A new discovery is rewriting the history of evolution by millions of years
Scientists in Australia have unearthed the oldest known fossil footprints of a reptile -like creature, pushing back the timeline of terrestrial life by millions of years.
The prints, dating back approximately 350 million years, suggest animals transitioned from aquatic to fully terrestrial life far more rapidly than previously believed.
This discovery surpasses the prior record held by footprints found in Canada, dated to 318 million years ago.
The finding challenges existing theories about the evolutionary journey from fin to limb. "We had thought the transition from fin to limb took much longer," commented California State University paleontologist Stuart Sumida, who was not involved in the study.
The emergence of the first land-dwelling animals is estimated to have occurred around 400 million years ago. This new evidence significantly shortens the assumed timeframe for the development of fully terrestrial locomotion in vertebrates.
The ancient footprints from Australia were found on a slab of sandstone recovered near Melbourne and show reptile-like feet with long toes and hooked claws.
Scientists estimate the animal was about 2 1/2 feet (80 centimeters) long and may have resembled a modern monitor lizard. The findings were published Wednesday in Nature.
The hooked claws are a crucial identification clue, said study co-author and paleontologist Per Ahlberg at Uppsala University in Sweden.
'It's a walking animal,' he said.
Only animals that evolved to live solely on land ever developed claws. The earliest vertebrates -- fish and amphibians – never developed hard nails and remained dependent on watery environments to lay eggs and reproduce.
But the branch of the evolutionary tree that led to modern reptiles, birds and mammals – known as amniotes – developed feet with nails or claws fit for walking on hard ground.
'This is the earliest evidence we've ever seen of an animal with claws,' said Sumida.
At the time the ancient reptile lived, the region was hot and steamy and vast forests began to cover the planet. Australia was part of the supercontinent Gondwana.
The fossil footprints record a series of events in one day, Ahlberg said. One reptile scampered across the ground before a light rain fell. Some raindrop dimples partially obscured its trackways. Then two more reptiles ran by in the opposite direction before the ground hardened and was covered in sediment.
Fossil 'trackways are beautiful because they tell you how something lived, not just what something looked like,' said co-author John Long, a paleontologist at Flinders University in Australia.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Sun
12 hours ago
- The Sun
THREE James Bond frontrunners revealed as 007 race reaches finish line – is your favourite in the mix?
JAMES Bond fans are desperate to know who the next 007 will be - and they may now be one step closer to finding out. There are three frontrunners as the race reaches the finish line - but is your favourite in the mix? 4 4 4 With Denis Villeneuve on board as the franchise's next director, Amazon is looking at a 2028 release date for 26th instalment. Insiders have also told Variety that the studio and producers are interested in casting a British actor under the age of 30. Saltburn star Jacob Elordi, Spider-Man's Tom Holland and Babygirl actor Harris Dickinson are at the top of the wish list. Although Jacob, 28, is Australian, is does not rule him out - especially as Aussie actor George Lazenby having previously played Bond in On Her Majesty's Secret Service in 1969. While there is still speculation that Aaron Taylor-Johnson, 35,or Henry Cavill, 42, are also in the running - but with them both being over 30, it may rule them out. While fan favourite Idris Elba, 52, may have missed his chance for the role after years of ducking speculation. Elsewhere a top US actor could be announced as the new James Bond according to the latest odds from the bookies. Hollywood hot property Timothee Chalamet has seen his likelihood of becoming 007 increase thanks to his previous collaborations with the acclaimed director. The star, who has twice been nominated for the Academy Award for Best Actor, worked with Denis Villeneuve on both Dune and Dune: Part Two - with both flicks going on to become box office hits. It has sparked speculation that their work together in the past could mean that he is a shoe-in to secure the role from Daniel Craig. James Bond expert drops huge hint about new 007 actor after he starred in movie with huge A-list actress According to new odds from Ladbrokes, Timothee has seen his odds rise to a cool 16/1. Last week, 57-year-old Denis was revealed to have been appointed the director of the 26th James Bond flick by Amazon MGM. The Canadian film-maker told how some of his "earliest movie-going memories" were linked to the James Bond movie franchise. He spoke out after his role was made public and said: "Some of my earliest movie-going memories are connected to 007. "I grew up watching James Bond films with my father, ever since 'Dr. No' with Sean Connery. I'm a die-hard Bond fan." In the statement, he added: "To me, he's sacred territory. "I intend to honour the tradition and open the path for many new missions to come. "This is a massive responsibility, but also, incredibly exciting for me and a huge honour. "Thank you to Amazon MGM Studios for their trust." Timeline of James Bond actors Over the years there have been seven actors who have played 007. The first ever James Bond film was in 1962, and this is who has played the lead role over the years: Sean Connery - The late star was the first ever actor to play Bond, and reprised the role for seven movies. George Lazenby - The star only played Bond once, but was the youngest actor to ever play the spy. Roger Moore - The late movie star spent 12 years making seven films in the famous franchise. Timothy Dalton - The smooth actor took over from Roger Moore and appeared in The Living Daylights and Licence to Kill. Pierce Brosnan - The handsome star played Bond for four movies from 1995 to 2002. Daniel Craig - The British star was the first blonde James Bond and the sixth actor to win the role in 2005. 4
Daily Mail
15 hours ago
- Daily Mail
Concern as researchers link 'healthy' snacks to raised risk of a sudden heart attack
Oily fish, nuts and avocados—prized for being sources of 'healthy' fats—may not be as good for us as previously believed, scientists have claimed. The key culprit, according to Australian researchers, is fats in these foods known as omega-3—which studies have previously suggested protect heart health. However new evidence suggests omega-3 is linked to inflammation in the body, increasing the risk of obesity, type 2 diabetes and even a heart attack. The findings come from a major study involving 2,800 participants in the landmark Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children (ALSPAC), also known as Children of the 90s—one of the most detailed long-term health studies ever carried out. Researchers have followed the health of over 14,000 families in the Avon area since 1991, when the mothers were first recruited during pregnancy. The latest research looked at data collected when the children turned 24. After accounting for lifestyle factors such as smoking, scientists found that diets rich in omega-6 were associated with higher levels of GlycA—a blood biomarker linked to chronic inflammation, cancer and heart problems. Omega-6, found in vegetable and seed oils, has, in recently years, increasingly been associated with poor heart health. However, surprisingly, the researchers also found increased GlycA in those who consumed foods rich in omega-3 fats, which are usually considered 'heart healthy'. Professor Thomas Holland, from the RUSH institute for Healthy Aging, Chicago, who was not involved in the study, told Medical News Today the results were 'unexpected'. He added: 'Omega-3s are found in dark fatty fish, like salmon and sardines, and in plant-based foods like flaxseeds, chia seeds, and walnuts. 'Most people think of them as calming to the immune system. Yet in this study, higher omega-3 levels were linked to more inflammation, not less.' Lead author of the study, Professor Daisy Crick, an expert in molecular science from Queensland University, said: 'Our findings suggest that it's not as simple as "omega-3 is anti-inflammatory and omega-6 is pro-inflammatory".' She added that simply upping omega-3 intake may not be enough to cut inflammation or protect against heart disease. 'Improving the balance between the two fats could be a better method for people who want to reduce inflammation in their bodies,' she said. The study, published in the International Journal of Epidemiology, calls for further research to better understand how different fatty acids affect long-term health. Seed oils—such as sunflower, soybean and rapeseed—are high in polyunsaturated fats and have long been promoted as a 'heart healthy' alternative to saturated fats like butter and lard. But Professor Holland warned that rising consumption of seed oils could be fuelling obesity, heart disease, type 2 diabetes and even autoimmune conditions. Around 6.3 million people in the UK are thought to have raised cholesterol, which if left untreated can cause heart attacks and strokes, and seed oils may be contributing to this, Prof Holland suggested. It comes as alarming figures last year revealed that premature deaths from heart attacks and strokes had reached their highest level in more than a decade. MailOnline has previously highlighted how the number of young people, under 40, in England being treated for heart attacks by the NHS is on the rise. Cases of heart attacks, heart failure and strokes among the under-75s has tumbled since the 1960s. This is believed to be due to plummeting smoking rates, advanced surgical techniques and breakthroughs such as stents and statins. But now, rising obesity rates, and its catalogue of associated health problems such as high blood pressure and diabetes, are thought to be one of the major contributing factors.
Daily Mail
19 hours ago
- Daily Mail
Scientist reveal what extinct cavemen would have looked like today
Our ancient ancestors died out thousands of years ago, leaving behind nothing but fossils, a few scattered artefacts, and lingering traces in our DNA. For the last 40,000 years, Homo sapiens have been the only human species walking the Earth but what would cavemen like Neanderthals and Denisovans look like today if they had survived. has asked the experts to find out what the world might be like if they had survived. Surprisingly, they say that our distant evolutionary cousins might not be all that different to modern humans today. However, they might have had a hard time fitting in with our fast-paced, highly social societies. Dr April Noel, a Paleolithic archaeologist from the University of Victoria, told 'The idea that Neanderthals were hunched over, dim-witted individuals with no thought beyond their next meal is no longer tenable. 'At the same time, the idea that you could just slap a hat on a Neanderthal and you would not think twice about sitting next to him on the tube is also out the window.' What would they look like? Neanderthals and Denisovans are our closest ancient human relatives. The Neanderthals emerged around 400,000 years ago when they branched off from our common ancestors. Denisovans, meanwhile, are a far more elusive species of ancient humans who split from the Neanderthal evolutionary line around 430,000 years ago. If they had remained as separate species rather than going extinct, Neanderthals and Denisovans might look much the same as they did in the distant past. From the abundant fossil records, we know that Neanderthals were a little shorter than us on average, with shorter legs and wider hips. Neanderthals were very muscular and rugged, with large bodies and even larger heads. Their skulls show that they have room for a bigger brain than modern humans and would have been distinguished by a massive brow ridge and small foreheads. However, experts say they still would be clearly recognizable as fellow humans. Professor John Hawks, an anthropologist from the University of Wisconsin-Madison, told 'We don't know of any physiological traits that make Neanderthals distinct, that is, traits that don't overlap. 'Almost every physical trait in Neanderthals overlaps in its variation with ours today, at least to some extent.' That means they wouldn't look like lumbering cavemen or women, but rather like a slightly different variation of humans. Denisovans, meanwhile, are a little more of a mystery. It was only this month that scientists identified the first Denisovan skull, and besides this, there are only small fragments of bone to go on. Based on the newly identified skull, experts believe that Denisovans would have had a wide face with heavy, flat cheeks, a wide mouth, and a large nose. These bones also show that Denisovans would have been exceptionally large and muscular people, much stronger than more slender Homo sapiens. Not all that different However, experts say that Homo sapiens, Denisovans, and Neanderthals might not have remained that distinct for long. These human species interbred widely during the periods they overlapped, and many modern humans carry at least some Neanderthal and Denisovan DNA. If these species hadn't vanished, they might have continued to interbreed and further intermix our genes. Dr Hugo Zeberg, an expert on gene flow from Neanderthals and Denisovans into modern humans from the Karolinska Institute in Sweden, told 'In a way they never went extinct. We merged! 'Probably the relatively low amount of Neanderthal and Denisovan DNA in present humans reflects the fact that modern humans [Homo sapiens] were more numerous. 'But with more chances of encounters, we might have more archaic DNA present in the gene pool of modern humans.' We're still learning about how ancient genes influence modern humans, so it's hard to say what effects this mixing might produce. But Dr Zeberg points out that Denisovan genes are responsible for 'high altitude adaptation for Tibetans and some influence on lip shape in Latin American populations.' Similarly, Neanderthal and Homo Sapiens hybrids would likely have a mixture of the traits of both species such as larger heads, longer limbs, and narrower hips. Over time, some scientists believe Denisovans, Neanderthals and Homo Sapiens might have merged into a single human species with a mixture of all the traits. Dr Bence Viola, a paleoanthropologist at the University of Toronto, told 'I think it would have been impossible for Denisovans and Neanderthals to retain sufficient genetic isolation to remain a separate population. 'We know that they interbred with modern humans whenever they came into contact, and so the more contact there is, the more mixing happens – so they would have become a part of us.' Would they fit in? We don't currently know very much about how Denisovans lived, but research now shows Neanderthals might have struggled to fit in with modern society. One of the leading theories for why Homo sapiens survived while other species dropped off is that modern humans essentially 'tamed' ourselves. Modern humans developed genes that allowed us to become more sociable, develop larger social networks, and work with our fellow humans. Dr Noel says: 'Unlike their modern human contemporaries, Neanderthals lived in small, fairly isolated groups. 'If there was an accident that killed a number of their hunters or some other crisis occurred, they did not always have others to reach out to. As a result, their numbers would drop below what you need to be sustainable.' Dr Noel points out that research into Neanderthal genes suggests they were less cognitively flexible, had greater difficulties processing language, and lacked genes related to self-awareness, creativity, and behaviors intended to benefit others. 'In the highly connected world we all live in, I think Neanderthals would have been left behind, or at least, left out,' says Dr Noel. In a world where Neanderthals lived alongside other human species, this could really change the way society was structured. Professor Spikins says that while modern humans became 'tamer, more playful and more friendly to each other,' those changes came alongside 'being a bit easily led'. She adds: 'If Neanderthals were better at not "following the herd" and more of those tendencies were present, I bet much of our world would be different; they might not be easily swayed by social media!' How would the world be different? If Neanderthals and Denisovans hadn't gone extinct thousands of years ago, the world might be a very different place. From the evidence we have of these ancient species, we know that they lived in much smaller communities and had a far more limited impact on the land. In fact, Dr Zeberg points out that modern humans appear to be unique in the way that we modify the world around us through agriculture and large cities. One strange consequence of this is that a world where Homo sapiens are not dominant might mean a world without pets. There is no evidence that Neanderthals and Denisovans attempted to nurture relationships with animals through domestication - that means no horses, cats, dogs or even modern agricultural species like cattle and sheep. But with more of our relative anti-social genes, humanity may also have avoided some of its more destructive tendencies. Professor Spikins says: 'If Neanderthals had been the ones to survive, we might not have the problem we have with climate change, as their tendency to be more isolated within their separate groups might have limited how technology spread and got used, and how much the environment got exploited.'
