Research Indicates That the Size of Small Houses Made Ancient Giant Kangaroos Susceptible to Local Extinction

Extinct Kangaroos from the genus Protemnodon A recent study by paleontologists from the University of Adelaide, Queensland Museum, and Monash University discovered that these creatures were not adventurous wanderers traversing the plains, but rather homebodies that remained close to their habitats throughout their lives. This finding aligns with behaviors observed in modern kangaroo species, yet it was surprising to the researchers.



Protemnodon. Image credits: Andrey Atuchin / Rochelle Lawrence / Scott Hocknull.

Among large herbivorous mammals, greater body sizes are often associated with broader foraging ranges; however, it remains uncertain if this trend applies to extinct Australian megafauna.

In this study, paleontologist Christopher Laurikainen Gaete and colleagues investigated protemnodon fossils found in the Etna Cave, located north of Rockhampton in Central Queensland, Australia.

They examined strontium isotopes from kangaroo teeth, revealing matches only with local limestone rather than distant rock formations.

“The strontium isotopes in the fossilized teeth indicate the geology of the region where food was sourced,” they noted.

The findings suggest that Protemnodon had a significantly smaller foraging range than anticipated for its size, which is estimated at up to 170 kilograms.

Prior research indicates that Protemnodon likely lacked the capacity for long-distance travel due to its large size, thereby restricting its movement.

Additionally, this new study suggests that the stable, lush rainforest habitat provided sufficient food sources, negating the need for Protemnodon to wander far.

When climate change and increasing aridity disrupted this rainforest ecosystem about 280,000 years ago, the reduced foraging area may have left Protemnodon unable to find sufficient food, ultimately leading to the local extinction of these giant kangaroos.

Further investigations are needed to ascertain whether the limited range of Australia’s gigantic marsupials is a widespread pattern attributable to habitat rather than body size.

“We utilized data from contemporary kangaroos to predict a much broader foraging range for these giant extinct kangaroos,” explained Laurikainen Gaete.

“We were astonished to find they didn’t roam at all.”

“These innovative isotopic techniques have significantly advanced our field,” remarked Dr. Scott Hocknall, a senior scientist and curator at the Queensland Museum and paleontologist at Monash University.

“Think of it as an ancient GPS tracker. Fossils allow us to monitor individual movement, dietary habits, social interactions, and causes of death.”

“The ongoing debate regarding the extinction of Australia’s megafauna has persisted for decades, and now we can analyze it from an individual and species-specific standpoint,” stated Professor Anthony Doset, a paleontologist at the University of Wollongong.

“These precise methodologies enable us to examine each site and individual, facilitating more accurate extinction models.”

Researchers are currently planning to apply these methods to reconstruct the past behaviors and diets of MT ETNA and other extinct kangaroo species in the Capricorn Cave region.

“Many of the kangaroo species on Kangaroo Island, such as those found in Capricorn Caves, include tree kangaroos, pademelons, and rock wallabies, with descendants inhabiting the wet tropics and Papua New Guinea,” noted Professor Doset.

“We will employ these same techniques to explore how these surviving kangaroo species adapted to the environmental changes that contributed to the massive extinctions.”

The study will be published in the journal PLOS 1.

____

C. Laurikainen Gaete et al. 2025. Megafauna Mobility: An assessment of the foraging range of extinct macropodids from central Queensland, Australia. PLOS 1 20(4): E0319712; doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0319712

Source: www.sci.news

Experts explain why Olympic marathon runners are highly susceptible to getting diarrhea

From watching to cheering, or even dreaming of competing in the Olympics, every competition is thrilling. However, the excitement can quickly fade when considering the potential illnesses one may contract from participating. Experts have cautioned that athletes involved in the marathon swimming event in the River Seine in Paris are at risk of falling ill, most likely experiencing symptoms such as diarrhea.

“I would not have chosen the Seine,” stated Professor Davy Jones, an expert in Environmental Science and Public Health at Bangor University. He highlighted the high urbanization of the area, exposing the river to various chemicals and biological agents, increasing the risk of illness for athletes.

Concerns were raised after several training sessions in the Seine were canceled due to elevated levels of fecal matter in the water. Athletes, like Austrian swimmer Felix Aubeck, expressed apprehension about the water quality and its potential impact on their health.

Virus threat

Testing has shown unsafe levels of bacteria, including E. coli, in the water, prompting the need for further assessments and precautions to ensure the safety of athletes. Illnesses such as norovirus and ear infections have been observed as common post-swimming ailments.

The presence of these harmful substances in the water poses a significant health risk, with sewage overflow contributing to the contamination. Despite treatment efforts, the discharge of sewage into rivers remains a concern, particularly during heavy rains.

Experts emphasize the challenges of cleaning the Seine effectively to eliminate the risk of pathogens. While protective gear provides some defense, swimmers remain susceptible to exposure, especially during outdoor events in contaminated water.

Although the situation raises concerns, experts consider it an opportunity for a scientific study to understand the impact of water quality on athletes’ health. Ultimately, the decision to swim in the Seine remains a personal choice, with experts urging caution and thorough risk assessment.

About our experts

Professor Davy Jones: Professor of Environmental Science and Public Health at Bangor University, with expertise in advising governments and conducting research on various environmental issues.

David Warner: Professor of Environmental Systems Modeling at Newcastle University, known for his research on water quality and environmental pollution.

Read more:

Source: www.sciencefocus.com

British Safety Council’s findings reveal that AI safety devices are easily susceptible to breaches

The UK’s new Artificial Intelligence Safety Authority has discovered that the technology can mislead human users, produce biased results, and lacks safeguards against the dissemination of harmful information.

Announced by the AI Safety Research Institute, initial findings of research into advanced AI systems, also known as large language models (LLMs), revealed various concerns. These AI systems power tools like chatbots and image generators.

The institute found that basic prompts can bypass LLM safeguards and be used to power chatbots such as ChatGPT for “dual-use” tasks, which refers to using a model for both military and civilian purposes.

According to AISI, “Using basic prompting techniques, users were able to instantly defeat the LLM’s safeguards and gain assistance with dual-use tasks.” The institute also mentioned that more advanced “jailbreak” techniques could be used by relatively unskilled attackers within a few hours.

The research showed that LLM models can be useful for beginners planning cyberattacks and are capable of creating social media personas for spreading disinformation.

When comparing AI models to web searches, the institute stated that they provide roughly the same level of information, but AI models tend to produce “hallucinations” or inaccurate advice.

The image generator was found to produce racially biased results. Additionally, the institute discovered that AI agents can deceive human users in certain scenarios.

AISI is currently testing advanced AI systems and evaluating their safety, while also sharing information with third parties. The institute focuses on the misuse of AI models, their impact on humans, and their ability to perform harmful tasks.

AISI clarified that it does not have the capacity to test all released models and is not responsible for declaring these systems “secure.”

The institute emphasized that it is not a regulator but conducts secondary checks on AI systems.

Source: www.theguardian.com