logo
Flamingos create water tornadoes to trap and suck up their prey: study

Flamingos create water tornadoes to trap and suck up their prey: study

CBC23-05-2025

During the pandemic, Saad Bhamla watched the flamingos at the zoo perform strange head movements as they ate, and found himself wondering: "What the heck is going on?"
The birds would submerge their heads in the water, with their beaks by their feet, while stomping their webbed feet, walking sideways and moving their mandibles, splashing water everywhere.
Bhamla and his colleagues decided to study the movements. It turns out, he says, the flamingos use their necks and beaks to create a vortex in the water to trap and slurp up their prey — an evolutionary practice apparently distinct to them.
"We couldn't believe our eyes," Bhamla, an associate professor of bimolecular engineering at the Georgia Institute of Technology in Atlanta, told As It Happens host Nil Köksal.
"When they raise their heads underwater, they create a tornado, which traps these tiny shrimps and tiny invertebrates living in the water that they want to feed on, and makes their job easier to sift them through the mud and muddy things that they feed in."
The findings published in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences show that these bright pink, spindly-legged birds stand out not just for their whimsical aesthetic; but also for quirky foraging habits and unique evolution.
How do flamingos eat?
As part of their research, the team observed 3D-printed models of the flamingos' feet and beaks, and studied the skull of a deceased flamingo.
But the real stars of the study, Bhamla says, were Marty and Mattie, a dynamic duo of Chilean flamingos (Phoenicopterus chilensis) from the Nashville Zoo.
Thanks to their willingness to be fed in controlled conditions, the research team could observe these flamingos as they ate with their heads upside down and submerged in the tank.
Footage from a high-speed camera and other devices captured the velocity of these motions.
WATCH | Compiled simulations of flamingos' foraging behaviours:
The team confirmed that their head's anatomy — particularly their L-shaped beaks — help in creating this whirlpool effect as the birds quickly pull their heads out of the water.
"They're moving their heads in tens of milliseconds," Bhamla said. "And they're doing this constantly, over and over again."
The team also observed two other feeding techniques: chattering and stomping.
Chattering is when the birds clap their upper mandibles, or jaw bones, underwater. Mattie and Marty also chattered their beaks when they stood still, or as they stomped their feet to stir up the sediment below.
Stomping with their asymmetric webbed toes helps flamingos generate complementary vortexes to catch small prey and then easily swallow them with their beaks positioned near their feet.
The Bhamla Lab website lists a detailed breakdown of each of these techniques, including video clips and a comic book illustration.
'They're not doing a funny dance'
Jerry Lorenz, former research director of the bird conservation organization Audubon Florida who was not involved with this project, said the team "did an excellent job looking at the various flow patterns and movements" of both bill and tongue.
"We've known that flamingos had a very interesting way of foraging and that their mouth parts were just kind of a bizarre thing," he said. "But the way they put it together to make sense of the evolution that created this … was just really astounding. I was actually delighted by the whole thing."
From a conservation perspective, Lorenz says these findings are significant to understanding how flamingos interact with their environment to know how to best preserve it.
"Evolution doesn't do accidents. If they're doing a behaviour and you don't understand why, there is an evolutionary reason for them to be doing that," he said.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

He can't quit him — easily. Why SpaceX could complicate the Trump-Musk split
He can't quit him — easily. Why SpaceX could complicate the Trump-Musk split

CBC

timea day ago

  • CBC

He can't quit him — easily. Why SpaceX could complicate the Trump-Musk split

Billions of dollars lost in government contracts. A slew of regulatory headaches. These are just some of the ramifications Elon Musk could face over his fallout with U.S. President Donald Trump. The two men may have personally split, at least for now. But if Trump is seeking to retaliate against the tech billionaire, severing the relationship between Musk's many companies and the U.S. government could prove difficult, analysts say. "I would say the president has more cards than Musk does, but it doesn't mean that [Musk] doesn't have any," said Peter Hays, a lecturer of space policy and international affairs at George Washington University's Space Policy Institute. Both sides have "all kinds of leverage on each other," added Dan Grazier, senior fellow and program director at the D.C.-based Stimson Center, a think-tank focused on international security. The public fallout came after Musk repeatedly criticized Trump's spending bill. Trump eventually lashed back, posting on Truth Social that the easiest way to save "Billions and Billion of Dollars" would be to "terminate Elon's Governmental Subsidies and Contracts." However, those threats might not be so simple to implement. SpaceX, satellite contracts SpaceX has $15 billion US worth of contracts from NASA for the company's Falcon 9 rockets and its development of the multipurpose Starship rocket system, tapped to land NASA astronauts on the moon this decade. The company has also been awarded billions of dollars to launch most of the Pentagon's national security satellites into space while it builds a massive spy satellite constellation. That's why, if Trump cancels those contracts, SpaceX would have to seriously rethink its business model, Grazier says. Musk "needs the government to keep his company operating as they are," he said. But the U.S. government is also reliant on SpaceX, he says. For example, it's the only U.S. company capable right now of transporting crews to and from the International Space Station, using its four-person Dragon capsules. "Trump needs Elon Musk in pretty much the exact same way that Elon Musk needs President Trump, as far as SpaceX goes," Grazier said. "It's not like the United States has a credible alternative to SpaceX right now as far as space launch goes," he said. "And the United States needs reliable space launch capabilities." WATCH | F eud explodes into public view: Threats, insults as Trump-Musk feud explodes into public view 1 day ago Duration 2:27 Tearing up SpaceX contracts would have a huge domino effect across a lot of the government's critical functions in space, according to Clayton Swope, senior fellow at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. And those functions are "most closely centred around the Pentagon and NASA," he told Bloomberg News. But if Trump holds off on cancelling SpaceX contracts, and is looking for another way to poke at Musk, he could put the squeeze on Musk's companies through the government's regulatory agencies, some experts say. "Those can all be leverage points for the administration," said Cary Coglianese, director of the University of Pennsylvania's Penn program on regulation. Last year, Musk was waging at least 11 separate regulatory or legal battles with the Biden administration or independent federal agencies related to his business empire, according to NBC News. This might have been why, in part, Musk eventually endorsed Trump, who had pledged during the presidential campaign to slash regulations. How Trump's tax bill ignited his feud with Musk | Hanomansing Tonight 1 day ago Duration 7:21 Yet Trump could now pressure those same agencies to make Musk's life difficult. Just some of the regulators Musk's business empire must deal with include the Federal Communications Commission for his satellite internet service Starlink, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration for Tesla, and the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) for SpaceX. The FAA, under pressure from Trump, or to curry his favour, could say it's not going to approve any SpaceX launch permits, says Roger Nober, director of the Regulatory Studies Center, also at George Washington University. For Tesla, for example, Trump could pressure regulators to deny necessary approvals of its autonomous driving program, or could renew investigations into the safety of its full self-driving software, some analysts told ABC News. "If full self-driving were to be invalidated, that would be a huge hit to Tesla stock and to Musk," Gordon Johnson, CEO and founder of the data firm GLJ Research, told ABC. Although the courts shouldn't tolerate such actions if they are shown to be vindictive, the president wouldn't necessarily need a "litigation-proof strategy to really mess up" Musk's life, Coglianese said. It could still be "very painful and problematic" for Musk, while courts sorted out the issues, he said. "And if Musk's operations get delayed or disrupted, that can mean real money." Nober says he believes that any lasting regulatory change against Musk's companies would be difficult to implement, given his very public spat with Trump and that the president said he's going to punish his one-time friend. "If they then initiate regulatory action that's intended punish any of Musk's business… it's going to be vulnerable to challenge on the theory that it was arbitrary," he said. However, there may be other minor administrative regulatory roadblocks that government agencies could impose on Musk that would be difficult to challenge in court, Nober says. "They can make life difficult" for Musk, he said. On Thursday, amid their war of words, shares of Tesla plunged more than 14 per cent, leaving $150 billion US of the electric automaker's value erased by the end of trading day. The plunge was probably because Tesla, like a lot of Musk's companies, have a lot of little things they deal with, with a lot of regulatory bodies, Nober says. "Just making those more difficult, or slowing them down, or reviewing them, or taking longer to turn things around, has a cumulative impact," he said.

CO2 levels just broke another record. Here's what that means
CO2 levels just broke another record. Here's what that means

CBC

timea day ago

  • CBC

CO2 levels just broke another record. Here's what that means

Social Sharing When man first walked on the moon, the carbon dioxide concentration in Earth's atmosphere was 325 parts per million (ppm). By 9/11, it was 369 ppm, and when COVID-19 shut down normal life in 2020, it had shot up to 414 parts ppm. This week, our planet hit the highest levels ever directly recorded: 430 parts per million. For 67 years, the observatory on Hawaii's Mauna Loa volcano has been taking these measurements daily — tracking the invisible gas that is building up in our atmosphere and changing life on Earth. The record is known as the Keeling Curve. Charles David Keeling began those recordings, some of the first in the world to measure CO2 concentration over time. His son, Ralph Keeling, born one year before the observatory opened, has witnessed the rapid increase firsthand over his lifetime. "I was a teenager when I first started to appreciate what my father was doing and how it might be significant," Keeling told CBC News. Back then it was around 330 ppm. Keeling, a geochemistry professor at Scripps Institution of Oceanography at the University of California, San Diego, took over the research once his father passed away in 2005. "This problem is not going away, and we're moving further and further into uncharted territory, and almost certainly, very dangerous territory." Why CO2 matters The build up of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere isn't visible to the naked eye, but its concentration matters because of the greenhouse effect. Like the glass walls that trap heat from the sun in an actual greenhouse, gases in our atmosphere such as CO2 and methane also trap heat from the sun. At the start of the Industrial Revolution, ice core samples show CO2 levels were around 280 parts per million but as they rose, warming has increased by about 1.3 C over the pre-industrial average. That's led to rising temperatures and leading to more frequent and extreme weather, like heat waves, floods, wildfires and droughts. While many have heard about the goals of limiting warming to 1.5 C or 2 C above pre-industrial levels, there have also been efforts to return CO2 levels to below 350 parts per million, as a key part of limiting the damage from climate change. The record highs have continued though. Just in the last year, CO2 readings from May have increased more than three parts per million — that many more molecules of CO2 trapping heat and contributing to warming. "We know why it's rising faster than ever, it's because we're burning more fossil fuels each year," said Keeling. Direct link to fossil fuels Damon Matthews, a climate scientist and professor at Concordia University in Quebec, also says he's concerned and isn't surprised that there are new records every year. "If we want to actually stabilize CO2 levels in the atmosphere, we would need to cut global emissions by more than 50 per cent, and we're nowhere near doing that," he said, adding that there are other gases at play but CO2 is the dominant influence. "Every May, we're going to see a new record of atmospheric CO2, until we actually make a lot more progress on climate mitigation than we have today." The annual cycle, peaking in late spring in the northern hemisphere, is tied to plant photosynthesis — CO2 concentrations drop in the summer as plants absorb the gas and release oxygen. In 2021, the International Energy Agency said that if the world wants to limit global warming and reach net-zero by 2050, there could be no new coal, oil or gas projects. Matthews is part of Canada's net-zero advisory body and says he's seen some progress in decreasing CO2 emissions the last few years, but not enough. He says Europe's emissions have been going down for decades, and that last year CO2 emissions in China didn't increase. However, he says Canada still lags behind other countries, and the U.S. is trending the other way. "There's lots of policy options, certainly focusing on expanding the oil and gas industry in Canada right now is not going to get us where we need to go in terms of climate," he said. "We just need to stop arguing about whether it's a priority and start doing the things that we know will help to solve the problem."

‘Inevitably going to implode': Here's what experts think about Trump and Musk's relationship as it unravels online
‘Inevitably going to implode': Here's what experts think about Trump and Musk's relationship as it unravels online

CTV News

time2 days ago

  • CTV News

‘Inevitably going to implode': Here's what experts think about Trump and Musk's relationship as it unravels online

Psychologist Simon Sherry shares what he thinks may be behind public fallouts in the wake of Trump and Musk's online fight. It may be the most high-profile breakup between two of the most powerful and richest men in the world. Donald Trump and Elon Musk, who not too long ago was a strong ally and adviser to the U.S. president, captured the world's attention this week with their war of words on social media, including X, which Musk owns. What could be happening with the alliance between two of the world's most influential men, or what could similar feuds mean? reached out to a wide variety of experts, from a psychologist to Trump's biographer, asking what they think. Simon Sherry, a registered psychologist, said he couldn't speak directly about Trump or Musk since he has not assessed or diagnosed them. However, he said he could speak of individuals who may have certain personality traits and relationship styles that could lead to a similar public fallout. Sherry says people who exhibit narcissistic qualities generally 'don't play nicely' with each other. 'Speaking in general terms, when two narcissistic individuals interact, it often becomes a struggle for dominance,' Sherry, a professor from the department of psychology and neuroscience at Dalhousie University in Halifax, said in a video interview with on Friday. 'So if you've got traits like grandiosity and entitlement, you have a great need for admiration.' 'So if you've traits like grandiosity and entitlement, you have a great need for admiration.' These types of individuals may also be 'low on empathy' and 'cold' during interactions, he adds. 'And if you have that cold and unempathetic style, it's more likely that you're going to escalate conflict, as opposed to move toward repairing a relationship or any sort of a reconciliation.' Bree McEwan, a communication professor at the University of Toronto Mississauga, told in a video interview Friday that the public unravelling between Trump and Musk raises questions. 'This is perhaps an unusual moment where we're having power players in the U.S. government air out all of their beef in online settings,' said McEwan, who specializes in social media's role in personal communication and public discourse. 'It does allow for a lot of conversation and chatter to occur around their discussion, but it also brings up the question of how much of this is a performance, who's that performance for, and how much of this is sort of serious business of these major players,' McEwan added. The high-profile feud also has significant consequences, she adds. 'From a responsibility perspective, when you are two major players whose every action has a huge influence on world markets, there's a point here where maybe you should be picking up the phone and talking to each other, maybe have a conversation in the Oval Office,' she said. Breakup was 'inevitable': Trump biographer Marc Fisher, co-author of the 2016 book 'Trump Revealed: An American Journey of Ambition, Ego, Money, and Power,' called the duo's breakup 'inevitable.' 'This is a case of two wealthy and narcissistic billionaires, who are very accustomed to having the spotlight entirely to themselves and find that, when someone challenges them, they tend to push back pretty hard,' Fisher said in a video interview with on Friday. He added that the fallout 'makes perfect sense,' with Musk moving on as a top White House adviser. 'He had endangered his own businesses by devoting himself entirely to his time in Washington, and so he's now abandoned Trump and Trump doesn't like that,' he said. 'He doesn't like when people separate from him or critique him in any way, and so we have this battle of the wits and battle of the wills going that very much reflects the personalities of both men.' Both Musk and Trump are prone to 'overreactions' and 'emotional reactions,' Fisher added. 'Both of them see this kind of dispute as something that ought to play out in public, because that gives them even more attention, and attention is really the currency by which they measure their own success,' he said. Fisher adds that the public fight positions Trump as standing up to a billionaire, while Musk may be trying to prove to his stockholders that he's paying attention to his business. 'Neither of them has much to lose here,' he said. 'A marriage of convenience' Fisher doesn't believe Trump and Musk had a genuine connection. 'It was a marriage of convenience, really more of an accident than anything else, doomed from the start,' Fisher said. 'It's the kind of relationship that was perhaps mutually beneficial for a short time but was inevitably going to implode.' For Trump, Musk provided 'extraordinary energy' to allow Trump and his officials to show they were 'really tearing the federal government apart,' Fisher said, noting Trump seems to have less energy now than during his first administration. 'For Musk, this was an opportunity to push forward his business interests, get in close with the president who had a significant sway over whether large government contracts, which are at the heart of Musk's operations, would come his way and stay with his companies,' Fisher said. 'And so this was really, something that seemed mutually beneficial for a time.' 'Kerosene being thrown on this fire' Jeffrey Dvorkin, a media observer and former director of the journalism program at University of Toronto, had some ideas on what may be happening with the insults between the two men online. He called social media the 'kerosene being thrown on this fire.' 'I think that what we're seeing is the acting out of these unresolved issues that stem from childhood, but now have a terrible impact on the rest of us,' the senior fellow of Massey College at the University of Toronto said in a video interview with on Friday, referring to their 'very demanding' fathers. 'It is a destabilizing situation in the United States in the American government, which is never good for anybody.' Meanwhile, he said Musk is 'a disruptor.' 'He's throwing his toys around the room, hoping someone will pick up after him,' Dvorkin said. 'There may be some rationalization of what they're doing and why they're doing it, but I think deep down, we're dealing with two deeply flawed people, who have never really learned how to play well with others.' But Dvorkin sees one benefit in the feud. 'The only advantage I can see is that Canada now has a new prime minister who seems to be a grown up, the adult in the room, and he will now be able to exercise a level of control that maybe the previous prime minister was unable or unwilling to do,' he said.

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