How did cockroaches survive the asteroid that led to the extinction of dinosaurs?
How did cockroaches survive the asteroid that led to the extinction of dinosaurs? – Kinjal, age 11, Delhi, India
When the rock now known as the Chicxulub impactor plummeted from outer space and slammed into the Earth 66 million years ago, cockroaches were there. The impact caused a massive earthquake, and scientists think it also triggered volcanic eruptions thousands of miles from the impact site. Three-quarters of plants and animals on Earth died, including all dinosaurs, except for some species that were ancestors of today's birds.
How could roaches a couple of inches long survive when so many powerful animals went extinct? It turns out that they were nicely equipped to live through a meteoric catastrophe.
If you've ever seen a cockroach, you've probably noticed that their bodies are very flat. This is not an accident. Flatter insects can squeeze themselves into tighter places. This enables them to hide practically anywhere – and it may have helped them survive the Chicxulub impact.
When the meteor struck, temperatures on Earth's surface skyrocketed. Many animals had nowhere to flee, but roaches could take shelter in tiny soil crevices, which provide excellent protection from heat.
The meteor's impact triggered a cascade of effects. It kicked up so much dust that the sky darkened. As the sun dimmed, temperatures plunged and conditions became wintry around the globe. With little sunlight, surviving plants struggled to grow, and many other organisms that relied on those plants went hungry.
Not cockroaches, though. Unlike some insects that prefer to eat one specific plant, cockroaches are omnivorous scavengers. This means they will eat most foods that come from animals or plants as well as cardboard, some kinds of clothing and even poop. Having appetites that aren't picky has allowed cockroaches to survive lean times since the Chicxulub extinction and other natural disasters.
Another helpful trait is that cockroaches lay their eggs in little protective cases. These egg cartons look like dried beans and are called oothecae, which means 'egg cases.' Like phone cases, oothecae are hard and protect their contents from physical damage and other threats, such as flooding and drought. Some cockroaches may have waited out part of the Chicxulub catastrophe from the comfort of their oothecae.
Modern cockroaches are little survivors that can live just about anywhere on land, from the heat of the tropics to some of the coldest parts of the globe. Scientists estimate that there over 4,000 cockroach species.
A handful of these species like to live with humans and quickly become pests. Once cockroaches become established in a building, it's hard to rid every little crack of these insects and their oothecae. When large numbers of roaches are present in unsanitary places, they can spread diseases. The biggest threat they pose to human health is from allergens they produce that can trigger asthma attacks and allergic reactions in some people.
Cockroach pests are hard to manage because they can resist many chemical insecticides and because they have the same abilities that helped their ancestors outlive many dinosaurs. Still, cockroaches are much more than a pest to control. Researchers study cockroaches to understand how they move and how their bodies are designed to get ideas for building better robots.
As a scientist, I see all insects as beautiful, six-legged inspirations. Cockroaches have already overcome odds that were too great for dinosaurs. If another meteorite hit the Earth, I'd be more worried for humans than for cockroaches.
Hello, curious kids! Do you have a question you'd like an expert to answer? Ask an adult to send your question to CuriousKidsUS@theconversation.com. Please tell us your name, age and the city where you live.
And since curiosity has no age limit – adults, let us know what you're wondering, too. We won't be able to answer every question, but we will do our best.
This article is republished from The Conversation, a nonprofit, independent news organization bringing you facts and trustworthy analysis to help you make sense of our complex world. It was written by: Brian Lovett, West Virginia University
Read more:
To help insects, make them welcome in your garden – here's how
Why are moths attracted to light?
The invasive emerald ash borer has destroyed millions of trees – scientists aim to control it with tiny parasitic wasps
Brian Lovett does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
Scientists Merged 3 Human Brains—Here's How
"Hearst Magazines and Yahoo may earn commission or revenue on some items through these links." Here's what you'll learn when you read this story: Brain-to-brain verbal communication in humans was first accomplished in 2014 when brain-computer interfaces helped transmit a message from India to France. Since then, some progress has been made on technology that could make so-called mind-reading possible, including a device that would allow at least three people to share thoughts. While communication using only thoughts shows promise in the medical field for patients who are unable to speak, when it comes to other uses, there are still many ethical implications that need to be navigated. Mind reading has long existed in science fiction—Vulcan mind meld, anyone?—and those carnivals where alleged mind readers try to part you from your last $10 bill with a promise that they know exactly what you're thinking. But thanks to some recent scientific developments, it is now no longer the stuff of cyberpunk and magic. Back in 2014, two words were heard halfway around the world. Those words were ciao and hola. The only people who heard them were two subjects, one in India and one in France, both of whom were willing subjects for an experiment that wanted to probe into whether it was possible for one person to find out what another was thinking from 5,000 miles away. The non-invasive research merged brain-computer interfaces and computer-brain interfaces. Brain-computer interfaces allow the brain to control a device or application by analyzing and translating brain signals into digital commands, while computer-brain interfaces use a computer to influence brain activity. Wireless EEG recorded brain activity through electrodes on the subjects' heads. When the subject in India sent the message, the letters of the two words were then converted to binary code. The code was transferred to another computer before being sent to the subject in France via internet. Transmission of thoughts from one brain to another succeeded. Because the computer-brain interface used transcranial magnetic stimulation to prepare the receiver by using magnetic fields to boost electrical signals in neurons, the receiver found out when there was a message on the way. This experiment marked the first brain-to-brain verbal communication in humans and opened up a new frontier. 'We speculate that future research could explore the use of closed mind-loops in which information associated to voluntary activity from a brain area or network is captured and, after adequate external processing, used to control other brain elements in the same subject,' the researchers who ran the experiment said at the time in a study published in PLOS One. How far have we come since then? In 2019, another research team invented BrainNet, a non-invasive system that also uses EEG and transcranial magnetic stimulation and became the first multi-person brain-to-brain interface. Meant for problem-solving applications, it can accommodate three people at a time, decoding the brain signals of the two message senders with EEG before transmitting them to the receiver through an internet connection. BrainNet originally demonstrated how three people could silently work together to tackle a computer game similar to Tetris. The researchers predicted that the system could eventually be scaled to accommodate larger groups. The mechanism behind direct brain-to-brain communication, or neural interfacing, in both humans and animals was elucidated in 2021, when veterinary physiologist Ehsan Hosseini hypothesized that the weak magnetic field in one animal's brain was capable of transmitting information to another. He also suggested that cryptochromes, proteins that act as photoreceptors which help regulate circadian rhythm, can actually perceive these magnetic fields and convert them to action potentials, or ultrafast zaps of voltage across the membrane of a neuron. Other studies even claimed that the ability to pick up on weak magnetic field energy may explain telepathy and other paranormal phenomena. More recently, the neurotechnology startup Neuroba is exploring ways to integrate human consciousness with not only brain-computer interfaces, but AI and even quantum communication. They are currently trying to develop algorithms that will allow messages to be delivered more accurately. This could be a breakthrough in the medical field, with patients who are otherwise unable to speak still having the ability to communicate by using just their brains, whose messages will be analyzed and translated by a computer. Beyond medical use, ethical implications for this technology remain unclear. Neuroba also mentions that a device like an updated version of BrainNet could revolutionize the workplace by connecting thoughts during meetings and other collaborative efforts. While some are convinced that hooking up everyone's brains in a conference room would be revolutionary, there are concerns. Everyone reading each other's thoughts and thinking alike, possibly being pressured to think alike, ventures on the robotic and could possibly (brace for another Star Trek reference incoming) create another Borg. There is also the possibility of misusing neural interfacing to invade others' privacy. Ultimately, much of the field still remains unexplored, and a code of ethics will have to be established if it is to be used regularly in the future. You Might Also Like Can Apple Cider Vinegar Lead to Weight Loss? Bobbi Brown Shares Her Top Face-Transforming Makeup Tips for Women Over 50
Yahoo
5 hours ago
- Yahoo
'Jurassic World Rebirth' chomps on big $147-million Fourth of July box office weekend
Dinosaurs ruled the box office once again this weekend as "Jurassic World Rebirth" hauled in a strong $147.3 domestically over the five-day Fourth of July period to kick off what industry insiders hope will be an impressive month at movie theaters. The holiday total for "Jurassic World" in the U.S. and Canada exceeded industry expectations. Universal Pictures' "Jurassic World" reboot was expected to gross $120 million to $130 million during its long opening weekend, according to analyst and studio projections. The movie unseated Apple's Brad Pitt racing film "F1 The Movie," which landed in second place with $26.1 million domestically, bringing its total to $109.5 million in North America, according to distributor Warner Bros. "Rebirth's" 2022 predecessor, "Jurassic World: Dominion," debuted with $145 million from its first three days of release and went on to collect $1 billion globally. The new movie carries an estimated production budget of $180 million, not counting marketing costs. Big-budget creature features have global appeal, as the numbers showed. Opening in 82 countries outside the U.S. and Canada, "Rebirth" grossed $171 million internationally. That included $41.5 million from China, proving that Hollywood movies can still do well in the Middle Kingdom despite the dominance of local production in the populous country. The global total for "Rebirth's" opening was $318.3 million. Directed by Gareth Edwards ("The Creator," "Rogue One") and starring Scarlett Johansson and Mahershala Ali, "Rebirth" earned unenthusiastic reviews from critics, notching a 52% approval rating on aggregator Rotten Tomatoes. The "Jurassic" franchise has seen multiple iterations since Steven Spielberg's landmark 1993 blockbuster "Jurassic Park," based on the popular Michael Crichton science fiction novel, wowed audiences with its combination of practical and computer-generated effects that gave the T. Rex and other killer dinos their stunning realism. That film spawned not only sequels but toys, theme park attractions, animated series and video games. Although the sequels, starting with Spielberg's own "The Lost World," never achieved the acclaim of the original, they continued to mint money for Universal and Spielberg's production company, Amblin. Prior to "Rebirth," the "Jurassic" movies had grossed a total of roughly $6 billion worldwide, not adjusting for inflation, according to box office website The Numbers. The first "Jurassic Park" grossed $978 million worldwide, according to Box Office Mojo, which is equal to $1.86 billion in today's dollars. Read more: Pixar had its worst opening weekend ever with 'Elio.' What happened? The latest "Jurassic" movie did not get a slot at Imax theaters, since those were taken up by "F1." Next week, the valuable Imax real estate will be taken up by Warner Bros. and DC Studios' "Superman." Films shown on Imax often reap bigger box office numbers, aided in part by the higher ticket prices at those theaters, and because they're viewed as more of a must-see "event." "Jurassic World" is the first of three big tentpole films arriving this month in theaters. In addition to "Superman," Walt Disney Co. and Marvel Studios' "The Fantastic Four: First Steps" opens in a few weeks. July has historically been one of the strongest summer months at the box office, putting more pressure on these three films to deliver. Despite big box office gains in April and May, June saw a string of underperforming films such as Lionsgate's "John Wick" spinoff "Ballerina," Sony Pictures' "Karate Kid: Legends" and Disney and Pixar's original animated effort "Elio." Theatrical business in June was 25% lower compared to the pre-pandemic average of June 2017, 2018 and 2019, according to David A. Gross's FranchiseRe movie industry newsletter. It was also down 5.3% compared to last June, which saw big hits like Disney and Pixar's "Inside Out 2" and Sony's "Bad Boys: Ride or Die." "We see this ebb and flow," said Shawn Robbins, founder of the website Box Office Theory. "These next four to five weeks will certainly give us a sense of how to grade the summer overall.' Sign up for our Wide Shot newsletter to get the latest entertainment business news, analysis and insights. This story originally appeared in Los Angeles Times.
Yahoo
5 hours ago
- Yahoo
Jurassic World: Rebirth Review: I Was Really Hoping They'd Have Thrills On This Dinosaur Tour
When you buy through links on our articles, Future and its syndication partners may earn a commission. I don't think I'd be surprising anyone who knows me by saying that I'm a Jurassic franchise superfan. I'm even someone who enthusiastically enjoyed both of the previous sequels to Jurassic World. But I can agree with everyone that 1993's Jurassic Park is the high bar of the series, and even when hearing various claims that Jurassic World: Rebirth was a love letter to that very modern classic, I put aside my usual trepidations. Jurassic World Rebirth (2025) Release Date: July 2, 2025Directed By: Gareth EdwardsWritten By: David KoeppStarring: Scarlett Johansson, Mahershala Ali, Jonathan Bailey, Rupert Friend, Manuel Garcia-Rulfo, Luna Blaise, David Iacono, Audrina Miranda, Philippine Velge, Bechir Sylvain, and Ed SkreinRating: PG-13 for intense sequences of violence/action, bloody images, some suggestive references, language and a drug 134 minutes I was wrong to do that, because if this is supposed to be a declaration of love for that original movie, it veers far from the mark. Stop me if you've heard this one: the hubris of humanity led to the recreation of dinosaurs, which our species now wants to exploit in the name of profit. What passes for novelty this time around is Rebirth's new island location, a remote facility where mutated attractions were being created for the main park. This lost world is now hosting a mercenary team led by Scarlett Johansson's Zora Bennett, with the goal being to recover genetic samples of the largest dinosaurs. The aim is to create a super drug that benefits cardiac health, and if that was the sole focus of this story, I might have been able to get on board. That's not what happens, however, as a family unit (Manuel Garcia-Rulfo, Luna Blaise, David Iacono and Audrina Miranda) randomly shipwrecked by some dinosaurs is rescued by the aforementioned mercenary team – an effort to make the tale into something more "blockbuster" worthy. And that is where the greatest irony presented in Jurassic World Rebirth lies, as watching this movie didn't invigorate my dino loving heart; rather, it broke it into 65 million pieces. As well-cast as Jurassic World Rebirth's mercenary mission plotline is, it should be the one and only plot this picture follows. Along with Johansson (a Jurassic superfan herself) are Jonathan Bailey, Rupert Friend, and Mahershala Ali. That sort of roster almost makes you think you're in for a Wes Anderson adventure, especially with Johansson and Friend being Asteroid City veterans. I think I honestly would take a modest stop-motion Anderson film over what we have here, with all of the money and effects a mega franchise can buy. And that is what brings me to the heart of my disappointment: writer David Koepp's script. Returning to the franchise for the first time since 1997's The Lost World: Jurassic Park, the scribe has given us a story that induces head-scratching. There is literally a moment where this film finds its characters minutes away from Ile Saint-Hubert, the island at the heart of Rebirth, only to turn around and save the family that'll give us our merchandising-friendly subplot. It's a move that's questioned by all but Zora and Duncan Kincaid (Mahershala Ali) – her traumatized friend who offers her conscience a window to sneak in Jurassic World Rebirth's unsubtle social messaging. With past films offering spins on Michael Crichton's thesis of scientific power being mishandled by humanity's hubris, director Gareth Edwards' entry focuses on the class inequality inherent with such big pharma fortune seeking. But it never lands its ideas as well as the previous films, which leads to a promising story beat turning into a blunt instrument that beats us over the head. As for the Jurassic part of this equation, Koepp's pre-release promise to not change the series canon holds up. However, Rebirth doesn't feel like a movie that's interested in even touching the more recent stories at hand, as seen in the decision to wipe out most of the world's dinosaurs at the start of the film. If anything, this feels like a partial attempt to execute a Halloween 2018 style sequel in Jurassic World's universe – selectively side stepping previous developments while eager to include legacy character name drops and callbacks. So I'd check those dino droppings for member berries, as I have a feeling they've poisoned what could have been a fun romp. For as much complaining as I've done about Jurassic World Rebirth's human characters, I can see the promise that they represent. Scarlett Johansson and Jonathan Bailey in particular have fantastic chemistry as the characters that puzzle out the moral dilemma we're supposed to be invested in. Mahershala Ali is left on the outside looking in, infusing as much personality as he can as an undeveloped figure of conscience. So with lackluster humans, you'd think the dinosaurs would pick the slack, right? Instead, I am shocked at how dino-avoidant Rebirth actually is, especially with mutant creatures on the table. So much of the hype surrounding the fifth Jurassic sequel has been teasing the Distortus Rex, a dinosaur that's literally designed with Alien's Xenomorph and Return of the Jedi's Rancor in mind. But we barely get to see the beast clearly, despite recent marketing not being very shy with the beast's face. As for the rest of our dinosaurs, we get what amounts to a legacy cameo from a T-Rex, bringing to life a long deleted scene from Jurassic Park's original script. It's not very long or terribly exciting, and the only benefit I can honestly claim is that we get to see a sleepy Rex roll over like an adorable house cat. That's not exactly an adventure 32 years in the making. Yet somehow, with Jurassic World Rebirth's beasts mostly hiding in the background – save for Dolores, an adorable Aquilops – I still found myself once again rooting for the dinosaurs. The big difference this time out is instead of wanting inGen's unwanted menagerie to teach us a lesson in why we shouldn't play God, I wanted them to take me away from the uninteresting human characters. This is where the Delgado family comes in, as their presence robs Zora Bennett and her team of any substantial development while also giving us an underbaked family unit meant to recall the emotional ride of Lex and Tim in Jurassic Park. It bothers me that the segment of Rebirth's narrative giving people of color its focus feels like a last minute addition. I do not fault stars Manuel Garcia-Rulfo, Luna Blaise, Audrina Miranda or David Iacono for their portion of the movie being annoying, especially because I wanted them to work better in the overall structure of the story. Diversity in representation doesn't only belong to the dinosaurs. Audrina Miranda notably also has the skills to sell the CGI/puppetry mashup of Dolores as a mini-dino companion worthy of an actual plotline... but alas, Jurassic World Rebirth doesn't even recognize what it has going for it long enough to really double down, as it flies towards an ending that can't even decide what it wants to be. Some of the worst criticisms of nostalgic legacyquels apply to Jurassic World: Rebirth . Acting as a greatest hits compilation of locations, iconography, and visual beats that made for the most memorable Jurassic moments, there's no heart behind the choices. It's a movie that asks for 'oohs' and 'ahhs' without inspiring them to come from an organic or meaningful place. If you'd asked me before seeing Rebirth if there's such a thing as too many references to John Williams' Jurassic Park theme, I may have said 'No.' But the underwhelming score from composer Alexandre Desplat has proven me wrong, as the numerous deployments of the iconic tune are all I really remember from this would-be adventure picture's score. The greatest failing I think Jurassic World: Rebirth suffers from is an obviously rushed production schedule. I still remember the project being announced out of nowhere last year, barreling down with what seemed like a freight train's worth of momentum to the finish line this summer. It's a lesson we should have learned in the past, as 2001's Jurassic Park III suffered a rushed production that yielded similarly disastrous results. I now feel I need to return to the only other entry I dislike in this canon, if only so I can decide whether I need to apologize for treating it so roughly. Despite my criticisms, I still believe in the promise of the Jurassic franchise at large. For my own personal scorecard to only have two misfires in a canon of seven films (and two wildly entertaining animated series), that's not a bad average to have. If there was a little more time and care given to Rebirth, I could see it being the lean and mean jungle adventure it's attempting to resemble. If there's a new entry announced tomorrow, I'll be there without question. I just hope that if the Jurassic universe continues, it takes its time to let an idea worthy of trotting out these massive marvels dawn on its consciousness. But unfortunately for now, I cannot endorse this walk in the park.
