasses.

The funding also helps the University to fulfil its role in society by delivering outreach programmes such as the Faculty of Mathematics Millennium Outreach project. In the 2019/20 academic year, the project’s web-based maths resources attracted over 12 million visits from users worldwide and more than 40 million page views, while over 13,000 school students and more than 2,250 teachers were involved in our face-to-face activities and online webinars and events.

We believe that values are upheld - and improvements happen - through engagement. This is, incidentally, also the UK’s approach to foreign policy and we would encourage proactive engagement from government to navigate the evolving geopolitical landscape that seeks to balance trade relations with national security considerations. We need to maintain vigilance and be alert to the potential complications of working with international partners. The new international engagement principles we have developed at Cambridge will allow us to continue to interact on vital research with partners across the world, and to do so with a full understanding of the risks as well as the benefits.

About the authors

Professor Anne Ferguson-Smith is Pro-Vice-Chancellor for Research and the Arthur Balfour Professor of Genetics.

Professor Andy Neely is Pro-Vice-Chancellor for Enterprise and Business Relations. He is Director of the Centre for Digital Built Britain and a Fellow of Sidney Sussex College.

A team of engineers from the University of Cambridge used computer modelling to quantify how droplets spread when people cough. They found that in the absence of masks, a person with COVID-19 can infect another person at a two-metre distance, even when outdoors.

The team also found that individual coughs vary widely, and that the ‘safe’ distance could have been set at anywhere between one to three or more metres, depending on the risk tolerance of a given public health authority.

The results, published in the journal Physics of Fluids, suggest that social distancing is not an effective mitigation measure on its own, and underline the continued importance of vaccination, ventilation and masks as we head into the winter months in the northern hemisphere.

Despite the focus on hand-washing and surface cleaning in the early days of the pandemic, it’s been clear for nearly two years that COVID-19 spreads through airborne transmission. Infected people can spread the virus through coughing, speaking or even breathing, when they expel larger droplets that eventually settle or smaller aerosols that may float in the air.

“I remember hearing lots about how COVID-19 was spreading via door handles in early 2020, and I thought to myself if that were the case, then the virus must leave an infected person and land on the surface or disperse in the air through fluid mechanical processes,” said Professor Epaminondas Mastorakos from Cambridge’s Department of Engineering, who led the research.

Mastorakos is an expert in fluid mechanics: the way that fluids, including exhaled breath, behave in different environments. Over the course of the pandemic, he and his colleagues have developed various models for how COVID-19 spreads.

“One part of the way that this disease spreads is virology: how much virus you have in your body, how many viral particles you expel when you speak or cough,” said first author Dr Shrey Trivedi, also from the Department of Engineering. “But another part of it is fluid mechanics: what happens to the droplets once they’re expelled, which is where we come in. As fluid mechanics specialists, we’re like the bridge from virology of the emitter to the virology of the receiver and we can help with risk assessment.”

In the current study, the Cambridge researchers set out to ‘measure’ this bridge through a series of simulations. For example, if a person coughed and emitted a thousand droplets, how many would reach another person in the same room, and how large would these droplets be, as a function of time and space?

The simulations used refined computational models solving the equations for turbulent flow, together with detailed descriptions of droplet motion and evaporation.

The researchers found that there isn’t a sharp cut-off once the droplets spread beyond two metres. When a person coughs and isn’t wearing a mask, most of the larger droplets will fall on nearby surfaces. However, smaller droplets, suspended in the air, can quickly and easily spread well beyond two metres. How far and how quickly these aerosols spread will depend on the quality of ventilation in the room.

In addition to the variables surrounding mask-wearing and ventilation, there is also a high degree of variability in individual coughs. “Each time we cough, we may emit a different amount of liquid, so if a person is infected with COVID-19, they could be emitting lots of virus particles or very few, and because of the turbulence they spread differently for every cough,” said Trivedi.

“Even if I expel the same number of droplets every time I cough, because the flow is turbulent, there are fluctuations,” said Mastorakos. “If I’m coughing, fluctuations in velocity, temperature and humidity mean that the amount someone gets at the two-metre mark can be very different each time.”

The researchers say that while the two-metre rule is an effective and easy-to-remember message for the public, it isn’t a mark of safety, given the large number of variables associated with an airborne virus. Vaccination, ventilation and masks – while not 100% effective – are vital for containing the virus.

“We’re all desperate to see the back of this pandemic, but we strongly recommend that people keep wearing masks in indoor spaces such as offices, classrooms and shops,” said Mastorakos. “There’s no good reason to expose yourself to this risk as long as the virus is with us.”

The research team are continuing this research with similar simulations for spaces such as lecture rooms that can help assess the risk as people spend more time indoors.

Mastorakos is a Fellow of Fitzwilliam College, Cambridge. The research was supported in part by the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EPSRC), part of UK Research and Innovation (UKRI).

Reference:
Shrey Trivedi et al. ‘Estimates of the stochasticity of droplet dispersion by a cough.’ Physics of Fluids (2021). DOI: 10.1063/5.0070528

The University is delighted to have been awarded two significant grants by the Office for Students (OfS) and Research England (RE) to deliver innovative and ambitious programmes designed to improve the admission of students from under-represented minority ethnic backgrounds into the highest level of postgraduate education (notably postgraduate research or doctoral study undertaken as PhDs or DPhils).

Across the Higher Education sector the proportion of students from minority ethnic cohorts who continue into initial postgraduate study is lower than for White students, and the gap is even greater in doctoral study. The difference is particularly marked for Black British, British Pakistani and British Bangladeshi students. These gaps ultimately mean fewer people from minority ethnic backgrounds progress into academia as a career, resulting in fewer professors with these heritages.

A grant of £800,000 will be shared between the Universities of Cambridge and Oxford enabling the two institutions to work together in a ground-breaking collaboration to develop and test a range of new admissions practices and systems designed to transform selection processes for postgraduate research. A set of new selection model prototypes that build on world-leading inclusive recruitment practices will be tested in a total of 16 volunteer departments, eight in each University, and will range from simple and efficient solutions like contextual flags to models that could revolutionise pathways into academic research. Among areas to be considered will be the extent to which systems need to adapt better to take account of different student pathways and trajectories, how, and when to apply, and the availability of support through the transition from undergraduate to postgraduate study.

Professor Graham Virgo, Senior Pro-Vice-Chancellor at the University of Cambridge, said:

“We are really pleased to be partnering with the University of Oxford, and delighted that this OfS/RE funding competition has brought about the opportunity to share data and current practice so openly. We feel this is indicative of a wider desire across the sector to collaborate to bring about transformational change in representation in postgraduate study.”

The aim is to halve the current ‘offer gap’ in pilot sites by the end of 2025, with an aspiration to eliminate the gap altogether within one school generation (by 2035). To drive the initial four year project, the two Universities will create four new posts. A range of stakeholders will be consulted at every stage. Included in the programme is a combined Cambridge-Oxford Student Panel. It is intended that the programme will develop a range of new, fair postgraduate admissions processes and tools for use throughout the Higher Education sector.  

Dr Katherine Powlesland, Postgraduate Widening Participation Manager at the University of Cambridge, said:

“By the time many students from underrepresented ethnic groups come to apply for postgraduate research study, they have often chosen pathways that inadvertently may have made it harder for them to access postgraduate research and funding, because of certain established selection practices. We want to find ways to make admissions systems flex better – thinking imaginatively about pre-requisites, really interrogating the inclusivity of our systems, asking the right questions so we can spot and support the best talent – and also to think radically about innovative inclusive recruitment. From the postgraduate communities of Britain’s leading research universities come the experts of tomorrow: the decision-makers and advisors on climate change, on educational policy, on social justice. We need these researchers to represent the widest range of lived experience possible, so that, ultimately, all voices can be heard and no perspective goes unseen.”

Martin Williams, Pro-Vice-Chancellor for Education at the University of Oxford, said:

“We’re delighted that our joint bid with the University of Cambridge to the OfS/Research England competition to improve access to postgraduate research study for under-represented students has been successful. The University (of Oxford) has taken significant steps in recognising the issue of graduate access in recent years, and this has become a strategic priority building on the work that been done at undergraduate level for years.” 

Cambridge’s second successful bid to the same funding competition is a collaboration with University College London and City University and will offer paid summer research internships for students from under-represented ethnic groups.

Dr Powlesland added: “We also know there is a lot we could do further upstream to support ethnic minority students to make successful applications for postgraduate research study. We are delighted that, with the support of the Office for Students and Research England, we are also able to partner with UCL and City on a really exciting project to deliver undergraduate summer research internships. Cambridge will be offering at least 72 paid internships over three years to Black British, British Bangladeshi, and British Pakistani undergraduates as part of the collaboration. We are excited to be pushing for real change in minority ethnic representation in academic research.’

The University of Cambridge has made significant improvements over the last five years in diversifying its undergraduate population so that it is more reflective of UK society as a whole. The work in this area has not just been focused on numbers but on improving student experience too. That’s why the Black Advisory Hub was established. As part of this project, new ways of assessing applicants for postgraduate study will be examined, and the University will seek to overturn any systemic barriers that may exist. Today’s postgraduates are, after all, tomorrow’s experts in their respective fields.

How is it that a chef can control their knife to fillet a fish or peel a grape and can wield a cleaver just as efficiently as a paring knife? Even those of us less proficient in the kitchen learn to skilfully handle an astonishing number of different objects throughout our lives, from shoelaces to tennis rackets.

This ability to continuously acquire new skills, without forgetting or degrading old ones, comes naturally to humans but is a major challenge even for today’s most advanced artificial intelligence systems.

Now, scientists from the University of Cambridge and Columbia University (USA) have developed and experimentally verified a new mathematical theory that explains how the human brain achieves this feat. Called the COntextual INference (COIN) model, it suggests that identifying the current context is key to learning how to move our bodies.

The model describes a mechanism in the brain that is constantly trying to figure out the current context. The theory suggests that these continuously changing beliefs about context determine how to use existing memories — and whether to form new ones. The results are reported in the journal Nature.

“Imagine playing tennis with a different racket than usual or switching from tennis to squash,” said co-senior author Dr Daniel Wolpert from Columbia University. “Our theory explores how your brain adjusts to these situations and whether to treat them as distinct contexts.”

According to the COIN model, the brain maintains a repertoire of motor memories, each associated with the context in which it was created, such as playing squash versus tennis. Even for a single swing of the racket, the brain can draw upon many memories, each in proportion to how much the brain believes it is currently in the context in which that memory was created. 

This goes against the traditional view that only one memory is used at a time. To improve performance on the next swing, the brain also updates all memories, once again depending on its belief about the current context. When the context of the movement is judged to be new (the first time we play squash after years of tennis, for example), the brain automatically creates a new memory for that context. This ensures that we do not overwrite previously established memories, such as the memory for playing tennis.

This research may lead to better physical therapy strategies to help people with injuries use their bodies again. Often the improvements seen in the setting of a physical therapist's office do not transfer to improvements in the real world.

“With a better understanding of how context affects motor learning, you can think about how to nudge the brain to generalise what it learns to contexts outside of the physical therapy session,” said first author Dr James Heald. “A better understanding of the basic mechanisms that underlie the context dependence of memory and learning could have therapeutic consequences in this area.”

“What I find exciting is that the principles of the COIN model may also generalise to many other forms of learning and memory, not just memories underlying our movement,” said co-senior author Professor Máté Lengyel from Cambridge’s Department of Engineering. “For example, the spontaneous recurrence of seemingly forgotten memories, often triggered by a change in our surroundings, has been observed both in motor learning and in post-traumatic stress disorder.”

COINing a new model

Practice with a tennis racket, and the brain forms motor memories of how you moved your arm and the rest of your body that improve your serve over time. But learning isn’t as simple as just making better memories to make movements more precise, the researchers said. Otherwise, a tennis player’s serves might improve to the point at which they never hit a ball out of bounds. The real world and our nervous systems are complex, and the brain has to deal with a lot of variability.

How does the brain distinguish this noise — these random fluctuations — from new situations? And how does it understand that a slightly lighter tennis racket can still be operated using previous tennis racket memories? But that a table tennis paddle is an entirely different kind of object that requires starting from scratch?

The answer, according to the COIN model, may be Bayesian inference, a mathematical technique used to deal with uncertainty. This method statistically weighs new evidence in light of prior experience in order to update one's beliefs in a changeable world. In the COIN model, a context is a simplifying assumption that, in a given set of circumstances, certain actions are more likely to lead to some consequences than others. The new theory's acceptance of the role that uncertainty plays in motor learning is similar to how quantum physics views the universe in terms of probabilities instead of certainties, the scientists noted.

Getting a handle on the theory

The researchers put the COIN model to the test on data from previous experiments, as well as new experiments, in which volunteers interacted with a robotic handle. Participants learned to manipulate the handle to reach a target while the handle pushed back in different ways.

Volunteers who spent time learning to operate the handle as it pushed to the left, for instance, had more trouble operating the handle when it changed behaviour and pushed to the right, as compared to volunteers who started with a handle pushing to the right. The COIN model explained this effect, called anterograde interference.

“The longer you learn one task, the less likely you are to move into a new context with the second task,” said Wolpert. “You’re still forming a motor memory of the second task, but you’re not using it yet because your brain is still stuck back in the first context.”

The model also predicted that a learned skill can re-emerge even after subsequent training seems to have erased it. Called spontaneous recovery, this re-emergence is seen in many other forms of learning besides motor learning. For example, spontaneous recovery has been linked with challenges in treating post-traumatic stress disorder, where contexts can trigger traumatic memories to spontaneously recur.

Scientists usually explain spontaneous recovery by invoking two different learning mechanisms. In one, memories learned quickly are forgotten quickly, and in the other, memories learned slowly are forgotten slowly, and can thus reappear. In contrast, the COIN model suggests there is just one mechanism for learning instead of two separate ones, and that memories that apparently vanished may be ready to pop back with the right trigger: the belief that the context has re-emerged. The researchers confirmed this in their lab with new experiments.

Máté Lengyel is a Fellow of Churchill College. The research was supported by the European Research Council, the Wellcome Trust, the Royal Society, the National Institutes of Health, and the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council.

Reference:
James B Heald, Máté Lengyel and Daniel M Wolpert. ‘Contextual inference underlies the learning of sensorimotor repertoires.’ Nature (2021). DOI: 10.1038/s41586-021-04129-3

Adapted from a Columbia University press release.

The soft-yet-strong material, developed by a team at the University of Cambridge, looks and feels like a squishy jelly, but acts like an ultra-hard, shatterproof glass when compressed, despite its high water content.

The non-water portion of the material is a network of polymers held together by reversible on/off interactions that control the material’s mechanical properties. This is the first time that such significant resistance to compression has been incorporated into a soft material.

The ‘super jelly’ could be used for a wide range of potential applications, including soft robotics, bioelectronics or even as a cartilage replacement for biomedical use. The results are reported in the journal Nature Materials.

The way materials behave – whether they’re soft or firm, brittle or strong – is dependent upon their molecular structure. Stretchy, rubber-like hydrogels have lots of interesting properties that make them a popular subject of research – such as their toughness and self-healing capabilities – but making hydrogels that can withstand being compressed without getting crushed is a challenge.

“In order to make materials with the mechanical properties we want, we use crosslinkers, where two molecules are joined through a chemical bond,” said Dr Zehuan Huang from the Yusuf Hamied Department of Chemistry, the study’s first author. “We use reversible crosslinkers to make soft and stretchy hydrogels, but making a hard and compressible hydrogel is difficult and designing a material with these properties is completely counterintuitive.”

Working in the lab of Professor Oren A. Scherman, who led the research, the team used barrel-shaped molecules called cucurbiturils to make a hydrogel that can withstand compression. The cucurbituril is the crosslinking molecule that holds two guest molecules in its cavity – like a molecular handcuff. The researchers designed guest molecules that prefer to stay inside the cavity for longer than normal, which keeps the polymer network tightly linked, allowing for it to withstand compression.

“At 80% water content, you’d think it would burst apart like a water balloon, but it doesn’t: it stays intact and withstands huge compressive forces,” said Scherman, Director of the University’s Melville Laboratory for Polymer Synthesis. “The properties of the hydrogel are seemingly at odds with each other.”

“The way the hydrogel can withstand compression was surprising, it wasn’t like anything we’ve seen in hydrogels,” said co-author Dr Jade McCune, also from the Department of Chemistry. “We also found that the compressive strength could be easily controlled through simply changing the chemical structure of the guest molecule inside the handcuff.”

To make their glass-like hydrogels, the team chose specific guest molecules for the handcuff. Altering the molecular structure of guest molecules within the handcuff allowed the dynamics of the material to ‘slow down’ considerably, with the mechanical performance of the final hydrogel ranging from rubber-like to glass-like states.

“People have spent years making rubber-like hydrogels, but that’s just half of the picture,” said Scherman. “We’ve revisited traditional polymer physics and created a new class of materials that span the whole range of material properties from rubber-like to glass-like, completing the full picture.”

The researchers used the material to make a hydrogel pressure sensor for real-time monitoring of human motions, including standing, walking and jumping.

“To the best of our knowledge, this is the first time that glass-like hydrogels have been made. We’re not just writing something new into the textbooks, which is really exciting, but we’re opening a new chapter in the area of high-performance soft materials,” said Huang.

Researchers from the Scherman lab are currently working to further develop these glass-like materials towards biomedical and bioelectronic applications in collaboration with experts from engineering and materials science. The research was funded in part by the Leverhulme Trust and a Marie Skłodowska-Curie Fellowship. Oren Scherman is a Fellow of Jesus College.

Reference:
Zehuan Huang et al. ‘Highly compressible glass-like supramolecular polymer networks.’ Nature Materials (2021). DOI: 10.1038/s41563-021-01124-x

Developed in partnership with students and digital agency Battenhall, the campaign’s second phase– launched in 2020 - features a series of videos specifically created to encourage more applications from UK Bangladeshi and Pakistani students - two of the most underrepresented groups at the University of Cambridge.

The campaign won the award for ‘Best Social Media Diversity and Inclusivity Program or Initiative’ in The Drum Awards for Social Media in 2021, and separately won ‘Best use of digital from the education sector’, as well as the Grand Prix, in the Digital Impact Awards 2021.

Get In Cambridge was also shortlisted in the Asian Media Awards 2021.

In the films, 10 Cambridge students, who went to state schools in London, Manchester and Bradford before arriving at Cambridge to study subjects including English, History and Classics, compare the perceptions they had of the University as sixth formers with the reality of their lived experience. The films follow them in lectures, prayer spaces and at University cultural and religious society events, as they make it clear that concerns over cultural barriers can be overcome at Cambridge, religious practices can be observed, and people don’t have to change who they are to fit in.

The series – funded philanthropically - also includes six ‘Myth vs Reality’ videos that, among others, challenge the myth that Cambridge is more expensive to study at than other universities, and highlight the opportunity of being able to apply to a women-only college.

Get In Cambridge
Cambridge launched social media campaign 'Get In Cambridge' in 2019 to help increase diversity in the undergraduate body. Cambridge alumna and YouTube vlogger Courtney Daniella fronted the first phase of the campaign, and in five films described her journey to Cambridge from her single-parent family on a North London council estate. 

“Two years on from the death of Saskia Jones and Jack Merritt, our thoughts are with their families, with their friends, and with all those Cambridge colleagues who endured the horror of the day’s tragic events. Today our University community joins in remembrance of two bright young people whose legacy must continue to push us all to strive for a world that is more humane and just.”

Professor Stephen J Toope, Vice-Chancellor

“The second anniversary of the tragedy at Fishmongers Hall brings renewed heartache and grief for all who love and miss Jack Merritt and Saskia Jones, and whose lives have been impacted by the consequences of the violence that day. As a community of learners we continue to stand in solidarity against violence and the harm that it causes, spurred on by the spirit of Jack and Saskia, determined to play our part in building towards a world where there is less harm and more justice for all.”

Dr Ruth Armstrong, Senior Research Associate, University of Cambridge; Founder and Director, Learning Together

“This is a day to hold all those impacted by the tragic deaths of Saskia Jones and Jack Merritt in mind, especially their families and friends, present and past, and far and near students and staff of the Institute of Criminology. It is also a time to remember, with gratitude, Jack and Saskia, and their creative and positive contributions to criminal justice.”

Professor Loraine Gelsthorpe, Director, Institute of Criminology

Building on research supported by The Mark Foundation for Cancer Research and Cancer Research UK, the collaboration aims to address the problems of fragmented or siloed data and disconnected patient information, which is challenging for clinicians to manage effectively and can prevent cancer patients receiving optimal treatment.

“Thanks to ever-improving technologies, we now generate increasing amounts of complex data for each patient with cancer,” said Professor Richard Gilbertson, Director of the Cancer Research UK Cambridge Centre, and Head of the Department of Oncology at the University of Cambridge. "These include multiple imaging scans, digital pathology, genomic data, advanced blood tests and treatment information. Bringing all this data together to make precise and informed decisions for patients can be hard. We often do this inefficiently and miss important connections between the data."

This new application would be designed using advanced software engineering and machine learning methods to integrate a variety of patient data including clinical, imaging and genomic data - from diagnosis through every stage of treatment - into one single location. The aim is to offer all medical teams involved in a patient’s cancer care - medical oncologists, clinical oncologists, surgeons, radiologists, pathologists, clinical nurse specialists and more - simultaneous access to the necessary data and information to allow the medical team to plan the best, most personalised treatment for each of their patients.

The application is expected to be evaluated for ovarian cancer initially in Cambridge and the goal is to evaluate it across the UK, and beyond. Ovarian cancer is often difficult to treat as most patients present with advanced disease. Although initially 70-80% of patients will respond well to chemotherapy, ultimately most develop chemotherapy resistance leading to treatment failure.  The application may help clinicians have better visibility on how the patient respond to treatment, thus helping them more effectively identify when treatment may require adjustment. If the application is successfully developed, our vision is for it to be expanded for use in breast and kidney cancer patients.

“Healthcare professionals can struggle to easily find and interpret the many different types of patient data information they need to make the best clinical decisions,” said Dr Ben Newton, GM Oncology at GE Healthcare. “Bringing these multiple data streams into a single interface could enable clinicians to make fast, informed and highly personalised treatment decisions throughout a patient’s cancer care pathway.”

Two Addenbrooke’s cancer clinicians aiming to evaluate the application to help patients are consultant oncologist Professor James Brenton, professor of Ovarian Cancer Medicine and a senior group leader at the Cancer Research UK Cambridge Institute; and consultant radiologist Professor Evis Sala, professor of Oncological Imaging, University of Cambridge.

“Aggregating and analysing the substantial amounts of data available would help address an unmet need. Ovarian cancer is an important and complex disease with poor outcomes, and we believe this application would help us deal with its complexity. Eventually, we hope to be able to better understand the disease and therefore improve treatment and outcomes for patients,” says Professor Brenton, who co-leads the Mark Foundation Institute for Integrated Cancer Medicine (MFICM) at the University of Cambridge.

“If we can aggregate and integrate relevant data along the care pathway, and visualize the output, it may ultimately lead to clinicians making better-informed decisions and better care.” adds Professor Sala who also co-leads the MFICM at the University of Cambridge.

“The team aims to transform the delivery of cancer patient care by integrating multiple data streams together into a single platform that can be accessed simultaneously by clinicians, patients and multi-disciplinary teams from tertiary and regional hospitals.”

The development work will be underpinned by GE Healthcare’s Edison platform to integrate data from diverse sources, such as electronic health records and radiology information systems, imaging and other medical device data.

The method, called transformational machine learning (TML), was developed by a team from the UK, Sweden, India and Netherlands. It learns from multiple problems and improves performance while it learns.

TML could accelerate the identification and production of new drugs by improving the machine learning systems which are used to identify them. The results are reported in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

Most types of machine learning (ML) use labelled examples, and these examples are almost always represented in the computer using intrinsic features, such as the colour or shape of an object. The computer then forms general rules that relate the features to the labels.

“It’s sort of like teaching a child to identify different animals: this is a rabbit, this is a donkey and so on,” said Professor Ross King from Cambridge’s Department of Chemical Engineering and Biotechnology, who led the research. “If you teach a machine learning algorithm what a rabbit looks like, it will be able to tell whether an animal is or isn’t a rabbit. This is the way that most machine learning works – it deals with problems one at a time.”

However, this is not the way that human learning works: instead of dealing with a single issue at a time, we get better at learning because we have learned things in the past.

“To develop TML, we applied this approach to machine learning, and developed a system that learns information from previous problems it has encountered in order to better learn new problems,” said King, who is also a Fellow at The Alan Turing Institute. “Where a typical ML system has to start from scratch when learning to identify a new type of animal - say a kitten - TML can use the similarity to existing animals: kittens are cute like rabbits, but don’t have long ears like rabbits and donkeys. This makes TML a much more powerful approach to machine learning.”

The researchers demonstrated the effectiveness of their idea on thousands of problems from across science and engineering. They say it shows particular promise in the area of drug discovery, where this approach speeds up the process by checking what other ML models say about a particular molecule. A typical ML approach will search for drug molecules of a particular shape, for example. TML instead uses the connection of the drugs to other drug discovery problems.

“I was surprised how well it works – better than anything else we know for drug design,” said King. “It’s better at choosing drugs than humans are – and without the best science, we won’t get the best results.”

Reference:
Ivan Olier et al. ‘Transformational Machine Learning: Learning How to Learn from Many Related Scientific Problems.’ Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (2021). DOI: 10.1073/pnas.2108013118

The study, published in Nature Communications and led by Cambridge Earth Sciences’ Dr Giulio Lampronti, observed reactions as materials were pulverised inside a miniaturised grinding mill — providing new detail on the structure and formation of crystals.

Knowledge of the structure of these newly-formed materials, which have been subjected to considerable pressures, helps scientists unravel the kinetics involved in mechanochemistry. But they are rarely able to observe it at the level of detail seen in this new work.

The study also involved Dr Ana Belenguer and Professor Jeremy Sanders from Cambridge’s Yusuf Hamied Department of Chemistry.

Mechanochemistry is touted as a ‘green’ tool because it can make new materials without using bulk solvents that are harmful to the environment. Despite decades of research, the process behind these reactions remains poorly understood.

To learn more about mechanochemical reactions, scientists usually observe chemical transformations in real time, as ingredients are churned and ground in a mill — like mixing a cake — to create complex chemical components and materials.

Once milling has stopped, however, the material can keep morphing into something completely different, so scientists need to record the reaction with as little disturbance as possible — using an imaging technique called time-resolved in-situ analysis to essentially capture a movie of the reactions. But, until now, this method has only offered a grainy picture of the unfolding reactions.

By shrinking the mills and taking the sample size down from several hundred milligrams to less than ten milligrams, Lampronti and the team were able to more accurately capture the size and microscopic structure of crystals using a technique called X-ray diffraction.

The down-scaled analysis could also allow scientists to study smaller, safer, quantities of toxic or expensive materials. “We realised that this miniaturised setup had several other important advantages, aside from better structural analysis,” said Lampronti. “The smaller sample size also means that more challenging analyses of scarce and toxic materials becomes possible, and it’s also exciting because it opens up the study of mechanochemistry to all areas of chemistry and materials science.”

“The combination of new miniature jars designed by Ana, and the experimental and analytical techniques introduced by Giulio, promise to transform our ability to follow and understand solid-state reactions as they happen,” said Sanders.

The team observed a range of reactions with their new miniaturised setup, covering organic and inorganic materials as well as metal-organic materials — proving their technique could be applied to a wide range of industry problems. One of the materials they studied, ZIF-8, could be used for carbon capture and storage, because of its ability to capture large amounts of CO2. The new view on these materials meant they were able to uncover previously undetected structural details, including distortion of the crystal lattice in the ZIF-8 framework.

Lampronti says their new developments could not only become routine practice for the study of mechanochemistry, but also offer up completely new directions for research in this influential field, “Our method allows for much faster kinetics, and will open up doors for previously inaccessible reactions — this could really change the playing field of mechanochemistry as we know it.”

Reference:
Giulio I. Lampronti et al. ‘Changing the game of time resolved X-ray diffraction on the mechanochemistry playground by downsizing.’ Nature Communications (2021). DOI: 10.1038/s41467-021-26264-1

A new interactive graphic developed by UK researchers and published by The BMJ will help people decide what to do in everyday situations to protect themselves, and others, from COVID-19.

Based on estimates provided by 26 international experts, it shows the different pathways that may be taken by the virus that causes COVID-19 when it transfers between two people.

It is designed to help illustrate the risks of catching COVID-19 in different scenarios - and what can be done to reduce those risks - based on the available evidence.

As well as the areas of scientific consensus, it also conveys the uncertainties and the disagreement that exists between experts about how the virus behaves, how it is transmitted, and how we can best reduce the likelihood of transmission through personal and social measures.

The researchers say the tool should support decision-makers and the public to make informed decisions about how to reduce virus transmission in different contexts, such as how to make a workplace or a public area as safe as it can be while still being open and functional.

To create the tool, the researchers, led by the University of Cambridge, consulted 26 experts from a range of disciplines and countries, asking them for every value needed to underpin the graphic.

These included the importance of different virus transmission routes (eg. small and large airborne droplets, contact with contaminated surfaces) during a range of activities (eg. talking, coughing, exercising, eating) in different environments (eg. outdoors or indoors in different sized rooms, with or without ventilation).

They also gathered estimates on the importance of different protective measures, such as face coverings and screens, physical distancing, hand hygiene, surface cleaning, in reducing transmission.

Analysis of all the values showed that airborne transmission routes were most important in almost all situations, while face coverings, especially when worn by an infected person as a form of source control, were the most important mitigation measure.

But importantly, all routes were considered to play a part in transmission, and simple measures such as physical distancing, hand washing, and respiratory hygiene all made a useful contribution.

The researchers found important evidence gaps and differences in opinion among experts around several variables, including the role of aerosol transmission; the effects of different kinds of masks on inhaled aerosols; and the effects of face coverings on transfer from hand to eyes, nose, and mouth.

“Everyone has been keen to know how much difference each possible action we’ve been told about makes, and finally we have been able to gather together enough knowledge from experts from around the world and in a range of fields to answer those questions,” said co-lead author Dr Alexandra Freeman from Cambridge’s Winton Centre for Risk & Evidence Communication.

She added: “The tool is interactive, so that you can explore the scenarios that are most relevant to you, whether it’s because you sing in a choir, or want to know about the risks of eating in a small restaurant. How much difference would it make if you opened the windows, or cleaned the surfaces? Have a look and find out.”

“It is all too easy to focus on just a single route of spread for COVID and forget about all the others,” said co-author Harry Rutter from the University of Bath. “One of the ways a tool like this can help is by making it clear that all the transmission routes matter, in different proportions in different contexts. The fact that one of those routes - airborne transmission - is the main one in most situations doesn’t mean that we can ignore the others.”

The authors acknowledge some study limitations and say generating robust evidence on the complex and highly contingent routes of COVID-19 virus transmission is not straightforward. But they say they hope their approach will prove helpful to those faced with the challenge of communicating complex, imprecise, and uncertain evidence in the future.

The research was supported by the PROTECT COVID-19 National Core Study on transmission and environment (managed by the Health and Safety Executive on behalf of HM Government), and the David and Claudia Harding Foundation. Cambridge co-authors on the paper also included Dr Shaun Fitzgerald from the Department of Engineering and Professor David Spiegelhalter from the Winton Centre for Risk and Evidence Communication.

Reference:
Alexandra LJ Freeman et al. ‘Expert elicitation on the relative importance of possible SARS-CoV-2 transmission routes and the effectiveness of mitigations.’ BMJ Open (2021). DOI: 10.1136/ bmjopen-2021-050869

Harry Rutter et al. ‘Visualising SARS-CoV-2 transmission routes and mitigations.’ BMJ (2021). DOI: 10.1136/bmj-2021-065312

Adapted from a BMJ press release. 

Detecting light beyond the visible red range of our eyes is hard to do, because infrared light carries so little energy compared to ambient heat at room temperature. This obscures infrared light unless specialised detectors are chilled to very low temperatures, which is both expensive and energy-intensive.

Now researchers led by the University of Cambridge have demonstrated a new concept in detecting infrared light, showing how to convert it into visible light, which is easily detected.

In collaboration with colleagues from the UK, Spain and Belgium, the team used a single layer of molecules to absorb the mid-infrared light inside their vibrating chemical bonds. These shaking molecules can donate their energy to visible light that they encounter, ‘upconverting’ it to emissions closer to the blue end of the spectrum, which can then be detected by modern visible-light cameras.

The results, reported in the journal Science, open up new low-cost ways to sense contaminants, track cancers, check gas mixtures, and remotely sense the outer universe.

The challenge faced by the researchers was to make sure the quaking molecules met the visible light quickly enough. “This meant we had to trap light really tightly around the molecules, by squeezing it into crevices surrounded by gold,” said first author Angelos Xomalis from Cambridge’s Cavendish Laboratory.

The researchers devised a way to sandwich single molecular layers between a mirror and tiny chunks of gold, only possible with ‘meta-materials’ that can twist and squeeze light into volumes a billion times smaller than a human hair.

“Trapping these different colours of light at the same time was hard, but we wanted to find a way that wouldn’t be expensive and could easily produce practical devices,” said co-author Dr Rohit Chikkaraddy from the Cavendish Laboratory, who devised the experiments based on his simulations of light in these building blocks.

“It’s like listening to slow-rippling earthquake waves by colliding them with a violin string to get a high whistle that’s easy to hear, and without breaking the violin,” said Professor Jeremy Baumberg of the NanoPhotonics Centre at Cambridge’s Cavendish Laboratory, who led the research.

The researchers emphasise that while it is early days, there are many ways to optimise the performance of these inexpensive molecular detectors, which then can access rich information in this window of the spectrum.

From astronomical observations of galactic structures to sensing human hormones or early signs of invasive cancers, many technologies can benefit from this new detector advance.

The research was conducted by a team from the University of Cambridge, KU Leuven, University College London (UCL), the Faraday Institution, and Universitat Politècnica de València.

The research is funded as part of a UK Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EPSRC) investment in the Cambridge NanoPhotonics Centre, as well as the European Research Council (ERC), Trinity College Cambridge and KU Leuven.

Jeremy Baumberg is a Fellow of Jesus College, Cambridge. 

Reference:
Angelos Xomalis et al. ‘Detecting mid-infrared light by molecular frequency upconversion with dual-wavelength hybrid nanoantennas’, Science (2021). DOI: 10.1126/science.abk2593

The first phase was aimed at UK Black undergraduate students, and the second at British Pakistani and Bangladeshi students. 

Grants ranging from £12,000 to £20,000 have been given to nine postgraduates studying for their Master’s to cover outstanding fees and living costs. And additional awards of £1,750 have been given to 21 undergraduates to help with maintenance costs. More than £180,000 has been awarded in total.  

Senior Pro-Vice-Chancellor, Professor Graham Virgo, said:

“The Get In campaign has been successful in breaking down misguided perceptions of Cambridge among under-represented groups of students who may have been put off applying. The videos that were produced for social media reached new audiences of young people and enabled us to say directly to them that Cambridge is a place where you can come to and thrive. Thanks to the generosity of the donors backing the campaign we’re now able to help some of those students with their living costs and ease the financial concerns they may have. We know there’s a challenge in encouraging more students from these backgrounds into postgraduate education, so it’s particularly pleasing to see awards being made to those embarking on their Master’s courses.”

Launched in 2019, with the support of a leading group of alumni, the Get In Cambridge campaign has recently won two Digital Impact Awards as well as the Drum Award for Best Social Media and Inclusivity Programme.

One of the students benefitting from an award is Saif Mohammed, who is studying for a Master’s in Theology, Religion and the Philosophy of Religion. Originally from Bradford, he studied for his first degree at the University of Essex and had doubts as to whether Cambridge was the right place for him:

“I am filled with gratitude for this opportunity. I hope that it raises the confidence of other prospective students like me that postgraduate studies and enrolment at Cambridge is really possible, despite any seemingly daunting extrinsic barriers to entry. Watching other students from similar backgrounds to mine in the Get In videos assured me that I am not alone on this journey, and that I wouldn't be totally out of place.”

Zaynab Ahmed was one of the students featured in last year’s videos produced for the campaign. She is now the Access, Education and Participation Officer at the Cambridge Students’ Union:

“Having been involved with Get In Cambridge, it’s incredible to see it evolve from a social media campaign to life-changing funding for students from minority ethnic communities that are under-represented in Higher Education. It’s especially exciting to see dedicated funding for Master’s students as a lack of postgraduate funding means many students are unable to take up offers to study at Cambridge. Going forward, I would love to see Get In commit to more targeted access and outreach work for students.”

The donors who have given money to the Get In campaign know first-hand about the importance of ensuring higher education remains accessible to all. Most are Cambridge graduates. Iain Drayton, now co-head of Goldman Sachs’ Investment Banking Division in Asia (ex Japan) said:

“At university I learned a lot from talking with people who were majoring in other subjects, and from listening to their differing approaches to problems, challenges and issues. So in my view, encouraging people from different backgrounds to come together is fundamental to bringing diverse perspectives to bear, and to driving new, original and innovative thought.”

The University of Cambridge has made significant improvements in recent years in diversifying its undergraduate population. It recognises there is work to do in ensuring its postgraduate community is also representative of wider UK society and has announced it’ll be embarking on a four year project, in partnership with the University of Oxford, with the aim of removing any systemic barriers that may exist within the postgraduate applications process.

The image shows undergraduate students who took part in the second phase of the social media campaign in 2020

Worldwide, drunk driving is a major problem, despite decades of health promotion activities. Road traffic injuries have become the leading killer of people aged five to 29 years, and recently, the World Health Organization has said that alcohol-related traffic accidents are one of the major causes. In 2019, between 210 and 250 people were killed in accidents in Britain where at least one driver was over the drink-drive limit, the highest level since 2009.

Drinking alcohol causes significant impairment to our motor function, and the more we drink, the worse this becomes. Drunk drivers may struggle to keep their vehicle in lane and have slow reaction times, as well as being more likely to take risks.

In research published today in the Harm Reduction Journal, a team of researchers from Witten/Herdecke University and the University of Cambridge studied how accurately participants were able to estimate their fitness to drive after drinking alcohol.

Ninety students (average age 24 years old) took part in an experiment on two separate days. Participants were split into two groups: a study group and a control group. Both groups consumed either beer or wine or both until they reached a maximum breath alcohol concentration (BrAC) of 0.11%.

The research was carried out in Germany, where the legal driving limit is a BrAC of 0.05% (in England and Wales, the level is 0.08%).

In the study group, participants were told at the start that when they reached a BrAC of 0.05%, they would be switched from beer to wine or vice versa, though it was not explicitly explained that this was the legal driving limit.

The researchers monitored each participant’s breath alcohol concentration using breathalysers. With each measurement, they asked the participants to estimate their own breath alcohol concentration. All participants were asked to come forward when they thought they had reached the legal driving limit.

The team found that on the first study day, more than a third (39%) of participants who believed they had reached the legal driving limit had in fact already exceeded this threshold. On the second day this proportion increased to more than half (53%).

Dr Kai Hensel from Witten/Herdecke University and the University of Cambridge, who led the study, said: “In countries with legal alcohol limits, it’s usually the driver who makes a judgement about how much they’ve drunk and how fit they are to drive. But as we’ve shown, we are not always good at making this judgement. As many as one in two people in our study underestimated how drunk they were – and this can have devastating consequences.”

The researchers also noticed that participants became poorer at estimating their BrAC level the drunker they became. “This could have serious consequences in England and Wales, where the legal driving limit is higher, as it suggests that a significant number of people might misjudge how drunk they are and consider themselves fit to drive when in fact they have a potentially dangerously high level of alcohol in their blood,” added Dr Hensel.

To see whether people were able to improve their ability to estimate how drunk they are, the researchers compared the volunteers’ self-estimation of having reached the legal driving limit between the two study days. For the study group participants were better able to estimate how drink they were on the second day, but this was not the case for the control group.

Dr Hensel added: “Drinking and driving is a major risk fact for road traffic accidents. Anything that can be done to reduce these numbers is worth trying. With guidance, our participants were able to improve their judgement. It could be that pop-up stalls set up around drinking establishments to help people understand their breath alcohol concentration might help.

“Really, the best advice is that if you’re driving, just don’t drink. But if you really do feel like a drink, then look into your own alcohol tolerance. This differs from one person to the next, depending on your sex, weight and age, and there are some reliable apps out there that can help guide you.”

Carlsberg donated 420 litres of beer to be utilised for research purposes only, but had no role in the design, conduct, or analyses of the study.

Reference
Köchling, J et al. The hazardous (mis)perception of Self-estimated Alcohol intoxication and Fitness to drivE – an avoidable health risk: the SAFE randomised trial. Harm Reduction Journal; 7 Dec 2021; DOI: 10.1186/s12954-021-00567-4

Major scientific breakthroughs deepen our understanding of nature and ourselves. Such discoveries have the potential to transform our everyday lives.  

Yet the same science that holds promise for progress often raises concerns and questions for society.  

Who bears responsibility for the societal and ethical implications of scientific discoveries? When and how should wider public views be brought into discussion about the direction of scientific research, its benefits and risks? How can members of the public, ethicists and scientists be empowered to take part in meaningful and constructive dialogue? And what can we do to help researchers negotiate a path through these complexities? 

The new Kavli Centre for Ethics, Science, and the Public at the University of Cambridge will tackle these critical questions.  

Announcing the launch today, Professor Anna Middleton, inaugural Director of the Kavli Centre for Ethics, Science, and the Public at the University of Cambridge, said: “From the discovery of DNA to the development of the first AI, and to the sequencing of 20% of the world’s COVID-19 virus today, Cambridge is at the cutting edge of science, and has been for centuries. This is truly a place where the big questions get explored. Through collaboration with experts in popular culture we will find the evidence base to drive conversations with everyday people around the ethical issues raised by science, so that all of us can share in decision making around the implications of science for society.” 

The Kavli Centre will foster global conversations and pursue fundamentally new ways to build and create new spaces and mechanisms for interaction on the ethical issues associated with scientific discovery. It will create a programme of innovative research and public engagement on broad scientific domains, initially focusing on three rapidly changing fields: genome editing, artificial intelligence and big data.  

The Centre is a unique collaboration between the University of Cambridge and Wellcome Connecting Science, with funding from The Kavli Foundation. Building on the close relationship between the University and Wellcome Connecting Science, it will work with international partners and have a global view. 

Cynthia Friend, President of the Kavli Foundation: “This is an exciting and innovative endeavour. Ensuring the public is meaningfully involved in ethical considerations born from scientific discovery is important. The vision, creativity, and global community of the Cambridge team impressed us.”  

Alongside inaugural Director Professor Anna Middleton, the Kavli Centre will be supported by Dr. Richard Milne as Deputy Director and Lead for Research, and Dr. Catherine Galloway as Lead for Innovation and Translation.  

The Kavli Centre for Ethics, Science, and the Public will be hosted within the University of Cambridge’s Faculty of Education as its primary base, with a physical presence at Wellcome Connecting Science premises on the Wellcome Genome Campus near Cambridge.  

Today also sees the launch of a sister Kavli Center for Ethics, Science, and the Public at UC Berkeley in the United States. With a similar mission but an independent programme to its Cambridge counterpart, the Berkeley centre will initially address artificial intelligence, genome editing and neuroscience. The two centres may collaborate on key projects or events.