Scientists make incredible discovery after exploring newly revealed section of seafloor: 'We seized upon the moment'
Fortunately, an international team of researchers found a way to turn this gargantuan lemon into lemonade: they used the opportunity to explore a never-before-seen section of the seafloor.
What they found was nothing short of amazing.
As Schmidt Ocean Institute detailed, the expedition was part of the Challenger 150 global cooperative. This program conducts deep-sea biological research intended to better understand how to sustainably manage the deep ocean.
The initial mission was to study the seafloor around where this massive section of ice shelf met the Bellingshausen Sea. However, plans rapidly shifted when the approximately 209-square-mile iceberg broke off, revealing a massive section of the seafloor that was previously inaccessible.
"We seized upon the moment, changed our expedition plan, and went for it so we could look at what was happening in the depths below," expedition co-chief scientist Dr. Patricia Esquete said, per the Schmidt Ocean Institute.
SuBastian, a remotely operated vehicle (ROV) designed to safely explore deep waters, plunged to a depth of around 1,300 meters.
The ROV discovered a vast ecosystem of underwater plant and animal life. Among them were sea sponges, anemones, octopi, icefish, and giant sea spiders that may have been thriving down there for centuries.
"We didn't expect to find such a beautiful, thriving ecosystem," Dr. Esquete said. "Based on the size of the animals, the communities we observed have been there for decades, maybe even hundreds of years."
What amazed the research team most was how this ecosystem was capable of thriving without the help of nutrients raining down from the water above. They theorized that ocean currents may be responsible for providing such a vast ecosystem with the resources it requires.
Do you think America is in a housing crisis?
Definitely
Not sure
No way
Only in some cities
Click your choice to see results and speak your mind.
There's no doubt studying the seafloor is fueled in part by sheer wonder for the array of life on our planet — but that's not the only thing driving it.
Understanding how this vast, unseen part of the planet operates can better inform us on how to protect the environment. With this knowledge, we can support these ecosystems, better manage resources, assess human impact, and more.
Similar deep-sea research is being conducted elsewhere. An expedition in Papua New Guinea's "rainforest of the ocean" uncovered several new species, affording conservationists a greater understanding of how to protect and manage this crucial section of the deep sea.
In New Zealand, a similar expedition discovered a new species of sea squirt. It's believed that studying these fascinating filter feeders can potentially improve human immune systems and even reverse signs of aging.
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.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Scientific American
14 hours ago
- Scientific American
U.S. Cuts Antarctica's Only Research Icebreaker Ship under Trump Budget Squeeze
Many ships have tried to reach the floating tongue of Thwaites Glacier —a 130-kilometer-wide conveyor belt of ice that slides off West Antarctica's coast and splinters into the sea. Thwaites is rapidly destabilizing, and precise mapping of the seafloor and ocean currents surrounding it are urgently needed to know how much damage the crumbling glacier and resulting sea-level rise could do to coasts worldwide. Only one vessel—the U.S. research icebreaker Nathaniel B. Palmer (NBP)—has successfully penetrated the area's phalanx of sea ice and billion-metric-ton icebergs to reach a critical location on Thwaites, widely considered the world's most dangerous glacier. The NBP has made about 200 research cruises to Antarctica in the past 30 years, in many cases reaching places never before visited. But if the Trump administration has its way, this will all come to an end in October. The NBP's expeditions along remote parts of the Antarctic coast have gathered voluminous data that are critical to U.S. interests. If the Thwaites glacier were to implode, it could raise the average global sea level by 65 centimeters, and it could potentially trigger wider Antarctic ice sheet collapse that could raise global sea level by more than three meters. Marine science shows that a disproportionate brunt of that rise would inundate the Gulf of Mexico and eastern U.S. coasts. Frequent measurements in Antarctica's remote locations are needed to project how quickly this might happen. Expeditions also monitor marine ecosystems that are rapidly shifting as a result of climate change and affecting the large commercial fisheries in surrounding waters. Yet Antarctic science experts and officials told me that the administration is imposing such severe budget cuts on the U.S. National Science Foundation (NSF) that the organization has no realistic option but to terminate its lease for the NBP after 30 years. The U.S. is 'losing the only research [icebreaker it has] in the Southern Hemisphere,' says Michael Jackson, the NSF's former section head for Antarctic sciences, who left in December. A replacement vessel —if one is even funded—'will probably take 10 years to build,' he says. On supporting science journalism If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today. This latest move caps what feels like a major U.S. retreat from Antarctica, says Theodore Scambos, a polar glaciologist at the University of Colorado Boulder. For 27 years, the U.S. had operated two research icebreakers in the region. But in 2024 NSF dropped its lease for the smaller of the two craft because of budget shortfalls. That and the impending loss of the NBP marks 'a general decline of America in the science and exploration fields,' Scambos says. 'And I hate that.' This loss will have widespread consequences, according to a wide range of scientists, logistics experts, former NSF officials and former diplomats interviewed for this story. It will hamstring U.S. influence in the Antarctic at a time when geopolitical competition and resource exploitation are intensifying in the region. It will also undermine scientists' ability to monitor rapid changes in Thwaites and other remote areas—at the very moment climate impacts on the continent are accelerating. Researchers first learned of the NBP 's situation on May 30, when the Trump administration released its full fiscal year 2026 budget request for NSF to Congress. The termination was buried in a single sentence on page 102 of the 222-page document. The budget request also stipulated a 70 percent funding cut for polar science research projects overall. 'None of us saw that coming,' says Patricia Yager, a polar marine biologist at the University of Georgia, who called the move 'shocking.' In response to a request for comment from Scientific American, an NSF spokesperson confirmed via e-mail that NSF had proposed terminating the lease of the NBP in Trump's 2026 fiscal year budget request but provided little additional information. Although the U.S. Coast Guard has three icebreakers— Polar Star, Healy and the newly commissioned Storis, a former commercial icebreaker—none can fill NBP 's role. Healy is continually committed to Arctic duties; sending it to Antarctica and back to do even a single day of scientific work would require 60 days of travel. Storis, which has a troubled history, will also be used in the Arctic. And Polar Star is simply not equipped for the kind of research the NBP does. 'The Palmer is the most amazing research tool that we have; there's nothing like it anywhere in the world,' Yager says. It can plow through meter-thick sea ice at three knots with little more than gentle side-to-side rocking. And it can remain at sea for 65 days, a vital capability given that a round trip to Thwaites takes nearly two weeks from the nearest port. Waiting for vast rafts of sea ice and icebergs to shift and open a passage can add many more days. When the NBP is in Antarctic waters, it continuously collects data. Multibeam sonar captures a three-dimensional map of the seafloor, revealing features such as undersea canyons that influence the stability of coastal glaciers. Another sonar system traces sediment layers below the seafloor, which can provide important records of past climate periods. Even in rough seas and high winds, the ship's dynamic positioning system allows it to hover within a few feet of its intended location while technicians do the delicate work of collecting sediment cores or piloting remote-operated submersibles on the seafloor. The NBP can carry and launch two helicopters, which proved decisive during a 2010 cruise, allowing researchers to leapfrog over impassable sea ice and install instruments for monitoring crustal movements and glacial retreat as far as 200 kilometers away. The impending loss of the NBP means five Antarctic missions, slated for October 2025 through April 2026, now hang in limbo. The NSF is scrambling for ways to salvage at least some of them. For example, the agency might send the University of Alaska Fairbanks's Arctic research vessel Sikuliaq all the way down to Antarctica in January to perform a major ecological survey that has been conducted annually since 1999. The survey covers 2,000 kilometers along the Antarctic Peninsula's coast and out past the lip of the continental shelf. It measures the abundance of krill and phytoplankton—which anchor the region's ecosystem—and monitors deep ocean currents. In recent decades this survey has revealed important changes in ocean mixing that have caused the winter sea ice season in this relatively temperate section of Antarctica to shorten by roughly 100 days a year. But the Sikuliaq is already in high demand in the Arctic, for up to a dozen expeditions per year. And compared with the NBP, it has fewer berths for scientists, can spend fewer days at sea and has more limited ice-breaking capabilities—effectively excluding it from Thwaites and other heavily iced sections of the Antarctic coastline. A few other countries have research icebreakers, including the U.K., Germany, Australia, South Korea and China. It is possible that a couple U.S. researchers could occasionally find ride-along spots. But that may not advance U.S. research priorities, Scambos says: 'You're not going to get somebody else's icebreaker to bring you and 20 of your colleagues and undertake a major mission that has U.S. research interest behind it.' The NSF spokesperson stated that the agency 'has started the process to identify vessels and partnerships to continue support of marine science.' A new icebreaker that would eventually replace the NBP is in early design stages, but it would take a decade to build. The work on this new Antarctic research vessel has been moving slowly for a variety of reasons, even prior to the start of the current Trump administration. The NSF spokesperson stated that the agency 'has paused source selection activities' for the next stage of development. Since the 1950s the U.S. has maintained a larger scientific presence on the Antarctic continent than any other nation, by way of research stations, ships, remote air transport and exploratory teams that drive vehicles in long traverses across the ice sheet. For now, NSF plans to try to keep operating the three U.S. land bases in Antarctica—the Palmer, McMurdo and Amundsen-Scott South Pole stations—because the harsh environment would cause them to rapidly deteriorate if they were not staffed. But spending an ensuing decade without a research icebreaker could have major geopolitical consequences. Antarctica is Earth's largest remaining territory not unilaterally controlled by any particular nation. The U.S. has long backed the Antarctic Treaty, under which nations set aside any territorial land claims they've made and reserve the continent for scientific research. If international commitment to the treaty ever faltered, however, nations might pursue territorial claims on the continent, and those claims would be bolstered by having maintained research stations, communications hubs, deep water ports and air transport and driving routes. 'Operations and logistics are 100 percent necessary for U.S. national security interests,' says William Muntean III, a former senior adviser for Antarctic affairs and a deputy representative for the U.S. State Department to the annual Antarctic Treaty Consultative Meeting. The scientific research conducted there is a fundamental part of that equation. 'In the Antarctic Treaty System,' Muntean says, 'knowledge is what equals power.' That's because the rules of play for Antarctica and its surrounding seas are constantly negotiated and monitored by more than two dozen countries with research stations there—and any negotiations become especially heated when it comes to resource extraction. For years commercial vessels have plied the coastal seas for Antarctic toothfish (sold in restaurants as 'sea bass') and krill. The U.S. and a handful of other countries have sought to establish several marine protected areas around the continent where fishing would be prohibited, but they have encountered resistance from Russia and China. Negotiations often hinge on data collected from research vessels, such as those that document changes in ecosystems. In this way, Muntean says, 'knowing what is actually happening in Antarctica gives a country the ability to then influence' what happens. Right now the NBP remains moored at the main pier in Punta Arenas in southern Chile—its standard departure point for Antarctica. The ship's fate is on hold until early September, when Congress returns from recess. 'The budget request is always just a policy document,' says Alexandra Isern, a former assistant director of the NSF. In the NSF's pending request, she says, the Trump administration is putting 'a line in the sand' for what it wants. Funding bills that were sitting in Congress before recess add confusion. Senate bill 2354, which passed out of the Appropriations Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice, Science and Related Agencies in mid-July, appears to restore full funding to the NSF. The corresponding House bill restores roughly two thirds of the proposed cuts. Isern says 'members [of Congress] are big supporters of the Antarctic program,' but neither of those bills mentions the NBP or the new icebreaker intended to replace it. Jackson fears that Congress will cave to pressure from the Trump administration and neither the NBP nor the other polar research funding will be saved. In the meantime, polar researchers across the U.S. continue to prepare for science missions that may or may not happen. Some have already shipped their scientific gear south to Chile in case their cruise happens after all. Others will have to do so in the coming weeks, before Congress returns. Amid the uncertainty, Oscar Schofield, a biological oceanographer at Rutgers University, sees a clear message. The administration is already stripping climate data from government websites, preparing to halt EPA regulation of carbon dioxide emissions and quietly discussing plans to scuttle a state-of-the-art NASA satellite that monitors carbon dioxide—allowing the spacecraft to burn up in the atmosphere. Canceling the NBP, he says, looks like 'a political decision of not wanting to support climate change research.' In this decision, Schofield sees an important lever of soft power being abandoned. 'Since World War II,' he says, 'there was always a strong belief that if the U.S. had the strongest scientists and the strongest engineers, it would serve national security.' Those generational investments, he says, are now being undone.
Yahoo
21 hours ago
- Yahoo
How long tubes of mud could reveal how Antarctica is changing
Why would anyone brave hand-numbing cold, icy winds and rough seas - sometimes working through the night - to dig up mud from the Antarctic seabed? That is what an international team of particularly adventurous researchers did earlier this year in the remote Antarctic Peninsula, on a mission aiming to reveal centuries of scientific secrets about the Southern Ocean. Scientists around the world will now share and analyse these precious mud samples to work out how human activity - including a century of industrial whaling - affected Antarctica and the rest of our planet. The research is part of a global effort to understand the relationship between the ocean and the climate. A history of ocean life Researchers used a special coring drill - a bit like a huge apple-corer - tethered to a research ship, to drill at depths of up to 500m. They collected more than 40 long cores, or tubes, of seafloor sediment from locations around the peninsula. This is one of the richest habitats for marine life in Antarctica, and a focal point for fishing, tourism and - before it was banned in the 1980s - industrial whale hunting. Collecting the sediment gives insight and clues to the past, "like a book of history", explained lead researcher Dr Elisenda Balleste from the University of Barcelona. "What is living in the seas now, what was living in the seas in the past and evidence of our human impact" is recorded in layer upon layer of sediment over centuries, she said. By preserving and dating those layers, and analysing what they contain, researchers can build a picture of the history of Antarctic marine life. Once on board the ship, the cores were frozen and transported to Barcelona and Dr Balleste's laboratory. From there, carefully extracted pieces of this Antarctic mud will be sent out to several academic institutions around the world. Scientists will scan and date the sediment layers, work out what microbial life they contain, measure levels of pollution and calculate how much carbon is buried in the mud. It is part of a mission - the Convex Seascape Survey - which involves universities and research institutions around the globe working together to better understand how our ocean and climate are connected. Claire Allen, an oceanographer from the British Antarctic Survey who has studied Antarctica's past for more than 20 years, said that cores like these were particularly valuable. "Before 1950 - before there was any kind of monitoring capacity in Antarctica - sediment cores and ice cores are the only way that we can get an insight into any of the climatic or physical properties that have changed over time," she said. The DNA fingerprint from whale hunting The newly collected samples being stored for DNA analysis have to be kept at temperatures low enough to stop all biological processes. Dr Balleste took them out of the industrial-sized freezer where they are being stored to show them to us, very briefly. "They're kept at minus 80 degrees to stop them degrading," she explained. These small pieces of the seabed - frozen in time at temperatures that preserve genetic material - will be used for what is known as environmental DNA analysis. It is an area of science which has developed rapidly in recent years. It gives researchers the ability to extract genetic information from water, soil and even air, like a fingerprint of life left behind in the environment. Dr Carlos Preckler, from King Abdullah University in Saudi Arabia, is leading this part of the research and will be trying to measure how almost a century of industrial whaling in Antarctica affected the ocean and our atmosphere. Carbon - when it is released into the atmosphere as carbon dioxide - warms up our planet like a blanket. So, as the world struggles to reduce those emissions, any processes that absorb and lock significant amounts of carbon might help to rein in global warming. "We know whales have a lot of carbon in their bodies, because they are huge animals," said Dr Preckler. What he and his colleagues want to know is how much of that carbon gets buried in the seafloor - and locked away from the atmosphere - when the animals die. "We can measure whale DNA and the carbon in the sediment," explained Dr Preckler. "So we can measure what happened before industrial whaling removed most of the whales in the [Southern] ocean," he added. That, the researchers say, will provide a measure of how much whales - simply by existing, being huge and living out their natural lives - remove carbon from our atmosphere and help in the fight against climate change.
UPI
a day ago
- UPI
Argentina's science, technology budget falls to lowest level since 2002
Argentina's science and technology budget has dropped to 0.156% of gross domestic product, its lowest level since 2002, according to a July report from the EPC, a group of researchers, analysts and consultants specializing in science, technology and innovation policy. Photo by ckstockphoto/Pixabay Aug. 18 (UPI) -- Argentina's scientific expedition "Talud Continental IV," which live-streamed the Mar del Plata submarine canyon using the remotely operated vehicle SuBastian, became a cultural phenomenon. The recently completed mission averaged 500,000 viewers per broadcast and drew more than 17.5 million views in three weeks. The mission, led by scientists from Argentina's National Scientific and Technical Research Council (Conicet) in collaboration with the Schmidt Ocean Institute, showcased the potential of Argentine science on the international stage. However, that success contrasts sharply with the difficult situation facing scientific research in Argentina. The country's science and technology budget has dropped to 0.156% of gross domestic product, its lowest level since 2002, according to a July report from the EPC, a group of researchers, analysts and consultants specializing in science, technology and innovation policy. The sector's share of GDP fell 48% compared to 2023. Spending in the first half of 2025 was down 19% from the same period in 2024, marking a decline of more than 40% in two years. This is the lowest level recorded since 2002, when the country was in the midst of one of its worst economic crises. Although the figure stood at 0.30% of GDP when President Javier Milei took office, severe cuts to science and technology have been made over the past two years as part of broader austerity measures to fund social programs. The Ministry of Science was downgraded to a secretariat, while major research agencies faced steep reductions. Conicet lost 41% of its funding compared with 2024, the I+D+I Agency saw its budget cut by 67%, the National Institute of Industrial Technology fell 46%, the National Institute of Agricultural Technology lost 39.6%, the National Commission on Space Activities dropped 40%, and the National Genetic Data Bank saw its resources reduced by 50.4%. The adjustment marks an unprecedented cut in government investment in science. In 2024, the state financed 59.5% of the country's research and development, while private companies contributed just 20.7% and universities 1.2%. In research and development specifically, 61% of funding came from public agencies and universities. The government, however, has prioritized other areas it considers key to development, including agribusiness, energy and mining, the knowledge economy and innovation, and health, while sidelining programs tied to climate change, the environment and social sciences. The effects are already visible: insufficient resources for research, lack of equipment and supplies, suspended contracts, wage cuts and a growing brain drain of Argentine scientists abroad. The effect on scientific employment is clear. An estimated 4,148 jobs have been lost in Argentina's National Science, Technology and Innovation System, a third of them at Conicet, which now has only 11,868 researchers. For Guillermo Durán, dean of the Faculty of Exact and Natural Sciences at the University of Buenos Aires, the problem goes beyond economics. "There is a political decision to dismantle Argentina's science and technology system and the high-quality public university system that has always set us apart as a country," he said. His faculty lost 13% of its teaching staff in 2024 due to budget cuts and salary reductions. "These people decided to end a series of very good programs for Argentina. The damage they are causing could take many years to recover from," Durán warned. Agustín Campero, president of the Alem Foundation and former secretary of Scientific and Technological Articulation under President Mauricio Macri, agreed on the seriousness of the situation. "It is dire and will have severe consequences for Argentina's development," he said. The Science System Financing Law, approved by Congress in 2021, set a schedule for the gradual growth of state investment in science and technology to reach 1% of GDP by 2032. That is what the scientific community and universities are now demanding.
