Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Science News

27 Unknown Species Discovered 40

Posted by samzenpus from the how-about-the-cave-hoek dept.
NaijaGuy writes "27 unknown species of spiders, centipedes, scorpion-like creatures and other animals have been discovered in caves beneath national parks in California's Sierra Nevada. The Texas-based Zara Environmental led the 3-year exploration and has published reports with photos of the fascinating critters. "Not only are these animals new to science, but they're adapted to very specific environments -- some of them, to a single room in one cave," said Joel Despain, a cave specialist who helped explore 30 of the 238 known caves in Sequoia and Kings Canyon National Parks."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

27 Unknown Species Discovered More

27 Unknown Species Discovered

Comments Filter:
  • "There was also a daddy long legs with jaws bigger than its body..."

    *RUNS* Aren't those deadly, but only aren't because their fangs are too small to pierece the skin?

    • Re:Yikes! (Score:2, Informative)

      by Crunchie Frog ( 791929 )
      Aren't those deadly, but only aren't because their fangs are too small to pierece the skin?

      Nope just another urban legend [snopes.com]

      • Absence of evidence (Score:2, Interesting)

        by jfengel ( 409917 )
        Interesting. It doesn't say that experiments say otherwise; it just says that the experiments haven't been done.

        So you have to make kind of a logical jump from there to saying that whoever is saying it doesn't have any proof, either. Which is almost certainly true, though it's a bit of a jump; conceivably it could be some sort of unpublished report. But as far as I know it's not based on anecdotal evidence, either; I've never heard of any small animals being bitten.

        Presumably nobody's done the study beca

        • Re:Absence of evidence (Score:2, Informative)

          by mmontour ( 2208 )
          Interesting. It doesn't say that experiments say otherwise; it just says that the experiments haven't been done.

          They have been done, on Mythbusters. The venom didn't produce any significant effects.
      • Foo: Aren't those deadly, but only aren't because their fangs are too small to pierece the skin?

        Bar: Nope just another urban legend [snopes.com]

        Thanks for the link. I live in Daddy Longlegs country and have played with them since I was a kid, but never heard anything like this until my teenage daughter's boyfriend "informed" me of the "fact" within the past year. Unfortunately, simply showing him the evidence probably won't do anything to sway his views. Remember, folks: Hire a teenager, while they still know everyt
      • They tested it on Mythbusters. Adam put his arm in a jar full of them until one bit. He didn't die.
    • As pointed out, another urban legend. But this doesn't make it any less scary. I hate spiders! grrrrrrr :)
  • so, who would like to begin the debate as to if this gives evidence of evolution in action? (and likewise, who wants to be first to disagree?)

  • Bah! (Score:1, Offtopic)

    by Mad_Rain ( 674268 )
    What, no Hobbits [nationalgeographic.com] discovered? Well, perhaps they were eaten by those spiders. ;)
    • What, no Hobbits discovered? Well, perhaps they were eaten by those spiders. ;)

      Nah. Spiders don't eat hobbits. They've tried more than once, I might add, but they found out the hard way that hobbits have a nasty tendency to sting...

  • *shudder* (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Z0mb1eman ( 629653 ) on Wednesday January 18, 2006 @09:18PM (#14506109) Homepage
    Too many spiders and scorpions... *shudder*

    Anyone know what the ecosystem in those caves (and in caves in general) feeds on? What's at the bottom of the food chain? (since there's no photosynthesis...)

    And no, I didn't have the patience to read TFA carefully, though I did look at all the pictures in the four reports... hence the *shudder* :p

    • Re:*shudder* (Score:2, Interesting)

      by aphoenix ( 877085 )
      Probably fungus is the snack of choice for those lingering near the bottom of the chain. There is flora that thrives in the dark - fungi tend to do so, but any non-photosynthetic flora that enjoys the damp could survive or even start to flourish.

    • Probably varies. (Score:5, Informative)

      by jd ( 1658 ) <imipakNO@SPAMyahoo.com> on Thursday January 19, 2006 @12:32AM (#14507165) Homepage Journal
      In New Zealand, you'll find caves filled with glow-worms, which feed on insects that fly in. In many caves with lake systems, you'll find sightless fish that feed off algae that comes in from the outside. Caves with geothermal heating may well have extremophile algae that live off the chemical soup. In general, life tends to be extremely creative in its methods of surviving and adapting.


      (Ice worms, another recently discovered species, can only survive in freezing or near-freezing conditions and live in glaciers. They crawl to the surface at night and feed off any organic matter that has settled on the ice. They were discovered in Washington State, I believe.)


      What shocks me is that many of the species that have been discovered in the past ten to fifteen years (the Wollemi Pine, for example, as well as the Ice Worms) have largely been in very well-explored, well-documented regions that may not be exactly on the beaten track, but have certainly been visited by knowledgable experts many times over many decades. In some cases, many centuries.


      Some of these discoveries (as in this case) have been through inadequate study. Other cases have been uncovered as a result of genetic studies proving physically similar organisms to actually be unrelated. (The converse has also happened.) Yet others have been through skeptisism obstructing observation. These things are all understandable and are inevitable. It's shocking only because virtually all environmental and developmental policy is based on what is known, and what is known is proving to be limited.


      We'll be discovering new species for a long time to come, but if we had more scientists doing basic field-work and/or DNA mapping, we'd find them a lot faster. The problem is, basic research isn't profitable (so corporations are generally uninterested) and isn't vote-winning (so politicians don't care). The sciences don't come cheap, but if nobody is going to cough up the cash, it will be left to pure chance on the encounter and blind luck on the necessary awareness. To me, that feels utterly wrong. Knowledge should be gained, not gambled.

      • You're definitely right. There's an old saying "What you find depends on what you're looking for." I think that even scientists are victims of their own predefined notions of what is possible and what is not.

        I think it's wonderful that people are constantly reminded that there is nothing is impossible.
    • Organic debris washed in with water, bat shit, leaves , etc.

  • Will slashdotters become a new species? (Score:3, Funny)

    by line-bundle ( 235965 ) on Wednesday January 18, 2006 @09:33PM (#14506186) Homepage Journal
    If they stay in their parents' basement? They have adapted to one room right?

  • That's... (Score:1, Funny)

    by Eightyford ( 893696 )
    That's one intelligent designer!

  • Worlds within worlds. (Score:2, Interesting)

    by qualico ( 731143 )
    "...they're adapted to very specific environments -- some of them, to a single room in one cave."

    If that is true, then there are far more discoveries on the way.

    Think about every orifice in the Earth.
    Has anyone calculated the possible surface area?

    Worlds within worlds.

  • Great. (Score:3, Funny)

    by Carpe PM ( 754778 ) on Thursday January 19, 2006 @01:34AM (#14507446)
    I knew before I got up today that one of the things that would NOT make my day would be to read "WE FOUND MORE SPIDERS"!! The ones that I already knew about were plenty, thanks.

  • A few thoughts (Score:2, Interesting)

    by awarlaw ( 102125 )
    1. Does the flash of the camera impair the creature?
    2. It seems that life can adapt to ANY non-vaccuum (maybe even there!)
    3. Maybe they evolved recently (within the last few decades). I am starting to think that Darwin's changes happen on an even faster scale than years. I am starting to think maybe changes can happen in a CURRENT generation.

    Just some thoughts

    -AL
  • There are 10,000 [missouri.edu] new species discovered every year. Than means 10000/365 = 27+epsilon every day. So Slashdot is now reporting when news hasn't happened?
  • I wonder what kind of Phat L00tz they drop.

Slashdot Top Deals

"The following is not for the weak of heart or Fundamentalists." -- Dave Barry

Close