Mega Tsunami of the World Oceans: Chevron Dune Formation, Micro-Ejecta, and Rapid Climate Change as the Evidence of Recent Oceanic Bolide Impacts

This paper deals with the physical and environmental effects resulting from oceanic impacts by sizable comets, and the rates and risks associated with such cosmic impacts. Specifically, we investigate two sets of probable oceanic impact events that occurred within the last 5,000 years, one in the Indian Ocean about 2800 BC, and the other in the Gulf of Carpentaria (Australia) about AD 536. If validated, they would be the most energetic natural catastrophes occurring during the middle-to-late Holocene with large-scale environmental and historical human effects and consequences. The physical evidence for these two impacts consists of several sets of data: (1) remarkable depositional traces of coastal flooding in dunes (chevron dunes) found in southern Madagascar and along the coast of the Gulf of Carpentaria, (2) the presence of crater candidates (29-km Burckle crater about 1,500 km southeast of Madagascar which dates to within the last 6,000 years and 18-km Kanmare and 12-km Tabban craters with an estimated age of AD 572±86 in the southeast corner of the Gulf of Carpentaria), and (3) the presence of quench textured magnetite spherules and nearly pure carbon spherules, teardrop-shaped tektites with trails of ablation, and vitreous material found by cutting-edge laboratory analytical techniques in the upper-most layer of core samples close to the crater candidates. Although some propose a wind-blown origin for V-shaped chevron dunes that are widely distributed around the coastlines of the Indian Ocean and in the Gulf of Carpentaria, we have evidence in favor of their mega tsunami formation. In southern Madagascar we have documented evidence for tsunami wave run-up reaching 205 m above sea-level and penetrating up to 45 km inland along the strike of the chevron axis. Subtly the orientation of the dunes is not aligned to the prevailing wind direction, but to the path of refracted mega-tsunami originating from Burckle impact crater. The results of our study show that substantive oceanic comet impacts not only have occurred more recently than modeled by astrophysicists, but also that they have profoundly affected Earth’s natural systems, climate, and human societies. If validated, they could potentially lead to a major paradigm shift in environmental science by recognizing the role of oceanic impacts in major climate downturns during the middle-to-late Holocene that have been well documented already by different techniques (tree-ring anomalies, ice-, lake- and peat bog-cores)

Burckle abyssal impact crater: Did this impact produce a global deluge?

We have found an impact crater that is likely < 6000 years old. Burckle crater is in the central Indian Ocean on the edge of a fracture zone at 30.87° S 61.36°E. The crater is 29±1 km wide and is the inferred source of layers with high magnetic susceptibility in 3 deep sea cores. Each layer goes to the top of the core. Two out of 3 of the cores have basal Pleistocene ages and the basal age of the third is unknown. The high susceptibility layers contain broken plagioclase, spinel periodotite, and chrysotile asbestos. One sample contains pure Ni with drops of oxidized Ni. Because pure Ni melts at 1453°C, it is very likely that the drops formed during an impact. The high susceptibility layers from 2 cores are over 5 times thicker than they should be for a 29 km wide source crater. We also find that a 29 km wide source crater cannot vaporize enough seawater to produce meters of rain, even in a restricted region between 4750 and 7250 km from the crater. Thus, we infer that Burckle crater was produced as part of a Shoemaker-Levy type impact of a comet. The fragmented comet also produced two other large impact centers, one in the northwest Pacific and another in the central eastern Pacific. Where the rainout from these impact centers overlaps, we see deluge events that are over a week long. The impact event also produced devastating tsunamis, winds, and associated social upheaval. We date the event to around 2807 B.C

A Synoptical Classification of the Bivalvia (Mollusca)

The following classification summarizes the suprageneric taxono-my of the Bivalvia for the upcoming revision of the Bivalvia volumes of the Treatise on Invertebrate Paleontology, Part N. The development of this classification began with Carter (1990a), Campbell, Hoeks-tra, and Carter (1995, 1998), Campbell (2000, 2003), and Carter, Campbell, and Campbell (2000, 2006), who, with assistance from the United States National Science Foundation, conducted large-scale morphological phylogenetic analyses of mostly Paleozoic bivalves, as well as molecular phylogenetic analyses of living bivalves. Dur-ing the past several years, their initial phylogenetic framework has been revised and greatly expanded through collaboration with many students of bivalve biology and paleontology, many of whom are coauthors. During this process, all available sources of phylogenetic information, including molecular, anatomical, shell morphological, shell microstructural, bio- and paleobiogeographic as well as strati-graphic, have been integrated into the classification. The more recent sources of phylogenetic information include, but are not limited to, Carter (1990a), Malchus (1990), J. Schneider (1995, 1998a, 1998b, 2002), T. Waller (1998), Hautmann (1999, 2001a, 2001b), Giribet and Wheeler (2002), Giribet and Distel (2003), Dreyer, Steiner, and Harper (2003), Matsumoto (2003), Harper, Dreyer, and Steiner (2006), Kappner and Bieler (2006), Mikkelsen and others (2006), Neulinger and others (2006), Taylor and Glover (2006), Kříž (2007), B. Morton (2007), Taylor, Williams, and Glover (2007), Taylor and others (2007), Giribet (2008), and Kirkendale (2009). This work has also benefited from the nomenclator of bivalve families by Bouchet and Rocroi (2010) and its accompanying classification by Bieler, Carter, and Coan (2010).This classification strives to indicate the most likely phylogenetic position for each taxon. Uncertainty is indicated by a question mark before the name of the taxon. Many of the higher taxa continue to undergo major taxonomic revision. This is especially true for the superfamilies Sphaerioidea and Veneroidea, and the orders Pectinida and Unionida. Because of this state of flux, some parts of the clas-sification represent a compromise between opposing points of view. Placement of the Trigonioidoidea is especially problematic. This Mesozoic superfamily has traditionally been placed in the order Unionida, as a possible derivative of the superfamily Unionoidea (see Cox, 1952; Sha, 1992, 1993; Gu, 1998; Guo, 1998; Bieler, Carter, & Coan, 2010). However, Chen Jin-hua (2009) summarized evi-dence that Trigonioidoidea was derived instead from the superfamily Trigonioidea. Arguments for these alternatives appear equally strong, so we presently list the Trigonioidoidea, with question, under both the Trigoniida and Unionida, with the contents of the superfamily indicated under the Trigoniida.Fil: Carter, Joseph G.. University of North Carolina; Estados UnidosFil: Altaba, Cristian R.. Universidad de las Islas Baleares; EspañaFil: Anderson, Laurie C.. South Dakota School of Mines and Technology; Estados UnidosFil: Araujo, Rafael. Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Cientificas. Museo Nacional de Ciencias Naturales; EspañaFil: Biakov, Alexander S.. Russian Academy of Sciences; RusiaFil: Bogan, Arthur E.. North Carolina State Museum of Natural Sciences; Estados UnidosFil: Campbell, David. Paleontological Research Institution; Estados UnidosFil: Campbell, Matthew. Charleston Southern University; Estados UnidosFil: Chen, Jin Hua. Chinese Academy of Sciences. Nanjing Institute of Geology and Palaeontology; República de ChinaFil: Cope, John C. W.. National Museum of Wales. Department of Geology; Reino UnidoFil: Delvene, Graciela. Instituto Geológico y Minero de España; EspañaFil: Dijkstra, Henk H.. Netherlands Centre for Biodiversity; Países BajosFil: Fang, Zong Jie. Chinese Academy of Sciences; República de ChinaFil: Gardner, Ronald N.. No especifica;Fil: Gavrilova, Vera A.. Russian Geological Research Institute; RusiaFil: Goncharova, Irina A.. Russian Academy of Sciences; RusiaFil: Harries, Peter J.. University of South Florida; Estados UnidosFil: Hartman, Joseph H.. University of North Dakota; Estados UnidosFil: Hautmann, Michael. Paläontologisches Institut und Museum; SuizaFil: Hoeh, Walter R.. Kent State University; Estados UnidosFil: Hylleberg, Jorgen. Institute of Biology; DinamarcaFil: Jiang, Bao Yu. Nanjing University; República de ChinaFil: Johnston, Paul. Mount Royal University; CanadáFil: Kirkendale, Lisa. University Of Wollongong; AustraliaFil: Kleemann, Karl. Universidad de Viena; AustriaFil: Koppka, Jens. Office de la Culture. Section d’Archéologie et Paléontologie; SuizaFil: Kříž, Jiří. Czech Geological Survey. Department of Sedimentary Formations. Lower Palaeozoic Section; República ChecaFil: Machado, Deusana. Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro; BrasilFil: Malchus, Nikolaus. Institut Català de Paleontologia; EspañaFil: Márquez Aliaga, Ana. Universidad de Valencia; EspañaFil: Masse, Jean Pierre. Universite de Provence; FranciaFil: McRoberts, Christopher A.. State University of New York at Cortland. Department of Geology; Estados UnidosFil: Middelfart, Peter U.. Australian Museum; AustraliaFil: Mitchell, Simon. The University of the West Indies at Mona; JamaicaFil: Nevesskaja, Lidiya A.. Russian Academy of Sciences; RusiaFil: Özer, Sacit. Dokuz Eylül University; TurquíaFil: Pojeta, John Jr.. National Museum of Natural History; Estados UnidosFil: Polubotko, Inga V.. Russian Geological Research Institute; RusiaFil: Pons, Jose Maria. Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona; EspañaFil: Popov, Sergey. Russian Academy of Sciences; RusiaFil: Sanchez, Teresa Maria. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentina. Universidad Nacional de Córdoba; ArgentinaFil: Sartori, André F.. Field Museum of National History; Estados UnidosFil: Scott, Robert W.. Precision Stratigraphy Associates; Estados UnidosFil: Sey, Irina I.. Russian Geological Research Institute; RusiaFil: Signorelli, Javier Hernan. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Centro Nacional Patagónico; ArgentinaFil: Silantiev, Vladimir V.. Kazan Federal University; RusiaFil: Skelton, Peter W.. Open University. Department of Earth and Environmental Sciences; Reino UnidoFil: Steuber, Thomas. The Petroleum Institute; Emiratos Arabes UnidosFil: Waterhouse, J. Bruce. No especifica;Fil: Wingard, G. Lynn. United States Geological Survey; Estados UnidosFil: Yancey, Thomas. Texas A&M University; Estados Unido

Effect of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor and angiotensin receptor blocker initiation on organ support-free days in patients hospitalized with COVID-19

IMPORTANCE Overactivation of the renin-angiotensin system (RAS) may contribute to poor clinical outcomes in patients with COVID-19. Objective To determine whether angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor or angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) initiation improves outcomes in patients hospitalized for COVID-19. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS In an ongoing, adaptive platform randomized clinical trial, 721 critically ill and 58 non–critically ill hospitalized adults were randomized to receive an RAS inhibitor or control between March 16, 2021, and February 25, 2022, at 69 sites in 7 countries (final follow-up on June 1, 2022). INTERVENTIONS Patients were randomized to receive open-label initiation of an ACE inhibitor (n = 257), ARB (n = 248), ARB in combination with DMX-200 (a chemokine receptor-2 inhibitor; n = 10), or no RAS inhibitor (control; n = 264) for up to 10 days. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The primary outcome was organ support–free days, a composite of hospital survival and days alive without cardiovascular or respiratory organ support through 21 days. The primary analysis was a bayesian cumulative logistic model. Odds ratios (ORs) greater than 1 represent improved outcomes. RESULTS On February 25, 2022, enrollment was discontinued due to safety concerns. Among 679 critically ill patients with available primary outcome data, the median age was 56 years and 239 participants (35.2%) were women. Median (IQR) organ support–free days among critically ill patients was 10 (–1 to 16) in the ACE inhibitor group (n = 231), 8 (–1 to 17) in the ARB group (n = 217), and 12 (0 to 17) in the control group (n = 231) (median adjusted odds ratios of 0.77 [95% bayesian credible interval, 0.58-1.06] for improvement for ACE inhibitor and 0.76 [95% credible interval, 0.56-1.05] for ARB compared with control). The posterior probabilities that ACE inhibitors and ARBs worsened organ support–free days compared with control were 94.9% and 95.4%, respectively. Hospital survival occurred in 166 of 231 critically ill participants (71.9%) in the ACE inhibitor group, 152 of 217 (70.0%) in the ARB group, and 182 of 231 (78.8%) in the control group (posterior probabilities that ACE inhibitor and ARB worsened hospital survival compared with control were 95.3% and 98.1%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE In this trial, among critically ill adults with COVID-19, initiation of an ACE inhibitor or ARB did not improve, and likely worsened, clinical outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT0273570

The Archaeology of Cosmic Impact: Lessons from Two Mid-Holocene Argentine Case Studies

Cosmic impact is a category of natural catastrophe neglected or misunderstood by most archaeologists in reconstructions of past human population dynamics. We discuss the nature of impact by asteroids and comets and what is known and theorized about the Quaternary Period impact record. As case studies for our exploration of how archaeological method and theory can be productively applied to the study of cosmic impact, we focus on two confirmed Holocene asteroid impacts in central and northeastern Argentina, Rio Cuarto and Campo del Cielo, both likely dating between 6 and 3 cal ky BP. We model and assess the potential destructive effects of these impacts on contemporary hunting and gathering populations using several lines of evidence. The search for Quaternary Period cosmic impacts, along with the documentation of the effects of confirmed cosmic impacts on human populations, particularly of those organized in small-scale social groups, represents a challenge and key opportunity for future archaeological research.Fil: Barrientos, Gustavo. Universidad Nacional de La Plata. Facultad de Ciencias Naturales y Museo; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - La Plata; ArgentinaFil: Masse, W. Bruce. Los Alamos National High Magnetic Field Laboratory; Estados Unido

Distribution and extirpation of pigs in Pacific Islands: a case study from Palau

Neolithic arrival in the Pacific involved, as in other parts of the world, the translocation of domesticated plants and animal by pottery-making cultures in prehistory. Globally uncommon, though, was the abandonment of pottery on some islands and the extirpation of the pig (Sus scrofa/verrucosus) and dog (Canis familiaris) – the two largest mammalian quadrupeds introduced to Oceania –from the subsistence and cultural system. This paper examines the extirpation of pigs from the Palau Islands as a case study to understand why an important domesticate has such an uneven prehistoric distribution. When suids are fed agricultural produce required to sustain the human population it has been proposed that competition and extirpation will result, especially on small islands with limited arable land. However, pigs are considered problem animals in many environments because of the damage they cause to horticultural production, particularly the effects of free-range pigs on gardens and plantations. It is suggested that extirpation and low-level animal keeping are a response to the threat pigs pose to plant food yields and social relations

Distribution and extirpation of pigs in Pacific Islands: A case study from Palau

Neolithic arrival in the Pacific involved, as in other parts of the world, the translocation of domesticated plants and animals by pottery-making cultures in prehistory. Globally uncommon, though, was the abandonment of pottery on some islands and the ex