SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Submitted via IRC for Bytram
First Major Rain in Centuries Triggers Wave of Death in Earth's Driest Desert
After not experiencing any meaningful amounts of precipitation for at least 500 years, Chile’s Atacama Desert is finally getting some rain. Quite unexpectedly, however, these rains—instead of fostering life—are doing the exact opposite.
[...] The unprecedented rains, the authors say, are the result of changing climatic conditions over the Pacific Ocean. An extensive “mass of clouds” came to the desert from the Pacific Ocean—an “unprecedented phenomenon,” the researchers say, that occurred twice in three years.
The resulting precipitation resulted in the widespread extinction of many native microbial species. The local extinction rate, according to the new study, reached as high as 85 percent in the hardest-hit places. Extremophile organisms, accustomed to arid conditions, were unable to cope with the influx of water.
“The hyperdry soils before the rains were inhabited by up to 16 different, ancient microbe species,” said Alberto G. Fairén, an astrobiologist at Cornell and a co-author of the new study, in a statement. “After it rained, there were only two to four microbe species found in the lagoons,” said Fairen, who is also a researcher with the Centro de Astrobiología, Madrid. “The extinction event was massive.”
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Runaway1956 on Sunday November 18 2018, @12:30PM (5 children)
The presumption is that it hasn't rained like this in millennia. "At least 500 years" it says. With the implication that the dry spell probably goes back even further. Oh-kay - so - uhhhh - did all of these life forms just evolve in such a short period of time? Or, did some related microbes just kind of fall into the niche, and adapt to it, in a relatively very short period of time?
But, that extinction rate. Is that throughout the desert? Or, in those areas that accumulated the most rain? Are there areas that stayed dryer, leaving a population that will spread out and colonize the desert again?
So, not extinct. There was an 85% die off, and that only in the hardest hit places. That leaves 15% to repopulate those hardest hit places, amirite? And, how about those places that weren't hit so hard? We might presume that they lost somewhere between 0% and 84% of their population. Meaning, they may not have suffered at all, right on across a spectrum of damage to, not quite as bad as the worst places.
So, not extinct. A major die off seems rather serious, but it's not an extinction.
And, we are left only with the knowledge that some unusual rainfall has been detrimental to some microbes in the desert.
They most definitely need a followup study. They may or may not have learned anything of value, you can't tell from this story!
Going to the published paper, I find this:
Two things to note. First, they were looking IN the water. The same water they believe killed the little critters. Did they bother to dig up areas that were not wetted, areas that were slightly wetted, and areas that were thoroughly wetted, but not submerged?
And, also - they are searching for microbes that they can induce to reproduce. What about the possibility that the microbes WON'T reproduce, until they experience an extended dry spell?
How soon can their study be reproduced? I'm mindful of all the papers being published which are NOT reproducible.
(Score: 5, Interesting) by Spamalope on Sunday November 18 2018, @01:23PM (3 children)
Yes! It seems unlikely that the microbes made it millions of years but don't have a strategy to handle rain on a world whose surface is more water than not.
I bet you'll find several strategies being employed. I bet some will infiltrate the soil with at least part of the population, and some will use a cyst like structure. Dry spells seem like a great trigger too. If they didn't desiccate their samples how can they be sure none of the microbes in the water are viable? If they only checked for reproduction while wet they've not really checked for life. Extremophiles aren't so easy to kill as that usually.
(Score: 2) by takyon on Sunday November 18 2018, @01:29PM (1 child)
Maybe microbes evolve so quickly to adapt to a new environment that they don't need to survive unexpected rainfall. New microbes will come in to fill the slightly wetter environment, and those will be replaced by microbes adapted to the bone-dry environment. And so on.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 2, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 18 2018, @07:14PM
Counting number of species doesnt make sense at the microbial level, the grouping is basically totally arbitrary. So the very premise for this study is flawed.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1764935/ [nih.gov]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 21 2018, @02:03AM
I just exterminated a head full of lice, I'm sure they'll come back. I have got to stop giving hugs to the kid. They're disgusting pest carriers.
(Score: 2) by FatPhil on Monday November 19 2018, @10:00AM
>
> So, not extinct. There was an 85% die off, and that only in the hardest hit places. That leaves 15% to repopulate those hardest hit places, amirite?
"""
In the soils of Yungay, and depending on the specific area covered with the inspected lagoons, between 87% and 75% of the previously reported species vanished, with only up to four species of bacteria (two in the most extreme case) able to survive in these new, but transitory, bodies of water.
"""
yooarrong.
Believe it or not, when the nice scientist lady says "extinct", she means "extinct".
Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves