‘Cryptic' creature with ‘window' in its eyelid found on rock. It's a new species
As scientists recently discovered, it turned out to be a new species.
A team of researchers spent five years traveling throughout Saudi Arabia and Jordan as part of a project to survey reptile biodiversity, according to a study published July 1 in the peer-reviewed journal BMC Zoology.
During the searches, researchers encountered dozens of 'cryptic'-looking lizards, the study said. The lizards sort of looked like a known species, but DNA analysis showed they were genetically distinct.
Researchers realized they'd discovered a new species: Mesalina cryptica, or the Arabian small-spotted lizard.
Arabian small-spotted lizards are considered 'medium-sized,' reaching up to 6 inches in length, the study said. Their tails are significantly longer than their bodies, and their feet have one longer toe. Their lower eyelids have 'a transparent window made up of two large scales.'
Photos show the brown coloring of the new species, which varies from 'beige to dark brown.' Small black and white spots dot the lizards' backs, and their tails have a slight blue tinge.
Researchers said they named the new species after the Latin word for ''concealed' or 'hidden'' because it had been 'overlooked' due to its visual similarity to other known species.
Arabian small-spotted lizards were 'observed or captured in rocky or gravely habitats,' the study said. They were 'typically encountered in flat areas of hard gravel with sparse shrubby vegetation and scattered rocks of varying sizes, using rock crevices for shelter.'
At some sites in Saudi Arabia, the lizards were seen 'climbing steep scree slopes,' researchers said. In Jordan, the lizards lived 'in flat deserts of volcanic black basalt rocks.'
Photos shared on MorphoBank by the researchers show the new species in its natural habitat.
Much about the lifestyle and behavior of the new species remains unknown.
Arabian small-spotted lizards have been found at dozens of sites in Saudi Arabia, a few sites in Jordan and one site in Kuwait, the study said. 'Our understanding of the species' real range is far from complete … It is very likely that the range of the species is continuous all the way from Jordan to Kuwait.'
The new species was identified by its size, body proportions, coloring and other subtle physical features, the study said. DNA analysis found the new species had at least 4% genetic divergence from related species.
The research team included Jiří Šmíd, Doubravka Velenská, Lukáš Pola, Karin Tamar, Salem Busais, Mohammed Shobrak, Mohammed Almutairi, Al Faqih Ali Salim, Saad Dasman Alsubaie, Raed Hamoud AlGethami, Abdulaziz Raqi AlGethami, Abdulkarim Saleh Alanazi, Ahmed Mohajja Alshammari, Damien Egan, Ricardo Ramalho, David Olson, Josh Smithson, Laurent Chirio, Marius Burger, Ryan van Huyssteen, Melissa Petford and Salvador Carranza.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
21 hours ago
- Yahoo
What was the first human species?
When you buy through links on our articles, Future and its syndication partners may earn a commission. All humans today are members of the modern human species Homo sapiens — Latin for "knowing man." But we're far from the only humans who ever existed. Fossils are revealing more and more about early humans in the genus Homo — ancestors like Homo erectus (Latin for "upright man"), who lived in Africa, Asia and parts of Europe between 1.9 million and 110,000 years ago. Scientists now recognize more than a dozen species in the Homo genus. So what, exactly, was the first human species? The answer, it turns out, is not crystal clear. Fossil finds in Morocco have revealed that anatomically modern humans emerged at least 300,000 years ago. But the oldest human species scientists definitively know about is called Homo habilis, or "handy man" — a tool-using primate who walked upright and lived in Africa between 2.4 million and 1.4 million years ago. However, earlier fossils hint that other Homo species may predate H. habilis. The scarcity of early human fossils makes it challenging to know if unusual specimens are a newfound species or simply an atypical member of a known species. On top of that, evolution can be gradual, so it's hard to pinpoint when a new species emerges, especially when fossils have a mix of features from different species. "The process of evolution is continuous, but the labels we place on it for convenience are static," Tim D. White, a paleoanthropologist at the University of California Berkeley, told Live Science. Related: Why did Homo sapiens outlast all other human species? Earliest Homo Most evolutionary theories suggest that H. habilis evolved from an earlier genus of primate named Australopithecus — Latin for "southern ape" because its fossils were first discovered in South Africa. Sign up for our newsletter Sign up for our weekly Life's Little Mysteries newsletter to get the latest mysteries before they appear online. Various species of Australopithecus lived from about 4.4 million to 1.4 million years ago. It may be that H. habilis evolved directly from the species Australopithecus afarensis — the best-known example of which is "Lucy," who was unearthed at Hadar in Ethiopia in 1974. The fossils of our genus are usually distinguished from Australopithecus fossils by Homo's distinctively smaller teeth and a relatively large brain, which led to the greater use of stone tools. But White noted that traits like smaller teeth and bigger brains must have emerged at times in the Australopithecus populations that early Homo evolved from. "If you had an Australopithecus female, there wasn't a birth at which point she would have christened the child Homo," he said. As a result, there is no fixed point in time in which Homo originated; instead, the Homo genus emerged roughly between 2 million and 3 million years ago, White said. Evolving in Africa Since the 1970s, researchers in Africa have discovered fossils that they've attributed to another ancient species, Homo rudolfensis, which challenges the idea that H. habilis was the earliest Homo. H. rudolfensis seems to have been physically much bigger, had a larger brain and a flatter facial structure than H. habilis, which may have made it look more like a modern human. Its fossils are roughly the same age as H. habilis — as much as 2.4 million years old. But "there is only one really good fossil of this Homo rudolfensis," according to the Smithsonian National Museum of Natural History, so scientists don't know if H. rudolfensis is an unusual H. habilis or even an Austrolopithicus with a larger-than-usual brain. Paleoanthropologist Rick Potts, who heads the Smithsonian Institute's Human Origins program, told Live Science that even older fossils from Africa appear to be from the genus Homo and may predate both of those species. RELATED MYSTERIES —What did the last common ancestor between humans and apes look like? —Are Neanderthals and Homo sapiens the same species? —Why did Homo sapiens emerge in Africa? The oldest of those fossils date from about 2.8 million years ago, but they are only fragments — a few jaw bones and a few teeth — so they are not enough to establish if they came from a different, unnamed species of Homo, he said. A 2025 study found additional teeth dating to 2.59 million and 2.78 million years old that may also belong to this mysterious early Homo species. So it may be that the first human species has not yet been found. "There's a whole lot of excitement, but there is also a lot of uncertainty, about trying to discover more about the origins of the genus Homo," Potts said. Human evolution quiz: What do you know about Homo sapiens? Solve the daily Crossword
USA Today
a day ago
- USA Today
Sorry guys, size does matter: Meet the creature dubbed as the 'Genital King'
Four newly-discovered tarantula species were just dubbed the "Genital King," and for tarantulas, size really does matter. The species are all under the genus Satyrex, which loosely translates to the epithet that Tinder dates around the world would love to boast. Still, they would certainly fall short compared to this tarantula, which can be found in southeastern Yemen and southwestern Oman, countries that share a border in Asia on the Arabian Peninsula. A study published by the peer-reviewed scientific journal ZooKeys revealed the discovery of the well-endowed spiders. Spiders don't have penises, but instead have pedipalps, which are secondary sexual organs that deliver sperm to females, said Alireza Zamani, the arachnologist and taxonomist at the University of Turku in Finland, who discovered the spider. Satyrex compared to other tarantulas Most tarantulas' pedipalps are around 1.5 times larger than the carapace, their midsection, according to Zamani. It's "extremely rare," but sometimes pedipalps can be 2.5 times longer. However, for the Genital King, "it is almost four times longer than the carapace," said Zamani. "It's almost as long as the longest legs of the tarantula." If the tarantula swapped roles, and those proportions belonged to a human instead, their penis would be the length of their leg. Why is it so big? How did the spider develop such a big member? Well, researchers don't know, but they have a hypothesis. "This elongation has happened as a result of what we call sexual selection," Zamani said. "The females of this species, and probably others that we are currently considering in this genus, are very, very aggressive." The tarantulas are more aggressive than any species in the Americas. So, the running theory is that the tarantulas have such long pedipalps because it makes it easier for them to administer their sperm into the female and make a quick getaway before the female tarantula can attack. Where did their name come from? The tarantula's Latin name is a combination of Satyr, a mythological creature known for having a large, erect penis, and rex, which means king. "It's interesting for a wide group of people and not just a group of scientists who study them," said Zamani. "So I spent a lot of time thinking about 'What name should I pick?'" "It just was at the back of my mind all the time," said Zamani. It took Zamani and a colleague a month to come up with the name. And, ironically enough, when trying to come up with the name, he kept thinking of a famous quote from Spider-Man. " I usually say this thing that 'With great power comes great responsibility,'" said Zamani. "If you have the power to actually name a species, then you have to be responsible to give it a good name, something memorable, especially if it's something that creates interest." Julia is a trending reporter for USA TODAY. Connect with her on LinkedIn,X, Instagram, and TikTok: @juliamariegz, or email her at jgomez@
Medscape
13-08-2025
- Medscape
Fish Bone or Cancer? 80-Year-Old's Perforation Case
Key Takeaways An 80-year-old man presented with progressive lower left-quadrant abdominal pain. Imaging studies identified a mass adjacent to the sigmoid colon, with features suggestive of an abscess, although no definitive foreign body was detected preoperatively. Surgical exploration revealed a sigmoid colon perforation associated with a sharp foreign object, which was later confirmed to be a fish bone. Histopathological examination revealed an inflammatory response without evidence of malignancy. The case reported by Daniel Herrera Hernández, MD, and colleagues from the Hospital General Regional No. 1 Instituto Mexicano del Seguro Social, Tijuana, Mexico, highlighted a rare cause of intestinal perforation. The Patient and His History The patient had a medical history of diabetes mellitus and hypertension. There was no prior surgical history or screening colonoscopy. He reported a 12-day history of lower left-quadrant abdominal pain, progressively worsening to become intolerable, prompting emergency admission. Findings and Diagnosis On presentation, the patient was stable but exhibited abdominal distension and tenderness on palpation of the left hemiabdomen, without signs of peritoneal irritation. Laboratory tests showed leucocytosis of 20,800/μL (4000-11,000), neutrophils at 65.1% (40%-70%) of total leukocytes, and a serum creatinine of 1.0 mg/dL (0.6-1.2). Abdominal and pelvic CT scans revealed a mass adjacent to the descending colon with peripheral enhancement dependent on the colonic wall, extending into the muscular layer, suggestive of an abscess, as well as a small radio-opaque object in the middle of the phlegmon, supportive of a foreign body. Adjacent fat stranding and free fluid were observed in the left iliac fossa. The patient underwent exploratory laparotomy, revealing a colonic perforation at the sigmoid colon with firm adhesions to the abdominal wall. A sharpened foreign body, approximately 2 cm in length, was found at the adhesion site, which was the cause of the perforation. No diverticula were identified in the colon. Left hemicolectomy with transverse colon terminal colostomy was performed. Postoperative recovery was uneventful under antibiotic therapy with meropenem and metabolic management. The patient was discharged on postoperative day 5 with clinical improvement. The histopathology report indicated chronic inflammation with no evidence of malignancy. Discussion 'Intestinal perforation by a fish bone in the colon is a rare complication that poses diagnostic challenges. It requires a high index of suspicion from surgeons or emergency physicians. In patients with risk factors, such perforations can resemble tumours with abscess formation or perforation secondary to malignancy,' the authors wrote. This story was translated from Univadis Germany.
