New Issue: Science’s Impossible Questions. Read Now

Mouse To Scorpion: "Is That All Ya Got?"

Grasshopper mice have evolved biochemical pathways that thwart scorpion venom by reacting to it as a painkiller. Sophie Bushwick reports.

Illustration of a Bohr atom model spinning around the words Science Quickly with various science and medicine related icons around the text

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

Rodents called grasshopper mice have an unusual favorite food. Not grasshoppers. No, they really like scorpions. You can see the problem. But the mice shrug off any scorpion stings. And a new study shows how.

Researchers injected common house mice with scorpion venom. The mice nursed the injection site for several minutes. But grasshopper mice injected with venom fussed for only a few seconds. In fact, they were more bothered by saline solution. 

So what’s going on? In the house mouse, a specific type of nerve-cell signaling-channel got activated by the venom. But this same channel in grasshopper mice stayed inactive in the presence of venom—meaning the mice remained blissfully ignorant.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


In addition, a separate pathway did react to the scorpion venom—and it actually temporarily blocked pain signals. Meaning that for grasshopper mice, scorpion venom is actually an analgesic. The work is in the journal Science. [Ashlee H. Row et al., Voltage-Gated Sodium Channel in Grasshopper Mice Defends against Bark Scorpion Toxin]

Understanding details of this system could lead to new approaches in the treatment of pain in people, so that someday we might ask, “Scorpion, where is thy sting?”

—Sophie Bushwick

[The above text is a transcript of this podcast.]

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe