Creature that can 'punch [its] way through aquarium glass' found inhabiting new waters: 'It's not something to celebrate'
New Zealand officials are investigating the appearance of Japanese mantis shrimp in the country's northern coastal waters, reported Phys.org.
Researchers trapping invasive Asian paddle crabs in Tauranga Harbor got more than they bargained for when they caught a Japanese mantis shrimp, according to a December Facebook post from the Toi Moana Bay of Plenty Regional Council.
"It's the first time one has been found in the Bay of Plenty region, but it's not something to celebrate," officials said.
While researchers have formally identified just one specimen, the public has reported several additional sightings. Officials are using these reports to assess how widespread the species might be in the harbor.
The creature received its "thumb splitter" nickname because it's aggressive and "can punch [its] way through aquarium glass," officials explained. These unusual shrimp also make a distinctive "rumbling growl sound."
When non-native species appear in new environments, they often disrupt the natural balance that keeps ecosystems healthy.
The Japanese mantis shrimp was first spotted in New Zealand in 2010 in Kaipara Harbor, but its spread to a new area signals growing problems for native wildlife.
These aggressive shrimp "can alter native habitats by digging burrows to live in and may compete with native species for food and space," experts said. This competition threatens local marine life that hasn't evolved to deal with these newcomers.
The situation adds to existing problems with other invasive species like the Asian paddle crabs that researchers originally targeted. When native species decline, it affects the entire food web and can reduce the health of coastal waters that people rely on for fishing, recreation, and natural protection.
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.
New Zealand's environmental authorities are taking swift action to address the problem before it grows.
Experts are currently developing a response plan to monitor and potentially control the spread of these invasive shrimp.
Officials have also begun educating the public about identifying the species, noting that "Japanese mantis shrimp can easily be confused with a native species that is of similar size and color." The key differences include "thinner maroon lines running down their bodies and a blue and yellow tail fan," according to officials.
By reporting unusual marine life sightings to local environmental agencies, you can help scientists track invasive species. Early detection gives authorities the best chance to protect native ecosystems before permanent damage occurs.
Some restaurateurs have successfully caught and served invasive species on their menus to combat overpopulation.
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
Axios
11 hours ago
- Axios
The great poaching: America's brain drain begins
The Trump administration's spending cuts and restrictions on foreign students are triggering a brain drain — and American scientists are panicking. Why it matters: U.S. researchers' fears are coming true. America's science pipeline is drying up, and countries like China are seizing the opportunity to surge ahead. 'This is such a race for being the science powerhouse that you never fully recover,' says Marcia McNutt, president of the National Academy of Sciences. 'You might accelerate back up to 60, but you can't make up for those years when you were at a standstill while the competition was racing ahead.' Driving the news: The National Science Foundation, which funds much of America's fundamental science research, is already doling out grants at its slowest pace in 35 years, The New York Times reports. More cuts to science could come with the "big, beautiful bill." Universities are also watching with bated breath as the administration tries to limit the number of foreign students studying in the U.S.. Harvard is pushing back, but could face a total ban on recruiting internationally. The Trump administration says it will " aggressively revoke" visas for Chinese students studying in "critical fields." By the numbers: While American universities are rescinding offers to incoming PhD students, other countries are recruiting heavily from U.S. labs. The journal Nature analyzed data from its jobs platform to track where scientists are looking for work. In the first few months of the Trump administration, there were jumps in the the number of U.S. applicants looking for jobs in Canada (+41%), Europe (+32%), China (+20%) and other Asian countries (+39%), compared to the same period in 2024. U.S. jobs saw fewer applications from candidates in Canada (–13%) and Europe (–41%). Case in point: France's Aix-Marseille University, which made headlines for earmarking millions of dollars for U.S. scientists, closed its application window after receiving a flood of apps. After American Nobel laureate Ardem Patapoutian's federal grant was frozen, he got an email from China offering 20 years of funding if he relocates his lab, The New York Times' Kate Zernike writes. He declined. 'This is a once-in-a-century brain gain opportunity,' the Australian Strategic Policy Institute wrote in a brief. The other side: The White House argues that its changes to the system will usher in a golden age of science and rebuild public trust. President Trump has also suggested that spots freed up by rejecting international students could be filled by American applicants. But professors say this isn't entirely realistic. "In hard sciences, in astronomy and physics and computer science, for example, there's no way you would fill that hole with local applicants of comparable quality," says Chris Impey, an astronomer at the University of Arizona. What to watch: 'The optimistic part of all of us thinks science is strong enough to outlast one administration, and for a while I thought that, but the hit to young people is at the center of the whole enterprise,' Impey says. 'It's like pulling the rug out from under the whole thing." It's not just brain drain of existing talent, he says. Students who are in high school and college now and thinking about a career in research might reconsider. "There's plenty of things smart kids can do. They don't have to go into science." At the same time, McNutt says she tells students: "If you went into graduate school in the fall of this year, by the time you get your PhD, this madness may be over. You come out with your new PhD ready to fill the gap."
Yahoo
11 hours ago
- Yahoo
There's an Invisible Line That Animals Don't Cross. Here's Why.
The animal kingdoms of Asia and Australia are worlds apart, thanks to an invisible line that runs right between the two neighboring continents. Most wildlife never cross this imaginary boundary, not even birds. And so it has been for tens of millions of years, shaping animal evolution in different ways on each side. It all started about 30 million years ago, when the Australian tectonic plate bashed up against the Eurasian tectonic plate and created an archipelago, rerouting ocean currents and creating new regional climates. On one side of the map, in Indonesia and Malaysia, monkeys, apes, elephants, tigers, and rhinos evolved; while on the other side, in New Guinea and Australia, marsupials, monotremes, rodents, and cockatoos flourish. Very few species are abundant on both sides. The curious faunal divide is named Wallace's Line – after the naturalist Alfred Russel Wallace, who first noticed the stark difference in animal life (mostly mammals) while exploring the region in the mid-19th century. "We may consider it established that the Strait of Lombok [between Bali and Lombok] only 15 miles wide [24 kilometers] marks the limit and abruptly separates two of the great zoological regions of the globe," Wallace wrote. The naturalist later went on to independently develop a theory of evolution around the same time as Charles Darwin. The line he drew on a map more than a century ago is still considered a hypothetical evolutionary barrier, although debates continue as to its exact location and mechanisms. Generally speaking, Wallace's line separates a shelf of the Asian continent from a shelf of the Australian tectonic plate. It is a geological line, but it is also a climatic and biological one. Deep ocean channels like the Lombok Strait separate each shelf, which makes it difficult for animals to cross. Even when sea levels in the distant past were much lower than today, this chasm would have still existed. While Wallace's invisible line is most obvious when comparing mammals in Asia and Australia, it also exists for birds, reptiles, and other animals. Even creatures with wings don't typically make the trip across Wallace's line, and in the ocean, some types of fish and microbes show genetic differences on one side of the border compared to the other, indicating very little mixing between populations. Scientists have yet to figure out what invisible barriers are holding these species back. Habitat and climate, however, are probably factors accentuating the evolutionary divide. In 2023, an analysis of more than 20,000 vertebrate species found that Southeast Asian lineages evolved in a relatively tropical ancient environment that allowed them to spread out toward New Guinea on humid island "stepping stones". Wildlife on the Australian continental shelf, meanwhile, evolved in distinctly drier conditions, which dictated a different evolutionary path. This meant that Australian wildlife was at a disadvantage in the tropical islands nearer the equator. The more researchers study the Wallace line, however, the less clear it becomes about where the line should be drawn and how 'porous' the barrier might be – at least to some animals that can swim, float, or fly, like bats, beetles, monitor lizards, or macaques. Wallace's divide isn't an absolute border, but more of a gradient, scientists say. Even still, the blurry line helps us make sense of animal evolution for thousands of species. "Darwin's and Wallace's mental and actual maps were the table on which the evolutionary scheme was played out, comparable in importance to the geological time scale," argued science historian Jane Camerini in 1993 for the History of Science Society. What started as a single, roughly placed line, drawn more than a century ago, has now helped shape a bigger and more complicated picture of the natural world and its mysteries. Dehorning Rhinos Cuts Poaching by 78% – Saving Thousands of Animals' Lives Worms Use Their Bodies to Build Towers as a Wild Survival Strategy Elusive LSD Fungus Finally Discovered on Flower
Yahoo
19 hours ago
- Yahoo
Resilience, a Private Japanese Spacecraft, Crash-Landed on the Moon
A Japanese spacecraft has probably crashed on the Moon, the second failed landing attempt for Tokyo-based private firm ispace. The HAKUTO-R Mission 2 (M2) lander — also called Resilience — began its landing sequence from a 100-kilometre-altitude orbit at 3.13am local time on 5 June. The craft was due to land near the centre of Mare Frigoris (Sea of Cold) at 4.17am. The ispace team said at a press conference that it lost contact with M2 when the craft was 192 metres above the Moon's surface and descending faster than expected. An attempt to reboot M2 was also unsuccessful. [Sign up for Today in Science, a free daily newsletter] M2 didn't receive measurements of the distance between itself and the lunar surface in time to slow down and reach its correct landing speed, the team said. 'It eventually slowed down, but not softly enough,' says Clive Neal, who studies the Moon at the University of Notre Dame in Indianapolis, US. He speculates that the failure was probably caused by a systems issue that wasn't identified and addressed during the M1 landing attempt. 'It's something that I believe will definitely be fixable, because getting that close means there's a few tweaks that are going to be needed for the next one,' he adds. If M2 had successfully landed on the lunar surface, the mission would have been the second time a commercial company had achieved the feat and a first for a non-US company. ispace's Mission 1 (M1) probably crashed during a landing attempt in April 2023. Lunar landings are challenging. When M1 crashed, Ryo Ujiie, ispace's chief technology officer said the telemetry — which collects data on the craft's altitude and speed — estimated that M1 was on the surface when it wasn't, causing the lander to free fall. Speaking to Nature last week, Ujiie said the company had addressed the telemetry issue with M2 and modified its software. 'We also carefully selected how to approach the landing site,' he added. Had M2 landed successfully, the craft would have supplied electricity for its cargo, including water electrolyzing equipment and a module for food production experiments — developed by Japan-based Takasago Thermal Engineering and biotechnology firm Euglena. A deep space radiation probe made by Taiwan's National Central University, and the 54-centimetre Tenacious rover were also be on board. The rover, created by ispace's European subsidiary in Luxemburg, was going to be released from the lander to collect imagery, location data and lunar sand known as regolith. Tenacious also carries a small red house made by Swedish artist Mikael Genberg. The craft launched on 15 January from Cape Canaveral, Florida, onboard a SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket. The rocket was also carrying the Blue Ghost Moon lander — developed by Firefly Aerospace, an aerospace firm based in Texas — which landed on the Moon on 2 March. M2 took a longer path to the moon than Blue Ghost, performing a lunar flyby on 15 February and spending two months in a low-energy transfer orbit before entering lunar orbit on 7 May. Ujiie says the path was slower because it was a low-energy trajectory, meaning that less fuel was used to move between Earth and lunar orbit. Richard de Grijs, an astronomer at Macquarie University in Sydney, Australia, says there will likely be more private companies trying to land their own crafts on the Moon. 'It seems that the big government players like NASA are quite keen to partner with commercial companies,' he says, because they can develop and launch crafts more cheaply than government bodies. He also expects that more missions will be launched in clusters, like the launch of M2 and Blue Ghost. This article is reproduced with permission and was first published on June 6, 2025.
