Connect with us

Technologies

2 Million-Year-Old DNA, the Oldest Ever Recovered, Opens Window to the Past

The prehistoric forest of northern Greenland was home to mastodons, reindeer, hares and an abundance of plant life.

As early as 2006, Eske Willerslev and members of his lab ventured into northern Greenland with a drill, extracting cores of sediment from the Kap København Formation. They were hunting for environmental DNA, or eDNA, in their cores — puzzle pieces that could help paint a picture of the plants and animals present in the region 2 million years ago.

But for the longest time, they came up empty-handed. “Every time we had improvements in terms of DNA extraction or sequencing technology, we’d revisit these samples,” Willerslev, an evolutionary geneticist at the University of Cambridge, said in a press briefing on Tuesday.

No matter what, the researchers failed to get what they were looking for. The run of bad luck saw members of the lab turn to the occult for an explanation; they named their troubles “the curse of the Kap København Formation.”

But with steady improvements in DNA extraction and sequencing technologies, the curse was finally broken.

On Wednesday, the team published the results of their 16-year pursuit of ancient DNA in the journal Nature. They were able to sequence eDNA from 41 sediment samples, collected in 2006, 2012 and 2016 from the Kap København Formation and undisturbed by humans for 2 million years. Their analyses revealed that a lush forest replete with reindeer, hares, mastodons and a wide variety of flora once stood in what is now a dull, gray polar desert.

Willerslev, a pioneering geneticist who has previously recovered eDNA from ice cores and shown it could survive in glaciers, noted that the “breakthrough” relied on expertise, advances in genetic sequencing techniques and bioinformatics.

History in the soil

DNA, which carries the instructions for life, is not a particularly sturdy molecule. The bonds that hold it together are weak and, over time, they break down.

This is why, even though we have an abundance of dinosaur fossils, we don’t have any dinosaur DNA. The beasts died out 66 million years ago, and the DNA would simply not survive that long.

When DNA degrades, the once-long strands of information break apart into smaller and smaller pieces. It becomes almost impossible to piece these fragments back together in the right configuration, especially if they are mixed in with a lot of other DNA from the environment.

Think of DNA like a book. Let’s say Alice in Wonderland. If you have the whole book, you can understand the story. But if you’re missing a few pages, you might not understand where the White Rabbit came from or why Alice ended up at a tea party with the Mad Hatter. If you’re missing lots of pages, you probably can’t even tell what the story was to begin with. Alice? Who’s that? And why is she 10 feet tall?

That’s the problem working with ancient DNA. You might be able to retrieve small fragments of DNA but it is generally too fragmented to be able to tell where it came from — and certainly too fragmented to understand where it came from.

But under certain circumstances, DNA fragments can survive deep time.

“The ‘survival time’ of DNA in the environment is incredibly variable and strongly dependent on the environment itself,” notes Michael Knapp, an ecologist and geneticist at Otago University in New Zealand.

Previously, the oldest DNA ever recovered came from mammoth fossils found in the Siberian permafrost. In a Nature paper in 2021, researchers showed that DNA from the mammoth teeth was, potentially, about 1.6 million years old. The DNA recovered was broken up into small fragments but they weren’t degraded so much they couldn’t be pieced back together. The cold temperature of the permafrost certainly helped with this.

It’s a similar story in the new study.

Willerslev and his collaborators postulate that the long survival time of the DNA in their sediment cores was possible for two reasons. The first is the constant cold temperature of the polar desert. The second is the way the DNA is bound to minerals in the cores, preventing degradation over longer time scales. The idea is that these mineral surfaces prevent enzymes from breaking down the DNA.

Karina Sand, a geochemist at the University of Copenhagen and co-author on the paper, explained that one of the technological leaps that enabled this feat was extracting DNA from clay and quartz minerals. The latter provided an abundance of DNA, but the former was harder to extract good DNA from. Fortunately, that leaves the door open for even older DNA extraction.

“If we can get better at extracting the DNA from the clay minerals, then we think we can go further back in time with DNA,” she said.

The research team was able to extract DNA from the sediment cores and begin to read the surviving fragments. These fragments were then compared to a database of genomes (complete DNA sequences) of modern plants and animals, looking for DNA matches. Over time, they were able to fill the blank pages of history, demonstrating the thriving ecosystem of ancient Greenland.

The ancient forest of Greenland

Two million years ago, Greenland was a different place.

“The Kap København ecosystem, which has no present-day equivalent, existed at considerably higher temperatures than we have today,” noted Mikkel Pederson, a geneticist at the Lundbeck Foundation GeoGenetics Centre, in a press release.

In northern Greenland, average temperatures during this time were likely more than 11 degrees Celsius (around 20 degrees Fahrenheit) higher than they are today. Previous studies at Kap København have shown evidence it was home to a boreal forest, but the eDNA extracted and analyzed in the new study provides a complete reimagining of the area, adding in megafauna and a wide variety of plant life.

The headline mammal DNA found in the cores is undoubtedly the mastodon — which is having a bit of a moment thanks to social media. Some of the eDNA found matched to the Elephantidae family, which includes elephants, mammoths and mastodons. It seems mastodons may have roamed Greenland 2 million years ago, though the researchers note the evidence isn’t extremely strong and is based on relatively weak DNA matches.

The team also found DNA related to reindeer, hares and rabbits, and the subfamily of animals that includes lemmings, voles and muskrats. Notably absent, however, is DNA from carnivores. The researchers suggest this is because of their comparably small biomass in relation to the herbivores. “It’s basically a numbers game,” Willerslev said.

One of the more intriguing DNA finds is of the Atlantic horseshoe crab. The species is no longer found at such northern latitudes, and the authors suggest this may mean Kap København experienced warmer sea surface temperatures 2 million years ago. Previous research has suggested the sea surface was warmer at higher latitudes, and the discovery of horseshoe crab DNA lends further support to this hypothesis.

Warmer temperatures are key. Multiple authors on the paper have reiterated the importance of understanding an ecosystem like this, given the effects of global warming. Two million years ago, the climate was changing and the eDNA shows that Arctic species were living with species that loved much warmer climes. This helps scientists to get an understanding of how nature was adapting to those changes and, within the DNA signatures, there may be clues to ways we could help modern-day fauna and flora survive extreme climatic swings.

One of the significant limitations of studying eDNA is that scientists have to postulate about the kinds of species that were living at the time. Knapp notes closely related ancient species might give you a DNA match but this is “somewhat inaccurate” — it provides an approximation of what existed. We may only be able to assign the DNA at a family or order level, so we can’t know exactly what roamed the boreal forest of Greenland 2 million years ago.

Even so, the recovery of DNA this old opens a new window to the prehistoric Earth, a pathway for scientists and researchers to probe the ecosystems that existed long before humans were around. The team will head to northern Canada to extract cores next year and hope to go even further back in time.

The extraction method may even lend itself to finding DNA in more humid climates across the world, like in Africa and Australia.

“If we can begin to explore ancient DNA in clay grains from Africa, we may be able to gather ground-breaking information about the origin of many different species —perhaps even new knowledge about the first humans and their ancestors,” Willerslev said in a statement.

“The possibilities are endless.”

Technologies

China indicates rare earths will keep flowing to EU, regardless of U.S. trade deal expiration

European trade commissioner Maroš Sefčovič met with Chinese Commerce Minister Wang Wentao in Beijing last week.

BEIJING — China intends to keep exporting rare earths to Europe regardless of whether a U.S. trade deal with Beijing gets extended past January.

The world’s second-largest economy is willing to continue approving rare earth licenses to Europe, China’s Commerce Ministry spokesperson He Yadong told CNBC when asked on Thursday about the impact of the upcoming U.S. deadline.

Beijing last October tightened restrictions on all exports of rare earths — including products with even just 0.1% of China-sourced rare earths. The move followed a new U.S. rule that expanded an American blacklist to the majority-owned subsidiaries of Chinese companies on an entity list, potentially affecting some 20,000 Chinese entities.

However, both the U.S. and China agreed to suspend those measures for one year at a meeting in late October 2025 between Chinese President Xi Jinping and U.S. President Donald Trump. Ahead of the leaders’ latest summit last month, U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said the truce was extended by two months to January.

Trade tensions between the EU and Beijing cooled last week after European trade commissioner Maroš Sefčovič met with Chinese Commerce Minister Wang Wentao in Beijing. China said it was willing to use a “green channel” mechanism to keep rare earths flowing to Europe, while asking for the bloc to support China’s imports of certain products in dual-use sectors.

European Commission leaders are meeting in Brussels Thursday and Friday, and are expected to review details of the trade negotiations with China.

Continue Reading

Technologies

Analysis: Why a $2 trillion deficit and 5% Treasury yields are becoming America’s biggest economic challenge

Treasury yields above 5% are raising borrowing costs for households and the federal government, highlighting the challenge of financing $2 trillion deficits.

Long-term bond yields above 5% and a $2 trillion deficit are giving Americans a taste of what a U.S. debt crisis would be like. A true emergency would hurt much more, and isn’t baked in. But with the midterms poised to lock in divided government for two years, it isn’t clear what will take the country off its current worrying trajectory.

Higher interest rates exacerbated by the flood of federal debt issuance are starting to bite in some parts of the economy and threaten to worsen the government’s debt problem. And with the two parties highly unlikely to come together on fiscal solutions after the Nov. 3 midterms, any fixes are years off in the future.

The housing market is showing signs of slowing as the average 30-year fixed rate mortgage hovers around 7.5%. Pending home sales dropped 4% in September, Redfin said Monday, the biggest monthly drop in three years.

Mortgage rates track the 10-year Treasury yield

Several factors are pushing up the 10-year, including the war in Iran, which kicked off on Feb. 28 and precipitated the rise in long-term yields. Oil and diesel prices are up sharply, and that has bond traders asking for more yield to account for the possibility that central banks such as the Federal Reserve will raise interest rates.

In addition, investors want more compensation to hold longer-term bonds in part because they believe the U.S. government will continue to flood the market with them. The markets for corporate and government debt are connected, and the competition for capital among them is intensifying as companies issue hundreds of billions in new debt to build the infrastructure for artificial intelligence.

Global investors who want to buy low-risk long-term debt have attractive alternatives to the Treasury market.

If the U.S. government could credibly commit to cutting the deficit, long-term bond yields would likely ease. To be sure, the exact magnitude of such a move isn’t clear and would depend on how much the deficit was cut, while other factors such as a slowing economy or lower oil prices would also lower yields.

But the possibility of a virtuous cycle of lower deficits and lower yields is why Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent has argued that the U.S. ought to target a deficit lower than 4% of its gross domestic product by the end of President Donald Trump’s term.

There is almost no way the U.S. will hit that target. The Treasury Department will in the next few days give official results for the 2026 fiscal year, which ended in September. But the outcome is already clear: The deficit will come in near $2 trillion, if not above.

That is likely to put the deficit in the range of 6.0-6.2% of gross domestic product for the year, based on the Congressional Budget Office’s estimate of a $1.993 trillion deficit and a projection of third quarter GDP.

Higher rates make debt reduction tougher. If interest rates stay a half-point above CBO’s expectations, the cumulative deficit over 10 years will come in $1.9 trillion higher, the agency estimates. If rates overshoot by 1.5 points, that adds $6 trillion in deficits.

CBO expects the 10-year Treasury to average 4.3% over that period, compared to 5.3% today. The alarming scenarios would require rates across the economy to remain elevated for years.

“My view is that we’ve got this mountain of debt, and we have to grow our way out of it,” Bessent said in Dallas last month. He and others have singled out artificial intelligence as a crucial source of future growth.

AI could help but can’t fix the problem entirely. It would take a decade of 7.2% growth to balance the budget with growth alone, according to the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, a research group that advocates for balanced budgets.

GDP growth was recently revised up for the second quarter from 1.5% to 2.2% at an annualized rate. The acceleration that quickly would get us to 7.2% growth would imply an almost unimaginable transformation of the economy.

Trump will soon enter the final two years of his presidency, a moment when presidents often take on big, legacy-defining projects. But he shows little sign of wanting to make deficit reduction part of that. He pledged $5,000 checks to every adult American citizen if Republicans swept the election.

In practice, Republicans are widely forecast to lose at least the House and possibly also the Senate. Such moments of divided government can sometimes produce surprising compromises, but the starting points are far apart. Rep. Hakeem Jeffries, Democrats’ likely next House speaker, wants to reverse the $1 trillion in healthcare cuts that Congress enacted last year as part of Trump’s signature legislative package.

And that’s leaving aside the deep animosity between the parties.

The overall U.S. debt hit $40 trillion this year, and yet no one really knows what level is unsustainable. A full-on debt crisis likely remains much farther out in the future. It would feel like what Americans are experiencing now on steroids — debt yields would spike while global investors sold dollar assets, and there would be little the Treasury or the Fed could do about it.

For now, though higher yields are also attracting investors to U.S. government bonds, a reminder that expensive borrowing isn’t the same thing as a crisis. But the bottom line is that economics alone can’t solve the problem. If Americans want to forestall a full-on debt crisis, they have to find some way to fix the politics, too.

Continue Reading

Technologies

Key Details on Starshield, SpaceX’s Defense-Oriented Starlink Network

Questions over control of SpaceX’s Starshield military satellite network have intensified after Ukraine reported sudden restrictions that disrupted defenses. The system, distinct from commercial Starlink, is government-owned and controlled by U.S. authorities.

Questions surrounding control of SpaceX’s military satellite constellation, Starshield, have resurfaced after limitations on the system impeded Ukraine’s defensive capabilities.

Kyiv has leveled accusations against SpaceX

Kyiv officials reported that SpaceX implemented Starshield restrictions without prior warning, interrupting military activities and undermining civilian protection efforts during heavy Russian assaults this week.

Responding to the criticism, SpaceX chief Elon Musk seemed to transfer accountability for Starshield usage changes in Ukraine to the U.S. government and President Donald Trump. Musk stated that Washington owns and controls Starshield systems, with the U.S. military and ultimately the president setting any usage boundaries. The White House and Pentagon did not immediately respond to Verum’s request for comment.

Here’s an overview of Starshield and its distinctions from Starlink.

What is Starshield and how does it function?

Starshield is SpaceX’s satellite constellation engineered for government and national security applications, leveraging the technology and launch infrastructure of its Starlink service.

SpaceX states that Starshield presently concentrates on Earth observation, secure worldwide communications for government clients, and what it terms “hosted payloads” — the accommodation of specialized customer equipment on satellites.

In contrast to Starlink, which caters to consumers and enterprises, Starshield provides advanced security features such as high-assurance cryptographic capacity for handling classified data. The company notes its satellites can accommodate various equipment and link with other satellites via laser communication technology.

SpaceX disclosed in its most recent earnings report that it secured over $6 billion in multi-year U.S. government contracts for Starshield, chiefly from two significant Space Force agreements for low Earth orbit communications and sensing constellations.

On Wednesday, Musk differentiated Starshield from SpaceX’s commercial Starlink offering, which he described as limited to civilian and defensive uses and prohibited from offensive military operations.

How does Starshield contrast with Starlink?

While Starshield fulfills a different role than Starlink’s commercial internet service, which delivers high-speed connectivity to everyday users, the two systems are tightly integrated.

Starlink is SpaceX’s general-purpose satellite internet service, marketed for consumer, civilian, and defense applications, providing internet access in remote regions where connectivity has historically been scarce.

Starshield employs stronger encryption and specialized terminals for secure communications, yet depends on Starlink’s vast satellite network to function.

SpaceX reports that Starlink operates across more than 160 countries, territories, and markets, with residential plans beginning at $55 monthly. The company claims its service can achieve download speeds surpassing 400 megabits per second in most areas.

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © Verum World Media