First-of-its-kind fossil settles long-standing debate
The well-preserved Sinopterus atavismus fossil, found in the Jehol Biota, contained intact gut contents, settling a long-standing debate about their diet.
Researchers discovered an abundance of tiny plant cell particles, known as phytoliths, and small grinding stones, called gastroliths, within the pterosaur's stomach.
The presence of phytoliths and gastroliths, previously found in other herbivorous dinosaurs, indicates the pterosaur consumed full meals consisting only of plants.
This finding, published in the journal Science Bulletin, concludes a scientific debate, as previous theories on pterosaur diets were mainly based on anatomical features or partial remains.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
13 hours ago
- The Independent
This is the best time to take an exam to boost your chances of passing, study finds
Sign up for our free Health Check email to receive exclusive analysis on the week in health Get our free Health Check email Get our free Health Check email Email * SIGN UP I would like to be emailed about offers, events and updates from The Independent. Read our Privacy notice Midday may be the best time to take an oral exam, interview for a job, or even go on trial, a new study has found. Researchers at Italy's University of Messina found a significant difference in students' pass rates in the late morning compared to early morning or late afternoon. At 12pm the students' passing rate was 72 per cent, compared to 54 per cent at 8am and 51 per cent at 4pm. Pass rates at 11am and 1pm were slightly lower at 67 per cent. 'We show that academic assessment outcomes vary systematically across the day, with a clear peak in passing rates around midday,' said Professor Carmelo Mario Vicario. 'Students were more likely to pass in late morning compared with early morning or late afternoon,' he said. 'We believe this pattern could extend to job interviews or any evaluative process scheduled throughout the day.' The study was based on the outcome of 104,552 assessments delivered by 680 examiners for 1,243 courses. The researchers chose to look at university oral exams, which are more subjective and aren't marked solely on correct answers, but also on delivery. It follows research showing that judges are more likely to rule in favour of a defendant at the start of sessions or after meal breaks. However, it is thought that this could also come down to the types of cases that are heard at different times of day. The study's author believes the findings could extend to job interviews ( Getty/iStock ) While the study could not identify the exact cause, it said the midday peak was consistent with evidence that cognitive performance improves over the morning and declines during the afternoon. The report said this could be due to the students' falling energy levels, as well as professors', who may give a harsher mark if they are experiencing decision fatigue. Researchers also said that it could be a result of students and professors competing chronotypes, the body's natural preference of sleeping times. 'People in their early 20s are usually night owls, while people in their 40s or older tend to be morning larks. The students might be least cognitively sharp at the time when the professors are most alert.' Prof Vicario suggested that to counteract these effects, students would benefit from better sleep, mental breaks, and scheduling exams outside of personal low periods. 'For institutions, delaying morning sessions or clustering key assessments in the late morning may improve outcomes. 'We believe this pattern could extend to job interviews or any evaluative process scheduled throughout the day. 'We would be very interested in investigating whether hiring decisions, too, fluctuate in fairness or outcome depending on time of day.'
BBC News
13 hours ago
- BBC News
Mollisonia symmetrica: Fossil suggests spiders originated in the sea
Did spiders first appear on land or in the sea? That's a question that has puzzled scientists for many years.A team of researchers in America think they might have found the discovered a tiny 500-million-year-old marine fossil that suggests that arachnids (a group of animals which includes spiders, scorpions and ticks) evolved in the ocean, before moving out of the water and adapting to land. What did scientists discover? An international team of experts led by the University of Arizona in the US, decided to take a closer look at a half-a-billion-year-old marine fossil of an extinct animal called Mollisonia undertook a detailed analysis of its well-preserved features including its brain and central nervous system. Until now, the creature was thought to be an ancient member of a specific group of arthropods known as chelicerates, which lived during the Cambrian period (around 500 million years ago) and are ancestors to modern-day horseshoe crabs. However, to the team's surprise, they found that the brain structure of the Mollisonia symmetrica was not similar to that of horseshoe crabs, as would be it had more in common with modern spiders and their led scientists to suggest that the first spiders were marine, originating in the ocean. Professor Nicholas Strausfield, the lead author of the study, said that many questions still remain over how arachnids evolved and moved from the sea to the land."It is still vigorously debated where and when arachnids first appeared and whether these were marine or semi-aquatic like horseshoe crabs."He also suggested what these ancient spiders could have fed on when they first moved on to the land. "We might imagine that a Mollisonia-like arachnid also became adapted to terrestrial life making early insects and millipedes their daily diet," Professor Strausfield team now think that Mollisonia symmetrica could be the ancient ancestor of a wide range of arachnids including spiders and scorpions.
The Independent
14 hours ago
- The Independent
The NHS change that could prevent 6,500 cancer cases each year
A new study suggests that thousands of breast cancer cases could be prevented annually in the UK by expanding eligibility for risk-reducing mastectomies (RRM). The research indicates that approximately 6,500 cases could be averted each year if RRM was more widely adopted beyond current genetic predispositions. Currently, RRM is primarily offered to women with BRCA1, BRCA2, or PALB2 genes, but the study proposes including those with other high-risk genes like ATM and CHEK2. The study also highlights that a combination of factors, including family history, parity, breastfeeding, and mammogram density, should be considered for RRM eligibility. Researchers from Queen Mary University of London and the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine found RRM to be cost-effective for women aged 30-55 with a lifetime breast cancer risk of 35 per cent or more.
