Flash flood wave from Bhutan leads to formation of new downstream lake, raising concerns about secondary threats

A recent study published in Royal Society Open Science questions the existence of an Ice Age giant bird, suggesting that previously cataloged fossils might simply be larger variations of modern common cranes.

In the nineteenth century, archaeologists investigating caves and swamps in Europe found a vast collection of remains from the ancient Ice Age. Among these findings, the French biologist Alphonse Milne-Edwards described an ancestral species of crane, named Grus primigenia, based on bone fragments taken from a cave in southern France.

Due to the notably larger size of its bones compared to contemporary cranes, the scientific community spent over one hundred and fifty years believing it was a distinct species that inhabited the end of the last Glacial Period, more than twenty thousand years ago.

However, new research, conducted in collaboration with the Centre for Paleogenetics in Stockholm, Sweden, and led by Bournemouth University, reached this conclusion after analyzing ancient DNA samples. The analysis was performed on 18 crane bones collected in England, Wales, France, Germany, and the Balearic Islands.

John Stewart, the article's author, expressed suspicion that these large cranes were, in fact, common European cranes of increased size. He speculates that the classification error might be linked to the size differences between males and females; the ancient males were larger than current birds, while the females of that period had a size similar to modern males.

The methods historically used contributed to this confusion, as previous studies classified these large birds solely based on the shape and size of their bones. With the advancement of genetic sequencing techniques, DNA analysis can now provide a much more accurate determination of these animals' identity.

Stewart also raised possible reasons why modern cranes are smaller. Hypotheses include selective pressures imposed by human activities on the habitats of these birds. Environmental changes could result in lower food availability or force migrations to areas with less resource competition. In times of scarcity, smaller individuals, which require fewer supplies, may gain an advantage.

The researcher emphasizes, however, that further investigation is needed to fully understand this issue. According to him, although many bird species are currently vulnerable to human intervention, it is plausible that the number of past extinctions has been exaggerated, given that some of these cases may only represent changes in the size of species that still exist.

Currently, the common crane can be found in much of Northern Europe, including Norway, Sweden, and Finland, as well as the western part of Asia. Characterized by long legs and necks, gray plumage, and a distinctive red mark on the head, they are known for flying in large groups organized in a V-formation during their migratory journeys.

The 17th Conference of the Parties to the United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity (COP17), held in Yerevan, Armenia, is just hours away from its official closing, with participating states showing significant distance from reaching a consensus on the central elements for Nature preservation, which may lead to discussions continuing into the night.

After almost two weeks of proceedings, significant divergences remain regarding crucial topics. These include granting subsidies to environmentally harmful activities, such as oil extraction; defining the best methodology to fund biodiversity protection; and increasing corporate contributions to a United Nations fund dedicated to nature conservation, which faces resource scarcity.

Francisco Ferreira, president of the environmental association Zero, commented in a note sent to Lusa that several vital issues still await a decision. He stressed that although technical advances and important decisions have occurred over the two weeks, the more complex political issues remain unresolved. Ferreira stated that COP17 showed that the world possesses the necessary knowledge to curb biodiversity loss, but the obstacle lies in the absence of political will, funding, and concrete decisions, with progress towards 2030 falling short of the goals set in 2022.

A plenary meeting scheduled for early afternoon was postponed until early evening, while smaller working groups continue to operate. Discussions at COP17 are primarily focused on drafting a 'global stocktake' of progress in the area of biodiversity, a document awaited but still pending despite initial optimism about its completion before the current day.

This stocktake should be based on the results obtained after the 2022 Biodiversity Agreement, known as the Kunming-Montreal Agreement, which is comparable to the Paris Agreement on climate change. This agreement defined 23 goals to be achieved by 2030, such as protecting 30% of terrestrial and oceanic areas, combating pollution and invasive species, and restoring degraded ecosystems; however, most of these goals are behind schedule.

The objective of the global stocktake is to guide states toward the correct path through tangible proposals, but countries face notable difficulties when dealing with issues related to subsidies granted to harmful practices, estimated at $2.6 trillion annually. Another relevant point of contention is determining who should bear the financial objectives set for 2030, in a context where the public finances of many countries are under pressure, leading them to try to avoid the responsibility of increasing allocations.

Francisco Ferreira identified financing as the 'main blockage' of the summit, highlighting an 'enormous contradiction between funding for conservation and subsidies that promote habitat destruction, soil degradation, and overfishing.' In addition to monetary issues, the president of Zero mentioned that the positions adopted by certain countries, specifically Russia and Saudi Arabia, are complicating collaboration between biodiversity and climate change, as well as scientific recognition and articulation with other international pacts.

The president of Zero also expressed concern about the persistence of divergences regarding the effective participation of indigenous peoples and local communities, emphasizing that it is deeply worrying the time spent 'discussing words' instead of implementing concrete actions, given that biodiversity protection sustains both human living conditions and economies.

The European Union has been trying to persuade large emerging economies, such as China, to adhere to the official donor base, without success so far. Efforts to strengthen the 'Cali Fund,' a United Nations mechanism intended to share profits generated by companies exploiting genetic data of plants and other organisms, are also proving challenging.

In previous events, such as the biodiversity summit in Colombia in 2024, negotiations ended without an agreement on conservation funding, which were resumed and concluded in Rome in early 2025. In Yerevan, it is expected to be decided today whether Panama or Ecuador will host the next summit, COP18, in 2028. On the eve of the COP17 closing, Astrid Schomaler, UN biodiversity officer, called on countries to demonstrate 'audacity and innovation to find common ground.'