This rock slab contains prints from 47 dinosaurs. It was on display at a high school.
This rock slab contains prints from 47 dinosaurs. It was on display at a high school.
Show Caption
Hide Caption
Fossilized dinosaur footprints found on boulder
An Australian researcher discovered dozens of three-toed dinosaur footprints on a boulder in Callide Basin.
Australian researchers have found a boulder with one of the country's highest concentrations of dinosaur footprints, and it turns out it had been on display at a high school.
The 66 fossilized footprints were left by 47 individual dinosaurs during the early Jurassic period, around 200 million years ago in a coal-mining region in Queensland called the Callide Basin.
Paleontologist Anthony Romilio of the University of Queensland's Dinosaur Lab made the discovery, and the research was published this month in the peer-reviewed journal Historical Biology.
Altogether, the researchers looked at three rock slabs bearing footprints, most of which came from one slab discovered in 2002.
Romilio said in a video that the footprints are mostly headed in one of two directions.
'(This) kind of indicates to us that they were either crossing a river," he said.
Footprints were left by herbivorous dinosaurs
A surveyor found the slab containing 47 footprints in 2002, the researchers wrote in the paper. The surveyor notified a senior geologist and the slab was eventually donated as a semi-public display at Biloela State High School in Queensland, Australia.
The slab includes tiny to small-sized tracks, and likely belong to ornithischian dinosaurs, the researchers said.
According to Romilio, the dinosaurs were very small and when they left the marks on the boulder, they were traveling less than 4 mph. The largest track was left by a dinosaur measuring about 30 inches at the hip, the researchers said.
Referring to past research, Romilio said that similar findings show dinosaurs with similar footprints were plant-eaters. They had long legs, chunky bodies, short arms and a small head with a beak.
The slab also contains about 100 circles, indicating that there were invertebrates and a fast-moving river.
'These animals were making a meager living out of what was coming through the sediments,' Romilio said in another video.
Rocks containing dinosaur footprints used as bookends, parking lot markers
Community members contacted Romilio about the specimen containing 66 prints once they found out about his previous work. He said it's common for fossils of this sort to hide in plain sight.
"It's incredible to think that a piece of history this rich was resting in a schoolyard all this time," he said, adding that he used advanced 3D imaging and light filters to see "hidden details" in the dinosaur footprints.
A second specimen the researchers looked at was found at a mine called Boundary Hill, then transported to the Callide Mine Office, the researchers said. When Romilio looked into it, it was being used at the entrance of a parking lot.
The rock contains two footprints left by a dinosaur walking on two legs, likely measuring around 31 inches in length, he said on the university's website.
The third specimen contains a single print and was being used as a bookend, Romilio said.
Previously, early Jurassic tracks were found at three sites in Queensland: Mount Morgan, Carnarvon Gorge and Biloela.
The researchers said this latest discovery is a sign of "the prevalence of ornithischian dinosaurs across the region" and gives scientists "an unprecedented snapshot" of how dinosaurs moved and behaved in Australia.
Saleen Martin is a reporter on USA TODAY's NOW team. She is from Norfolk, Virginia – the 757. Email her at sdmartin@usatoday.com.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
a day ago
- Yahoo
The science behind the smell of rain
You know the smell. It's there every time the first fat raindrops hit the ground—a distinctive, earthy scent that suffuses the air, an aroma that speaks of the changing seasons and promises relief from stifling summer heat. There's a name for the smell of rain, too: 'petrichor,' a poetic portmanteau of the Greek words 'petros' (stone) and 'ichor' (the blood of the gods in Greek mythology). Petrichor: the smell of rain. But what causes it? The name 'petrichor' was coined by Australian scientists Isabel Bear and Dick Thomas in 1964, in a paper that constituted perhaps the first serious scientific attempt to explain the phenomenon. The duo used the word to refer to an oil that they distilled from samples of soil and vegetation that were left for up to a year exposed to air and daylight but shielded from rain. They found that the oil contained a complex mixture of volatile organic compounds. One question left unanswered by Bear and Thomas was the origin of these compounds, and subsequent research has focused on one particular compound, a volatile bicyclic alcohol called geosmin. The compound was isolated a year after Bear and Thomas's paper, and its name literally means 'earth smell.' Along with another volatile organic compound called 2-methylisoborneol or 2-MIB, geosmin is primarily responsible for the characteristic smell of earth—and both contribute greatly to the smell of rain. Ryan Busby, an ecologist at the US Army's Corps of Engineers, tells Popular Science that these compounds exist in soil the world over, and that they're spritzed into the air whenever soil is disturbed. '[The compounds] accumulate in the pore spaces in the soil,' Busby explains. 'There might be some binding to soil particles. [And] research has shown that that impact with the soil surface causes the volatiles to be released into the atmosphere.' So where do geosmin and 2-MIB come from? Busby says that while the source of both compounds remains the subject of plenty of active research, the current scientific consensus is that they are released by soil-dwelling bacteria. Differing ratios of the two compounds may explain why the smell differs subtly from place to place. 'Geosmin is pretty consistent across the environment, while 2-MIB is more variable. [Where 2-MIB is present], it is released in much higher concentrations, so you get areas where there's huge concentrations, and then areas where there's none,' Busby says. The other components that make up petrichor—a myriad less powerful plant-related volatiles, and also perhaps the distinctive acrid smell of ozone that accompanies lightning—vary from location to location. Humans are remarkably sensitive to the smell of geosmin, in particular. In water, it can be detected at concentrations as low as 4 ng/L, which equates to about one teaspoon in 200 Olympic swimming pools. Busby says there are several theories for why this might be. 'One [theory] is finding water sources,' he explains. 'Geosmin seems to be more prevalent in moist, fertile soils.' The presence of moist soil means the presence of water, and it's easy to see how being able to catch a whiff of geosmin on the wind and follow it to a source of water would provide a valuable evolutionary advantage. It's not just humans who appear to be able to rely on the scent of these volatile compounds to find water, Busby says. 'Camels can detect geosmin and find oases in the desert from 50 miles away. Mosquitoes use it to find stagnant ponds for laying eggs, and raccoons use it to find turtle nests and buried eggs.' But while the smell of geosmin and 2-MIB are appealing to us, their taste is the complete opposite. 'It's kind of funny,' muses Busby. 'We love the smell, but we hate the taste.' In water, these compounds are responsible for the musty, moldy taste that indicates that water isn't safe to drink. Busby says, 'Any time you drink water and you think, 'Oh, this, this tastes like lake water,' it's because those compounds are dissolved in what you're drinking.' Again, there's most likely an evolutionary reason for this: it's one thing for the soil around a water source to smell of bacteria, but if the water itself carries the distinctive musty odor of geosmin and 2-MIB, it also most likely carries the potential for gastrointestinal unpleasantness. Busby says that this explains why geosmin and 2-MIB are 'the primary odor contaminants of drinking water globally.' There's one unanswered question here, though: why are geosmin and 2-MIB there in the first place? As Busby points out, while it's clear that 'there are a number of uses for geosmin for us, we're not sure exactly why [bacteria] produce it in such quantities. It's a [large] energy cost to produce a chemical like that.' So why do soil-borne bacteria pump out geosmin and 2-MIB? What's in it for them? A paper published in Nature Microbiology in 2020 suggested a possible answer. The study examined interactions between Streptomyces—one variety of geosmin- and 2-MIB-producing bacteria—and small creatures called springtails. (Springtails are one of three varieties of six-legged arthropods that are not considered insects, and they have a taste for bacteria.) Crucially, the researchers found that in the bacteria studied, geosmin and 2-MIB were produced only by colonies that were also producing reproductive spores. In fact, they can only be produced by those specific colonies: 'The genes for geosmin and 2-MIB synthases are under the direct control of sporulation-specific transcription factors, constraining emission of the odorants to sporulating colonies,' the paper explains. Springtails are attracted by geosmin and 2-MIB, so unsurprisingly, upon arrival at the odor-emitting colonies, they helped themselves happily to a tasty microbial snack. In doing so, they also consumed the bacterial spores. The spores were then able to pass through the springtail's digestive tracts and emerge ready for action from the other end. Busby says this might also explain why the smell of rain is strongest when it comes from rain hitting dry soil. 'As soil dries out, the bacteria are going to go dormant, and there seems to be a flush of release [at that point]. So from that respect, [the compounds] are a way to attract something that maybe will carry [the bacteria] to a more conducive environment for growth.' It might feel like the poetic appeal of petrichor is diminished somewhat by discovering that the oh-so-evocative smell of rain most likely exists to encourage a bunch of tiny arthropods to poop out bacterial spores. But ultimately, it's another example of nature finding a way—a co-evolutionary relationship that recalls bees and pollen, and one that extends its benefits to the rest of us. So the next time the rain hits dry soil, think about the tiny bacteria that both lead us to water and stop us drinking from sources that might harm us. This story is part of Popular Science's Ask Us Anything series, where we answer your most outlandish, mind-burning questions, from the ordinary to the off-the-wall. Have something you've always wanted to know? Ask us.
Washington Post
2 days ago
- Washington Post
Ancient T. rex ancestor discovered: Khankhuuluu, ‘prince of dragons'
A new species of early tyrannosaur, dubbed the 'prince of dragons,' has been discovered lurking in a collection of fossils first excavated in Mongolia in the early 1970s, scientists said Wednesday in the journal Nature. Khankhuuluu mongoliensis — its scientific name — is an evolutionary ancestor of the most famous tyrannosaur, the 'tyrant lizard king,' T. rex. With their bone-crushing bites and spindly little arms, large tyrannosaurs (scientifically known as 'eutyrannosaurians') are the celebrities of the dinosaur world. But they started off as small-bodied tyrannosauroids some 150 million years ago in the Jurassic period. It wasn't until the late Cretaceous that they began evolving into the giants that ignite people's imaginations. Their precise evolutionary origins, however, have long been murky. A critical swath of the family tree is blank. Khankhuuluu, known from two partial skeletons in fossil collections at the Institute of Paleontology in Mongolia, helps fill in this gap — a transitional 86 million-year-old species that represents the closest known ancestor to the famed late tyrannosaurs. Previously, it had been described as an alectrosaurus, another early tyrannosaur. Asked for a modern-day comparison, University of Calgary graduate student Jared Voris, who led the work, said to imagine a large, predatory horse. 'What makes them so important is their age,' said Stephen Brusatte, a paleontologist at the University of Edinburgh who was not involved in the study. 'They are about 86 million years old, a good 20 million years older than T. rex. It has been a frustrating gap in the record.' Voris was on a research trip in Mongolia in 2023 when he sent a text halfway across the world to his adviser, Darla Zelenitsky, an associate professor of paleontology. He told her that he thought some of the fossils he had examined in a museum collection were actually a new species. Those specimens had been classified for decades as alectrosaurus, 'an enigmatic and poorly represented tyrannosauroid species,' Zelenitsky and Voris wrote in their study. What leaped out to Voris initially was that the snout bone was hollow, a clear sign that this was an early ancestor of the tyrannosaur family. It was the first of what would come to be dozens of features that suggested this creature was something new. Zelenitsky, a paleontologist at the University of Calgary, said she was excited but cautioned Voris to take his time. Some bones were sent to Japan, where the research team was able to conduct CT scans to study them in greater detail. The scientists also traveled to the American Museum of Natural History in New York to study alectrosaurus fossils to make sure the animals they were researching were distinct. 'There's no doubt this is a new species,' Zelenitsky said. 'There's also no doubt that it's the ancestor to these large apex predator tyrannosaurs.' The new study reveals an intermediate form — a slender, relatively flat-snouted creature. Other tyrannosaur experts said it was good to see these specimens reexamined with modern techniques and understanding. Thomas R. Holtz Jr., a vertebrate paleontologist at the University of Maryland, recalled that in the 1980s, the find in Mongolia was relatively famous within the small community of tyrannosaur specialists. He was the envy of colleagues back then, because he had been able to hunt down a blurry microfiche of the paper, published in an obscure Mongolian geologic journal in the 1970s. 'It helps fill in a gap in time and in the evolutionary tree,' Holtz said. Khankhuuluu is part of a gold rush in discoveries that are filling in more chapters of tyrannosaur evolution. Over the past 15 years, there has been an explosion in discoveries of tyrannosaur species, said Joseph Sertich, a vertebrate paleontologist with the Smithsonian Tropical Research Institute. Sometimes, new species come to light by dusting off old fossils and finding ones that were misclassified in museum collections, as in the new study. Other times, scientists dig up new bones. Voris and Zelenitsky paint a picture of species evolution and migration as tyrannosaurs dispersed between Asia and North America over millions of years. Khankhuuluu, or another closely related species, left Asia and moved into North America, giving rise to tyrannosaurs there around 85 million years ago. Several million years later, a migration back to Asia resulted in two new branches of the tyrannosaur family tree: the giants on one branch and the 'Pinocchio rexes' — smaller dinosaurs with long, slender snouts — on the other. And at the very end of tyrannosaur evolution, one of the giants migrated back to North America, giving rise to T. rex. Sertich drew the analogy to big cats, where many species can live alongside one another — leopards, lions or tigers coexisting as predators in the ecosystem. 'The patterns of evolution we are uncovering are revealing a complex story of evolution that goes far beyond tyrant dinosaurs and has bearing on the origins of the modern ecosystems of the Northern Hemisphere,' Sertich said. 'Ultimately, this paper is exploring the ancient connections between North America and Asia, two continents that have shared species, including humans, for the past 90 million years.'
Yahoo
2 days ago
- Yahoo
Experts encourage innovative method to combat invasive fish devastating local ecosystems: 'It's a real natural, sustainable solution'
Invasive tilapia have been threatening endangered cod populations in Australia's Mary River, but experts say the cod are biting back, the Australian Broadcasting Corp. reported. Conservationists from Burnett Mary Regional Group performed a routine survey in April, which involved catching and testing some of the region's Mary River cod. Researchers were pleased to discover traces of tilapia in two of the cods' mouths and also documented an 80-centimeter (31.5-inch) cod eating a 40-cm (15.75-in) tilapia. In other words, despite the fact that the tilapia are not native to the area and the cod haven't evolved to eat them, the endangered native fish have adapted and are eating them anyway. "There was always the hope and suspicion that [the cod] were eating everything," BMRG CEO Tom Espinoza said. "It's provided a lot of hope for people that are invested in healthy cod populations across the board. … Hopefully in 10, 15, 20 years' time, we've got a population of large cod that can do the rest of the job themselves. It's a real natural, sustainable solution." This is encouraging news, because as matters stand, the tilapia are a serious problem. They're invasive — meaning they came to the area from another region and thrived so well that it's damaging the ecosystem — and they eat the eggs and young of not only cod but also other endangered species such as the "bum-breathing" Mary River turtle, Australian lungfish, and white-throated snapping turtle. Because the tilapia have spread to 26 of Queensland's 67 catchments, it's considered impossible for humans to eradicate them. Left unchecked, they could destroy the native species in the river, damaging the ecosystem that both people and wildlife rely on. However, steps have been taken to control the population. For example, tilapia are being harvested to use as fertilizer for native plants. Now that it appears cod are also eating the tilapia, there's a chance to achieve a new healthy balance. Should we be actively working to kill invasive species? Absolutely It depends on the species I don't know No — leave nature alone Click your choice to see results and speak your mind. Join our free newsletter for good news and useful tips, and don't miss this cool list of easy ways to help yourself while helping the planet.
