New study challenges discovery of Earth's ‘oldest' impact crater
Case in point: the discovery of an ancient meteorite impact crater was recently reported in the remote Pilbara region of Western Australia. The original study, by a different group, made headlines with the claim that the crater formed 3.5 billion years ago. If true, it would be Earth's oldest by far.
As it turns out, we'd also been investigating the same site. Our results are published in Science Advances today. While we agree that this is the site of an ancient meteorite impact, we have reached different conclusions about its age, size and significance.
Let's consider the claims made about this fascinating crater.
One impact crater, two versions of events
Planetary scientists search for ancient impacts to learn about Earth's early formation. So far, nobody has found an impact crater older than the 2.23-billion-year-old Yarrabubba structure, also in Australia. (Some of the authors from both 2025 Pilbara studies were coauthors on the 2020 Yarrabubba study.)
The new contender is located in an area called North Pole Dome. Despite the name, this isn't where Santa lives. It's an arid, hot, ochre-stained landscape.
The first report on the new crater claimed it formed 3.5 billion years ago, and was more than 100 kilometres in diameter. It was proposed that such a large impact might have played a role in forming continental crust in the Pilbara. More speculatively, the researchers also suggested it may have influenced early life.
Our study concludes that the impact actually happened much later, sometime after 2.7 billion years ago. This is at least 800 million years younger than the earlier estimate (and we think it's probably even younger; more on that in a moment).
We also determined the crater was much smaller – about 16km in diameter. In our view, this impact was too young and too small to have influenced continent formation or early life.
So, how could two studies arrive at such different findings?
Subtle clues of an impact
The originally circular crater is deeply eroded, leaving only subtle clues on the landscape. However, among the rust-coloured basalts are unique telltale signs of meteorite impact: shatter cones.
Shatter cones are distinctive fossilised imprints of shock waves that have passed through rocks. Their unique conical shapes form under brief but immense pressure where a meteorite strikes Earth.
Both studies found shatter cones, and agree that the site is an ancient impact.
This new crater also needed a name. We consulted the local Aboriginal people, the Nyamal, who shared the traditional name for this place and its people: Miralga. The 'Miralga impact structure' name recognises this heritage.
Determining the timing of the impact
The impact age was estimated by field observations, as neither study found material likely to yield an impact age by radiometric dating, a method that uses measurements of radioactive isotopes.
Both studies applied a geological principle called the law of superposition. This states that rock layers get deposited one on top of another over time, so rocks on top are younger than those below.
The first group found shatter cones within and below a sedimentary layer known to have been deposited 3.47 billion years ago, but no shatter cones in younger rocks above this layer. This meant the impact occurred during deposition of the sedimentary layer.
Their observation seemed to be a 'smoking gun' for an impact 3.47 billion years ago.
As it turns out, there was more to the story.
Our investigation found shatter cones in the same 3.47 billion-year-old rocks, but also in younger overlying rocks, including lavas known to have erupted 2.77 billion years ago.
The impact had to occur after the formation of the youngest rocks that contained shatter cones, meaning sometime after the 2.77-billion-year-old lavas.
At the moment, we don't know precisely how young the crater is. We can only constrain the impact to have occurred between 2.7 billion and 400 million years ago. We're working on dating the impact by isotopic methods, but these results aren't yet in.
Smaller than originally thought
We made a first map showing where shatter cones are found. There are many hundreds over an area 6km across. From this map and their orientations, we calculate that the original crater was about 16km in diameter.
A 16km crater is a far cry from the original estimate of more than 100km. It's too small to have influenced the formation of continents or life. By the time of the impact, the Pilbara was already quite old.
A new connection to Mars
Science is a self-policing sport. Claims of discovery are based on data available at the time, but they often require modification based on new data or observations.
While it's not the world's oldest, the Miralga impact is scientifically unique, as craters formed in basalt are rare. Most basalts there formed 3.47 billion years ago, making them the oldest shocked target rocks known.
Prior to impact, these ancient basalts had been chemically altered by seawater. Sedimentary rocks nearby also contain the earliest well-established fossils on Earth. Such rocks likely covered much of early Earth and Mars.
This makes the Miralga impact structure a playground for planetary scientists studying the cratered surface (and maybe early life) of Mars. It's an easily accessible proving ground for Mars exploration instruments and imagery, right here on Earth.
Aaron J. Cavosie is a Senior Lecturer in the School of Earth and Planetary Sciences at Curtin University.
Alec Brenner is a Postdoc in Earth and Planetary Sciences at Yale University.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
BreakingNews.ie
2 days ago
- BreakingNews.ie
Scientists discover ‘deceptively cute' ancient whale
A chance discovery of a 25 million-year-old fossil on an Australian beach has allowed palaeontologists to identify a rare, entirely new species that could unlock mysteries of whale evolution. Researchers this week officially named Janjucetus dullardi, a cartoonish creature with bulging eyes the size of tennis balls, in the Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society. Advertisement Unlike today's whales, the juvenile specimen was small enough to fit in a single bed. Boasting fiendish teeth and a shark-like snout, however, this oddball of the ocean was nasty, mean and built to hunt. 'It was, let's say, deceptively cute,' said Erich Fitzgerald, senior curator of vertebrate palaeontology at Museums Victoria Research Institute, and one of the paper's authors. 'It might have looked for all the world like some weird kind of mash-up between a whale, a seal and a Pokemon but they were very much their own thing.' Advertisement The rare discovery of the partial skull, including ear bones and teeth, was made in 2019 on a fossil-rich stretch of coast along Australia's Victoria state. Jan Juc Beach, a cradle for some of the weirdest whales in history, is becoming a hotspot for understanding early whale evolution, Mr Fitzgerald said. Few family trees seem stranger than that of Janjucetus dullardi, only the fourth species ever identified from a group known as mammalodontids, early whales that lived only during the Oligocene Epoch, about 34 to 23 million years ago. That marked the point about halfway through the known history of whales. Advertisement The tiny predators, thought to have grown to three metres (10ft) in length, were an early branch on the line that led to today's great baleen whales, such as humpbacks, blues and minkes. Ruairidh Duncan, left, and Erich Fitzgerald examine a partial fossil skull in the palaeontology lab at Melbourne Museum in Melbourne, Australia (Tom Breakwell/Museums Victoria via AP) But the toothy ancestors with powerful jaws would have looked radically different to any modern species. 'They may have had tiny little nubbins of legs just projecting as stumps from the wall of the body,' said Mr Fitzgerald. That mystery will remain tantalisingly unsolved unless a specimen is uncovered with more of its skeleton intact, which would be something of a miracle. Advertisement Even the partial skull that allowed the initial identification this week was an astonishing discovery. Janjucetus dullardi was named by researchers after an amateur fossil hunter who does not mind its looks in the slightest. 'It's literally been the greatest 24 hours of my life,' said Ross Dullard, who discovered the skull while fossil hunting at Jan Juc Beach. After Wednesday's confirmation of the new species, the school principal walked like a rock star on to campus with 'high fives coming left, right and centre', he said. Advertisement His friends and family are probably just relieved it is over. 'That's all they've heard from me for about the last six years,' he said. Mr Dullard was on a regular low-tide hunt at Jan Juc the day he spotted something black protruding from a cliff. Poking it dislodged a tooth. He knew enough to recognise it was unlikely to belong to a dog or a seal. 'I thought, geez, we've got something special here,' he said. Mr Dullard sent photos to Museums Victoria, where Mr Fitzgerald saw them and immediately suspected a new species. Confirming the find was another matter. This was the first mammalodontid to be identified in Australia since 2006 and only the third on record in the country. Ruairidh Duncan examines a tooth and partial fossil skull, at left, in the palaeontology lab at Melbourne Museum in Melbourne, Australia (Tom Breakwell/Museums Victoria via AP) Fossils of sufficient quality, with enough of the right details preserved to confirm uniqueness, are not common. 'Cetaceans represent a fairly miniscule population of all life,' Mr Fitzgerald said. Millions of years of erosion, scavengers and ocean currents take their toll on whale skeletons too. 'It's only the chosen few, the vast minority of all whales that have ever lived and died in the oceans over millions of years, that actually get preserved as fossils,' he added. Finds such as Janjucetus dullardi can unlock insights into how prehistoric whales ate, moved, behaved – and evolved. Researchers said the discoveries also helped to understand how ancient cetacean species adapted to warmer oceans, as they study how today's marine life might respond to climate change. Meanwhile, Mr Dullard planned to host a fossil party this weekend, featuring cetacean-themed games and whale-shaped treats in jello, to celebrate his find finally being confirmed. 'That's taken my concentration for six years,' he said. 'I've had sleepless nights. I've dreamt about this whale.'
The Independent
2 days ago
- The Independent
Rare ‘brain-eating amoeba' detected in drinking water supplies in Australia
One of the world's most dangerous water-borne microorganisms, commonly called a 'brain-eating amoeba ', has recently been detected in two drinking water supplies in south-west Queensland. Both affected towns are about 750 kilometres west of Brisbane: Augathella (population roughly 300) and Charleville (population 3,000). During an analysis of water samples commissioned by Queensland Health, Naegleria fowleri was detected in the water systems of two health facilities, one in Charleville and one in Augathella, as well as in the incoming town water supply at both facilities. The Shire Council of Murweh, which takes in the two affected locations, issued a health notice for residents and visitors on August 7, warning of the detection of N. fowleri in the water supplies. So what is this organism? And how significant is the risk likely to be in these Queensland towns, and elsewhere? It's rare – but nearly always fatal The N. fowleri amoeba is a microscopic organism found around the world. It only lives in warm freshwater, generally between 25 and 40°C. This can include ponds, lakes, rivers, streams and hot springs. If someone is infected with N. fowleri, it causes what's called primary amoebic meningoencephalitis, a serious infection of the brain. Symptoms include a sore throat, headache, hallucinations, confusion, vomiting, fever, neck stiffness, changes to taste and smell, and seizures. The incubation period of primary amoebic meningoencephalitis – the time between infection and symptoms appearing – typically ranges from three to seven days. Tragically, this illness is nearly always fatal, even if someone receives medical attention quickly. Death typically occurs about five days after symptoms begin. Fortunately, though, cases are very rare. In the United States, there were 167 reported cases of primary amoebic meningoencephalitis between 1962 and 2024, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Only four survived. A global review of the disease up to 2018 reported that, of 381 known cases, Australia accounted for 22, the fifth highest number, after the US, Pakistan, Mexico and India. Some 92% of people died. So how does someone get infected? The route of infection is very unusual and quite specific. N. fowleri infects the brain through a person's nose. The amoeba then passes through a protective membrane called the nasal epithelium. This is an important physical barrier and allows the amoeba to travel to the brain through the olfactory nerve, which is responsible for our sense of smell. The infection then kills brain tissue and causes swelling of the brain, termed cerebral oedema. Infections occur in people when infected water travels up their nose. Most cases involve children and young people who have swum in infected waters. The majority of cases occur in males, with an average age of 14. Even water sports in affected waterways can be dangerous. A person is currently in intensive care in Missouri after it's believed they became infected while water skiing. Regarding the recent detection in Queensland water supply systems, the source of the infection has not been reported. It's possible a fresh waterway, or groundwater, which feeds into the affected drinking water systems, was contaminated with N. fowleri, and the amoeba travelled from there. But this will likely be determined with further investigation. How dangerous is N. fowleri in drinking water? First, it's important to note you can't get primary amoebic meningoencephalitis from drinking contaminated water. But any activity that allows infected water to enter a person's nose is potentially dangerous. This can happen during a bath or a shower. Some people flush their nasal passages to clear congestion related to allergies or a viral infection. This has been linked to infections with N. fowleri. If you're going to flush your nasal passages, you should use a sterile saline solution. Even young children playing with hoses, sprinklers or water activities could be at risk. A 16-month-old child was fatally infected following an incident involving a contaminated water 'splash pad' in the US in 2023. Splash pads are water-based recreation activities, primarily for young children, that involve splashing or spraying water. So what's the risk in Queensland? Regarding N. fowleri, Australian drinking water guidelines advise: If the organism is detected, advice should be sought from the relevant health authority or drinking water regulator. The guidelines also provide recommendations on how to disinfect water supplies and control N. fowleri, using chlorine and other chemical compounds. All public town water supplies across Australia are regularly tested to ensure that the water is safe to drink. We don't yet know the exact cause of the detection of the amoeba N. fowleri in these Queensland towns' water supplies. But drinking or cooking with water contaminated with this amoeba will not cause an infection. Any activity that allows potentially contaminated water to go up the nose should be navigated carefully for now in the affected areas. Contamination of a town's drinking water supply from this amoeba is very rare and is unlikely in other Australian town water supplies. How about swimming? To reduce your risk in potentially infected warm, fresh waters, you should keep your head above water while swimming. And don't jump or dive in. You can use a nose-clip if you want to swim with your head under water. The amoeba cannot survive in salt water, so there's no risk of swimming in the ocean. Also, properly maintained swimming pools should be safe from the organism. New South Wales Health advises that the amoeba cannot survive in water that is clean, cool and adequately chlorinated. Ian A. Wright is an Associate Professor in Environmental Science at Western Sydney University.
The Guardian
2 days ago
- The Guardian
How a marine heatwave is threatening Australia's spectacular coral reefs
When it comes to coral, the Great Barrier Reef steals the global limelight. It's a bucket-list place for many and, when it gets hit by coral bleaching, it makes news around the world. But Australia has another group of spectacular reefs on the west of the continent. Many of them had managed to escape the worst of global heating, until the worst marine heatwave ever recorded for this region. Even a 'hope spot' for coral reefs has been decimated by the most severe heatwave on record for that part of the world. I've been following the fate of the reefs on both coasts over recent months, and for today's newsletter I'll try to make some sense of it – after the most important reads of the week. When you're the biggest living structure on the planet, it's not surprising you would hog the headlines. When the climate crisis is putting you under pressure, you light up like a million raised white flags to let the world know you're in trouble. The Great Barrier Reef (GBR), on Australia's Queensland coast, is bigger than Italy and home to thousands upon thousands of species of fish, coral, molluscs and other amazing stuff. This Australian summer, parts of the reef saw mass coral bleaching for the sixth time since 2016. We learned last week that the bleaching the previous summer – the worst on record there – drove the biggest annual drops in coral cover since detailed monitoring started in the mid-1980s. But on the opposite side of the vast continent, Western Australia (WA) has its own World Heritage-listed reef at Ningaloo, famed for its corals and whale sharks. And just like the GBR might overshadow Ningaloo on the name-recognition stakes, so does Ningaloo overshadow Western Australia's other remote and largely pristine coral reefs. Most of WA's reefs had escaped major heat stress events, at least until the 'longest, largest and most intense' marine heatwave ever recorded in the state's waters started to unfold around September 2024. This week, marine scientists from government agencies and universities revealed the most comprehensive assessment yet of the known impacts of that heatwave. From Ningaloo north, reefs saw between 11% and more than 90% of their corals hit by bleaching, and death on systems as far as 1,500 km apart (for UK readers, that's farther than driving from Land's End to John o'Groats or, for American subscribers, a few hours farther than a drive from New York to Chicago). Scientists found hardly any live corals on three remote but spectacular reefs at Rowley Shoals. The shoals, more than 1,000 km from Darwin in the Northern Territory, are described by some as one of the world's greatest diving spots. Scientists speak of them with reverence. With their steep drop-offs and sandy-bottomed lagoons covered in corals and teeming with life, they had been a 'hope spot' for marine scientists because they had been largely untouched by the rising ocean heat that has hit most of the world's reefs. Until now. Australia's reefs are not the only ones suffering. Reefs elsewhere are also in the midst of an ongoing global bleaching event that has caused enough heat to bleach more than 80% of reefs in more than 80 countries since it started in January 2023. How, or if, these reefs recover is an open question. Corals are complex animals, and the reefs they make with their skeletons in tropical waters are some of the richest places, in biodiversity terms, on the planet. They make up less than 1% of the ocean floor, but are home to about a quarter of marine life. They support the lives and livelihoods of hundreds of millions of people. Previous work published by the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has warned that if global temperature increases hit that famous 1.5C increase, then 70% to 90% of tropical reefs will disappear. The reality is likely more complicated. Scientists are still learning about how much capacity corals have to acclimatise, and are still understanding how reef systems will respond depending on their size, location and other pressures such as fishing and pollution. Sign up to Down to Earth The planet's most important stories. Get all the week's environment news - the good, the bad and the essential after newsletter promotion What solutions might there be? There's the obvious one: get greenhouse gas emissions down as low as possible, as fast as possible. And there are a suite of more direct efforts, from developing more heat-resistant corals and 'restoring' reefs by planting out more heat-tolerant species, to brightening clouds to shade reefs, to improving local conditions to make corals as resilient as possible. None of the coral scientists I've spoken to argue that any of these steps are a substitute for climate action, and there's a live debate among them about the wisdom of some of these interventions. The lowest-risk approach for averting an ecosystem collapse remains tackling global heating. Without it, the surviving corals will keep raising the white flag of alarm. Read more: WA's 'longest and most intense' marine heatwave killed coral across 1,500km stretch 'If the reef had a voice, it would sing': could legal personhood help the Great Barrier Reef? Fears for South Australia's annual cuttlefish gathering amid deadly algal bloom This is an edited version of Down to Earth, or climate crisis newsletter. To sign up to receive the full version in your inbox every Thursday, click here
