scientist analyzing body of water samples for evidence of the Loch Ness giant have , manifestly , made a “ surprising ” discovery .
Yes , it is more than fair to prove a skeptical eyebrow at this news . Particularly as we have n’t in reality been give any new information on the issue just yet – the squad is not expected to announce their finding until next calendar month .
“ We ’ve tested each one of the main lusus naturae hypotheses , and three of them we can likely say are n’t right and one of them might be , ” Professor Neil Gemmell , a genomic and replication specializer at the University of Otago , fluff in an interview withThe Scotsman .
Gemmell is leadingresearch analyzing samples of Loch Ness waterto find DNA traces from nautical - dwelling organism – and , of course , grounds of Nessie itself .
Unsurprisingly , citation of a fabulous aquatic brute is attracting quite a lot of care . However , the literal purpose of the study is to draw up an constitutive visibility of the various unlike organisms and micro - organism blot out in the Scottish lake .
To do so , the squad is overwork a comparatively new technique call environmental DNA sampling ( or eDNA ) , which can be used to dog animals without harming or disturbing the creatures . Just last class , scientist were able-bodied to identifysix previously unobserved species of sharkusing eDNA collected in the New Caledonian archipelago in the Pacific Ocean .
Already , the team has get word 15 species of fish and up to 3,000 metal money of bacterium , The Scotsmanreports . The initial architectural plan was to issue the findings in January , but the process of cataloging such a widely - range group of being has learn longer than anticipated .
“ What we ’ll have achieved is what we set out to do , which is document the biodiversity of Loch Ness in June 2018 in some level of particular , ” Gemmellexplained .
As for Nessie , Gemmell haspreviously saidthat he is disbelieving about the lusus naturae ’s existence but will keep an open psyche when it occur to the solvent of the DNA analysis .
So far , the evidencein favour of the Loch Ness giant ’s existence is limited to sketchy recordings , muzzy photo , doubtful sounding tarradiddle – some dating as far back asthe 6th century .
One of the leading theory ( as suggest at by Gemmell ) suggests that Nessie is , in fact , a sturgeon or giant catfish . More out - there theories claim that it isa long - necked plesiosaurthat make do to survivethe Cretaceous - Paleogene extinction event – and experience on in arcanum for the last 65 million yr . ( Needless to say , it ’s highly unconvincing . )
More recently , researchhas suggest that the sudden flurry of Nessie sightings in the 1930s can be excuse by mass delusions triggered by the discovery of dinosaur fossils date to the Jurassic and Cretaceous flow .
We ’ll have to wait until next calendar month to find out what Gemmell ’s " surprising " breakthrough is , but there is one thing we do know for certain – if by some awe-inspiring chance we ever do discover evidence of the Loch Ness giant , there are alreadyplans in placeto pull in up protections for the creature .
Still , we wo n’t be bind our breath .
