Satellites show mysterious fairy circles in more parts of the world

The imaginary circuits amaze viewers and cause controversy among experts. For decades, scientists have hotly debated the origin of the strange polka dot-like patterns of the wasteland, which are found in the Namib Desert, stretching from Angola to northern South Africa. Some researchers also say that it occurs in… Australian outback.

Now, there’s something new to debate: to what extent are there superstitious circles around the world?

Findings based on satellite images published Monday in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences raise the possibility that the circuits are imaginary Significantly more widespreadtaking place in up to 263 locations in 15 countries across three continents.

“We have discovered fairy circle locations in many other places that we never knew existed, because most of the work on this topic has been carried out in only two countries, Namibia and Australia,” said Fernando Maestre, an ecologist at the university. Alicante in Spain and author of the study.

Other researchers who have worked on fairy circles say that until field work is done, it remains to be seen whether any of the newly identified bare circular spots are real fairy circles.

“In all arid regions of the world, there are different types of bare patches, which result from different processes,” said Norbert Jürgens, an emeritus ecologist at the University of Hamburg, who was not involved in the research.

Until this study, Dr. Meister and his colleagues had not been part of the community of fairy circle researchers, which was sometimes divided. They were plunged into the mystery when Emilio Gerado, a data scientist also at the University of Alicante and one of the study’s authors, discovered something strange on Google Earth: patterns in Niger that looked like fairy circles. He wondered whether they might exist in other dryland habitats.

To find out, the researchers trained a pattern recognition model using images of well-known fairy tale circles from Namibia and Australia. They applied the model to satellite images of 575,000 two-and-a-half-acre plots of dryland around the world.

Although drylands cover 41% of the Earth’s surface, the researchers’ model identified only a small portion that likely contains fairy circles: about 193 square miles. The researchers consulted satellite images to manually confirm that the imaginary circle-like patterns occurred in almost all the places identified by the model, from Kazakhstan to Madagascar.

Based on their findings, they created a profile of the types of habitats where fairy-circle-like patterns are most likely to occur: hot, arid places with sandy, low-nitrogen soils that receive between 4 and 12 inches of annual rainfall.

Dr. Meister said statistical tests confirmed that “the patterns we found are exactly the same patterns that people found in Namibia and Australia.”

Dr. Meister said he and his colleagues went into their study well aware that chimeric circuits were a “hotly debated topic.” Partly for this reason, they chose to be conservative in describing their findings as “fairy circle-like floral patterns.”

“We’re not trying to fight with anyone,” Dr. Meister said.

However, the new findings have sparked strong reactions.

“Unfortunately, the study dilutes the term ‘fairy circle’ and ignores the definition of fairy circles in the process,” said Stefan Getzen, an ecologist at the University of Göttingen in Germany.

In 2021, Dr. Getzen and colleagues He argued that imaginary circles are real They occur in a grid-like pattern with a “very strong” arrangement.

None of the newly identified imaginary circle-like vacuoles fit this strict pattern, Dr. Getzen said.

Walter Tschinkel, a biologist at Florida State University, who was also not involved in the research, agreed with Dr. Getzen. While the authors of the new paper “certainly found plenty of circular or circular vacuoles found in areas with dry climates and sandy soils,” the patterning “doesn’t really meet the standard of fairy circles.”

Dr. Meister responded that Dr. Getzen’s definition “was not supported by the entire scientific community working with chimeric circles” and “does not undermine our findings in any way.”

The lack of a uniform definition of the chimeric circuit poses a problem for the entire field, said Michael Kramer, an ecophysiologist at the University of Cape Town, who was not involved in the research.

“Unfortunately, the only guardians of the term ‘imaginary circle’ are self-appointed,” Dr. Kramer said. “Achieving agreement on nomenclature for imaginary circles would likely require establishing an agreement for imaginary circles on nomenclature, which seems unlikely.”

Whatever the newly discovered gaps, they give scientists a lot of work to do, said Hezi Ishak, an environmental physicist at Ben Gurion University in Israel, who was not involved in the research.

“We now have 263 new sites to investigate,” he said. “That’s what’s interesting and exciting about science: solving natural mysteries.”