logo
Monkeys are kidnapping babies of another species on a Panamanian island, perplexing scientists

Monkeys are kidnapping babies of another species on a Panamanian island, perplexing scientists

Yahoo19-05-2025

Sign up for CNN's Wonder Theory science newsletter. Explore the universe with news on fascinating discoveries, scientific advancements and more.
At first, behavioral ecologist Zoë Goldsborough thought the small figure seen on the back of a capuchin monkey in her camera trap footage was just a baby capuchin. But something, she said, seemed off. A closer look revealed the figure's unexpected coloration. She quickly sent a screenshot to her research collaborators. They were perplexed.
'I realized that it was really something that we hadn't seen before,' Goldsborough said.
Further observation of the video and cross-checking among researchers revealed that the small figure was actually a monkey of a different species — a baby howler.
'I was shocked,' Goldsborough said.
As Goldsborough searched through the rest of her footage, she noticed the same adult monkey — a white-faced capuchin nicknamed 'Joker' for the scar on his mouth — carrying a baby howler monkey in other clips, too. Then, she noticed other male capuchins, known scientifically as Cebus capucinus imitator, doing the same thing. But why?
Using 15 months of camera-trap footage from their research site on Jicarón Island, a small island 55 kilometers (34 miles) off the coast of Panama and part of Coiba National Park, Goldsborough's collaborators from the Max Planck Institute of Animal Behavior, University of Konstanz, and Smithsonian Tropical Research Institute, among others, studied the odd behavior to find an answer.
They found that, starting with Joker, four subadult and juvenile male capuchin monkeys had abducted at least 11 infant howler monkeys between January 2022 and March 2023. With no evidence of the capuchins eating, caring for or playing with the infants, the study authors suspect the kidnapping behavior is a kind of 'cultural fad' — and potentially a symptom of the monkeys' unique conditions in the ecosystem of Jicarón. They reported their initial findings Monday in the journal Current Biology.
Still, many questions remain. And unraveling the mystery could be crucial, the researchers said. The howler population on Jicarón is an endangered subspecies of mantled howler monkeys, Alouatta palliata coibensis, according to the IUCN Red List of Threatened Species, a global assessment of species' vulnerability to extinction. Additionally, howler monkey moms give birth only once every two years, on average.
Examining the capuchin kidnapper case 'was kind of like a roller coaster where we kept having different interpretations, and then we would find something that proved that wrong,' said Goldsborough, the study's lead author and a doctoral student with the Max Planck Institute of Animal Behavior and University of Konstanz.
Jicarón Island is uninhabited by humans. With no electricity and a rocky terrain, scientists have to haul their gear and other materials to the island with boats when the tides are right, making in-person observations of the skittish capuchin monkeys difficult. That's why they use camera traps: hidden, motion-triggered cameras that capture photos and videos of the ground-dwelling capuchins.
But there's a major limitation to their work: You don't know what you can't see, and the camera traps don't capture what's happening in the treetops, where howler monkeys live. So, the study team couldn't definitively confirm how, when, or why capuchins abducted the babies.
At first, the researchers thought it was a rare, one-time case of adoption. Monkeys have been known to 'adopt' abandoned infants of the same or other species. But Joker wasn't caring for the howlers — he was just carrying them on his back, with no clear benefit to himself, until the infants eventually perished of starvation without access to breast milk.
It's an odd behavior for male primates, said Pedro Dias, a primatologist at Veracruzana University in Mexico who studies Mexico's mantled howler monkeys and was not involved in the research. In primatology, it's fairly common to find females adopting or abducting infants to then care for them as a maternal instinct, he said. But on Jicarón, the males were not providing maternal care.
When behavioral ecologist Corinna Most first read about the Jicarón monkey kidnappings, she suspected something else was going on. 'They're probably eating these babies,' said Most, an adjunct associate professor at Iowa State University who studies baboons, of her initial thoughts.
Abduction for predation isn't uncommon in the animal world, added Most, who was not involved with the research. But as she learned more about the team's observations, she was surprised to find that wasn't happening in this case, either.
Instead, the capuchins toted around the baby howlers for days with few interactions — no play, minimal aggression and little interest. Why they would exert the energy to steal babies is largely unclear, said study coauthor Brendan Barrett, a behavioral ecologist and Goldsborough's adviser.
However, it's important to note that these island capuchins evolved in a different environment from their mainland relatives, explained Barrett. Capuchins are 'destructive, explorative agents of chaos,' he said. Even on the mainland, they rip things apart, hit wasp nests, wrestle with each other, harass other species and poke around just to see what happens.
On an island without predators, 'that makes it less risky to do stupid things,' Barrett said. Island capuchins can also spread out since they don't need strength in numbers for protection, allowing them to explore.
With this relative safety and freedom, Jicarón's capuchin monkeys might be a bit bored, the researchers proposed.
Boredom, it turns out, could be a key driver of innovation — particularly on islands, and particularly among younger individuals of a species. This idea is the focus of Goldsborough's thesis research on Jicarón and Coiba's capuchins, the only monkey populations in these areas that have been observed using stones as tools to crack nuts. Consistent with the abductions, it's only the males who use tools on Jicarón, which remains a mystery to the researchers.
'We know that cultural innovation, in several cases, is linked to the youngest and not the oldest,' Dias said.
For example, evidence of potato-washing behavior in macaques on Japan's Koshima Island was first observed in a young female nicknamed Imo.
There are a few possible reasons for this, Dias explained. Adolescence is a time during which primates are independent from their mothers, when they start to forage and explore on their own. At that stage the monkeys also aren't fully integrated into their group's society yet.
Over-imitation — a tendency in human children to imitate the behavior of others even if they don't understand it — could possibly be at play as well, Most said.
This over-imitation isn't found in other animals, Most emphasized, but, 'I almost feel like this is what these other capuchins are doing,' perhaps as a way to socially bond with Joker, she observed.
Most said she has usually thought that necessity, rather than free time, is the mother of invention in nature. But 'this paper makes a good case for (the idea that) maybe sometimes animals that are really smart, like capuchins, just get bored,' she noted.
People and other primates famously share a certain level of intelligence defined by tool usage and other metrics, but some shared traits could be less desirable, Goldsborough said.
'One of the ways we are different from many animals is that we have many of these sort of arbitrary, nearly functionless cultural traditions that really harm other animals,' she added.
As a kid growing up in the northeastern United States, Barrett said he used to catch frogs and lightning bugs in mason jars while exploring the outdoors. While he never meant to hurt them, he knows those activities usually aren't pleasant for the animal.
It's possible that the capuchins' kidnapping behavior is similarly arbitrary — if not moderately entertaining for them. Barrett and Goldsborough said they hope this new behavior fades away, much like fads among humans come and go. Or perhaps the howler monkeys will catch onto what's happening and adapt their behavior to better protect their babies, Goldsborough added.
'It kind of is like a mirror that reflects upon ourselves,' Barrett said, 'of us seemingly doing things to other species that can harm them and seem atrocious that have no real purpose.'

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

A surprising study revealed biological activity on a distant planet. Weeks later, scientists say there's more to the story
A surprising study revealed biological activity on a distant planet. Weeks later, scientists say there's more to the story

Yahoo

time11 hours ago

  • Yahoo

A surprising study revealed biological activity on a distant planet. Weeks later, scientists say there's more to the story

Sign up for CNN's Wonder Theory science newsletter. Explore the universe with news on fascinating discoveries, scientific advancements and more. A tiny sign revealed in April seemed like it might change the universe as we know it. Astronomers had detected just a hint, a glimmer of two molecules swirling in the atmosphere of a distant planet called K2-18b — molecules that on Earth are produced only by living things. It was a tantalizing prospect: the most promising evidence yet of an extraterrestrial biosignature, or traces of life linked to biological activity. But only weeks later, new findings suggest the search must continue. 'It was exciting, but it immediately raised several red flags because that claim of a potential biosignature would be historic, but also the significance or the strength of the statistical evidence seemed to be too high for the data,' said Dr. Luis Welbanks, a postdoctoral research scholar at Arizona State University's School of Earth and Space Exploration. While the molecules identified on K2-18b by the April study — dimethyl sulfide, or DMS, and dimethyl disulfide, or DMDS — are associated largely with microbial organisms on our planet, scientists point out that the compounds can also form without the presence of life. Now, three teams of astronomers not involved with the research, including Welbanks, have assessed the models and data used in the original biosignature discovery and got very different results, which they have submitted for peer review. Meanwhile, the lead author of the April study, Nikku Madhusudhan, and his colleagues have conducted additional research that they say reinforces their previous finding about the planet. And it's likely that additional observations and research from multiple groups of scientists are on the horizon. The succession of research papers revolving around K2-18b offers a glimpse of the scientific process unfolding in real time. It's a window into the complexities and nuances of how researchers search for evidence of life beyond Earth — and shows why the burden of proof is so high and difficult to reach. Located 124 light-years from Earth, K2-18b is generally considered a worthy target to scour for signs of life. It is thought to be a Hycean world, a planet entirely covered in liquid water with a hydrogen-rich atmosphere, according to previous research led by Madhusudhan, a professor of astrophysics and exoplanetary science at the University of Cambridge's Institute of Astronomy. And as such, K2-18b has rapidly attracted attention as a potentially habitable place beyond our solar system. Convinced of K2-18b's promise, Madhusudhan and his Cambridge colleagues used observations of the planet by the largest space telescope in operation, the James Webb Space Telescope, to study the planet further. But two scientists at the University of Chicago — Dr. Rafael Luque, a postdoctoral scholar in the university's department of astronomy and astrophysics, and Michael Zhang, a 51 Pegasi b / Burbidge postdoctoral fellow — spotted some problems with what they found. After reviewing Madhusudhan and his team's April paper, which followed up on their 2023 research, Luque and Zhang noticed that the Webb data looked 'noisy,' Luque said. Noise, caused by imperfections in the telescope and the rate at which different particles of light reach the telescope, is just one challenge astronomers face when they study distant exoplanets. Noise can distort observations and introduce uncertainties into the data, Zhang said. Trying to detect specific gases in distant exoplanet atmospheres introduces even more uncertainty. The most noticeable features from a gas like dimethyl sulfide stem from a bond of hydrogen and carbon molecules — a connection that can stretch and bend and absorb light at different wavelengths, making it hard to definitively detect one kind of molecule, Zhang said. 'The problem is basically every organic molecule has a carbon-hydrogen bond,' Zhang said. 'There's hundreds of millions of those molecules, and so these features are not unique. If you have perfect data, you can probably distinguish between different molecules. But if you don't have perfect data, a lot of molecules, especially organic molecules, look very similar, especially in the near-infrared.' Delving further into the paper, Luque and Zhang also noticed that the perceived temperature of the planet appeared to increase sharply from a range of about 250 Kelvin to 300 Kelvin (-9.67 F to 80.33 F or -23.15 C to 26.85 C) in research Madhusudhan published in 2023 to 422 Kelvin (299.93 F or 148.85 C) in the April study. Such harsh temperatures could change the way astronomers think about the planet's potential habitability, Zhang said, especially because cooler temperatures persist in the top of the atmosphere — the area that Webb can detect — and the surface or ocean below would likely have even higher temperatures. 'This is just an inference only from the atmosphere, but it would certainly affect how we think about the planet in general,' Luque said. Part of the issue, he said, is that the April analysis didn't include data collected from all three Webb instruments Madhusudhan's team used over the past few years. So Luque, Zhang and their colleagues conducted a study combining all the available data to see whether they could achieve the same results, or even find a higher amount of dimethyl sulfide. They found 'insufficient evidence' of both molecules in the planet's atmosphere. Instead, Luque and Zhang's team spotted other molecules, like ethane, that could fit the same profile. But ethane does not signify life. Arizona State's Welbanks and his colleagues, including Dr. Matt Nixon, a postdoctoral researcher in the department of astronomy at the University of Maryland College Park, also found what they consider a fundamental problem with the April paper on K2-18b. The concern, Welbanks said, was with how Madhusudhan and his team created models to show which molecules might be in the planet's atmosphere. 'Each (molecule) is tested one at a time against the same minimal baseline, meaning every single model has an artificial advantage: It is the only explanation permitted,' Welbanks said. When Welbanks and his team conducted their own analysis, they expanded the model from Madhusudhan's study. '(Madhusudhan and his colleagues) didn't allow for any other chemical species that could potentially be producing these small signals or observations,' Nixon said. 'So the main thing we wanted to do was assess whether other chemical species could provide an adequate fit to the data.' When the model was expanded, the evidence for dimethyl sulfide or dimethyl disulfide 'just disappears,' Welbanks said. Madhusudhan believes the studies that have come out after his April paper are 'very encouraging' and 'enabling a healthy discussion on the interpretation of our data on K2-18b.' He reviewed Luque and Zhang's work and agreed that their findings don't show a 'strong detection for DMS or DMDS.' When Madhusudhan's team published the paper in April, he said the observations reached the three-sigma level of significance, or a 0.3% probability that the detections occurred by chance. For a scientific discovery that is highly unlikely to have occurred by chance, the observations must meet a five-sigma threshold, or below a 0.00006% probability that the observations occurred by chance. Meeting such a threshold will require many steps, Welbanks said, including repeated detections of the same molecule using multiple telescopes and ruling out potential nonbiological sources. While such evidence could be found in our lifetime, it is less likely to be a eureka moment and more a slow build requiring a consensus among astronomers, physicists, biologists and chemists. 'We have never reached that level of evidence in any of our studies,' Madhusudhan wrote in an email. 'We have only found evidence at or below 3-sigma in our two previous studies (Madhusudhan et al. 2023 and 2025). We refer to this as moderate evidence or hints but not a strong detection. I agree with (Luque and Zhang's) claim which is consistent with our study and we have discussed the need for stronger evidence extensively in our study and communications.' In response to the research conducted by Welbanks' team, Madhusudhan and his Cambridge colleagues have authored another manuscript expanding the search on K2-18b to include 650 types of molecules. They have submitted the new analysis for peer review. 'This is the largest search for chemical signatures in an exoplanet to date, using all the available data for K2-18b and searching through 650 molecules,' Madhusudhan said. 'We find that DMS continues to be a promising candidate molecule in this planet, though more observations are required for a firm detection as we have noted in our previous studies.' Welbanks and Nixon were pleased that Madhusudhan and his colleagues addressed the concerns raised but feel that the new paper effectively walks back central claims made in the original April study, Welbanks said. 'The new paper tacitly concedes that the DMS/DMDS detection was not robust, yet still relies on the same flawed statistical framework and a selective reading of its own results,' Welbanks said in an email. 'While the tone is more cautious (sometimes), the methodology continues to obscure the true level of uncertainty. The statistical significance claimed in earlier work was the product of arbitrary modeling decisions that are not acknowledged.' Luque said the Cambridge team's new paper is a step in the right direction because it explores other possible chemical biosignatures. 'But I think it fell short in the scope,' Luque said. 'I think it restricted itself too much into being a rebuttal to the (Welbanks) paper.' Separately, however, the astronomers studying K2-18b agree that pushing forward on researching the exoplanet contributes to the scientific process. 'I think it's just a good, healthy scientific discourse to talk about what is going on with this planet,' Welbanks said. 'Regardless of what any single author group says right now, we don't have a silver bullet. But that is exactly why this is exciting, because we know that we're the closest we have ever been (to finding a biosignature), and I think we may get it within our lifetime, but right now, we're not there. That is not a failure. We're testing bold ideas.'

How one planet is revealing why it's so hard to detect life beyond Earth
How one planet is revealing why it's so hard to detect life beyond Earth

Yahoo

time17 hours ago

  • Yahoo

How one planet is revealing why it's so hard to detect life beyond Earth

Sign up for CNN's Wonder Theory science newsletter. Explore the universe with news on fascinating discoveries, scientific advancements and more. A tiny sign revealed in April seemed like it might change the universe as we know it. Astronomers had detected just a hint, a glimmer of two molecules swirling in the atmosphere of a distant planet called K2-18b — molecules that on Earth are produced only by living things. It was a tantalizing prospect: the most promising evidence yet of an extraterrestrial biosignature, or traces of life linked to biological activity. But only weeks later, new findings suggest the search must continue. 'It was exciting, but it immediately raised several red flags because that claim of a potential biosignature would be historic, but also the significance or the strength of the statistical evidence seemed to be too high for the data,' said Dr. Luis Welbanks, a postdoctoral research scholar at Arizona State University's School of Earth and Space Exploration. While the molecules identified on K2-18b by the April study — dimethyl sulfide, or DMS, and dimethyl disulfide, or DMDS — are associated largely with microbial organisms on our planet, scientists point out that the compounds can also form without the presence of life. Now, three teams of astronomers not involved with the research, including Welbanks, have assessed the models and data used in the original biosignature discovery and got very different results, which they have submitted for peer review. Meanwhile, the lead author of the April study, Nikku Madhusudhan, and his colleagues have conducted additional research that they say reinforces their previous finding about the planet. And it's likely that additional observations and research from multiple groups of scientists are on the horizon. The succession of research papers revolving around K2-18b offers a glimpse of the scientific process unfolding in real time. It's a window into the complexities and nuances of how researchers search for evidence of life beyond Earth — and shows why the burden of proof is so high and difficult to reach. Located 124 light-years from Earth, K2-18b is generally considered a worthy target to scour for signs of life. It is thought to be a Hycean world, a planet entirely covered in liquid water with a hydrogen-rich atmosphere, according to previous research led by Madhusudhan, a professor of astrophysics and exoplanetary science at the University of Cambridge's Institute of Astronomy. And as such, K2-18b has rapidly attracted attention as a potentially habitable place beyond our solar system. Convinced of K2-18b's promise, Madhusudhan and his Cambridge colleagues used observations of the planet by the largest space telescope in operation, the James Webb Space Telescope, to study the planet further. But two scientists at the University of Chicago — Dr. Rafael Luque, a postdoctoral scholar in the university's department of astronomy and astrophysics, and Michael Zhang, a 51 Pegasi b / Burbidge postdoctoral fellow — spotted some problems with what they found. After reviewing Madhusudhan and his team's April paper, which followed up on their 2023 research, Luque and Zhang noticed that the Webb data looked 'noisy,' Luque said. Noise, caused by imperfections in the telescope and the rate at which different particles of light reach the telescope, is just one challenge astronomers face when they study distant exoplanets. Noise can distort observations and introduce uncertainties into the data, Zhang said. Trying to detect specific gases in distant exoplanet atmospheres introduces even more uncertainty. The most noticeable features from a gas like dimethyl sulfide stem from a bond of hydrogen and carbon molecules — a connection that can stretch and bend and absorb light at different wavelengths, making it hard to definitively detect one kind of molecule, Zhang said. 'The problem is basically every organic molecule has a carbon-hydrogen bond,' Zhang said. 'There's hundreds of millions of those molecules, and so these features are not unique. If you have perfect data, you can probably distinguish between different molecules. But if you don't have perfect data, a lot of molecules, especially organic molecules, look very similar, especially in the near-infrared.' Delving further into the paper, Luque and Zhang also noticed that the perceived temperature of the planet appeared to increase sharply from a range of about 250 Kelvin to 300 Kelvin (-9.67 F to 80.33 F or -23.15 C to 26.85 C) in research Madhusudhan published in 2023 to 422 Kelvin (299.93 F or 148.85 C) in the April study. Such harsh temperatures could change the way astronomers think about the planet's potential habitability, Zhang said, especially because cooler temperatures persist in the top of the atmosphere — the area that Webb can detect — and the surface or ocean below would likely have even higher temperatures. 'This is just an inference only from the atmosphere, but it would certainly affect how we think about the planet in general,' Luque said. Part of the issue, he said, is that the April analysis didn't include data collected from all three Webb instruments Madhusudhan's team used over the past few years. So Luque, Zhang and their colleagues conducted a study combining all the available data to see whether they could achieve the same results, or even find a higher amount of dimethyl sulfide. They found 'insufficient evidence' of both molecules in the planet's atmosphere. Instead, Luque and Zhang's team spotted other molecules, like ethane, that could fit the same profile. But ethane does not signify life. Arizona State's Welbanks and his colleagues, including Dr. Matt Nixon, a postdoctoral researcher in the department of astronomy at the University of Maryland College Park, also found what they consider a fundamental problem with the April paper on K2-18b. The concern, Welbanks said, was with how Madhusudhan and his team created models to show which molecules might be in the planet's atmosphere. 'Each (molecule) is tested one at a time against the same minimal baseline, meaning every single model has an artificial advantage: It is the only explanation permitted,' Welbanks said. When Welbanks and his team conducted their own analysis, they expanded the model from Madhusudhan's study. '(Madhusudhan and his colleagues) didn't allow for any other chemical species that could potentially be producing these small signals or observations,' Nixon said. 'So the main thing we wanted to do was assess whether other chemical species could provide an adequate fit to the data.' When the model was expanded, the evidence for dimethyl sulfide or dimethyl disulfide 'just disappears,' Welbanks said. Madhusudhan believes the studies that have come out after his April paper are 'very encouraging' and 'enabling a healthy discussion on the interpretation of our data on K2-18b.' He reviewed Luque and Zhang's work and agreed that their findings don't show a 'strong detection for DMS or DMDS.' When Madhusudhan's team published the paper in April, he said the observations reached the three-sigma level of significance, or a 0.3% probability that the detections occurred by chance. For a scientific discovery that is highly unlikely to have occurred by chance, the observations must meet a five-sigma threshold, or below a 0.00006% probability that the observations occurred by chance. Meeting such a threshold will require many steps, Welbanks said, including repeated detections of the same molecule using multiple telescopes and ruling out potential nonbiological sources. While such evidence could be found in our lifetime, it is less likely to be a eureka moment and more a slow build requiring a consensus among astronomers, physicists, biologists and chemists. 'We have never reached that level of evidence in any of our studies,' Madhusudhan wrote in an email. 'We have only found evidence at or below 3-sigma in our two previous studies (Madhusudhan et al. 2023 and 2025). We refer to this as moderate evidence or hints but not a strong detection. I agree with (Luque and Zhang's) claim which is consistent with our study and we have discussed the need for stronger evidence extensively in our study and communications.' In response to the research conducted by Welbanks' team, Madhusudhan and his Cambridge colleagues have authored another manuscript expanding the search on K2-18b to include 650 types of molecules. They have submitted the new analysis for peer review. 'This is the largest search for chemical signatures in an exoplanet to date, using all the available data for K2-18b and searching through 650 molecules,' Madhusudhan said. 'We find that DMS continues to be a promising candidate molecule in this planet, though more observations are required for a firm detection as we have noted in our previous studies.' Welbanks and Nixon were pleased that Madhusudhan and his colleagues addressed the concerns raised but feel that the new paper effectively walks back central claims made in the original April study, Welbanks said. 'The new paper tacitly concedes that the DMS/DMDS detection was not robust, yet still relies on the same flawed statistical framework and a selective reading of its own results,' Welbanks said in an email. 'While the tone is more cautious (sometimes), the methodology continues to obscure the true level of uncertainty. The statistical significance claimed in earlier work was the product of arbitrary modeling decisions that are not acknowledged.' Luque said the Cambridge team's new paper is a step in the right direction because it explores other possible chemical biosignatures. 'But I think it fell short in the scope,' Luque said. 'I think it restricted itself too much into being a rebuttal to the (Welbanks) paper.' Separately, however, the astronomers studying K2-18b agree that pushing forward on researching the exoplanet contributes to the scientific process. 'I think it's just a good, healthy scientific discourse to talk about what is going on with this planet,' Welbanks said. 'Regardless of what any single author group says right now, we don't have a silver bullet. But that is exactly why this is exciting, because we know that we're the closest we have ever been (to finding a biosignature), and I think we may get it within our lifetime, but right now, we're not there. That is not a failure. We're testing bold ideas.'

This ‘Tower of Worms' Is a Squirming Superorganism
This ‘Tower of Worms' Is a Squirming Superorganism

Yahoo

timea day ago

  • Yahoo

This ‘Tower of Worms' Is a Squirming Superorganism

When food runs out, certain tiny roundworms, barely visible to the naked eye, crawl toward one another and build living, wriggling towers that move as one superorganism. For the first time, we've caught them doing that in nature on video. Scientists spent months pointing their digital microscope at rotting apples and pears to finally catch a glimpse of these living towers formed by Caenorhabditis roundworms in an orchard that is just downhill from the Max Planck Institute of Animal Behavior's location in Konstanz, Germany. 'It wasn't that hard to find. It's just the people didn't have the interest or time or funding for this kind of research,' says biologist Daniela Perez, lead author of the study. Perez and her team at the Max Planck Institute of Animal Behavior then studied this behavior in a laboratory to learn more. To spur the towering, they placed groups of Caenorhabditis elegans in a dish without food, alongside a toothbrush bristle that could work as a scaffold. Dozens of worms quickly climbed on top of the bristle and one another to form a structure that moved in an eerily coordinated manner. The tower responded to the touch of a glass pipe by attempting to latch onto it; it stretched to bridge the gap between the bottom of the dish and its lid; and it even waved its tip around to probe the surrounding environment. The results were published Thursday in Current Biology. [Sign up for Today in Science, a free daily newsletter] Researchers had previously observed this towering in the lab but didn't know that it was an actual survival strategy in the wild. 'Discovering [this behavior] in wild populations is really important as it shows this is a part of how these animals live and not just a lab artifact,' says William Schafer, a geneticist at the University of Cambridge, who studies C. elegans and was not involved in the study. Why do the worms do this? The researchers think towering helps worms set out to find richer food sources. When resources are limited, 'it probably makes sense for microscopic organisms to cooperate for dispersing by forming something bigger,' says the study's senior author Serena Ding. The towers could allow some of their members to reach new places or to hitchhike on other organisms such as fruit flies. The bigger question is how the worms communicate within the towers. If the worms on top latch onto a fly, how do those at the bottom know to detach from where they're anchored? They could communicate chemically through pheromones and mechanically through movement patterns, Schafer suggests. Perez says her team plans to test this next. 'Every time we have a meeting, we end up with 10 new project ideas,' she says. 'There are so many directions we can take this.'

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store