Fossil of oldest known modern bird discovered in Antarctica
CNN —
A near complete skull fossil found in Antarctica has revealed the oldest known modern bird — a mallard duck-size creature related to the waterfowl that live by lakes and oceans today, a new study has found.
The 68 million-year-old fossil belongs to an extinct species of bird known as Vegavis iaai that lived at the end of the Cretaceous period, when Tyrannosaurus rex dominated North America and just before a city-size asteroid hit Earth, dooming the dinosaurs to extinction.
Birds that lived among the dinosaurs were barely recognizable when compared with today's bird species. Many sported bizarre features such as toothed beaks and long, bony tails.
Vegavis, however, would have been ducklike in size and similar ecologically to aquatic bird species such as loons, said Christopher Torres, an assistant professor of biology at the University of the Pacific in California and lead author of the study published Wednesday in the journal Nature.
'So this bird was a foot-propelled pursuit diver. It used its legs to propel itself underwater as it swam, and something that we were able to observe directly from this new skull was it had jaw musculature (that) was associated with snapping its mouth shut underwater in pursuit of fish. And that is a lifestyle that we observe broadly among loons and grebes,' he said.
Paleontologists first described Vegavis 20 years ago, but many were skeptical that it represented a modern or crown bird species. Most modern bird fossils that had been unearthed at that point dated to after the dinosaur-killing asteroid struck off the coast of what's now Mexico 66 million years ago. Many scientists assumed that modern-looking birds began to evolve after and perhaps in response to the mass extinction.
Previous Vegavis fossil specimens also lacked a complete skull, said study coauthor Patrick O'Connor, a professor of anatomical sciences at Ohio University. Skulls are where the most characteristic features of modern birds, such as a lack of teeth and an enlarged premaxillary bone in the upper beak, can be identified.
The fossil examined in the study, collected during a 2011 expedition by the Antarctic Peninsula Paleontology Project, was found encased in rock that dated back 68.4 to 69.2 million years and displayed modern characteristics, such as a toothless beak, according to the study.
'The new fossil shows Vegavis is undoubtedly a modern bird (something that was challenged in the past) and is an exceptional find preserving a strange and surprising morphology,' said Juan Benito Moreno, a fellow in the department of earth sciences at the University of Cambridge and an expert on fossil birds, in an email.
'The new skull of Vegavis shows a very specialized morphology for diving and fish eating, more so than I would have expected,' added Moreno, who was not involved in the study but was involved in the discovery of the only other known modern bird species from the Cretaceous.
A survivor of mass extinction?
The brain shape revealed by the new fossil, which researchers scanned using computerized tomography to create a three-dimensional reconstruction, was also characteristic of modern birds, according to the study.
Together, these features place Vegavis in the group that includes all modern birds, and the fossil skull represents 'the earliest member of this entire radiation that we see around us today, that consists of 11,000 bird species,' O'Connor said.
While Vegavis resembled present-day waterfowl in some ways, other features didn't fit the mold. For instance, the study noted that the skull preserves traces of a slender, pointed beak powered by enhanced jaw muscles, a feature that is more like diving birds than other known waterfowl.
'Antarctica at 69 million years ago didn't look like it did today. It was actually forested. It was a cool, temperate climate based on most of our modeling, and this animal, we recovered it in a marine rock unit so we would envision that it was doing this pursuit diving in a nearshore, marine environment,' O'Connor added.
Torres, who was a postdoctoral fellow studying avian paleontology at Ohio University when he conducted the research, said the discovery of the Vegavis fossil in Antarctica and a fossil of an extinct bird species known as Conflicto antarcticus from a nearby location dating from shortly after dinosaurs' extinction would allow paleontologists to investigate how some animals survived the cataclysmic event.
'What happens to the survivors? What determines, number one, what a survivor is, and number two, what are the survivors going to look like after one of these catastrophic events?' he said.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
A cosmic murder mystery: Scientists spot supernova of star violently stripped to the bone
Israeli and American scientists have uncovered a never-before-seen type of supernova, shedding light on how stars produce and expel heavy elements like silicon and sulfur during their violent deaths. Israeli and American scientists discovered a never-before-seen type of supernova, one that blasts out heavy elements like silicon and sulfur from the body of a dying star, a new study reveals. The findings of this study were published in the peer-reviewed academic journal Nature, and provide evidence for a long theorized part of stellar anatomy. All of this was made possible by witnessing an extremely violent and unusual death of a star, the result of which allowed scientists to look deeper than ever before. Of violence and onions: The death of a star and supernovae To understand what exactly happened, it's important to understand what a supernova is and, before that, to understand what a star is. Stars are, at their core, massive and extremely hot balls of gas, specifically hydrogen and helium. These two elements are very common - in fact, they are so common that they make up almost all matter in the universe. So where does everything else come from? To oversimplify complex astrophysics and chemistry, when these hydrogen and helium come together, they can heat up and new elements can be formed - if the circumstances are right. Stars are where this happens. These giant balls of gas possess cores that are a lot more solid, specifically made of iron. The cores are active and are fueled by a process of energy production, which sees the lighter elements to form heavier ones. This is known by nuclear fusion, and it is this process that keeps the star hot, allowing gases to expand while simultaneously drawing its mass toward the core in a delicate gravitational balance. So that's how some of the heavier elements are made, but others still need more heat - hotter than what a star's core can usually handle. What's more, all those heavier elements are still stuck in the stars. How do they get out and expand into the universe, forming planets and asteroids and more? The answer is that the star has to die. When the star can no longer produce energy, it collapses in on itself. When this happens, it results in a massive explosion, one of the most powerful forces of energy in the universe - a supernova. This fuses some of those heavy elements together to make even heavier ones, and all of them get blasted out into the cosmos. This process is essential to the function of the universe, allowing everything to keep expanding and ultimately sending forth the building blocks of the universe's continued expansion. In other words, everything in the universe is made of stardust, and supernovas are what send that stardust out there to accumulate and make new things. The remnants of that progenitor star are still there, condensing together to form a neutron star or a black hole, or maybe even a diffuse nebula of sorts. So that's what scientists have already known. But there is more to this story. See, stars are a lot like onions and - they have layers. The heavier elements occupy the inner layers, getting heavier and heavier as they get closer to the iron core. The massive outer layers are where those lighter elements, like hydrogen and helium, are. But this was only a theory. Studying a supernova can be hard, as while the stars that go supernova are always 10-100 times heavier than the Sun, the explosion happens in a fraction of a second. Even still, it's possible to observe the bright light from the supernova for some time - even weeks can go by without the light fading. But until now, scientists have only ever seen the traces of light elements like hydrogen and helium, rather than anything heavier. But all of that changed with this study The now deceased star in question is SN2021yfj, a massive star far heavier than our Sun. In September 2021, the flare from its supernova was spotted by Dr. Steve Schulze, a former member of Weizmann Institute of Science's astrophysics team and now a researcher at Northwestern University. Using the Zwicky Transient Facility telescope in California, Schulze and his team did a spectral analysis. What this means is that they looked at the different colors of the flare's light. Each color represents a different element, and by observing which colors are present in its spectrum, scientists can figure out what elements are present. In other words, this is how you can use light and colors to figure out what things are made of. This isn't exactly easy, though, as intrusive obstacles can get in the way of a spectral analysis. In Schulze's case, those obstacles came in the form of clouds, stopping researchers from getting a clear enough image. But someone at the University of California, Berkeley, managed to get it. And the results were shocking. Normally, when studying a supernova, one expects to see the usual suspects of light and abundant elements, like helium, carbon, oxygen, and so on. But that's not what they found. Instead, the light fired out by SN2021yfj with its dying breaths consisted largely of sulfur, silicon, and argon. That's not supposed to happen. So how could the supernova just not have the lighter elements, and instead have the far heavier ones? A cosmic murder mystery: How a star was stripped to its core before death by explosion The conclusion Schulze came to was that something went wrong. Massive stars like SN2021yfj are, as mentioned previously, like onions - they have layers. And some of those layers have been peeled off. This itself isn't unheard of. Stripped stars, as they are known, have been seen before. But those usually have layers made of helium, carbon, or oxygen - exposed when the outermost hydrogen layers were lost somehow. But SN2021yfj must have had even those layers stripped away. That's not like just peeling a few layers off an onion. Rather, it's more like stripping it to the bone - and that's the part that's unheard of. 'This star lost most of the material that it produced throughout its lifetime,' Schulze said in a statement. 'So we could only see the material formed during the months right before its explosion. Something very violent must have happened to cause that.' This is not a thing that should happen. As noted by Weizmann's Dr. Ofer Yaron, a leading expert on supernovae, this level of deep exposure is a major challenge to prevailing theories on how these layers fall away. Something happened that caused this star to die like this. But what? Several theories were put forward. A companion star could have theoretically exerted force that caused the layers to be stripped away. Another explosion or strong stellar winds could have been the culprit. But the main suspect is actually SN2021yfj itself. The star's core likely produced so much heat that the nuclear fusion caused an incredibly powerful burst of energy. This then may have caused the star's layers to be blown apart, sending the outer layers away. This, essentially, means that SN2021yfj ripped itself apart. But this may have happened before. In fact, the shed layers may have collided into one another, or into another layer that had been blown out a previous time, and that resulted in another explosion. But how much does this factor into the death of SN2021yfj? That, currently, is still a mystery. But what is sure is that no one has ever had the chance to look at stellar anatomy this closely, going deeper than anyone has gone before. 'It's always surprising – and deeply satisfying – to discover a completely new kind of physical phenomenon,' said Prof. Avishay Gal-Yam, whose research group in Weizmann's Particle Physics and Astrophysics Department focuses on understanding how the elements are formed in the universe. 'As soon as I saw the data Dr. Schulze sent me, it was obvious we were witnessing something no one had ever seen before. 'Once we identified the spectral signatures of silicon, sulfur, and argon, it was clear this was a major step forward: Peering into the depths of a giant star helps us understand where the heavy elements come from. Every atom in our bodies and in the world around us was created somewhere in the universe and went through countless transformations over billions of years before arriving at its current place, so tracing its origin and the process that created it is incredibly difficult. Now it appears that the inner layers of giant stars are production sites for some of these important, relatively heavy elements.'
CNN
3 hours ago
- CNN
Trump admin strips ocean and air pollution monitoring from next-gen weather satellites
The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration is narrowing the capabilities and reducing the number of next-generation weather and climate satellites it plans to build and launch in the coming decades, two people familiar with the plans told CNN. This move — which comes as hurricane season ramps up with Erin lashing the East Coast — fits a pattern in which the Trump administration is seeking to not only slash climate pollution rules, but also reduce the information collected about the pollution in the first place. Critics of the plan also say it's a short-sighted attempt to save money at the expense of understanding the oceans and atmosphere better. Two planned instruments, one that would measure air quality, including pollution and wildfire smoke, and another that would observe ocean conditions in unprecedented detail, are no longer part of the project, the sources said. 'This administration has taken a very narrow view of weather,' one NOAA official told CNN, noting the jettisoned satellite instruments could have led to better enforcement and regulations on air pollution by more precisely measuring it. The cost of the four satellites, known as the Geostationary Extended Observations, nicknamed GeoXO, would be lower than originally spelled out under the Biden administration, at a maximum of $500 million per year for a total of $12 billion, but some scientists say the cheaper up-front price would come at a cost to those who would have benefited from the air and oceans data. 'Our information will be less rich, and our understanding of the whole phenomenon of a hurricane event, or of a fire event or of a drought event will be lesser because we don't have these context information instruments adding real time, integrated understanding of the events,' the official stated. Both instruments were already contracted to BAE Systems, which could now charge cancelation fees. The changes are aimed at curtailing costs and are due in part to the perception that some of the instruments were going to be focused on gathering data to study climate change. According to a Trump administration budget document, weather forecasting should be the 'exclusive' focus of the satellites. In addition to the reduced number of instruments, NOAA is now only building four satellites as part of the constellation, rather than six, with the first set to launch in 2032. Having fewer satellites in the sky means less redundancy and raises the risk of critical data outages, the NOAA official stated. 'It's gambling with the continuity of an operational system that we've relied on since the early 70s,' they said. The satellite series is meant to be the successor to the GOES satellites, which provide a wealth of data for weather forecasting, with the first launch set for 2032 and service lasting through 2055. CNN has contacted NOAA for comment. The atmospheric composition instrument, for example, would have enabled scientists to more precisely measure air pollutants, which could help reduce health risks from wildfire smoke events. It would also enhance US capabilities to conduct air quality monitoring and forecasting, as well as keep tabs on emissions of greenhouse gases and the pollutants that form smog. The atmospheric composition instrument would have been beneficial for both NOAA's weather and climate missions, according to an assessment of the instrument's value that NOAA performed and was signed off on by the Commerce Department, which oversees NOAA. The instrument, the report said, 'is fundamental to understanding changes in air quality, the stratospheric ozone layer, and climate, as well as their corresponding impacts on human health and natural and engineered ecosystems.' The report warned that without the instrument on GeoXO, the US would risk falling behind other countries' air quality monitoring capabilities, jeopardizing America's longtime leadership in Earth observations. Also cut from the planned GeoXO series of satellites is an instrument that would measure ocean color, which could provide insights into fisheries populations, algal blooms, ocean productivity and water quality. While it is not unheard of for NOAA or Congress to alter major satellite series, given a history of cost and schedule overruns in NOAA satellite programs, cancelling already contracted instruments — and doing so in part due to the administration's determination to focus NOAA more narrowly on weather forecasting, and away from climate change observations and research — stands out. The Trump administration's fiscal year 2026 budget request would close NOAA's extensive research facilities, shutting down its greenhouse gas monitoring network, among others. Congress is currently considering that proposal.
CNN
3 hours ago
- CNN
Trump admin strips ocean and air pollution monitoring from next-gen weather satellites
The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration is narrowing the capabilities and reducing the number of next-generation weather and climate satellites it plans to build and launch in the coming decades, two people familiar with the plans told CNN. This move — which comes as hurricane season ramps up with Erin lashing the East Coast — fits a pattern in which the Trump administration is seeking to not only slash climate pollution rules, but also reduce the information collected about the pollution in the first place. Critics of the plan also say it's a short-sighted attempt to save money at the expense of understanding the oceans and atmosphere better. Two planned instruments, one that would measure air quality, including pollution and wildfire smoke, and another that would observe ocean conditions in unprecedented detail, are no longer part of the project, the sources said. 'This administration has taken a very narrow view of weather,' one NOAA official told CNN, noting the jettisoned satellite instruments could have led to better enforcement and regulations on air pollution by more precisely measuring it. The cost of the four satellites, known as the Geostationary Extended Observations, nicknamed GeoXO, would be lower than originally spelled out under the Biden administration, at a maximum of $500 million per year for a total of $12 billion, but some scientists say the cheaper up-front price would come at a cost to those who would have benefited from the air and oceans data. 'Our information will be less rich, and our understanding of the whole phenomenon of a hurricane event, or of a fire event or of a drought event will be lesser because we don't have these context information instruments adding real time, integrated understanding of the events,' the official stated. Both instruments were already contracted to BAE Systems, which could now charge cancelation fees. The changes are aimed at curtailing costs and are due in part to the perception that some of the instruments were going to be focused on gathering data to study climate change. According to a Trump administration budget document, weather forecasting should be the 'exclusive' focus of the satellites. In addition to the reduced number of instruments, NOAA is now only building four satellites as part of the constellation, rather than six, with the first set to launch in 2032. Having fewer satellites in the sky means less redundancy and raises the risk of critical data outages, the NOAA official stated. 'It's gambling with the continuity of an operational system that we've relied on since the early 70s,' they said. The satellite series is meant to be the successor to the GOES satellites, which provide a wealth of data for weather forecasting, with the first launch set for 2032 and service lasting through 2055. CNN has contacted NOAA for comment. The atmospheric composition instrument, for example, would have enabled scientists to more precisely measure air pollutants, which could help reduce health risks from wildfire smoke events. It would also enhance US capabilities to conduct air quality monitoring and forecasting, as well as keep tabs on emissions of greenhouse gases and the pollutants that form smog. The atmospheric composition instrument would have been beneficial for both NOAA's weather and climate missions, according to an assessment of the instrument's value that NOAA performed and was signed off on by the Commerce Department, which oversees NOAA. The instrument, the report said, 'is fundamental to understanding changes in air quality, the stratospheric ozone layer, and climate, as well as their corresponding impacts on human health and natural and engineered ecosystems.' The report warned that without the instrument on GeoXO, the US would risk falling behind other countries' air quality monitoring capabilities, jeopardizing America's longtime leadership in Earth observations. Also cut from the planned GeoXO series of satellites is an instrument that would measure ocean color, which could provide insights into fisheries populations, algal blooms, ocean productivity and water quality. While it is not unheard of for NOAA or Congress to alter major satellite series, given a history of cost and schedule overruns in NOAA satellite programs, cancelling already contracted instruments — and doing so in part due to the administration's determination to focus NOAA more narrowly on weather forecasting, and away from climate change observations and research — stands out. The Trump administration's fiscal year 2026 budget request would close NOAA's extensive research facilities, shutting down its greenhouse gas monitoring network, among others. Congress is currently considering that proposal.
