Thursday, May 22, 2008 | Reason : In the News | print version

Scientists discover 'frogamander' fossil

by Reuters

Thanks to Tom Fields for the link.

http://www.reuters.com/article/scienceNews/idUSN2134298920080522

Scientists discover "frogamander" fossil
By Julie Steenhuysen

CHICAGO (Reuters) - The discovery of a "frogamander," a 290 million-year-old fossil that links modern frogs and salamanders, may resolve a longstanding debate about amphibian ancestry, Canadian scientists said on Wednesday.

Modern amphibians -- frogs, salamanders and earthworm-like caecilians -- have been a bit slippery about divulging their evolutionary ancestry. Gaps in the fossil record showing the transformation of one form into another have led to a lot of scientific debate.

The fossil Gerobatrachus hottoni or elderly frog, described in the journal Nature, may help set the record straight.

"It's a missing link that falls right between where the fossil record of the extinct form and the fossil record for the modern form begins," said Jason Anderson of the University of Calgary, who led the study.

"It's a perfect little frogamander," he said.

Gerobatrachus has a mixture of frog and salamander features, with fused ankle bones as seen only in salamanders, a wide, frog-like skull, and a backbone that resembles a mix of the two.

The fossil suggests that modern amphibians may have come from two groups, with frogs and salamanders related to an ancient amphibian known as a temnospondyl, and worm-like caecilians more closely related to the lepospondyls, another group of ancient amphibians.

"Frogs and salamanders share a common ancestor that is fairly removed from the origin of caecilians," Anderson said.

Gerobatrachus hottoni was discovered in Texas in 1995 by a group from the Smithsonian Institution that included the late Nicholas Hotton, for whom the fossil is named.

Anderson's team painstakingly removed layers of rock to reveal the anatomy of the skeleton.

"The fossil itself is almost perfectly complete," Anderson said.

"It died on its back. Its legs and arms were curled up on its belly and it's that part that weathered away."

While scientific opinion moves slowly, Anderson thinks the find will confirm the prevailing opinion that frogs and salamanders share a more modern ancestor.

"I think they (scientists) will be very happy with this as a resolution," he said.

(Editing by Maggie Fox)

Add to del.icio.us Posted: Thursday, May 22, 2008 | Permalink

Comments 1 - 29 of 29 |

Reload Comments | Back to Top | Page Numbers

1. Comment #183447 by Partisan on May 22, 2008 at 6:30 am

Yay, I managed to sneak in =], the link needs "-frogamander-fossils,reuters" added the end of it.

Still, another gap plugged in the fossil record. I wonder what all these frogamanders were up to in the garden of Eden?

Other Comments by Partisan

2. Comment #183459 by Tezcatlipoca on May 22, 2008 at 6:43 am

Yay!!! More "gaps".

Other Comments by Tezcatlipoca

3. Comment #183470 by Synchronium on May 22, 2008 at 6:56 am

Frogamander! Genius!

Other Comments by Synchronium

4. Comment #183503 by bugaboo on May 22, 2008 at 7:31 am

Frogamander went a courtin'.....

Other Comments by bugaboo

5. Comment #183512 by Broicher on May 22, 2008 at 7:48 am

I also see a danger in this discovery. All those IDiots will shout this is only one, but show us all the other transitional forms. Naming it Frogomander only supports their silly argumentation, whereas this is not a transitional form, but a being as we or our dogs and cats. ... Well, I hope you understand my point, it's sometimes hard to express yourself, when you're non-native.

Other Comments by Broicher

6. Comment #183521 by Quiddam on May 22, 2008 at 7:57 am

Unfortunately creationists can't tell the difference between a frog and a salamander in the first place. Harun Yayha's glossy and weighty tome "Atlas of Creation' features this picture of a 'A 280-MILLION-YEAR-OLD FROG FOSSIL' saying 'There exists no difference between this frog, alive 280 million years ago, and those of today.'
http://www.harunyahya.com/books/darwinism/atlas_creation/atlas_creation_02.php
Even a cursory glance shows that the 'FROG' fossil has a tail and short hind legs and is a SALAMANDER.

Karaurus to be precise - a different order but 'no difference' to a Creationist!

No wonder they can't grasp evolution.

Other Comments by Quiddam

7. Comment #183524 by Tezcatlipoca on May 22, 2008 at 8:04 am

Quiddam-

darn you to heck! Now my co-workers are looking at me rather strangely because of my inability to stop laughing. Thanks for looking through yo-yo's atlas.

Other Comments by Tezcatlipoca

8. Comment #183538 by DavidSJA on May 22, 2008 at 8:36 am

It'd be a really good exercise for an undergraduate student to go through that article and identify all of the misdirections.

Other Comments by DavidSJA

9. Comment #183544 by irate_atheist on May 22, 2008 at 8:46 am

But where's the crocoduck, eh?

Other Comments by irate_atheist

10. Comment #183547 by mordacious1 on May 22, 2008 at 8:52 am

Irate
So I rush to post: It's not exactly a crocoduck, and what do I see? Beat me by 6 minutes

Other Comments by mordacious1

11. Comment #183562 by The Schuermannator on May 22, 2008 at 9:18 am

This does nothing to further support the theory of evolution. Doesn't everyone see the gaps this now creates? What about the frog-frogamander??? And the salamander-frogamander???

Ha, evolution is just a myth!

**smacks forehead**

Other Comments by The Schuermannator

12. Comment #183598 by Border Collie on May 22, 2008 at 10:23 am

Interesting. Always nice to have more ammunition for evolution. Just don't want to get caught up in "having to have" those "missing links".

Other Comments by Border Collie

13. Comment #183599 by mordacious1 on May 22, 2008 at 10:26 am

I suggest that everyone look at the link in Quiddam's post. That is one weird looking frog fossil.

Other Comments by mordacious1

14. Comment #183607 by Epinephrine on May 22, 2008 at 10:44 am

That's brilliant Quiddam... I love the criticism that there's no half-chimpmunk/half-crocodile, complete with the chipmunk crawling out of a shell.

Other Comments by Epinephrine

15. Comment #183617 by mordacious1 on May 22, 2008 at 11:23 am

Epinephrine
I would think that the scarecrow would be welcomed at this denial picnic. He could join the rest of their strawmen that these people use, as long as he doesn't get that brain he wants.

Other Comments by mordacious1

16. Comment #183644 by Barbara on May 22, 2008 at 12:08 pm

@ Kirk Cameron:

Take THAT, you moron!
_______________________________________________

P.S. The Atlas of Creation is a stunning, beautifully illustrated, work of crap.

Other Comments by Barbara

17. Comment #183677 by Garnok on May 22, 2008 at 1:15 pm

Barbara said:

The Atlas of Creation is a stunning, beautifully illustrated, work of crap.

Yeah, I never would have thought that anyone would actually take the time to polish a piece of their sh!t and claim it to be gold but he showed me to be wrong about that.

Other Comments by Garnok

18. Comment #183705 by Quiddam on May 22, 2008 at 2:33 pm

He has now edited the web site, but the book still has pictures comparing fossil caddis-flies and spiders caught in amber with modern fishing lures, claiming they haven't changed either. With the usual creationist disregard for intellectual property, he trolled the Internet for many of the book's images.

I have the original pictures though.

Other Comments by Quiddam

19. Comment #183731 by calyx on May 22, 2008 at 4:29 pm

This is much better, croco-squirrel!

Other Comments by calyx

20. Comment #183763 by Wosret on May 22, 2008 at 6:41 pm

This is no frogamander! It's clearly a Salamog.

Other Comments by Wosret

21. Comment #183782 by Geodesic17 on May 22, 2008 at 8:07 pm

Isn't Turducken a transitionary animal?

Other Comments by Geodesic17

22. Comment #183785 by mordacious1 on May 22, 2008 at 8:16 pm

Calyx
Isn't that a croco-munk? or a chipadile?

Other Comments by mordacious1

23. Comment #183791 by steveroot on May 22, 2008 at 8:28 pm

9. Comment #183544 by irate_atheist on May 22, 2008 at 8:46 am
But where's the crocoduck, eh?

All in due course. It will be learned that it descended from the crockoshit... and another gap will be created when they find the remains of the crockofucktard.
Ste5e

Other Comments by steveroot

24. Comment #183822 by Wosret on May 22, 2008 at 11:37 pm

All in due course. It will be learned that it descended from the crockoshit...

Excellent. Gave me a good laugh.

Other Comments by Wosret

25. Comment #183844 by DamnDirtyApe on May 23, 2008 at 2:32 am

How much more bloody evidence is it going to take?

Maybe we should gather up all the evidence in the world and make a mega evidence mountain.

The giant Armadillo in the Natural History museum was enough for me.

Other Comments by DamnDirtyApe

26. Comment #183850 by calyx on May 23, 2008 at 2:50 am

Yeah I don't know hey, I have a creationist friend of mine at uni who I argue with, not only does he refuse to admit there is any evidence for evolution whatsoever, but he even admits that no matter what happened he would never change his mind anyway. I'm sure that's pretty typical.

Even if we had a mega evidence mountain, maybe a mobile one, we could parade it around through cities and things, wouldn't make a difference though :)

Other Comments by calyx

27. Comment #183933 by Quiddam on May 23, 2008 at 8:00 am

While we don't have a Chipodile (sounds like a male stripper) we do know what reptomams look like. We have lots of synapsid fossils and can clearly map the transition from undifferentiated dentition to specialized teeth and the transition from reptile jaw to mammal jaw - and ear bones.

Other Comments by Quiddam

28. Comment #183942 by hemin_1980 on May 23, 2008 at 8:36 am

Here is a link to the photo of Gerobatrachus hottoni

http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/Science/2008/05/21/g052107A.jpg

Other Comments by hemin_1980

29. Comment #184188 by King of NH on May 23, 2008 at 9:30 pm

Yes, yes. This is all well and good. But I think that when the earth was flooded in the great flood, the water was moving so fast that it simply slammed a frog into a salamander with enough force to fuse them somehow. The force also rocketed the space-time continuum backward by millions of years before the 6000 years of earth's history, but then it snapped back, leaving evidence of things that happened, oh, I don't know, 4000 years ago appear to have happened millions of years ago. Fossils are just the bones of sinners that have felt god's wrath.

-Graduate of Ken Hovind's Dr. Dino University

Other Comments by King of NH

Reload Comments | Back to Top