Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by janrinok on Wednesday September 09 2015, @03:27AM   Printer-friendly
from the needle-match dept.

Scientists hoping to preserve coral reefs have developed an autonomous submarine to help control populations of crown-of-thorns sea stars. The sea stars devour coral at alarming rates, and are surprisingly hardy. Missing limbs simply regrow after being removed, so scuba divers have had to resort to injecting the starfish with poison up to 10 times each.

The autonomous robot can stay underwater for up to six hours, and uses a new poison that requires only one injection. The robot identifies the sea stars using a sophisticated image processing algorithm. The new poison is allegedly harmless to other sea creatures.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 5, Informative) by takyon on Wednesday September 09 2015, @03:47AM

    by takyon (881) <{takyon} {at} {soylentnews.org}> on Wednesday September 09 2015, @03:47AM (#234066) Journal

    Why are the crown-of-thorns sea star populations increasing? Is it "natural"? Nope:

    These infestations of crown-of-thorns sea stars (herein abbreviated COTSS) are only partially our fault: it’s true that we’ve been relentlessly overfishing the things that eat COTSS, and that’s a bad thing. However, the chief cause of COTSS population explosions seems to be correlated with rain over nearby land washing extra nutrients into the water, causing plankton blooms and making it easier for COTSS larvae to find food and grow up big and strong and spiky. Since one single large COTSS female can deliver upwards of 50 million eggs, even a modest boost to larvae survival rates can result in an enormous boom in mature sea stars.

    --
    [SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +3  
       Informative=3, Total=3
    Extra 'Informative' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   5  
  • (Score: 2) by c0lo on Wednesday September 09 2015, @03:53AM

    by c0lo (156) on Wednesday September 09 2015, @03:53AM (#234072) Journal

    fixing a problem we cause

    Don't delude yourself into thinking those submarines are an actual solution to the problem.

    --
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0
    • (Score: 4, Funny) by takyon on Wednesday September 09 2015, @03:59AM

      by takyon (881) <{takyon} {at} {soylentnews.org}> on Wednesday September 09 2015, @03:59AM (#234074) Journal

      Moore's law will increase the capability of those subs. Pretty soon they'll be killing 4096 sea stars per nanosecond.

      --
      [SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
      • (Score: 3, Funny) by c0lo on Wednesday September 09 2015, @04:06AM

        by c0lo (156) on Wednesday September 09 2015, @04:06AM (#234076) Journal
        And the starfish will evolve to become smaller until they'll get to a density of 4096e+9 individuals per litre (or gallon if so you fancy).
        --
        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0
        • (Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 09 2015, @04:46AM

          by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 09 2015, @04:46AM (#234084)

          They already have. You can practically shred a crown of thorns and each piece will eventually grow into a full-size starfish. That's why they have to inject them, you can't really kill them otherwise.

          • (Score: 2) by bob_super on Wednesday September 09 2015, @05:12PM

            by bob_super (1357) on Wednesday September 09 2015, @05:12PM (#234307)

            Crown-of-thorns-nado just doesn't have a great ring to it. Hollywood will need to wait for real scientists to get closer to adding that power to humans.
            Or maybe read DBZ.

    • (Score: 2) by frojack on Wednesday September 09 2015, @04:57AM

      by frojack (1554) Subscriber Badge on Wednesday September 09 2015, @04:57AM (#234086) Journal

      Don't delude yourself into thinking those submarines are an actual solution to the problem.

      In fact they seem to be completely non-germane.

      The problem was that the old way required 10 injections per sea star, by divers.
      The new way use a new poison that is effective with a single injection.

      I'm betting the divers with an injection stick could do far more injections per hour than the robot, using the new poison.

      --
      No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 09 2015, @05:20AM

        by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 09 2015, @05:20AM (#234091)

        The robot doesn't need air.

        • (Score: 2) by frojack on Wednesday September 09 2015, @05:31AM

          by frojack (1554) Subscriber Badge on Wednesday September 09 2015, @05:31AM (#234095) Journal

          So what? It needs batteries.

          --
          No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
          • (Score: 2) by maxwell demon on Wednesday September 09 2015, @06:23AM

            by maxwell demon (1608) Subscriber Badge on Wednesday September 09 2015, @06:23AM (#234112) Journal

            They should have made a robot that gets its energy from the killed starfish.

            --
            The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
            • (Score: 2) by bob_super on Wednesday September 09 2015, @05:16PM

              by bob_super (1357) on Wednesday September 09 2015, @05:16PM (#234309)

              Maybe of the bastards are highly flammable, which is why they evolved to live underwater.

      • (Score: 2) by c0lo on Wednesday September 09 2015, @05:31AM

        by c0lo (156) on Wednesday September 09 2015, @05:31AM (#234096) Journal

        I'm betting the divers with an injection stick could do far more injections per hour than the robot, using the new poison.

        Which, you see, is a problem. A biiig problem...
        the way you suggest, it is the divers who will get paid and stayed employed instead of the corporation that builds those subs.

        Why do you hate progress?
        (cynical grin)

        --
        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0
      • (Score: 2) by Sir Finkus on Wednesday September 09 2015, @05:35AM

        by Sir Finkus (192) on Wednesday September 09 2015, @05:35AM (#234099) Journal

        I'm betting the divers with an injection stick could do far more injections per hour than the robot, using the new poison.

        Keep in mind that human divers can only spend a limited time underwater before they begin to have decompression related health risks. A lot of time and air can be burned ascending safely. A robot can dive and ascend as fast as it wants, and can stay underwater longer. It's also probably less expensive in the long run.

        • (Score: 2) by frojack on Wednesday September 09 2015, @06:18AM

          by frojack (1554) Subscriber Badge on Wednesday September 09 2015, @06:18AM (#234111) Journal

          The long run ??

          But I point out it took 10 years to develop the robot. Long run indeed.

          How many robot subs can they afford? The cited articles are careful to never mention a price, or how many people it takes to maintain, launch and recover these robots. About the biggest advantage it has is that it can go deeper than a scuba diver, but its not clear if the sea stars inhabit deeper water.

          --
          No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
          • (Score: 3, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 09 2015, @07:10AM

            by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 09 2015, @07:10AM (#234123)

            > The cited articles are careful to never mention a price, or how many people it takes to maintain, launch and recover these robots.

            Conspiracies under every rock. It was created at a university. They probably don't have a pricetag because it was research work, not product development. And operational costs are certainly shoe-string budget level because the people who do this sort of work of protecting reefs aren't in it for the money. The only benefit they get out of it is that their jobs are pretty mellow, hanging out on the water most of the day.

  • (Score: 2) by morgauxo on Thursday September 10 2015, @08:53PM

    by morgauxo (2082) on Thursday September 10 2015, @08:53PM (#234911)

    Um... you don't think that the extra nutrients are also human caused? A lot of that is probably unatural fertilizer. Even the natural stuff, much of it should have been filtered through swamps which have been filled or drained before reaching the sea.