logo
Adorable Triassic Reptile Used its Freaky Back Fin to Communicate

Adorable Triassic Reptile Used its Freaky Back Fin to Communicate

Gizmodo4 days ago
Technological advancements have brought us many things. For paleontologists, it's introduced the ability to probe softer material—skin, feathers, scales, and hair—found on fossilized creatures. And that's resulting in some strange new findings about long-extinct animals, showing us that they're even weirder than we imagined.
A paper published today in Nature offers a re-analysis of a fossilized Mirasaura grauvogeli, a 247-million-year-old reptile whose defining feature is a feather-like structure jutting out from its back. The popular conception of these features is that the appendages were feathers, but the new study argues this isn't the case. Rather, it's an unusual type of skin that stretched out like a fan from the reptile's back, the researchers argue. Further research is needed, but the study authors believe this fan likely served as a communication tool among the creatures.
These structures preserved pigment-carrying particles called melanosomes that are more bird-like than reptilian. But the curious thing about these appendages is that they were neither feathers nor scales. They're 'distinctly corrugated'—much like cardboard—and were likely malleable to some extent, the researchers report in the study.
'This evidence reveals that vertebrate skin has evolutionary possibilities that are weirder than might be easily imagined,' Richard Prum, an evolutionary biologist at Yale University who wasn't involved in the new work, wrote in a commentary for Nature. 'Mirasaura teaches us that a feather is only one of the many wondrous things that reptiles evolved to grow out of their skin.'
For the analysis, a team of paleontologists at Stuttgart's State Museum of Natural History, Germany, revisited an old fossil of Mirasaura discovered in 1939 and acquired by the museum in 2019. Researchers were in the dark about what the fossil even was—in fact, the team behind the new study was the one that identified the creature for the first time.
Similarly, paleontologists weren't able to fully understand Mirasaura's close relative, Longisquama insignis, which also featured long, feather-like structures on its back. At the time, scientists weren't sure what to make of it at all, partly because the Longisquama fossil wasn't well preserved. For the new work, however, the team reconstructed the skeletal anatomy of the two creatures, finding it highly likely that Mirasaura and Longisquama were both part of the drepanosaur family, a strange group of reptiles from the Triassic era (between 201 million and 252 million years ago), sometimes referred to as 'monkey lizards.'
And these drepanosaurs are as strange as they come: long, bird-like skulls, bodies like chameleons, and an anatomy that suggests they lived in trees. Should the new work be verified, it means that drepanosaurs may have sported elaborate, helical structures that extended out from their backs, like Mirasaura and Longisquama.
When studying the past, paleontologists use their best judgment to infer physical features based on the empirical evidence. So it's even wilder that, using such careful and sophisticated methods, scientists essentially found a reptilian version of Transformers. At the same time, such 'rediscoveries' of older fossils uncover amazing insights from the past—which is why we look forward to them each time.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

The Impact Of Faculty Tenure On Research Output Explored In New Study
The Impact Of Faculty Tenure On Research Output Explored In New Study

Forbes

timean hour ago

  • Forbes

The Impact Of Faculty Tenure On Research Output Explored In New Study

A new study measures research trajectories associated with the granting of faculty tenure. Does the awarding of tenure spur or slow the rate of university faculty research output? Do faculty members produce their most impactful work before or after they earn tenure? Do they become more creative and innovative after tenure or does their work take a turn toward safer, more incremental questions after they achieve the tenure milestone. Those and other questions are explored in a new, large-scale study — Tenure and Research Trajectories — published July 22 in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. The researchers — Giorgio Tripodi, Yifan Qian, Dashun Wang, Benjamin Jones, (all of Northwestern University), Xiang Zheng and Chaoqun Ni (University of Wisconsin-Madison), and Dakota Murray (Northeastern University) — examined the careers of 12,611 U.S. faculty members across 15 disciplines, spanning the sciences, engineering, business and social sciences. Each of the scholars had been granted tenure between 2012 and 2015. Using multiple data sources, the researchers evaluated those faculty member's publication records between 2011 and 2020, thereby capturing the five years before and the five years after each one had been awarded tenure. That time period also ensured that the results were not affected by the COVID-19 pandemic, which had a significant impact on tenure clocks and research production. On average, they found that publication rates rapidly increased up to the year before tenure, where they hit a peak. The most productive year for faculty on average was the one right before tenure was granted. That productivity was followed by a plateau around the time faculty were given tenure. This pre- versus post-tenure pattern took place regardless of how many years it took someone to earn tenure. 'Basically, as you start, you grow and produce more, and then (after tenure) there is often a stabilization,' said Tripodi in Northwestern's KelloggInsight. Research Impact The researchers also found a similar trend when it came to the publication of a scholar's research that carried the most impact. On average, the number of 'hit' research articles — those in the top 5% of the most frequently cited articles in the same publication year and field—were higher before tenure than after tenure. Faculty typically published their most-cited research article before they received tenure, even after controlling for age. Major Differences Between Disciplines However, if one looks at the individual disciplines, major differences in post-tenure publication rates are observed. In non-laboratory-based fields like business, social sciences, and mathematics, there were sharp declines in publication rates after tenure. In contrast, the publication rates for lab-based fields like biology, engineering and medicine mostly stayed stable after tenure. In other words, those disciplines that tend to depend more on extramural grants to support faculty research saw more sustained productivity. 'This is telling us that tenure, which is universal for professors, interacts with the disciplinary norms and the organizational structure of the scientific workforce,' Tripodi noted. Exploratory Work Increases After Tenure Another major finding was that the granting of tenure was associated with an increase in the novelty or exploratory nature of faculty research. Within the first five years after tenure, about two-thirds of professors starting exploring topics that were new to them, and roughly a third stopped researching one of the topics they previously had studied. Faculty almost always published their single most novel research article after they had earned tenure. 'Contrary to research impact, we see that the most-novel paper tended to appear after tenure,' Tripodi said. 'This is, to some extent, in accordance with the idea that tenure gives you more job security and thus more freedom to explore, and so you embark on potentially more-risky, more-novel projects.' 'Overall, the U.S. tenure system appears powerful and distinctive,' concluded Benjamin Jones. 'Tenure calls forth ever-increasing output during the 'tenure clock' years, followed by a shift to more novel and exploratory work. These trajectories appear distinctive compared with the patterns we see for scientific researchers in other organizational settings, including at either U.S. national laboratories or foreign universities that don't have the tenure system.'

Patients With Acromegaly Face Higher Cancer Risk
Patients With Acromegaly Face Higher Cancer Risk

Medscape

time4 hours ago

  • Medscape

Patients With Acromegaly Face Higher Cancer Risk

TOPLINE: Patients with acromegaly had significantly higher odds of developing leukemia/lymphoma or ovarian, breast, lung, or other cancers, many of which occurred at younger ages than typically seen in the general population. These data underscored the urgent need to integrate cancer screening protocols into routine care for patients with acromegaly to facilitate earlier detection and intervention. METHODOLOGY: Excess growth hormone secretion in patients with acromegaly increases the levels of insulin-like growth factor, a known cancer risk factor; however, the true prevalence of cancer in these patients is not well known. Researchers conducted a retrospective cohort analysis using data from a multinational research network platform to compare cancer prevalence in individuals with acromegaly and those without the condition. Patients with acromegaly (n = 10,207; mean age at disease onset, 43.2 years; 52.9% women) were matched with 102,070 individuals from the general population without the condition. TAKEAWAY: Patients with acromegaly had a 3.3-fold increased odds of developing leukemia/lymphoma (95% CI, 2.3-4.67), a 1.9-fold increased odds of developing ovarian cancer (95% CI, 1.3-2.8), a 1.8-fold increased odds of developing breast cancer (95% CI, 1.5-2.0), 1.9-fold increased odds of developing lung cancer (95% CI, 1.5-2.3), and a 1.5-fold increased odds of developing prostate cancer (95% CI, 1.3-1.8). The onset of certain cancers, specifically ovarian, lung, liver, and neuroendocrine, occurred much earlier (3.2-7.2 years) in patients with acromegaly than in control individuals from the general population. IN PRACTICE: 'Our findings suggest that acromegaly may play a bigger role in cancer risk than previously thought, highlighting the need for increased awareness and early cancer screening in this population,' said the lead researcher in a press release. SOURCE: This study was led by Hitam Hagog Natour, MD, Thomas Jefferson University Hospital in Philadelphia. It was presented on July 14, 2025, at the ENDO 2025: The Endocrine Society Annual Meeting in San Francisco. LIMITATIONS: This study did not report any specific limitations. DISCLOSURES: This study did not report any specific funding or conflicts of interest. This article was created using several editorial tools, including AI, as part of the process. Human editors reviewed this content before publication.

5-Grass SLIT Shows Benefit in Allergic Rhinoconjunctivitis
5-Grass SLIT Shows Benefit in Allergic Rhinoconjunctivitis

Medscape

time5 hours ago

  • Medscape

5-Grass SLIT Shows Benefit in Allergic Rhinoconjunctivitis

TOPLINE: Five-grass-pollen liquid sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) reduced symptoms and the need for medications to treat symptoms in patients with allergic rhinoconjunctivitis (ARC) with or without asthma — while maintaining a favorable safety profile and providing consistent benefits across ages, comorbidities, and treatment durations. METHODOLOGY: Researchers conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy of five-grass-pollen liquid SLIT in patients with ARC with or without asthma. Nine studies comparing the efficacy of interventional immunotherapy with that of placebo in this population were included. The key outcomes comprised symptom severity, assessed as the symptom score; a reduction in medication use, assessed as the medication score; and the incidence of adverse events (AEs). TAKEAWAY: A pooled analysis of eight studies showed a significant reduction in symptom score in the interventional immunotherapy group vs the placebo group (standardized mean difference [SMD], -0.34; 95% CI, -0.62 to -0.06; P < .05) over a mean follow-up of 19 months. Analysis of data pooled from six studies showed a significant reduction in use of drugs for symptoms in the interventional immunotherapy group vs the placebo group (SMD, -0.54; 95% CI, -0.97 to -0.10; P < .05) over a mean follow-up of 20 months. AEs occurred in 20.6% of participants in the interventional immunotherapy group vs 17.5% in the placebo group (P = .46), with treatment discontinuation rates due to AEs of 3.0% and 1.8%, respectively (P = .41). Treatment efficacy remained consistent regardless of cumulative dose, treatment duration, or asthma status. IN PRACTICE: '[The findings] suggest that the dose of five-grass SLIT-liquid can be safely adjusted for better adverse event management without compromising treatment outcomes,' the authors of the study wrote. 'This flexibility makes it possible to tailor treatment according to the patient's condition while addressing their needs and expectations,' they added. SOURCE: Danilo Di Bona, with the University of Foggia, Foggia, Italy, was the corresponding author of the study, which was published online on July 17 in the Journal of Investigational Allergology and Clinical Immunology. LIMITATIONS: The analysis had a relatively small sample size, variation in dosages and treatment durations across studies, and incomplete reporting of AEs in some studies. DISCLOSURES: This study was funded by Stallergenes Greer, a pharmaceutical company. One author declared receiving fees from this company. Some authors reported receiving consulting fees; payments or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events; or support for attending meetings or travel and serving on data safety monitoring boards or advisory boards for various pharmaceutical companies. This article was created using several editorial tools, including AI, as part of the process. Human editors reviewed this content before publication.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store