New Issue: Science’s Impossible Questions. Read Now

Second Piece of Fossil Forgery Identified

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


Discovered in 1999, the fossil Archaeoraptor was briefly believed to be the missing link between dinosaurs and birds. Shortly after its unveiling, however, it was determined that Archaeoraptor was instead a fake, probably comprised of up to five specimens of two or more different species. In 2000, scientists identified its tail as that of a Microraptor dinosaur from the early Cretaceous period. Now a report published today in the journal Nature classifies the rest of the faked fossil as the remains of a fish-eating bird.

Zhonghe Zhou and Fucheng Zhang of the Institute of Vertebrate Paleontology and Paleoanthropology in Beijing and Julia A. Clarke of the American Museum of Natural History in New York City made the assessment by comparing Archaeoraptor to the fossil bird Yanornis martini. Both the dimensions and anatomical features of the front half of the fossil forgery, including the legs, toes, and beak tip, correspond very closely to those of Y. martini, the team reports. In fact, once breakage is taken into consideration, they are nearly identical. The researchers also analyzed a third, previously undescribed specimen that was recently retrieved from the same fossil-rich region of China and determined that it was also a Yanornis. Digested fish remains preserved in the creature's gut provided scientists with a peek into Y. martini's dietary preferences.

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe