iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Salamander Species Deemed World's Oldest, Beiyanerpeton Jianpingensis, Lived 157 Million Years Ago

Jurassic Salamander

First Posted: 03/13/2012 8:05 am Updated: 03/13/2012 8:05 am

By: Jennifer Welsh, LiveScience Staff Writer
Published: 03/12/2012 03:06 PM EDT on LiveScience

A newly discovered 157-million-year-old salamander is the oldest of its kind and would've swum with the aquatic beasts of the Jurassic.

The discovery supports the idea that this order diverged from other salamanders earlier than thought, the researchers said.

Six specimens of this new species, now called Beiyanerpeton jianpingensis, were discovered in the Tiaojishan Formation, in Liaoning Province, China. Some other salamander specimens discovered in the area are quite a bit smaller than B. jianpingensis, suggesting they are either juveniles or a smaller species. The salamander's scientific name comes from "beiyan," an ancient name for the area in which it was discovered, and "herpeton," the Greek word for creeping animal.

With a snout-to-pelvis length (excluding its tail) of 4 inches (10 centimeters), this salamander would've looked similar to modern salamanders. "All salamanders look alike in having short limbs and a normally developed tail," study researcher Ke-Qin Gao, of Peking University in Beijing, told LiveScience in an email. "In that respect, a reconstruction of our new salamander would look very much like salamanders we see today — you can recognize it as a salamander easily," with slight anatomical differences.

The fossil was found in the bed of an ancient lake, and because of the shape of its tail and other anatomical features, including gills, the researchers note that it probably lived in an aquatic habitat.

It is the oldest example of the suborder of salamanders called Salamandroidea, which are still alive today with about 557 living species. The previous record holder for oldest salamander is a fossil discovered in Spain, which dates to about 114 million years ago, meaning the new specimen extends the fossil record for salamanders by 40 million years.

"The previously known salamandroid from Spain is quite different from ours. They cannot be classified in the same family," Gao said. "In terms of evolution, ours is much older and much more primitive."

The age of this fossil stacks up well with data from molecular experiments, which compared genes from modern Salamandroidea with a group of related salamanders, the Cryptobranchoidea, to determine how long ago the two groups diverged. Different experiments indicated different results: The two groups evolved into separate species either 140 million or 183 million years ago. The new example of Salamandroidea indicates the earliest date, 183 million years ago, is more likely.

The species is described today (March 12) in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

You can follow LiveScience staff writer Jennifer Welsh on Twitter @microbelover. Follow LiveScience for the latest in science news and discoveries on Twitter @livescience and on Facebook.

Copyright 2012 LiveScience, a TechMediaNetwork company. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
FOLLOW HUFFPOST SCIENCE

By: Jennifer Welsh, LiveScience Staff Writer Published: 03/12/2012 03:06 PM EDT on LiveScience A newly discovered 157-million-year-old salamander is the oldest of its kind and would've swum with...
By: Jennifer Welsh, LiveScience Staff Writer Published: 03/12/2012 03:06 PM EDT on LiveScience A newly discovered 157-million-year-old salamander is the oldest of its kind and would've swum with...
Filed by Travis Korte  | 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 152
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Post Comment Preview Comment
To reply to a Comment: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to.
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2  Next ›  Last »  (2 total)
12:14 PM on 05/03/2013
The question is.... Can this salamander be BURNED?! (It obviously can, it's dead.)
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Konnie
Really South Carolina??
07:28 PM on 03/16/2012
so that's where gingrich was spawnd
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
whirlpool
founder walnut tree congregation
02:12 PM on 03/15/2012
One of Newt's relatives?
photo
LMPE
I connect the most dissimilar things
08:51 PM on 03/14/2012
157 million years ago? No way! The big invisible guy put it there 6,000 years ago to test our faith! At least that's what the 2,000-year-old litany of barely related stories implies.
06:25 PM on 03/14/2012
Huh! Jurassic amphibians dont really take up much of the fame as the dinosaurs, since they are famous for, but for Jurassic amphibians only are mentioned in books.
05:09 PM on 03/14/2012
JUST THINK MANY OF THE UNTRA CHRISTIANS BELIEVE THE WORLD IS ONLY 5,000 YEAR OLD, I HAVE A SISTER IN LAW IN KANSAS CITY, THAT HAS BEEN A JESUS FREEK FOR 15 TO 20 YEARS, SWEARS THAT THE FOSSELS ARE A NOT REAL...BUT THEY BELIEVE MARY GAVE BIRTH TO JESUS FROM AN INVISIBLE HEAVENLY FATHER, AND HE GREW UP AN PREFORMED ALL THOSE MIRICALS, AND WILL SAVE ALL THE SOULS ON EARTH IF THEY JUST GIVE MONEYT TO A CHURCH AND ASK FOR FORGIVNESS----THINK ABOU IT THE MIDDLE AGES ARE STILL WITH US, AND SHE ALSO LIKE SARAH PALIN....REMARKABLE ENOUGH SHE IS FARILY BRIGHT, BUT LORDY WHAT DO THEY DO TO PEOPLE TO MAKE THEM EVEN SUGGEST SUCH CRAP.
photo
LMPE
I connect the most dissimilar things
08:52 PM on 03/14/2012
it's called brainwashing
09:50 PM on 03/14/2012
EXACTLY......
03:43 PM on 03/14/2012
How do they know it's a salamander? Because it hasn't evolved 157 million yrs, and they are still the same as modern salamanders just like all other living fossils...that have ever been discovered.They are all still unchanged and in the same family/order. Evolution is a hoax. I am glad for the find, but not happy about the stupid interpretation of educated people who ought to know better.

Argue with me all you wish my brainwashed Darwinian counterparts ...but the fact remains that the salamander even with minor changes is still a salamander. It has not become a non-salamander.
Syllogizer
Barely Left of Pobedonostsev
08:36 PM on 03/14/2012
The fact remains that the theory of evolution in biology is one of the best established scientific theories there is. Even the theory of gravitation cannot claim to be better -- until somebody finally detects gravity wave and gravitons.
09:30 PM on 03/14/2012
Then why, pray tell, have some of the most important scientists/authors rejected it (i.e. Dr. J.C. Sanford of Cornell, Dr. Richard Lumsden, Tulane U., Dr. Gary Parker, PhD of Ball State, Dr. Dean Kenyon, etc. all award winners and respected scientists along with a host of others have thrown out Darwinian evolution altogether? Each of them were men who argued for evolution vehemently and yet tossed it out when they came to the same realization: there is no evidence that such a theory has ever occurred. I likewise had the same kind of conversion but I am not as well known.
Syllogizer
Barely Left of Pobedonostsev
01:27 AM on 03/15/2012
Because the premise of your loaded question is false: they are NOT "some of the most important scientists".
05:07 AM on 03/17/2012
How many of your "most important" scientists are named Steve?

http://ncse.com/taking-action/list-steves
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Popopnano
Fuzzy peaches in your mouth
03:22 PM on 03/14/2012
Fake!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
wilsonrev1615
A true artist always starves...
02:47 PM on 03/14/2012
lol, yall know carbon dating is about as accurate as my piss stream is on any drunken weekend, right?
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
kareemachan
watashi ha tororu ga oroka da to omoi masu。
11:55 AM on 03/15/2012
And you are a paleontologist and know this for a fact, rev?
photo
qwert1234
haha, charade you are
02:44 PM on 03/15/2012
not true, but irrelevant considering carbon dating isn't used to date things this old
02:36 PM on 03/14/2012
I liked it before Chinese were discovering new species, better names, more standard and normally based on greek or latin.
photo
LMPE
I connect the most dissimilar things
08:53 PM on 03/14/2012
There's no law about what to name new species.
07:52 AM on 03/15/2012
Thanks captain obvious
05:24 AM on 03/17/2012
Actually there are.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Code_of_Zoological_Nomenclature

OK. Not "laws" per se. But, still . . .
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
mjmjupiter
if I don't see you in the future, I'll see you in
02:30 PM on 03/14/2012
And here I thought this article was about "Newt" Gingrich.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
brokenleoheart
11:33 AM on 03/14/2012
apparently the ENTIRE world lived in the liaoning province in china
09:32 AM on 03/14/2012
Uhhhh, tell me again about this millions and billions of years ago crapola. Proof is what we are looking for here, not your opinion. Thanx anywho!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
dacenar
Call it like I see it.
09:43 AM on 03/14/2012
It's called carbon dating. WOW!
11:12 AM on 03/14/2012
Not carbon dating, Carbon 14 is like an egg timer relative to these these time spans. Orders of magnitude less half life. Potassium Argon more likely used along with other interlocking methods like magnetic field reversal, and other more ubiquitous contemporaneous fossils.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Alex Fidelibus
Give reason a chance.
09:24 AM on 03/16/2012
No. They would have used some form of Isotopic Dating.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
kareemachan
watashi ha tororu ga oroka da to omoi masu。
11:57 AM on 03/15/2012
It's amazing how people who use and believe in the same basic science every day of their lives suddenly don't believe that same science in a situation like this.

Cognitive disconnect much?
09:21 AM on 03/14/2012
By whose reckoning? Who decides how many millions of years old it is? Whoever won the toss!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
dacenar
Call it like I see it.
09:42 AM on 03/14/2012
It's called carbon dating. Read a book every now and then.
04:06 PM on 03/15/2012
Tsk, tsk...you can date the same item 20 times and come up with 20 dates! Also, what date are you starting with to give you the earliest carbon date? What date do you begin with? It all depends on the scientist doing the study and in the field they grumble about it.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Alex Fidelibus
Give reason a chance.
09:26 AM on 03/16/2012
Common mistake. Carbon dating is only accurate for dating fossils that are younger than 60,000 years. They use isotopic dating, based on the half life of radioactive atoms for ancient rocks and fossils.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
brokenleoheart
11:35 AM on 03/14/2012
... scientists do... by carbon dating
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
ythri
12:14 PM on 03/14/2012
Carbon dating is only used for relatively recent objects. Other isotopes are used for fossils this old, as well at the stratum the fossil is found in and other established data.
09:06 AM on 03/14/2012
I thought Newt was the oldest salamander.
09:19 AM on 03/14/2012
LOL. Yea, and Ricky Santorum wants to take us back to this period in time!!!!
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Bones Rhodes
01:38 PM on 03/14/2012
---no: just the slimiest.