Beetle Naturally Builds Photonic Crystals

esocid writes "Impeding the dream of ultrafast optical computers, we've been unable to build an ideal 'photonic crystal' to manipulate visible light, until now. University of Utah chemists have discovered that nature already has designed photonic crystals with the ideal, diamond-like structure: They are found in the shimmering, iridescent green scales of a beetle from Brazil. The beetle is an inch-long weevil named Lamprocyphus augustus. Bartl and Galusha now are trying to design a synthetic version of the beetle's photonic crystals, using scale material as a mold to make the crystals from a transparent semiconductor. The scales can't be used in technological devices because they are made of fingernail-like chitin, which is not stable enough for long-term use, is not semiconducting and doesn't bend light adequately. Ideal photonic crystals could be used to amplify light and thus make solar cells more efficient, to capture light that would catalyze chemical reactions, and to generate tiny laser beams that would serve as light sources on optical chips."

Been there, done that

[Anonymous Coward]

Bartl and Galusha now are trying to design a synthetic version of the beetle's photonic crystals, using scale material as a mold to make the crystals from a transparent semiconductor.

Man, I remember when I studied this in school. The crystals weren't lining up right no matter what I tried. Eventually I solved it by continuously rotating them during the growing stage, while simultaneously directing acoustic vibrations into their center. I called this the "Twist and Shout" method.

-- Jon Titor

Re:

[GaryOlson]

Galusha and Bartl used optical studies and theory to predict optical properties of the scales' structure. The prediction matched reality: green iridescence.

Mr. AC, how difficult would it be to theoretically change the structure to reflect a different wavelenth -- red for instance?

Been there, DUNG that

[sproketboy]

NT required.

Alternate Title...

[TheRedSeven]

Decades of computer debugging efforts wiped out by naturalist...

Re:

[Ed Avis]

'First actual case of bug being found'

Probably for the best....

[ejecta]

Well it's probably for the best that we can't simply use the scales else the poor little devils would likely be on the fast track of the endangered species list.

Re:

[Em Adespoton]

Well, they ARE weevils; we usually use pesticides on these critters. The bigger problem would be mass-breeding schemes gone awry and all the crops these things live on being wiped out as a result....

Re:Probably for the best....

[Hojima]

It's ironic because the ads by google on TFA are all offering pest control

Re:

[Hojima]

Well I don't have a gmail account, and I live in campus associated housing, so I'm pretty sure that the search results are as obscured as they can get considering I share an IP address with many people and I inherited the IP address of the prior inhabitant (and I reformat my drive quite frequently).

Re:

[somersault]

I live in campus associated housing, so I'm pretty sure that the search results are as obscured as they can get

Now you've just given away even more information! You obviously live in an infested campus! :p

Re:

[tepples]

Well, they ARE weevils

Weevils wobble but...

Re:

[Bruiser80]

Actually, the opposite would be true. If we were harvesting the scales off of these beetles, we would ensure that there were always enough. You don't see cows going on the endangered species list anytime soon, do you? ;-)

Re:

[ejecta]

Perhaps, or maybe the prevailing theory was that there would be enough of them that taking some wouldn't matter.

Eg: Endangered Elephants vs Ivory
Eg: Endangered Whales vs Blubbler/Whale Meat

Re:

[Kral_Blbec]

Except those ARE protected and the only people that harvest them do so illegally. I dont think anyone is suggesting to illegalize collecting crystals

Re:

[Boogaroo]

The reason elephants and whales endangered due to over-hunting is mainly because it is hard to raise them. Otherwise, we could have done the whole livestock thing with them too.
Even professionals at zoos have a hard time getting reliable elephant birth rates. Just sustaining them is a challenge.
Oh, and good luck with raising a blue whale in captivity.

Re:

[deroby]

Didn't Arther C Clarke write a book about that ?

(out for some wiki-searching...)

et voila : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Deep_Range [wikipedia.org]

I highly enjoyed reading that one, I'm surprised to learn it's that old.

Re:

[Amouth]

oh it's no problem.. i just claim the world's oceans as my pond for rasing the blue whale...

but then i don't like whale meat so i wouldn't farm them

Re:

[ejecta]

They only became protected after they were endangered however, it was perfectly legal to kill them previously.

Of note, it's still perfectly legal to kill whales, there's quota systems in place in various countries. Then you have countries like Japan who just disregard international law and sail down to Australian Territorial Waters to hunt whales.

Re:

[HTH NE1]

I don't think anyone is suggesting to illegalize collecting crystals

I hope not. Have you any idea how many video games would be affected by that?

Re:

[Anonymous Coward]

The exact opposite is true.

Are cows endangered? Chickens? Pigs? Sheep?

If we need them we'll keep them around, sure they might exist solely on "farms" and be breed to better suit us than their survival in the natural world.

But they won't be endangered...

Re:Probably for the best....

[debatem1]

Good thing too; those crystals are the root of all weevil.

Re:

[regular_gonzalez]

ba-dit tchih [instantrimshot.com]

Re:

[l3mr]

No. On the opposite, it would guarantee their survival. Animals that bring direct benefit to humans are much less likely to go extinct than those who don't. We breed those.

nature...

[namekuseijin]

Some day we'll find ready-made mattresses somewhere...

Voon

[marquis111]

I vollue and globber floopily to you.

Re:Voon

[pushing-robot]

I gave a speech once. You may not instantly see why I bring the subject up, but that is because my mind works so phenomenally fast, and I am at a rough estimate thirty billion times more intelligent than you. Let me give you an example. Think of a number, any number.

Re:

[Kral_Blbec]

42

Re:

[marquis111]

Wrong, Zem, you see? Don't gup at me like that.

Re:

[chrome]

Epic thread is epic.

Re:

[Keramos]

Some day we'll find ready-made mattresses somewhere...

My cat has already discovered that.

PS. Soylent green is people too.

Re:

[Taibhsear]

It's bound to happen. Nature has already made the best pillows ever: Boobs.

But where are the

[hovelander]

I know it is sickeningly overused, but where will they get the tiny sharks for these tiny lasers?

We all know the answer...

Seamonkeys!!!!

Re:

[somersault]

An army of tiny laser wielding seamonkeys would be far more terrifying than a shark, if it didn't sound so cute!

Freeloading

[Anonymous Coward]

So, are they going to pay Brazil for the use of one of their "natural resources"?

If they don't Brazil (and others) may continue wiping out their biodiversity that could yield similar or greater benefits (cancer drugs, anyone?) to the global village. If the host country does not benefit (=get paid) for preserving biodiversity, what's their incentive?

We could now go into the whole climate change debate, but that should be obvious to everyone.

Re:

[AGMW]

So, are they going to pay Brazil for the use of one of their "natural resources"?

Sorry ... are you trying to say that we might be the leaser of two weevils?

Contradiction.

[EkriirkE]

The summary starts out by saying the beetle has ideal crystals, only to finish by saying they can't be used because they are not ideal.

Re:Contradiction.

[knarfling]

Not really. According to the article, it is the structure that is ideal, not the actual beetle scales. The real breakthrough is that the structure can be found in or created from different materials than diamonds. In this case, the structure is made by nature from fingernail like material, not something you normally associate with crystals.

Having said all that, it is a bit of a disappointment that they have not even created a man-made structure, only that they have confirmed that the structure found naturally on the beetles is the ideal crystal structure.

Why Nature wins

[SaintOfAllChucks]

is because of it's ability to do this. Many living things (bugs, fish, plants, few birds) have this trait. Even still we humans have a hard time even making good 2-D photonic crystals let alone 3-D.

Re:

[Duradin]

ID is all fun and games until someone finds a babelfish and renders the whole point moot.

Re:

[mr_mischief]

A better HHGTTG reference in this situation might be that manufacturing has pretty much stopped, because everything one needs grows somewhere if you look around a big enough area.

Re:Why Nature wins

[NewbieProgrammerMan]

But something like this has absolutely no reason to develop.

Just because you can't see the advantage in some feature doesn't mean that there isn't one. In addition, it was my understanding that it's possible for new features to appear and get "carried along" so long as they're not too detrimental to the organism's survival and procreation. They may or may not turn out to be useful later on.

Re:Why Nature wins

[Nasajin]

In furtherance to this point, there's also the fact that the ability to grow photonic crystals on one's back benefits this species of weevil through its ability to enter into a mutualistic relationship with homo sapiens. Thus, through the interest garnered by the crystals, human beings will attempt to keep the species alive at least as long as it takes to see if they're useful.

Re:

[246o1]

Insightful? The modding compels a response. The logic in this statement is totally lacking, as people just now discovered the value of these crystals. Clearly this couldn't have been a factor in natural selection leading up to now, unless you believe in some sort of psychic evolution, which could anticipate future needs. I hope the problem was just strange modding, not people actually thinking that was a logical argument. Perhaps funny would have been a better mod? I dunno.

Re:

[Nasajin]

The logic in this statement is totally lacking, as people just now discovered the value of these crystals.

It should be obvious that I do not believe that the crystals have been the reason for the animals success up to now; that is why my statement is not targeting the historical development of the beetles, and instead speaks in the present tense about the current interest in the crystals. There's no point in launching into the fundamentals of Darwinian evolutionary theory in /. - it's been done a thousand times before - but if you can't understand my point and want me to elaborate, I would say that the crystal

Re:

[Bloodoflethe]

This was a better explication than your previous post, which could indeed sound somewhat deterministic in nature.

The reason it could be misconstrued is that there were two points made in the post to which you replied. The more obvious one (the last sentence) shows that you were not talking about determinism in regards to evolution. However, if the reader were thinking of the first sentence, your post could seem to imply determinism.

Re:

[Omestes]

Did you read the GP?

Just because you can't see the advantage in some feature doesn't mean that there isn't one. In addition, it was my understanding that it's possible for new features to appear and get "carried along" so long as they're not too detrimental to the organism's survival and procreation. They may or may not turn out to be useful later on.

Basically there doesn't need to be any obvious, nor actual selective benefit for any evolved feature, as long as it is not at a detriment to the individual. If there is no reason to lose an accidental mutation, it will stay. Evolution has no brain.

That said, at some point these accidental features might become useful as based on the whim of the environment, and then will be actively selected for. Or visa versa, of course.

The insightful jest here is that these possibly (though doubtf

Re:

[somersault]

There's also the fact that pretty patterns and colours tend to help to attract mates..

Re:

[nephridium]

Why would you get flamed for things that are perfectly explainable (oh, and observable ;)). Any development that doesn't seem to have an obvious evolutionary advantage does not contradict evolution; they could be vestigial [wikipedia.org] like our appendix or even be atavisms [wikipedia.org] whose genes are coupled with a certain genetic mutation that makes it become dominant again.

Btw, you weren't defending ID here, as you only stated why you think evolution produced some strange effect you couldn't explain. "Defending" it would have

Re:

[aproposofwhat]

As J B S Haldane said, when asked what biology had taught him about God:

"I'm not sure, but He seems to be inordinately fond of beetles."

So it's hardly surprising to find beetles with advanced optical properties, is it?

Note - I'm as atheist as they come, and my tongue is firmly in my cheek :o)

Re:

[ResidntGeek]

But where was the cow/horse/whatever like animal that was so reproductively successful because its nose was genetically predisposed to be .1 inches longer than the others?

In an environment with the food up in tall trees?

Just a guess.

By the way, it's much shorter to type "eutherian" than "cow/horse/whatever like animal".

Re:

[Sangui]

But where was the cow/horse/whatever like animal that was so reproductively successful because its nose was genetically predisposed to be .1 inches longer than the others?

A breed of Finch on the Galapagos Islands. One one of the islands all of the Finches beaks are 1/3 of an inch longer than all the other islands because the food is slightly deeper in the ground on that island.

Re:

[afidel]

The selective advantage is obvious, a more pretty display means more mates means more offspring. It's actually one of the classic examples of a selective advantage. The fact that you didn't pick up on it means you probably flunked Bio 101, or you are intentionally ignoring it to further the ID bullcrap. I can't believe it's been over two hours and you haven't been called out, slashdot is really slipping.

Re:

[nguy]

Where did it begin? What "advantage" is the crystal structure over a normal green coloring?

Surface microstructures exist in lots of insects and they are used for all sorts of different purposes. They may have initially evolved to keep water from wetting the exoskeleton. As they got smaller and more efficient at that task, they also became optically active.

The ancestor of these beetles had such microstructures already, and all it took to make them green was tuning the spacing and size a little through a ti

Re:

[dargaud]

Another example going farther off topic, an elephants trunk. A long trunk is obviously helpful. But where was the cow/horse/whatever like animal that was so reproductively successful because its nose was genetically predisposed to be .1 inches longer than the others?

Very simple steps: - the pig uses his big nose to find chestnuts under the leaves. - the tapir uses his bigger nose to find roots and breaks down anthouses - the elephant just follows the same evolutionary steps. Just because you don't see why doesn't make it wrong. And as another of your replies stated it doesn't necessarily work in a straight line.

Re:

[Grym]

According to the theory of evolution, everything develops because it randomly mutates and gives an individual some sort of reproductive advantage that increases its chances of reproducing and passing the trait along.

No. See, your problem stems from your lack of understanding of what evolution is and what its implications are. You are viewing evolution as a type of applied engineering where stepwise improvements lead to new features and, eventually, the next species. This is not the case at all. Evolu

Re:

[Dr. Eggman]

No fair, Nature has a billion+ years head start!

I demand a rematch! Make Nature starover! No wait, better not. Nature can have its headstart, but we need the goal to be fair for both sides...

First one to the moon wins!

Re:Why Nature wins

[camperdave]

When the big dino-killer hit the planet, it most probably threw tons of biological samples off of the planet. Some of these would have struck the moon. Nature wins again!

In theory...

[GaryOlson]

How many petaflops could you process with a Beetle Cluster?

WE MUST CONSTRUCT ADDITIONAL PYLONS

[zegota]

For Aiur!

Re:

[TheRealMindChild]

We require more vespene gas

Re:

[EraserMouseMan]

DOH! You're gonna need a detector and a Dark Archon to kill that Lurker burrowed near the vespene.

Re:

[Sciros]

Pylons need 100 minerals, zero vespene gas. ^^

photonic structure in nature

[clockwork_orange]

photonic structure in nature is not new there are many places eg http://newton.ex.ac.uk/research/emag/butterflies/downloadable_papers.html [ex.ac.uk] looking at structure within various insects, looking to replicate it, the beetles talked about with in the article have been studied before.

This new device will work brilliantly -

[Geminii]

- if we can get enough bugs into it.

And people laughed at Starship Troopers

[smchris]

Once those beetles can fart at escape velocity it's all over.

More reason for preservation...

[scubamage]

So, it makes one wonder what other great secrets lie in wait in the Amazon - if we could get the bastards to stop destroying it.

Re:

[Paranatural]

Good luck with that. They're experiencing a population boom, and need food badly. They use that as the excuse to cut down the trees to sell to lumber mills for their ever-expanding market (China, India) and ever-dwindling supply. Also, keep in mind most of the nutrients from the jungles are all stored up in the trees. The same trees which are shipped off, and what isn't shipped off, is burned and blows away as smoke. Then they let cattle graze the grasses down to nothing and all the soil washes away, and th

Re:

[triffid_98]

BROWN PEASANT NEEDS FOOD BADLY!
BROWN PEASANT IS ABOUT TO DIE.

The only ways I know of to stop this particular out of control locomotive is to educate the poor farmers in basic soil retention and agricultural techniques the Europeans discovered hundreds of years ago and to convince the lumber mills to stop imports (I.E. Go out of business). Since 1 may well happen (In fact there are efforts to ensure it) but 2 will not, I don't see how anything will change.

The Obvious Solution

[Paranatural]

The scales can't be used in technological devices because they are made of fingernail-like chitin, which is not stable enough for long-term use, is not semiconducting and doesn't bend light adequately.

The obvious solution is to genetically engineer the beetles to replace the chitin with Photonic crystals. This would provide a self-reproducing source and it's show those uppity fireflies what's up.