Research Blog

Diffusion a la Chocolate Lava Cake

On February 21, 2013

In Chemistry, Faculty, Physics, Science Communication & Education, Students, Visualization

By Ashley Yeager

Note: This is the second post in a four-part, monthly series that will give readers recipes to try in their kitchen and learn a little chemistry and physics along the way. Read the first post here.

Making chocolate lava cakes demonstrates the diffusion of heat. Credit: Ashley Yeager, Duke.

Between bites of hot lava cake and vanilla ice cream, freshmen taking Chemistry and Physics of Cooking talk about diffusion. Their conversation isn’t so esoteric that an outsider wouldn’t understand.

Instead, it’s a simple chat about how long to cook a cake based on how heat moves.

Understanding diffusion is a way to make sense of cooking times, says chemistry and physics professor Patrick Charbonneau, who is leading the class along with chef Justine de Valicourt.

Diffusion of matter is how particles in a liquid, gas or solid intermingle and move from a region of higher concentration to one of lower concentration.

Heat diffusion describes how hot particles warm up cooler particles around them, which allows the inside of a dish to cook, even though only the outside is heated.

Before turning his students loose in a kitchen in Smith Warehouse to eat a product of this process, Charbonneau and his teaching fellows had the group work through the equations that describe diffusion.

“Solving the diffusion equations of heat gives you a first estimate of how long to bake a cake or cook a turkey,” Charbonneau says. The cooking time for lava cake is especially critical in order to get the outside it to bake, while the inside remains gooey, de Valicourt adds.

In class, the students calculated that to make a muffin-sized lava cake with ingredients at room temperature in an oven at 400°F (204°C) would take about 10 minutes. In the lab, they found that the calculation was fairly accurate, but for a more exact estimate of cooking time, they needed to factor in the temperature of melted chocolate chips in their recipe.

“Still, with the cooking time being not so mysterious, it’s one fewer thing left to chance,” Charbonneau says, adding, “then you can be more creative with the recipe in other ways.”

He and de Valicourt, who have partnered with the Alicia Foundation to offer the Chemistry and Physics of Cooking class, have provided the following recipe for experimenting with diffusion and hot lava cake.

Hot Lava Cake —

Ingredients:
60g (1/3 c) dark chocolate chips
60 g (1/2 stick) butter
60 g (1/4 c) sugar
3 eggs (or 2 egg and 45mL (3tbs) coconut milk)
30 g (1/4 c) flour
small pinch salt
Non-stick cooking spray

Materials:
1 bowl (bain-marie)*
4 ramekin dishes or 1 muffin tin
2 medium bowls
1 scale (if weighing ingredients)
1 sieve
1 cooking thermometer (optional)

* You can make a bain-marie by placing a bowl over a saucepan of simmering water.

Instructions:

1. Preheat the oven to 400°F/204°C.
2. Melt chocolate and butter on bain-marie. Stir. Do not boil the water or the chocolate could burn.
3. Combine eggs and sugar (and coconut milk) in a medium bowl and whisk until bubbly.
4. Combine flour and salt in another bowl and pass it through the sieve.
5. With one person whisking and another pouring, slowly add the chocolate mixture to the egg mixture.
6. Add the flour and salt to the wet ingredients and whisk well.
7. Spray ramekins or muffin tin with non-stick cooking spray.
8. Fill the ramekins or muffin tin a little more than halfway full.
9. Place the ramekins or tin in the oven on the middle rack.
10. Bake until the cakes start growing. The interior of the lava cake should be around 158-176°F/70-80°C and the outside around 203-212°F/95-100°C – ie until the edges of the cake are set, but the center is still a liquid – about 7 to 10 minutes (less for smaller cakes).

Blasting away glioblastomas

By Ashley Mooney

On February 21, 2013

In Biology, Cancer, Medicine, Neuroscience, Students

By Ashley Mooney

The purple area of this brain is a glioblastoma tumor.

Some undergraduates get to see the fruits of their lab labor early in their careers.

Junior Anirudh Saraswathula, a biology major and neuroscience minor, has been doing research at Duke since his first week on campus.

He started as a work-study student in professor of cell biology Blanche Capel’s lab, but said the basic sciences were not his true passion. Now, Saraswathula works on translating basic research with the Duke Brain Tumor Immunotherapy Program.

“A lot of what I do in the lab involves looking at protocols that are used in basic science research and trying to apply them to what we’re doing here,” he said. “So a lot of it is going to be culturing cells from patients, and then doing a variety of tests depending on what it is that I want to do.”

He is currently studying immune-system therapy for glioblastoma, a type of malignant brain tumor. By reprogramming a patient’s T-cells, researchers can direct the immune system to fight glioblastoma. Although Saraswathula was not involved in developing the treatment, he is working to evaluate the treatment’s mechanism and its long-term effects on the immune system.

“One of the reasons that brain tumors are so devastating (with treatment they can extend survival to about 18 months) is that they’re just so recurrent,” he said. “These types of tumors also change who you are as a person because of where they happen.”

Saraswathula’s day-to-day work involves culturing tissue, using flow cytometry — a technique used to sort cells, detect biomarkers and engineer proteins — and PCR, which copies DNA.

Saraswathula is also studying the quality of T-cell responses to different clinical trials and understanding whether certain types of B-cells are repressing the function of the tumor vaccine.

“Those projects are focused on future trials. How can we improve, how can we modify these therapies to better improve the immune system’s response in order to fight these tumors,” he said.

Although he began his research just for the experience of doing it, Saraswathula said that applicability is now what is most important to him.

“If I discover some obscure gene in stem cells, there’s not going to be any real application there for maybe 30 years,” he said. “With my current research, if I find something, [in] the next trial a few years from now, there will be a patient getting the drug, and I would have had a contribution to that.”

Finding Consciousness

By sa160@duke.edu

On February 21, 2013

In Lecture, Medicine, Neuroscience

By Nonie Arora

Brain scans of various disorders of consciousness. Credit: Wiki Commons

Can we be certain whether a patient is minimally conscious or in a persistent vegetative state?

What kinds of rights do minimally conscious patients have?

How should minimally conscious patients be treated?

Scientists, ethicists, lawyers and physicians asked these questions at the Finding Consciousness workshop at Duke in January 2013.

Recently, neuroscientists have devised methods to detect consciousness in patients with severe brain injury who may not appear to be aware of themselves and others. But as the science develops so do new ethical dilemmas.

Patients with severe brain injury are often written off, despite growing scientific evidence of potential improvement, said Joseph Fins from Cornell University. Fins gave the annual Nancy Weaver Emerson Lecture sponsored by the Trent Center for Bioethics, Humanities & History of Medicine as part of the workshop, and he focused on the application of neuroethics to the minimally conscious state.

Fins believes that family members of patients are often forced to make decisions about withholding or withdrawing care without complete, understandable information. They are compelled to consider organ donation, even prematurely. In his work, Fins interviews family members of brain injury patients. In one conversation, a mother of a patient described an interaction with a neurologist who called the patient “basically an organ donor now” and said, “He doesn’t have the reflexes of a frog.”

Then, the neurologist urged the mother to consider organ donation — all within 72 hours of the injury. Fins called for patients and family members to be treated with more sensitivity and respect.

Jeremy Fins. Credit: Trent Center for Bioethics, Humanities, and History of Medicine

The vegetative state has been seen as medical futility, and the paradigm was “once you’re vegetative, you’re done,” Fins said. However, physicians in the field have begun to see families and patients who have looked vegetative, but then suddenly showed some level of response to stimulus.

While some patients become permanently vegetative, others can become minimally conscious, Fins said, referencing a study where about 40 percent of patients who were diagnosed as vegetative were actually minimally conscious.

“This is unconscionable, but that’s where we are,” he said, adding that much of the disparity could come from disinterest, neglect and marginalization of these patients. People would not accept this level of misdiagnosis in cancer or diabetes care, he said.

It is our obligation to give voice to minimally conscious patients as a basic civil right, Fins said, especially as better methods of identifying these patients and stimulating recovery are likely to come in the future.

Close Encounters of the Twitter Kind

By Ashley Yeager

On January 30, 2013

In Faculty, Lecture, Physics, Science Communication & Education

By Ashley Yeager

Astrophysicist Katie Mack and other researchers are starting to join Twitter to do better science. Image courtesy of: mediabistro.com

Before launching into dark matter’s effects on particle physics in the early universe, astrophysicist Katie Mack of the University of Melbourne in Australia took a little detour Wednesday to talk about Twitter.

The social media tool is helping her “do better science and learn about new science,” she said during her Jan. 30 seminar at Duke.

The talk materialized from a tweet she had posted a few days ago about attending ScienceOnline, an annual, Raleigh-based conference for scientists and communicators talking and writing about science on the Internet.

Duke physicist Mark Kruse, who joined Twitter in October after the 2012 Council for the Advancement of Science Writers meeting, saw Mack’s tweet about coming to the Triangle and then contacted her to see if she would like to speak about her research.

She said yes, obviously, and explained during her talk that the invitation, as well as the other networking she has done on Twitter, got her to thinking about why all physicists (and scientists) should use the site.

@AstroKatie shares her top reasons scientists should be on Twitter. Credit: Katie Mack, U. of Melbourne.

Here is a paraphrased list of her top five reasons:

1. You can see what scientific breakthroughs people are getting excited about.
2. You can keep track of science discoveries outside of your field.
3. You can share your work with a broader audience.
4. You can connect with other scientists in and outside your field, building your professional network.
5. You can connect and share your work with the public.

Clearly Mack’s invitation to speak at Duke illustrates her third point about Twitter. Now, she said, she looks forward to attending her first ScienceOnline meeting to build on those points and learn new ways of using the tool to connect with other scientists and science enthusiasts.

You can follow Mack at @astrokatie, Kruse at @markckruse and ScienceOnline at @ScienceOnline (or #scio13) if you’re already on Twitter.

And, if you’re a Duke researcher not yet on Twitter but want to be, check it out here, then contact the university’s news office if you’ve got questions.

Designing Microbial "Factories" Rationally

By Pranali Dalvi

On January 29, 2013

In Chemistry, Environment/Sustainability, Genetics/Genomics, Lecture

By Pranali Dalvi

Using microbes to manufacture chemicals is starting to be cheaper and greener than traditional chemistry. And their feedstock is sugar, not oil.

Source: 2010 Agricultural Biotechnology International Conference

On Friday, Dr. Michael Lynch spoke to an engaged audience about how microbes have ushered in a new era in metabolic and genetic engineering. Lynch is the co-founder and CSO of OPX Biotechnologies, a Colorado-based company that makes bio-based chemicals and fuels from microbes. OPXBIO microbes produce fatty acids from hydrogen and carbon dioxide. In turn, the fatty acids are used to make cleaners, detergents, jet fuel, and diesel.

Lynch said it’s easier to understand the genetic circuits and enzymatic pathways of microbes, thanks to much cheaper DNA sequencing. What we still lack though, is an understanding of how to rationally design complex biological systems – likely because we fail to recognize the interplay among an organism’s genotype, phenotype, and environment.

It’s a complex set of factors that go into making phenotypic traits such as color, size, or shape.

“In an industrial setting [phenotypes] are equivalent to metabolism or higher production of the product of interest,” Lynch said. “In a clinical setting, [phenotypes] could be virulence or pathogenesis.”

One approach to understanding how phenotypes are controlled has been through functional genomics.

Let’s say we take a population of wildtype microorganisms and introduce genetic modifications in a controlled way. Next, we selectively screen for the phenotype of interest and compare the sequence of this phenotype to the wildtype to pinpoint the genetic mutations that made the difference.

Comparing phenotypes one at a time is inefficient, though. Lynch wanted to find a way to speed up this process.

“We wanted a process or technology or toolkit that evaluates all of your genes in parallel in a single experiment for the phenotype of interest,” Lynch explained.

Lynch found his inspiration in microbial biofilms, extracellular polysaccharide matrices that grow quickly.

OPXBIO’s Efficiency Directed Genome Engineering (EDGE) technology platform, Source: opxbio.com

Lynch’s studies revealed that microbial cultures grown in enriched media made biofilms, while those in minimal media did not. In a process known as destructional mutagenesis, Lynch and his colleagues then knocked out biofilm-making genes to identify what genes cause the biofilm phenotype in enriched medium but prevent it in minimal medium.

Lynch saw the individual microbial systems as factories that he can genetically modify to produce chemical compounds in biofilms – specifically, 3-hydroxypropionic acid – that can be chemically converted to commercially relevant compounds such as acrylic.

Scientists at OPXBIO have cracked the code for making acrylic from sugar. They give sugar feedstocks to genetically modified bacteria, whose enzymes convert the sugar into acrylic molecules. Acrylic has broad commercial applications in paints, adhesives, diapers, detergents, and even fuel – a $10 billion global market.

Cooking up chemistry with candy

By Ashley Yeager

On January 23, 2013

In Chemistry, Physics, Science Communication & Education, Students

By Ashley Yeager

Note: This is the first in a four-part, monthly series that will give readers recipes that they can try in their kitchen and also learn a little chemistry and physics along the way.

Making sucre à la crème (left) and soft toffee (right) illustrates the fundamental principles of changing a liquid to a solid. Credit: Ashley Yeager, Duke.

A dozen freshmen pull on pieces of fresh, soft toffee, popping the candy into their mouths and licking it from their teeth as chef Justine de Valicourt talks about making the treats in a tiny kitchen on the second floor of Smith Warehouse.

Eating toffee and other sweets doesn’t usually spark a discussion about chemistry. But, as the students learn, the core of the eating experience is entirely about chemistry and some physics too, says professor Patrick Charbonneau.

He is leading a freshman seminar, called the Chemistry and Physics of Cooking, and in this particular class, he, de Valicourt and a team of teaching assistants work with the students to explore phase transitions – such as the change of liquid water to ice – by making two traditional Québécois desserts, sucre à la crème and soft toffee.

Both desserts have the same ingredients — maple syrup, butter and cooking cream. But, the experience of eating them is entirely different. One, the toffee, is stretchy, chewy and sticky, while the other, the sucre à la crème, is more crumbly and smooth.

The way the sugar molecules in solution cool down into a solid structure is what determines the final texture of a candy or chocolate, Charbonneau says.

During the lab, the students cool one mixture of syrup, butter and cream quickly and then whisk it. The stirring motion forces the sugar molecules to bump into each other, creating seeds of crystallization, which continue to grow and eventually clump together to give the sucre à la crème its solid, crumbly texture.

The students mix and heat the ingredients, then let them cool slowly, leaving the candy to set for at least three hours. Not whisked or stirred, it solidifies without forming too many large crystals, giving it a glassier appearance and a stickier, chewy texture, a signature feature of toffee.

Making these candies is pretty basic, easy enough that anyone could try it in a home kitchen, Charbonneau says, adding that he and de Valicourt have provided the recipes as a way to reach beyond the classroom and give more than just their students an introduction to cooking and, of course, the chemistry behind it too.

Sucre à la crème —

Ingredients:
1 can of maple syrup (540mL)
45 g (3 tbsp.) of butter (plus some to grease the mold)
250 ml (1 cup) of cooking cream 35%

Materials:
1 medium saucepan
1 candy thermometer
1 wooden spoon
1 square mold
1 whisk
1 bucket of cold water

Instructions:

1. Put all ingredients in the saucepan. Stir.
2. Heat on the stove to 118°C (244°F) – 120°C (248°F). Be careful not to touch the bottom of the pan with the thermometer, which will give an incorrect reading.
3. Put the saucepan in the bucket of cold water and let the mixture cool down to 55°C (131°F) – 60°C (140°F) in the center. Do not stir the mixture.
4. Once cooled in the water, whisk the mixture to make a creamy pale paste. Pour in the mold and cut it before it gets too hard.
5. Let it rest 30 min in the fridge.

Soft toffee —

Ingredients:
1 can of maple syrup (540mL)
45 g (3 tbsp.) of butter (plus some to grease the mold)
250 ml of cooking cream 35%

Materials:
1 medium saucepan
1 candy thermometer
1 wooden spoon
1 square mold

Instructions:
1. Put all ingredients in the saucepan. Stir.
2. Heat on the stove to 118°C (244°F) – 120°C (248°F). Be careful not to touch the bottom of the pan with the thermometer, which will give an incorrect reading.
3. Pour into the greased mold, let it cool down slowly, without disturbing it for 3-8 hours.

What makes humans so unique?

By Pranali Dalvi

On January 18, 2013

In Animals, Behavior/Psychology, Biology, Genetics/Genomics, Lecture

By Pranali Dalvi
Human and chimpanzees are very similar genetically despite the stark differences in their outward appearances. So it must be just a very small portion of human genes that are responsible for everything from our upright posture to our ability to sing. What makes humans so unique?

On Jan. 14, Duke Professor of Biology Greg Wray spoke about his group’s work on the genetic and molecular processes that contribute to our uniquely human physiology and brains as a part of the Computational Biology and Bioinformatics Seminar Series.

“Humans are not the best model organisms since there is a limit to what you can do genetically and mentally. You can’t really make a human knockout (but sometimes, nature makes it for you),” Wray said.

Still, humans are immensely important to study for practical reasons. We have uniquely human courses of disease in part due to our physiological, cognitive, and mechanical properties. Also, we’re just intrinsically curious about our own bodies.

According to Wray, the answer to human uniqueness is our regulome, the genes, mRNAs, proteins, and metabolites that regulate which genes are turned on when.

This graph shows the two major shifts in diet (meat-rich diet and grain-based diet) that likely contributed to our divergence from chimpanzees and thus differential gene expression. Source: Greg Wray

One prevailing hypothesis is that human forerunners likely began diverging from chimps about 2 million years ago when we took on a meat-rich diet in the savannah. The ancestors of chimpanzees retreated to the rainforest to eat a diet consisting mostly of fruits. Our meat-rich diet seems to coincide with an increase in brain size. And today we metabolize fats much differently than chimpanzees.

Wray’s lab studied the effects of dietary changes on five tissue samples – the cerebral cortex and cerebellum of the brain, liver, fat, and skeletal muscle. What seems to have changed in chimps versus humans are genes related to neural functioning, development, and metabolism. For instance, 31 of 61 genes involved in insulin signaling are operated differently in chimps and humans. These differences in gene expression may also explain why humans are uniquely susceptible to diet-related illnesses like type II diabetes.

On the other hand, genes involved in the transcription, translation and replication of DNA, RNA processing and protein localization haven’t changed in chimps versus humans.

Fat cells also behave differently in humans versus chimps. Wray’s lab took adult stem cells from adipose tissue in both chimps and humans and challenged them with either more oleic acid (the main fatty acid in a meat-heavy diet) or more linoleic acid (the dominant fatty acid in a grain-based diet). The enzymes involved in fatty acid synthesis were more common in human adipose tissues. Wray believes that the increased fatty acid synthesis is probably responsible for building and fueling a larger human brain.

Another major shift in diet occurred during the agricultural revolution, which introduced omega-6 fatty acids into our diet along with pro-inflammatory compounds. Wray explains that the increase in grains from the shift in diet likely contributes to chronic pro-inflammatory diseases in humans, such as atherosclerosis.

“Understanding our metabolic history from an evolutionary context can potentially give us insight into some pretty prominent health concerns,” says Wray.

Grad Student Sees Yawning Gap in Animal Welfare

By Ashley Mooney

On January 18, 2013

In Animals, Behavior/Psychology, Biology, Field Research, Students

by Ashley Mooney

Sometimes a middle-school nickname becomes a career.

Graduate student Jingzhi Tan, yawned loudly during a quiet class in middle school in China, garnering the nickname Hippo. So now he’s at Duke, studying yawning behaviors in bonobos.

Jingzhi “Hippo” Tan is a graduate student working on bonobos’ love of strangers.

So-called ‘contagious yawning’ has been found in many species besides humans and other great apes, including baboons, monkeys and dogs. Tan found that bonobos are more likely to yawn along with strangers than they are to yawn with animals they already know. (They also prefer to share food with strangers first.) In the future, he hopes to do a similar study with chimpanzees, but must first modify the structure of the experiment.

“The bonobo study that we just did is technically unethical to do with chimps—you can’t put two strange chimps together because they’re going to kill each other,” Tan said. “Later we’re trying to develop a task that is chimp-friendly and we’re going to use it for comparison between a variety of species.”

His studies on great apes, he said, will hopefully reveal more about the human mind and aid wildlife conservation efforts.

Tan noted that there is no better way of understanding the human mind than studying its evolution. Through his studies, Tan hopes to uncover the constraints of human problem-solving abilities, which will help solve problems relating to conservation.

“There is a gap between people who want to conserve nature versus people who are making decisions and policies. Usually what they do is alienate each other,” Tan said. “You can’t actually do something unless you really understand the mind of people.”

Likasi, a resident of the Lola ya Bonobo sanctuary in Kinshasa, where Hippo does his work. (Jingzhi Tan)

As an undergraduate at Peking University, Tan studied under the only cognitive evolution professor in all of China. He is now the first Chinese person to study great apes in Africa.

Tan said he is concerned that chimps are apparently being illegally exported to China, where they end up in the entertainment industry. Tan said there is one reality show that features three chimps—dressed in human clothes—choosing fruit at a supermarket. Another pair of infant chimps were forced into a fake wedding, complete with a wedding dress, and received national media attention.

China needs stronger animal welfare laws, Tan said. “Going back to the big picture, in the next decade, if you want to help bonobos in Africa or any other animals in Africa, we have to get China involved. Right now it’s just completely empty and blank.”

A Call For Action: Genetic Testing Before Prescriptions

By Prachiti Dalvi

On January 12, 2013

In Biology, Genetics/Genomics, Lecture, Medicine

By Prachiti Dalvi

Structure of Codeine

Codeine is an opioid pain medication; but if you are a poor metabolizer of a particular enzyme (CYP2D6), you will experience no pain relief from this drug. However, if your doctor could administer something called pharmacogenetic testing, she would know to simply give you morphine (an active metabolite of codeine) instead. For now, this kind of testing isn’t available.

Mary Relling, PharmD

Mary V. Relling, PharmD, the Chair of Pharmaceutical Sciences at St. Jude’s Children Hospital spoke about the need to implement pharmacogenetic testing on Thursday, January 10. A number of tests have recently emerged that are ready for prime time. When we know that some drugs may have adverse effects for people with particular genetic phenotypes, it is unethical to prescribe these drugs without knowing the patient’s genetic status.

However, Relling said there are a number of barriers to integrating pharmacogenetic tests into clinical care: fragmentation of our healthcare system, a focus on sick-care rather than disease prevention, a lack of evidence for clinical utility or cost-effectiveness, complex underlying lab results, and a lack of a centralized system for recording patient information.

The best way to break through these barriers is to conduct testing preemptively, Relling said. We can simply take drop of blood when the baby is born and run genetic tests. “Genetic tests are lifetime results. It makes sense to have it in the background, just as we know a patient’s age, weight, sex, etc.,” Relling said. The barriers discussed above can be avoided to a certain extent at St. Jude’s because they have adopted a team approach to patient care and a 100% electronic system for recording patient records.

The growing affordability of genotyping makes using preemptive pharmacogenetic testing more feasible, she said. The cost of sequencing one or two genes in the past will now produce results for 225 genes. Two years ago, the Clinical Pharmacogenetics Implementation Consortium (CPIC) studied how to migrate pharmacogenetic testing from the laboratory into routine patient care. They looked for gene-drug pairs associated with potential risks of life-threatening toxicity, serious adverse effects, or lack of effectiveness. Eleven of the genes CPIC determined met the threshold for high-risk were found to have profound effects on 33 drugs.

Relling said approximately 48% of patients receiving drugs at St. Jude’s received orders for at least one of those pharmacogenetically high-risk medications.

She said the question now is how to use genetic test results rather than whether a genetic test should be ordered. In the coming years, we will have to address how to maintain the fine balance of providing the clinician with enough information to treat the patient and overwhelming the patient with genetic testing results that are difficult to interpret.

This lecture was a part of the Genomics and Personalized Medicine Forum sponsored by the Duke Institute for Genome Sciences and Policy (IGSP).

Not Swimming with Spinners

By Ashley Yeager

On December 17, 2012

In Animals, Behavior/Psychology, Biology, Environment/Sustainability

By Ashley Yeager

Spinner dolphins swimming just off the bow of a boat. Image courtesy of Dave Johnston, Duke.

Waianae, HI – Pet a dolphin for me, my sister texted as I stepped onto a catamaran in West Oahu. I didn’t have the heart to tell her that is exactly what I would NOT be doing, under any circumstances.

I have to admit that a little later, as a pod of wild spinner dolphins undulated just ahead of the bow of our boat, it was really hard not to reach out and try to touch one of them.

It was almost as if getting closer to the creatures as they slid through the water would free us, if only for a moment, from our artificial world of buildings, cars, computers and cell phones. But, in reality, interacting with spinners can’t take us away from our hyper-connected world, and chasing and touching the dolphins is not good for them either.

“If you try to play with spinners during the day, it’s like a stranger coming into your bedroom in the middle of the night and trying to wake you up,” says Nicholas School marine biologist Dave Johnston. He comes to Hawaii a few times each year to take photographs and other data on the islands’ spinner dolphins to learn more about their behaviors, population size and the bays they are swimming in during the day.

Spinner dolphins — Stenella longirostris – swim into shallow bays off Hawaii’s coast during the day to rest, turning off half of their brain at a time as they sleep. With one half on and one half off, they can still swim to the surface to breathe and ultimately recharge for the next night’s hunt.

But lots of vacationing people swimming and sailing in the bays aren’t thinking of the dolphins’ schedule and rest, they are only wanting to get closer to the wild animals. And the dolphins, much like humans, are curious. They’re going to check you out if you’re in their space, just like you would if you hear a strange noise in your room while your trying to sleep, our guides from Hawaii Nautical tell us as we cruise out of Waianae Harbor on West Oahu.

We sail for a bit and then come upon a pod of spinner dolphins resting off our port side. Everybody bunches to the front of the boat to get as close as they can to the animals. Our guides remind us of the dolphins’ sleep cycle and explain that the tour company follows the NOAA-sponsored Dolphin SMART program.

SMART stands for: Staying back from the dolphins; Moving away if they seem disturbed; Always keep a boat engine in neutral if you are near a pod; Refraining from feeding or touching them; and Teaching others to be dolphin SMART. Needless to say, we didn’t swim with or touch the dolphins. Sorry sis. Instead, we sailed a bit more, snorkeled with some sea turtles, not touching them of course, and then sailed back toward the harbor.

On the way back, we spotted another pod of spinners, and even more inspiring, we simply watched the animals. They were enjoying their rest, undisturbed in their home — something we all crave and appreciate when we can get it.