Posted on 02/14/2007 6:47:47 PM PST by Alouette
MEXICO CITY (AP) - A Mexican researcher announced the rare find of a tiny tree frog completely preserved in amber on Wednesday that he estimates lived about 25 million years ago.
The chunk of amber containing the 0.4-inch frog was uncovered by a miner in southern Chiapas states in 2005 and was bought by a private collector, who lent it to scientists for study.
Only a few preserved frogs have been found in chunks of amber - a stone formed by ancient tree sap - mostly in the Dominican Republic. Like those, the frog found in Chiapas was of the genus Craugastor, whose relatives still inhabit the region.
Biologist Gerardo Carbot of the Chiapas Natural History and Ecology Institute, who announced the discovery, said it was the first such frog found in amber in Mexico.
Carbot said he would like to extract a sample from the frog's remains to see if they contain well-preserved DNA, in order to identify the frog's species.
However, he expressed doubt that the stone's owner would allow researchers to drill a small hole into the chunk of amber. "I don't think he will allow it, because it's a very rare, unique piece," said Carbot.
I didn't know Helen Thomas was French.
Helen Thomas news trivia alert
I can never remember, was Craugastor a Decepticon or an Autobot?
Not THE Picture Again - PLEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEASE!
ROTFLMAO! I have often wondered what the conversations are like around your dinner table.
Hello my honey, hello my baby, hello my ragtime gal
LOL
Cool find! My daughter was just touring in Gdansk, Poland which has an Amber Museum. The Baltic nations apparently have some of the world's largest amber sites. I don't think she saw any amber-encased frogs, though.
ping
thanks for the chuckle
If this frog is 25 million years old where are all the intermediate species that are missing from the fossil record that one would expect in evolution?
It's interesting and certainly noteworthy but I question the estimated age given in the article.
"where are all the intermediate species that are missing from the fossil record that one would expect in evolution?"
I would guess they're either extinct or extant. ;)
"It's interesting and certainly noteworthy but I question the estimated age given in the article."
Well maybe you could tell us what method they used to date the amber why you find that method suspect?
This is one particular frog which is thought to have been alive 25 million years ago (or 40 million years after the Age of the Dinosaurs ended). Frogs are amphibians...amphibians were around before the first reptiles. The earliest amphibians predate the appearance of frogs, but the earliest frogs are thought to date back to around 200 million years ago. At least that's what evolutionary biologists seem to think.
Isn't that the thousand year old mummy that Bill Clinton had the hots for?
Er, umm, that one just didn't evolve for some reason.
I don't disagree that amphibians were among the first creatures on Earth but after degrees in biology, chemistry, and graduate work in anthropology I became very skeptical of carbon dating and other age estimations.
The find is very interesting but the age will get the headlines and if people knew how shaky the whole "dating game" they would be skeptical as well.
I have witnessed the pressure on scientist to make every find "older" for the "wow!" factor. I don't claim to know how old life on earth is because it is infantile science.
"Evolutionary biologist" have their own agenda that is treated with the same academic credibility as "global warming climatologist" where the ultimate answer drives the result.
As I stated.... the find is very interesting but the age brought out the devil's advocate in me.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.