Humans still haven't seen 99.999% of the deep seafloor

Npr - May 7th, 2025

A groundbreaking study led by Katy Croff Bell from the Ocean Discovery League reveals that humans have explored less than 0.001% of the deep seafloor, equivalent to the area of Rhode Island. This revelation, published in the journal Science Advances, highlights the limited scope of human exploration in the deep ocean, where unique creatures like vampire squid and blobfish reside. The research involved analyzing records of over 43,000 deep-sea expeditions, primarily conducted near the United States, Japan, and New Zealand, leaving vast regions like the Indian Ocean largely unexplored. The study underscores the challenges in mapping the deep sea due to the technological difficulties of deploying cameras beyond 200 meters, where sunlight diminishes and the environment becomes cold and dark.

The implications of the study are profound, as it reveals the need for broader exploration of the deep sea, which covers two-thirds of the planet. The lack of a representative sample means scientists cannot map global deep-sea habitats, which vary dramatically and host diverse ecosystems. Unexpected discoveries, such as sun-independent microbes, have previously revolutionized scientific understanding. Experts like Jeffrey Karson and Jon Copley emphasize the importance of developing low-cost technologies for broader accessibility to deep-sea exploration. The study suggests that instead of focusing on expensive projects, investments should be made in affordable platforms that can democratize ocean exploration, potentially leading to groundbreaking discoveries and a deeper understanding of Earth's largest biome.

Marine Biology Deep Sea Exploration Katy Croff Bell Ocean Discovery League Science Advances Deep Sea Ecosystems Hydrothermal Vents

Story submitted by Fairstory

RATING

8.2

Fair Story

Consider it well-founded

The article provides a well-rounded and accurate overview of the current state of deep-sea exploration, supported by credible sources and expert insights. It effectively communicates the complexity and mystery of the deep sea while highlighting the need for more inclusive and comprehensive exploration efforts. The article's strengths lie in its clarity, public interest relevance, and balanced presentation of expert perspectives. However, it could enhance its impact by connecting findings to specific policy debates or ethical considerations. Overall, the article succeeds in informing and engaging readers on an important scientific topic, with room for further exploration of its broader implications.

Accuracy

The article demonstrates a high level of factual accuracy and verifiability. It correctly cites the claim that humans have seen less than 0.001% of the globe's deep seafloor, which is supported by recent studies. The comparison of the observed seafloor area to the size of Rhode Island is a plausible analogy, although it could benefit from more precise calculations. The story accurately describes the challenges of deep-sea exploration, such as the difficulty of sending cameras beyond 200 meters, which aligns with established scientific knowledge. Additionally, the article correctly notes the geographic bias in exploration efforts, with most occurring near the United States, Japan, and New Zealand. While the article is largely accurate, it could enhance precision by providing more detailed data on the exact areas explored and the representativeness of the samples.

Balance

The article maintains a balanced perspective by presenting multiple viewpoints on the state of deep-sea exploration. It includes insights from researchers like Katy Croff Bell and Jeffrey Karson, as well as marine biologist Jon Copley, offering a well-rounded view of the challenges and opportunities in this field. However, the article could improve by including perspectives from more diverse geographic regions, particularly those underrepresented in deep-sea exploration, such as countries bordering the Indian Ocean. This would provide a more comprehensive understanding of global exploration efforts and potential biases.

Clarity

The article is well-written, with clear and concise language that effectively communicates complex scientific concepts to a general audience. The structure logically progresses from the mystery of the deep sea to specific findings and expert insights, facilitating easy comprehension. The use of vivid examples, such as the comparison to Rhode Island, aids in visualizing the scale of exploration. The tone remains neutral and informative throughout, ensuring that readers can easily grasp the information presented without confusion.

Source quality

The article references credible sources, including researchers from reputable institutions like the Ocean Discovery League and Syracuse University. The inclusion of expert opinions from individuals actively involved in deep-sea research adds authority to the reporting. However, the article could enhance source quality by providing more direct citations or references to the specific study mentioned, which would strengthen the credibility of the claims made. Including a broader range of sources, such as additional scientific studies or reports, could also enhance the depth of the article.

Transparency

The article provides a generally transparent account of the study's findings and the challenges of deep-sea exploration. It clearly attributes quotes and information to specific experts, which aids in understanding the basis of the claims. However, the article could improve transparency by offering more detailed explanations of the methodology used in the study, such as how the database of exploration efforts was compiled. Additionally, disclosing any potential conflicts of interest among the researchers or institutions involved would enhance transparency.