
Do these Florida dolphins have a language? Scientists are finding new clues.
They even have names—research has found they use 'signature whistles' to identify themselves, a sort of vocal version of a human's signature. These whistles are produced by one individual and repeated by another—'Jeff, Jeff'—to initiate or re-establish contact. The discovery back in 2013 that dolphins imitate each other's whistles showed that these cetaceans can understand and learn these unique sounds—a complex cognitive feat for non-human animals.
Now a talkative bunch of wild bottlenose dolphins have revealed another talent: they appear to be using a broad repertoire of whistles that are not names. So far, researchers have identified 22 of these 'non-signature whistles' used by dozens of the dolphins.
'We have these non-signature whistles that seem potentially like they could function like words of some kind, with specific meanings,' says Laela Sayigh, a marine biologist at Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution and Hampshire College in Massachusetts. Sayigh and her team were recently awarded the Coller-Dolittle Prize for Two-way Inter-species Communication.
Two of the whistles—with the catchy names NSWA and NSWB—seem to have a common function, one an alarm, the other a query, respectively. The findings, recently published as a preprint on bioRxiv, raise the question of whether dolphins may communicate using something akin to a language.
'If this pans out, it's a very, very big discovery in terms of understanding dolphin communication,' says Arik Kershenbaum, a zoologist at the University of Cambridge who was not involved in the research. But it's a big stretch at this point to consider these sounds similar to words, he says. 'Non-signature whistles have been of interest to researchers for ages and ages and no one's really got very far working on that. They're the big advantage of this study.'
The idea that dolphins may have a language dates back to the 1960s, though any conclusive evidence has remained elusive. Studying communication among an underwater species is difficult to observe and dolphins don't make any recognizably consistent movements linked to their sounds.
Yet for over forty years, scientists in the Sarasota Dolphin Research Program have carried out regular health assessments on a six-generation pod of around 170 wild dolphins that live in the waters around Florida's western coastline.
As dolphins surfaced for air, researchers were able to record decades of dolphin vocalizations by briefly placing underwater microphones called hydrophones on their heads, as they swam in temporary net corrals.
In 2012, the same research team began using digital acoustic tags fitted with suction cups, that ride on the back of the animals as they swim freely. These captured high-quality sounds and movement underwater. The result of this data is a giant catalogue of dolphin chit chat, based on more than 1,000 recording sessions made over the past 40 years.
Around 2017, while digging into some of this data, Sayigh noticed a strange whistle with an unusual flat tone in the middle. She was surprised to notice it was then used by another dolphin.
'I kind of thought I was going a little bonkers,' she says. But her team has now found more than 35 of the dolphins using the same signal.
Based on the context in which the dolphins make it, the researchers think this whistle—NSWB—could function as some sort of question.
In one instance, the researchers were running an experiment using a hydrophone dipped in the surface of the water. When they played the signature whistles of two closely bonded male dolphins as they swam together—they heard the query in return.
'On the boat we were joking that it was the 'WTF' whistle,' says Sayigh. 'It was kind of like, 'what's going on? We're together, but we're hearing us whistling to each other'.'
The second most common non-signature whistle, NSWA, has been used by over 25 individual dolphins and is a punchy combination of up-and-down sweeps. During a series of trials using drones to monitor movement, the whistle seemed to cause most dolphins to avoid the source.
'That doesn't absolutely mean it's an alarm type call, but it seems like a reasonable starting point as a hypothesis,' says Sayigh.
Jason Bruck, a biologist at Stephen F. Austin State University in Texas who was not involved in the study, says that really nailing down what the whistles mean will be a big challenge that will need good behavioral data. 'If the animal swims away from the whistle, did you offend it somehow? Did you play an alarm whistle? Did you whistle something that was so loud it scared them? You have no idea what's going on inside that animal's head.'
The research is still in its infancy. But dolphins are life-long learners, appear to use specific names, and females communicate at higher frequencies with their children—like human 'motherese.' The research team in Sarasota thinks this all suggests a wider repertoire of shared sounds that could reflect a starting point for a 'language-like communication system'.
'If there is a species that we might be able to kind of try to engage with in some kind of two way communication, these guys are really good candidates,' says Sayigh.
Whether or not the dolphins' communication is 'language-like' depends on how 'language' is defined, says Sara Torres Ortiz, a biologist at the University of Southern Denmark also not involved in the research.
If the criteria is referential signaling— specific sounds referring to specific objects or events—this ability has been seen in other animals, including vervet monkeys and prairie dogs. 'Given these precedents, it would not be surprising if dolphins also possess some form of referential communication,' she says.
Other animals may even have communication systems that are more effective than the sounds and cues that humans think of as language, says Bruck, including dolphins who collect information about their friends through urine. 'If we take the animals out of our own heads and we take them for what they are, you find that there's a lot of complexity in what they do as it is.'
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
7 days ago
- Yahoo
Study links fries to higher type 2 diabetes risk
A new study has found that eating three or more servings of French fries a week could increase the risk of developing type 2 diabetes. An international team of researchers, including an expert from the University of Cambridge, investigated links between potato consumption and the risk of type 2 diabetes. Overall they found a 20% increased risk for those who ate French fries at least three times a week, but not for those who ate baked, boiled or mashed potatoes. Dr Faye Riley, from Diabetes UK, said: "This research shows that the link between potatoes and type 2 diabetes isn't as clear-cut as it might seem." Academics analysed data from studies tracking the health of more than 205,000 medical workers in the US. Repeated surveys were taken about people's diets over almost four decades and during follow-up periods 22,000 cases of type 2 diabetes were documented. "The association between higher potato intake and increased [type 2 diabetes] risk is primarily driven by intake of French fries," the study authors wrote in The British Medical Journal. "Higher intake of French fries, but not combined baked, boiled, or mashed potatoes, was associated with a higher risk of [type 2 diabetes]." The research team also found replacing three servings of potatoes each week with whole grains was found to lower the risk of type 2 diabetes by 8%. They added replacing potatoes with white rice, however was also associated with an increased risk. Dr Riley, research communications lead at Diabetes UK, said: "Type 2 diabetes is a complex condition, with many factors influencing its development, including genetics, age and ethnicity. "Diet is just one part of the picture, but this study suggests that how food is prepared can make a difference and reinforces the advice to prioritise whole grains and cut back on fried or heavily processed foods as a way to support a balanced diet and reduce your risk." Follow Cambridgeshire news on BBC Sounds, Facebook, Instagram and X.


Scientific American
07-08-2025
- Scientific American
Students Find Hidden Fibonacci Sequence in Classic Probability Puzzle
A variation of a puzzle called the 'pick-up sticks problem' asks the following question: If I have some number of sticks with random lengths between 0 and 1, what are the chances that no three of those sticks can form a triangle? It turns out the answer to this quandary has an unexpected parallel to a pattern found across nature. The Fibonacci sequence is an ordered collection of numbers in which each term is equal to the previous two added together. It goes like this: 1, 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 13,..., and so on. These numbers show up practically everywhere. If you look at a plant with spirals, such as a pine cone or pineapple, more likely than not, the number of spirals going in each direction will be consecutive terms of the Fibonacci sequence. But a pair of young researchers were surprised to find that this pattern and the pick-up sticks problem are deeply connected. 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. The pick-up sticks problem is a variant of the 'broken stick problem,' which can be traced back to at least 1854. In its simplest iteration, the broken stick problem asks the likelihood that a stick broken randomly into three pieces can form a triangle. (In the pick-up stick problem, the lengths don't need to add up to a particular whole, so the possible lengths are distributed differently.) More than a century later, in the October 1959 issue of Scientific American, Martin Gardner wrote about the broken stick problem for his Mathematical Games column. Gardner highlighted it as a classic example of the counterintuitive nature of problems in probability and statistics. In a preprint paper posted to the server in May, the young researchers and their collaborators explore a new variation of the pick-up sticks problem. This effort started when Arthur Sun, a first-year undergraduate student at the University of Cambridge, thought up a problem for a university math contest. What is the likelihood, he wondered, that out of four sticks with random lengths between 0 and 1, no three could make a triangle? He enlisted the help of his friend Edward Wang, at the time a 12th grader at Scotch College, a secondary school in Australia, where he and Sun originally met. Together, Wang and Sun modeled the problem on their computers and ran random trials over and over, keeping track of the results of each trial. It seemed to the pair that four sticks could not make a triangle among them very close to one sixth of the time. Soon Wang and Sun started wondering what the answer was for larger groupings of sticks. They enlisted the help of David Treeby, a mathematician affiliated with Australia's Monash University and a teacher at Scotch College. The group ran even more simulations, and soon a pattern started to emerge. According to the researchers' simulations, if n was the number of sticks selected randomly, the chance of not having a valid triangle among them was the reciprocal of the first n Fibonacci numbers multiplied together. For instance, if you pick six sticks randomly, the probability that you cannot make a triangle with them is 1 / (1 × 1 × 2 × 3 × 5 × 8) = 1 ⁄ 240. The team was surprised that the famous sequence was connected to the triangle problem. 'We'd no reason to suspect that it would be,' Treeby says, 'but it was impossible that it wasn't.' The researchers began to develop a proof of why this connection must be true, but they needed an expert in statistics to pull it all together. They brought in a fourth collaborator, former Monash mathematician Aidan Sudbury. He'd been happily enjoying his retirement when the team approached him. 'I immediately was struck by what a charming problem it was,' he says. 'Delightful!' Together, the four researchers worked out a solid proof of the pattern that Sun and Wang had noticed. Though related results have been proved using similar methods and encompassing a wide array of stick-and-triangle problems, some experts in the field find this new paper's simplicity refreshing. 'What's nice about this is: it's very well written,' says Steven Miller, a mathematician at Williams College and president of the Fibonacci Association. 'It's accessible, it's easy to read, and it's extending a very famous problem.' To understand the pick-up sticks solution, think about the smallest possible case. Suppose you have three sticks with random sizes between 0 and 1. Any three sticks can form a triangle if, and only if, no stick is longer than the other two put together. If you have sticks of lengths 1, 2 and 300, no matter how wide an angle you put between them, the first two sticks could never stretch wide enough to accommodate the third. This is called 'the triangle inequality': if a, b and c represent the lengths of the sticks from shortest to longest, they will only fail to form a triangle when a + b ≤ c. To find the probability that three random lengths form a triangle, mathematicians can consider every set of three lengths as a point in three-dimensional space (for instance, lengths 1 ⁄ 2, 1 ⁄ 6 and 1 ⁄ 3 are represented by the point [ 1 ⁄ 2, 1 ⁄ 6, 1 ⁄ 3 ]). Because the lengths fall between 0 and 1, the set of all such points can be represented by a unit cube: Researchers then look at the subset of this cube where the points satisfy the triangle inequality—a shape that looks like this: With a little geometry, it turns out that this shape is exactly half the volume of the cube. Thus, three randomly picked lengths will be able to form a triangle exactly half of the time, as 1 / (1 × 1 × 2) = 1 ⁄ 2. Where does Fibonacci come in? Suppose a collection of any number of sticks is ordered from shortest to longest. If no three among them form a triangle, each stick's length must be greater than or equal to the sum of the previous two—otherwise, those three sticks could make a triangle. In the Fibonacci sequence, each number is precisely equal to the sum of the previous two. In other words, each segment of the Fibonacci sequence is as close as possible to having a triangle in it without actually having one. In Treeby's words, 'If we [avoid triangles] greedily, the Fibonacci sequence appears naturally.' The researchers feel there should be some path directly from this insight to a proof of the pick-up sticks theorem. They couldn't find one, however. 'We sort of hoped to find something that was a little bit more ... intuitive, but we couldn't formalize our thinking,' Treeby says. Instead their paper uses integrals to calculate the high-dimensional volumes directly—a method a bit like looking at the area inside the cube above (but without the visual reference). The researchers aren't on the prowl for a different proof right now—but they hope someone else might find one.
Yahoo
01-08-2025
- Yahoo
Nearby super-Earth K2-18 b may be a water-rich ocean planet: 'This has certainly increased the chances of habitability'
When you buy through links on our articles, Future and its syndication partners may earn a commission. The saga surrounding Neptune-size "super-Earth" exoplanet K2-18 b just got a whole lot more interesting. For a quick recap, this is the world a team of scientists recently suggested could host life — to the dismay of other scientists in the community, who felt the announcement failed to include necessary caution. While signs of life on the world have failed to conclusively present themselves to the James Webb Space Telescope (JWST), the powerful space telescope has discovered that this planet is so rich in liquid water that it could be an ocean, or "Hycean" world. "This has certainly increased the chances of habitability on K2-18 b" Nikku Madhusudhan, the University of Cambridge scientist behind the original K2-18b discovery as well as the new study, told "This is a very important development and further increases the chance of a Hycean environment in K2-18 b. It confirms K2-18 b to be our best chance to study a potential habitable environment beyond the solar system at the present time." The story regarding the habitability of K2-18 b began back in April 2025, when Madhusudhan and fellow researchers from the University of Cambridge announced they had found what they called the "strongest evidence yet" of life beyond the solar system around this distant super-Earth (it's around nine times as massive as our planet). The evidence came from the tentative detection of molecules that, when found in the atmosphere of Earth, are typically the result of biological processes of living things. The pressure was then on to confirm these potential biosignatures: dimethyl sulfide and dimethyl disulfide. The team set about this by observing four separate instances of K2-18 b crossing, or "transiting," the face of its parent red dwarf star, located about 124 light-years away, during its roughly 33-Earth-day orbit. Because chemicals absorb and emit light at characteristic wavelengths, when light from a parent star passes through a planet's atmosphere, the molecules in that atmosphere leave their telltale fingerprints in the spectrum of starlight. "With four additional transit observations using JWST, we have measured the spectrum of K2-18 b's atmosphere with unprecedented precision," Renyu Hu, the new study's team leader and a NASA Jet Propulsion Lab scientist, told "The spectrum allowed us to conclusively detect both methane and carbon dioxide in the planet's atmosphere and to constrain their abundances. This information points to a planet with a water-rich interior." Hu explained that the team searched for signals of dimethyl sulfide and other organic sulfur molecules in the spectrum using several independent models, but did not find conclusive evidence for their presence. "This was not necessarily disappointing," Hu continued. "We're excited about establishing the planet's water-rich nature." Is K2-18 b a ocean world? Saying it's now confirmed that K2-18 b is water-rich, Hu explained that the next step is to discover if the planet possesses a global liquid water ocean. Ironically, one of the most positive signs of such an ocean is the fact that the atmosphere of this super-Earth appears to lack water vapor. "The spectrum we obtained does not show signs of water vapor. If the atmosphere truly lacks water, this suggests that water has been depleted — most likely through condensation," Hu said. "On Earth, this process is known as the 'cold trap,' and geoscientists consider it essential for retaining water over billions of years by preventing it from escaping to space. "Observing a similar process on an exoplanet would be very exciting. Rigorously confirming the absence of water can by itself be a scientifically important goal for future observations," Hu said. However, Hu cautioned that the spectrum detected by the JWST could also be explained by an alternative model in which the atmosphere actually contains abundant water vapor. Establishing whether K2-18 b and other similar temperate, sub-Neptune-sized planets possess liquid water oceans, Hu says, will also require detecting the presence of a broader set of atmospheric gases beyond methane and carbon dioxide. It would also require an absence of molecules like ammonia, carbon monoxide and sulfur dioxide, which, as of yet, have indeed not been detected in the atmosphere of K2-18 b "This conclusion is based on theoretical work by my group and several others," Hu added. "With the new observations providing valuable context, we've summarized these insights into a roadmap to help guide future observations and studies." Meanwhile, the search for the biosignatures, dimethyl sulfide and dimethyl disulfide, is far from done; while not hitting the significance level required for a confirmation, this research did provide a stronger signal from these molecules than were provided by previous examinations. "The evidence for dimethyl sulfide in the present work is significantly higher than what we had with our previous observations in the same near-infrared wavelength range," Madhusudhan said. "However, this evidence is still not high enough to claim a conclusive detection. "We also need to be able to distinguish dimethyl sulfide from other possible contributors, such as methyl mercaptan, which is also a biosignature on Earth." Related Stories: — The mystery of how strange cosmic objects called 'JuMBOs' went rogue — These mysterious objects born in violent clashes between young star systems aren't stars or planets — James Webb Space Telescope dives into the atmosphere of a mystery rogue planet or failed star It looks certain that K2-18 b will continue to hold the interest of astronomers for some time. "It is great that we are able to infer tentative signs of potential biosignatures with current JWST observations, but significantly more time is needed for conclusive detections. A key question is whether the atmosphere contains one or more biosignatures," Madhusudhan said. "At the same time, extensive theoretical and experimental efforts are needed to robustly identify biological and non-biological pathways for candidate biosignature molecules." One thing the team is sure of, though, is the progress made thus far in the study of K2-18 b wouldn't have been possible without the JWST. And, the $10 billion space telescope is set to play a key role in the future investigation of this super-Earth. "Our observations and analyses add to the growing list of exciting discoveries that highlight the truly transformative science enabled by JWST," Hu concluded. "While we found its Near-Infrared Spectrograph [NIRSpec] particularly well suited to address the goals of our study, other JWST instruments or observational modes could provide complementary and highly valuable information to further enhance our understanding of this planet." The team's research is available as a preprint on the paper repository arXiv. Solve the daily Crossword