Scientists discover new crocodiles on Mexican islands that remained hidden for centuries
Tired of too many ads? go ad free now
Remote and ecologically rich areas like islands and coastal habitats often house unique species, but they're also among the most vulnerable to human development and environmental change.
In this delicate balance between discovery and destruction, science plays a crucial role in identifying species before they vanish, possibly unnoticed. Genetic analysis and modern fieldwork are helping scientists revisit long-held assumptions, bringing to light some unexpected biodiversity.
The more we discover, the easier it becomes, as each ecosystem holds details that deserve attention, research, and protection.
A recent discovery is a perfect example of the same
Scientists have identified two new species of crocodiles living in isolated parts of Mexico, one on the island of Cozumel and the other on the coral atoll of Banco Chinchorro, both situated off the Yucatán Peninsula. This is changing the assumptions, what scientists thought they knew about the American crocodile, which was believed to be a single, widespread species.
According to Biology Professor Hans Larsson, the lead investigator of the study, the discovery came after the team analyzed genetic samples from these crocodile populations and compared them to others across the Caribbean, Central America, and Mexico's Pacific coast.
'We assumed Crocodylus acutus was a single species ranging from Baja California to Venezuela and across the Caribbean. Our study is the first to extensively explore genomic and anatomical variation in these animals'.
Tired of too many ads? go ad free now
Small populations at risk despite stability
The two newly identified crocodile species remain unnamed but are genetically distinct, with fewer than 1,000 breeding individuals in each isolated population. While both groups appear stable, their limited numbers and confinement to small habitats make them especially vulnerable.
'Now that we recognize these crocodiles as distinct species, it's crucial to protect their habitats. Limiting land development and implementing careful conservation strategies on Cozumel and Banco Chinchorro will be key to ensuring their survival,' Larsson added.
A wake-up call for conservation
The discovery is also a race against time to catalog biodiversity before it's lost. 'Biodiversity is disappearing faster than we can discover what we're losing,' said Larsson. With coastal development and habitat degradation threatening crocodile populations across the globe, this find serves as both a scientific milestone and a conservation alarm bell.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hindustan Times
an hour ago
- Hindustan Times
Will an astronomical anomaly challenge the idea of scientific revolutions?
Before the revolution triggered by Nicolaus Copernicus, a 16th-century cleric, the Earth was the unmoving centre of the cosmos. Afterwards, it was one of a family of planets swinging through space. Before the work of Antoine Lavoisier, an 18th-century nobleman, chemists had no notion of 'oxygen', 'carbon' and the like; afterwards they could not understand the contents of their alembics without them. Such examples are at the heart of the idea, put forward in the 1960s by Thomas Kuhn, of the paradigm shift. Such shifts, he argued, did not just involve a new theory explaining the world better than an old one; they required a change in the sort of entities the world was thought to be made up of. In a way that seems almost self-exemplifying, the idea provided a new way of looking at science itself: not as one thing, but two. In the 'normal' phase scientists applied their physical and conceptual tools to problems the scope of which was pretty well understood; in revolutionary phases, paradigms shifted. Normal didn't mean dull or unimportant. When, in the 1980s, American astronomers made the case for the Hubble Space Telescope, then the costliest scientific instrument in history, none of its goals mattered more than what seemed a perfect example of normal science: nailing down the value of the constant (also named after Edwin Hubble, an astronomer) which says how fast the universe is expanding. The Hubble did this very well. The difficulty, as our Science section reports, is that since its launch it has become possible to estimate the Hubble constant on the basis of background radiation from all over the sky, rather than distances to individual objects. And these new estimates are significantly lower. The seemingly unbridgeable divide between the approaches has become known as the Hubble tension. To those who know their Kuhn this looks like the sort of anomaly that might precede some new paradigm shift. The possibility is tantalising. The conceptual usefulness of paradigm shifts has been much debated, as indeed has their existence. The concept is horribly overused. (A new paradigm for vegan cosmetics!) Yet the notion of a fresh worldview remains dramatic and beguiling, and the romance only increases when it applies on a cosmic, but reassuringly inconsequential scale. (A paradigm shift in financial markets might be far more practically important.) The problem is that, as Kuhn noted, you can judge these things only in retrospect. The sort of anomaly that is recast and solved by a paradigm shift is not in principle distinguishable from a 'normal' problem which has not yet been solved. The paradigms in which normal science is done are, like the fabric of the universe, somewhat stretchy; new ideas, sometimes quite big ones, can be incorporated without wholesale change. And some suspect that science's capacity to adapt itself in this way has increased since the days of Kuhn's examples. It is far more institutionalised and regimented today, and that may provide a stability, even a rigidity, to its worldviews. This need not be a bad thing. Paradigm shifts are not necessary for technological improvement. But it is hard not to think that, if their age has gone, then so has some of science's thrill—and hard not to want the Hubble tension to demonstrate that paradigms can still be pulled apart. Subscribers to The Economist can sign up to our Opinion newsletter, which brings together the best of our leaders, columns, guest essays and reader correspondence.
India Today
2 hours ago
- India Today
Nasa to build nuclear reactor on the Moon: Is it possible by 2030?
The United States, led by Nasa, has set its sights on a lunar first, building a nuclear reactor on the Moon by bold initiative comes amid an intensifying space race with China and Russia, both of which have revealed similar ambitions for lunar nuclear power in the coming project aims to create a reliable energy source for future moon bases, enabling extended human habitation and supporting advanced research far from NUCLEAR POWER ON THE MOON?advertisement Solar power, long the default for space missions, faces major limitations on the lunar day-night lasts about four Earth weeks, two weeks of continuous sunlight followed by two weeks of complete darkness, making uninterrupted solar energy impossible without massive, impractical agree that nuclear fission is currently the only viable technology to ensure consistent power for habitats, life-support systems, experiments, and potential lunar target design is a compact reactor capable of generating around 100 kilowatts, enough to power approximately 80 homes on Earth. While much smaller than terrestrial nuclear plants, it would mark a huge leap from the few hundred watts delivered by current space-based nuclear AND LOGISTICAL CHALLENGESBuilding and deploying a reactor on the Moon brings daunting technical hurdles. The system must be lightweight enough for rocket transport, robust enough to survive the lunar landing, and engineered for remote assembly and activation in harsh conditions without atmosphere or reliable cooling are adapting proven technologies, transitioning from traditional terrestrial reactors to modular, autonomous fission systems capable of withstanding wild temperature swings and micrometeorite safety is crucial, too. The reactor would likely launch in an unirradiated state, minimising risks during transit. Once operational, management of radioactive waste and decommissioning processes must comply with international space treaties to protect celestial bodies from contamination. Designers are adapting proven technologies, transitioning from traditional terrestrial reactors to modular. (Photo: Getty) IS THE 2030 TIMELINE FEASIBLE?Experts say the 2030 deadline is ambitious yet achievable, if enough funding and political backing engineering is possible; prototypes of compact, remote-ready reactors already exist, and Nasa has awarded contracts for lunar reactor design since fluctuating agency budgets, legal complexities, and the inherent risks of space nuclear operations could slow progress. The American space agency is going through a period of intense insecurity with major budget cuts under the Donald Trump administration, followed by mass space agency is also facing a brain drain as scientists and engineers remain uncertain over employment at the multiple affiliated organisations of Nasa. Experts say the 2030 deadline is ambitious yet achievable. (Photo: AP) THE BIGGER PICTUREThis moonshot isn't just about energy. The first nation to establish a nuclear reactor on the Moon could gain a strategic edge in the competition for extraterrestrial resources and future Mars successful, America's lunar reactor would stand as a centerpiece in sustaining humanity's future off-Earth, a challenge that is truly monumental but now, remarkably, within reach.- EndsMust Watch
Time of India
11 hours ago
- Time of India
She worked at Harvard for 30 cents an hour, her work shaped our understanding of the universe, but never won a Nobel Prize
Henrietta Swan Leavitt , an American astronomer whose groundbreaking discovery revolutionized how we measure the cosmos. Born in 1868, Leavitt began working at the Harvard College Observatory at a time when women were excluded from operating telescopes and instead employed as 'computers' to analyze astronomical data. Despite earning just 30 cents an hour, her dedication and meticulous research led to one of the most important astronomical breakthroughs of the 20th century. In 1908, Leavitt discovered the period-luminosity relationship of Cepheid variable stars , showing a direct link between their brightness and pulsation period. This discovery became the key to measuring vast cosmic distances and ultimately helped astronomers like Edwin Hubble prove that the universe is expanding. Yet, despite her monumental contributions, Leavitt was never awarded a Nobel Prize during her lifetime. The discovery that changed astronomy forever Leavitt's key insight came from studying Cepheid variable stars in the Small Magellanic Cloud, a galaxy assumed to be at a uniform distance from Earth. By carefully analyzing photographic plates, she found that the brightness of these stars varied in a predictable way tied to their pulsation period: the longer the period, the brighter the star. This relationship, now known as Leavitt's Law, gave astronomers a powerful 'standard candle,' an object of known brightness that can be used to calculate distances in space. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Are you Smarter than Average? Test Now! Try Now Undo Using this standard candle method, astronomers could measure how far away these stars and by extension, the galaxies they reside in actually were. This was a breakthrough in cosmic distance measurement, allowing scientists to determine the scale of the universe with unprecedented accuracy. Leavitt's discovery became the foundation for Edwin Hubble's later work in the 1920s where he used Cepheid variables to prove that the Milky Way was just one of many galaxies and that the universe itself was expanding. Overcoming barriers as a woman in science Henrietta Swan Leavitt's career unfolded during a time when women faced serious discrimination in science. Women were largely relegated to supportive roles and denied opportunities such as telescope operation and academic recognition. Leavitt was paid a modest wage of about 30 cents an hour as a 'computer' at Harvard, tasked with analyzing star data rather than conducting independent research. Despite these limitations, she showed extraordinary focus and persistence. Leavitt's progressive hearing loss later in life made her work even more challenging, yet she continued her observations and calculations until her untimely death at the age of 53. Tragically, although her work was foundational for modern astronomy, she never received the Nobel Prize or equivalent accolades during her lifetime, and a posthumous nomination was not permitted. Legacy and lasting impact on cosmology Leavitt's period-luminosity relationship remains one of the cornerstones of astrophysics. It revolutionized the way distances to faraway celestial objects are measured, enabling astronomers to map the universe on a grand scale. This method underpins modern cosmology, helping scientists determine not only distances but also the rate at which the universe is expanding, key to the Big Bang theory. Edwin Hubble famously used Leavitt's discovery to measure the distances to galaxies beyond the Milky Way and uncover the expanding nature of the universe, a milestone that forever changed humanity's understanding of our place in the cosmos. Today, Henrietta Swan Leavitt is celebrated as a pioneering figure in astronomy whose brilliance and perseverance overcame societal and physical obstacles, leaving a profound legacy that continues to guide scientific exploration.
