vikashkrsharma.tech

The world’s coral reefs are in the throes of a global bleaching event caused by extraordinary ocean temperatures, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and international partners announced Monday.

It is the fourth such global event on record and is expected to affect more reefs than any other. Bleaching occurs when corals become so stressed that they lose the symbiotic algae they need to survive. Bleached corals can recover, but if the water surrounding them is too hot for too long, they die.

Coral reefs are vital ecosystems: limestone cradles of marine life that nurture an estimated quarter of ocean species at some point during their life cycles, support fish that provide protein for millions of people and protect coasts from storms. The economic value of the world’s coral reefs has been estimated at $2.7 trillion annually.

“This is scary, because coral reefs are so important,” said Derek Manzello, the coordinator of NOAA’s Coral Reef Watch program, which monitors and predicts bleaching events.

The news is the latest example of climate scientists’ alarming predictions coming to pass as the planet heats. Despite decades of warnings from scientists and pledges from leaders, nations are burning more fossil fuels than ever and greenhouse gas emissions continue to rise.

Substantial coral death has been confirmed around Florida and the Caribbean, particularly among staghorn and elk horn species, but scientists say it’s too soon to estimate what the extent of global mortality will be.

To determine a global bleaching event, NOAA and the group of global partners, the International Coral Reef Initiative, use a combination of sea surface temperatures and evidence from reefs. By their criteria, all three ocean basins that host coral reefs — the Pacific, Indian and Atlantic — must experience bleaching within 365 days, and at least 12 percent of the reefs in each basin must be subjected to temperatures that cause bleaching.

Currently, more than 54 percent of the world’s coral area has experienced bleaching-level heat stress in the past year, and that number is increasing by about 1 percent per week, Dr. Manzello said.

He added that within a week of two, “this event is likely to be the most spatially extensive global bleaching event on record.”

Each of the three previous global bleaching events has been worse than the last. During the first, in 1998, 20 percent of the world’s reef areas suffered bleaching-level heat stress. In 2010, it was 35 percent. The third spanned 2014 to 2017 and affected 56 percent of reefs.

The current event is expected to be shorter-lived, Dr. Manzello said, because El Niño, a natural climate pattern associated with warmer oceans, is weakening and forecasters predict a cooler La Niña period to take hold by the end of the year.

Bleaching has been confirmed in 54 countries, territories and local economies, as far apart as Florida, Saudi Arabia and Fiji. The Great Barrier Reef in Australia is suffering what appears to be its most severe bleaching event; about a third of the reefs surveyed by air showed prevalence of very high or extreme bleaching, and at least three quarters showed some bleaching.

“I do get depressed sometimes, because the feeling is like, ‘My God, this is happening,’” said Ove Hoegh-Guldberg, a professor of marine studies at the University of Queensland who published early predictions about how global warming would be catastrophic for coral reefs.

“Now we’re at the point where we’re in the disaster movie,” he said.

The most recent confirmation of widespread bleaching, prompting Monday’s announcement, came from the Western Indian Ocean, including Tanzania, Kenya, Mauritius, the Seychelles and off the western coast of Indonesia.

Swaleh Aboud, a coral reef scientist at CORDIO East Africa, a research and conservation nonprofit group based in Kenya and focused on the Indian Ocean, said coral species that are known to be thermally resistant are bleaching, as are reefs in a cooler area considered to be a climate refuge.

Recently he visited a fishing community in Kenya called Kuruwitu that has worked to revive its reef. Many of the restored coral colonies had turned ghostly white. Others were pale, apparently on their way.

“Urgent global action is necessary to reduce future bleaching events, primarily driven by carbon emissions,” Mr. Aboud said.

Scientists are still learning about corals’ ability to adapt to climate change. Efforts are underway to breed coral that tolerate higher temperatures. In a few places, including Australia and Japan, coral appear to be migrating poleward, beginning to occupy places where reefs don’t exist. But scientists say a variety of factors, such as how much light penetrates the water and the topography of the sea floor, make such migration limited or unlikely in much of the world. Plus there’s the problem of ocean acidification; as seawater absorbs carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, it becomes more acidic, making it harder for coral to build and maintain reefs.

Dr. Hoegh-Guldberg, who has studied the impact of climate change on coral reefs for more than three decades, was an author of a 2018 report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change that found the world would lose the vast majority of its coral reefs at 1.5 degrees Celsius of warming, and virtually all at 2 degrees. Current pledges by nations put the Earth on track for about 2.5 degrees by 2100. Still, he has not lost hope.

“I think we will solve the problem if we get up and fight to solve the problem,” Dr. Hoegh-Guldberg said. “If we continue to pay lip service but not get on with the solutions, then we’re kidding ourselves.”

To introduce her children to the hidden marvels of the animal kingdom a few years ago, Anne De Cian stepped into her garden in Paris. Dr. De Cian, a molecular biologist, gathered bits of moss, then came back inside to soak them in water and place them under a microscope. Her children gazed into the eyepiece at strange, eight-legged creatures clambering over the moss.

“They were impressed,” Dr. De Cian said.

But she was not finished with the tiny beasts, known as tardigrades. She brought them to her laboratory at the French National Museum of Natural History, where she and her colleagues hit them with gamma rays. The blasts were hundreds of times greater than the radiation required to kill a human being. Yet the tardigrades survived, going on with their lives as if nothing had happened.

Scientists have long known that tardigrades are freakishly resistant to radiation, but only now are Dr. De Cian and other researchers uncovering the secrets of their survival. Tardigrades turn out to be masters of molecular repair, able to quickly reassemble piles of shattered DNA, according to a study published on Friday and another from earlier this year.

Scientists have been trying to breach the defenses of tardigrades for centuries. In 1776, Lazzaro Spallanzani, an Italian naturalist, described how the animals could dry out completely and then be resurrected with a splash of water. In the subsequent decades, scientists found that tardigrades could withstand crushing pressure, deep freezes and even a trip to outer space.

In 1963, a team of French researchers found that tardigrades could withstand massive blasts of X-rays. In more recent studies, researchers have found that some species of tardigrades can withstand a dose of radiation 1,400 times higher than what’s required to kill a person.

Radiation is deadly because it breaks apart DNA strands. A high-energy ray that hits a DNA molecule can cause direct damage; it can also wreak havoc by colliding with another molecule inside a cell. That altered molecule may then attack the DNA.

Scientists suspected that tardigrades could prevent or undo this damage. In 2016, researchers at the University of Tokyo discovered a protein called Dsup, which appeared to shield tardigrade genes from energy rays and errant molecules. The researchers tested their hypothesis by putting Dsup into human cells and pelting them with X-rays. The Dsup cells were less damaged than cells without the tardigrade protein.

That research prompted Dr. De Cian’s interest in tardigrades. She and her colleagues studied the animals she had gathered in her Paris garden, along with a species found in England and a third from Antarctica. As they reported in January, gamma rays shattered the DNA of the tardigrades, yet failed to kill them.

Courtney Clark-Hachtel, a biologist at the University of North Carolina Asheville, and her colleagues independently found that the tardigrades ended up with broken genes. Their study was published on Friday in the journal Current Biology.

These findings suggest that Dsup on its own does not prevent DNA damage, though it’s possible the proteins provide partial protection. It’s hard to know for sure because scientists are still figuring out how to run experiments with tardigrades. They cannot engineer the animals without the Dsup gene, for example, to see how they would handle radiation.

“We’d love to do this experiment,” Jean-Paul Concordet, Dr. De Cian’s collaborator at the museum, said. “But what we can do with tardigrades is still quite rudimentary.”

Both new studies revealed another trick of the tardigrades: They quickly fix their broken DNA.

After tardigrades are exposed to radiation, their cells use hundreds of genes to make a new batch of proteins. Many of these genes are familiar to biologists, because other species — ourselves included — use them to repair damaged DNA.

Our own cells are continually repairing genes. The strands of DNA in a typical human cell break about 40 times a day — and each time, our cells have to fix them.

The tardigrades make these standard repair proteins in astonishing large amounts. “I thought, ‘This is ridiculous’,” Dr. Clark-Hachtel recalled when she first measured their levels.

Dr. De Cian and her colleagues also discovered that radiation causes tardigrades to make a number of proteins not seen in other animals. For now, their functions remain mostly a mystery.

The scientists picked out a particularly abundant protein to study, called TRD1. When inserted in human cells, it seemed to help the cells withstand damage to their DNA. Dr. Concordet speculated that TRD1 may grab onto chromosomes and hold them in their correct shape, even as their strands start to fray.

Studying proteins like TRD1 won’t just reveal the powers of tardigrades, Dr. Concordet said, but could also lead to new ideas about how to treat medical disorders. DNA damage plays a part in many kinds of cancer, for example. “Any tricks they use we might benefit from,” Dr. Concordet said.

Dr. Concordet still finds it bizarre that tardigrades are so good at surviving radiation. After all, they don’t have to survive in nuclear power plants or uranium-lined caves.

“This is one of the big enigmas: Why are these organisms resistant to radiation in the first place?” he said.

Dr. Concordet said that this tardigrade superpower could just be an extraordinary coincidence. Dehydration can also break DNA, so tardigrades may use their shields and repair proteins to withstand drying out.

While a Paris garden may look to us like an easy place to live, Dr. Concordet said that it might pose a lot of challenges to a tardigrade. Even the disappearance of the dew each morning might be a catastrophe.

“We don’t know what life is like down there in the moss,” he said.

Tesla plans to lay off more than 10 percent of its work force in an effort to cut costs, Elon Musk, the automaker’s chief executive, told employees on Monday. The job cuts, amounting to about 14,000 people, come as the company faces increasing competition and declining sales.

“As we prepare the company for the next phase of growth, it is extremely important to look at every aspect of the company for cost reductions and increasing productivity,” Mr. Musk told employees in an email, a copy of which was reviewed by The New York Times.

“There is nothing I hate more, but it must be done,” he wrote.

The email was earlier reported by Electrek, an online news site, and Handelsblatt, a German business newspaper.

The move is the latest sign that Tesla may not be as unstoppable as it once seemed. The company’s sales are no longer growing at a rapid pace, and it has been slow to introduce new models. Automakers in Asia and Europe have been flooding the market with electric cars.

Mr. Musk’s many other ventures, and his penchant for making polarizing political statements, have raised questions about how focused he remains on managing Tesla. Wall Street is increasingly concerned about the company: Tesla’s share price has lost about one-third of its value this year.

This month, Tesla reported a decline in sales that caught investors off guard. The company said it delivered 387,000 cars worldwide in the first quarter, down 8.5 percent from the year before. It was the first time Tesla’s quarterly sales have fallen on a year over year basis since the start of the pandemic in 2020.

The company slashed prices significantly over the course of 2023 to increase demand, which has reduced the profit Tesla makes on each car. But that strategy appears to be losing its effectiveness.

Rivals like BYD of China, BMW of Germany, and Kia and Hyundai of South Korea reported increases in electric vehicle sales for the same period, suggesting that slower overall demand for battery-powered models was not the only explanation for Tesla’s problems.

Many of Tesla’s workers are based at four large car factories in Fremont, Calif., Austin, Texas, Shanghai or near Berlin.

A new Pentagon review of the events leading up to the bombing that killed 13 American service members at the airport in Kabul, Afghanistan, in August 2021, has reaffirmed earlier findings that U.S. troops could not have prevented the deadly violence.

The review’s conclusions focus on the final days and hours at Abbey Gate before the attack, which also killed as many as 170 civilians. The review provides new details about the Islamic State bomber who carried out the suicide mission, including how he slipped into the crowds trying to evacuate the capital’s airport just moments before detonating explosives.

Some Marines who were at the gate have said they identified the suspected bomber — who became known to investigators as “Bald Man in Black” — in the crowds hours before the attack but were twice denied permission by their superiors to shoot him. But the review, building on a previous investigation made public in February 2022, rejected those accusations.

The narrative of missed opportunities to avert tragedy has gained momentum over the past year among conservatives and has contributed to broader Republican criticisms of the Biden administration’s troop withdrawal and evacuation from Kabul in August 2021.

The bombing was a searing experience for the military after 20 years of war in Afghanistan. Thirteen flag-draped coffins were flown to Dover Air Force Base in Delaware, and a succession of funerals were held across the country for the service members, most of them under the age of 25.

Military officials had stood by the conclusions of the earlier inquiry that a lone Islamic State suicide bomber carried out the attack and was not joined by accomplices firing into the crowd.

But under mounting political pressure to address disparities in the earlier review and the accounts of the Marines at the gate — which also included reports that the Islamic State had conducted a test run of the bombing — a team of Army and Marine Corps officers interviewed more than 50 people who were not interviewed the first time around.

One of the main issues was the identity of the bomber. Almost immediately after the attack, the Islamic State identified him as Abdul Rahman Al-Logari. U.S. and other Western intelligence analysts later pieced together evidence that led them to the same conclusion.

American officials at the time said that Mr. Logari was a former engineering student who was one of several thousand militants freed from at least two high-security prisons after the Taliban seized control of Kabul on Aug. 15, 2021. The Taliban emptied the facilities indiscriminately, releasing not only their own imprisoned members but also fighters from ISIS Khorasan or ISIS-K, the terrorist organization’s Afghanistan branch and the Taliban’s nemesis.

Mr. Logari was not unknown to the Americans. In 2017, the C.I.A. tipped off Indian intelligence agents that he was plotting a suicide bombing in New Delhi, U.S. officials said. Indian authorities foiled the attack and turned Mr. Logari over to the C.I.A., which sent him to Afghanistan to serve time at the Parwan prison at Bagram Air Base. He remained there until he was freed amid the chaos after Kabul fell.

At the airport, investigators said, the bomber detonated a 20-pound explosive, probably carried in a backpack or vest, spraying 5-millimeter ball bearings in a tremendous blast that was captured in grainy video images shown to Pentagon reporters.

All this was known to the Marine and Army officials as they started their supplemental review last September. But they were assigned to address the lingering questions.

On the day of the bombing, Marines at the gate were given intelligence to be on the lookout for a man with groomed hair, wearing loose clothes and carrying a black bag of explosives. The review team determined, after additional interviews and assessing security camera footage and other photographs of the chaotic scene, that the description was not specific enough to meaningfully narrow the search.

But Marines at the gate came forward later to say that at about 7 a.m., they saw an individual matching the suicide bomber’s description. The Marines said that the man had engaged in suspicious behavior and that they had sent urgent warnings to leaders asking for permission to shoot. Twice their request was denied, they said.

The review team concluded that the Marines had conflated the intelligence reports with an earlier spotting of a man wearing beige clothes and carrying a black bag. The team also reviewed a photo taken of the suspect from one of the sniper team’s cameras.

The man in question did not actually match the description, the review team concluded. He was bald, wore black clothes and was not carrying a black bag. Moreover, photographs taken of Mr. Logari when he was in American custody did not match the photographs of the suspect, even after facial recognition software was used.

“Al-Logari and ‘Bald Man in Black’ received the strongest negative result,” concluded a slide from the supplemental review team’s findings that was briefed to reporters.

Moreover, the review team concluded, Mr. Logari did not arrive at Abbey Gate on Aug. 26 until “immediately before” the attack, minimizing his chances of being detected by the Marines.

The review team went through a similar process to discount the sightings of specific individuals whom Marines had suspected of carrying out a dry run of the eventual attack.

Members of the review team did not challenge the motives or dedication of the Marines who raised the vexing questions. But in the end, the review team concluded, the Marines were mistaken.

As traumatic as the bombing was, perhaps it is not surprising that the recollections and conclusions of Marines and soldiers that day, however sincere, were not supported by subsequent inquiries.

The findings of the original Army-led investigation in February 2022 contradicted initial reports by senior U.S. commanders that militants had fired into the crowd of people at the airport seeking to flee the Afghan capital and had caused some of the casualties.

The accounts of what unfolded immediately after the attack — from the Pentagon and people on the ground — changed several times. Defense Department officials initially said that nearby fighters from Islamic State Khorasan began firing weapons. That turned out not to be true.

Some people near the scene said the Marines had shot indiscriminately into the crowd, apparently believing they were under fire. That, too, according to the accounting by the military’s Central Command, turned out not to be true, although investigators said that British and American forces had fired warning shots in the air.

A Chinese company targeted by members of Congress over potential ties to the Chinese government makes blockbuster drugs for the American market that have been hailed as advances in the treatment of cancers, obesity and debilitating illnesses like cystic fibrosis.

WuXi AppTec is one of several companies that lawmakers have identified as potential threats to the security of individual Americans’ genetic information and U.S. intellectual property. A Senate committee approved a bill in March that aides say is intended to push U.S. companies away from doing business with them.

But lawmakers discussing the bill in the Senate and the House have said almost nothing in hearings about the vast scope work WuXi does for the U.S. biotech and pharmaceutical industries — and patients. A New York Times review of hundreds of pages of records worldwide shows that WuXi is heavily embedded in the U.S. medicine chest, making some or all of the main ingredients for multibillion-dollar therapies that are highly sought to treat cancers like some types of leukemia and lymphoma as well as obesity and H.I.V.

The Congressional spotlight on the company has rattled the pharmaceutical industry, which is already struggling with widespread drug shortages now at a 20-year high. Some biotech executives have pushed back, trying to impress on Congress that a sudden decoupling could take some drugs out of the pipeline for years.

WuXi AppTec and an affiliated company, WuXi Biologics grew rapidly, offering services to major U.S. drugmakers that were seeking to shed costs and had shifted most manufacturing overseas in the last several decades.

WuXi companies developed a reputation for low-cost and reliable work by thousands of chemists who could create new molecules and operate complex equipment to make them in bulk. By one estimate, WuXi has been involved in developing one-fourth of the drugs used in the United States. WuXi AppTec reported earning about $3.6 billion in revenue for its U.S. work.

“They have become a one-stop shop to a biotech,” said Kevin Lustig, founder of Scientist.com, a clearinghouse that matches drug companies seeking research help with contractors like WuXi.

WuXi AppTec and WuXi Biologics have also received millions of dollars in tax incentives to build sprawling research and manufacturing sites in Massachusetts and Delaware that local government officials have welcomed as job and revenue generators. One WuXi site in Philadelphia was working alongside a U.S. biotech firm to give patients a cutting-edge therapy that would turbocharge their immune cells to treat advanced skin cancers.

The tension has grown since February, when four lawmakers asked the Commerce, Defense and Treasury Departments to investigate WuXi AppTec and affiliated companies, calling WuXi a “giant that threatens U.S. intellectual property and national security.”

A House bill called the Biosecure Act linked the company to the People’s Liberation Army, the military arm of the Chinese Communist Party. The bill claims WuXi AppTec sponsored military-civil events and received military-civil fusion funding.

Richard Connell, the chief operating officer of WuXi AppTec in the United States and Europe, said the company participates in community events, which do not “imply any association with or endorsement of a government institution, political party or policy such as military-civil fusion.” He also said shareholders do not have control over the company or access to nonpublic information.

Last month, after a classified briefing with intelligence staff, the Senate homeland security committee advanced a bill by a vote of 11 to 1: It would bar the U.S. government from contracting with companies that work with WuXi. Government contracts with drugmakers are generally limited, though they were worth billions of dollars in revenue to companies that responded to the Covid-19 pandemic.

Mr. Connell defended the company’s record, saying the proposed legislation “relies on misleading allegations and inaccurate assertions against our company.”

WuXi operates in a highly regulated environment by “multiple U.S. federal agencies — none of which has placed our company on any sanctions list or designated it as posing a national security risk,” Mr. Connell said. WuXi Biologics did not respond to requests for comment.

Smaller biotech companies, which tend to rely on government grants and have fewer reserves, are among the most alarmed. Dr. Jonathan Kil, the chief executive of Seattle-based Sound Pharmaceuticals, said WuXi has worked alongside the company for 16 years to develop a treatment for hearing loss and tinnitus, or ringing in the ear. Finding another contractor to make the drug could set the company back two years, he said.

“What I don’t want to see is that we get very anti-Chinese to the point where we’re not thinking correctly,” Dr. Kil said.

It is unclear whether a bill targeting WuXi will advance at all this year. The Senate version has been amended to protect existing contracts and limit supply disruptions. Still, the scrutiny has prompted some drug and biotechnology companies to begin making backup plans.

Peter Kolchinsky, managing partner of RA Capital Management, estimated that half of the 200 biotech companies in his firm’s investment portfolio work with WuXi.

“Everyone is likely considering moving away from Wuxi and China more broadly,” he said in an email. “Even though the current versions of the bill don’t create that imperative clearly, no one wants to be caught flat-footed in China if the pullback from China accelerates.”

The chill toward China extends beyond drugmakers. U.S. companies are receiving billions of dollars in funding under the CHIPS Act, a federal law aimed at bringing semiconductor manufacturing stateside.

For the last several years, U.S. intelligence agencies have been warning about Chinese biotech companies in general and WuXi in particular. The National Counterintelligence and Security Center, the arm of the intelligence community charged with warning companies about national security issues, raised alarms about WuXi’s acquisition of NextCODE, an American genomic data company.

Though WuXi later spun off that company, a U.S. official said the government remains skeptical of WuXi’s corporate structure, noting that some independent entities have overlapping management and that there were other signs of the Chinese government’s continuing control or influence over WuXi.

Aides from the Senate homeland security committee said their core concerns are about the misuse of Americans’ genomic data, an issue that’s been more closely tied to other companies named in the bill.

Aides said the effort to discourage companies from working with WuXi and others was influenced by the U.S. government’s experience with Huawei, a Chinese telecommunications giant. By the time Congress acted on concerns about Huawei’s access to Americans’ private information, taxpayers had to pay billions of dollars to tear Huawei’s telecommunication equipment out of the ground.

Yet WuXi has far deeper involvement in American health care than has been discussed in Congress. Supply chain analytics firms QYOBO and Pharm3r, and some public records, show that WuXi and its affiliates have made the active ingredients for critical drugs.

They include Imbruvica, a leukemia treatment sold by Janssen Biotech and AbbVie that brought in $5.9 billion in worldwide revenue in 2023. WuXi subsidiary factories in Shanghai and Changzhou were listed in government records as makers of the drug’s core ingredient, ibrutinib.

Dr. Mikkael A. Sekeres, chief of hematology at the University of Miami Health System, called that treatment for chronic lymphocytic leukemia “truly revolutionary” for replacing highly toxic drugs and extending patients’ lives.

Janssen Biotech and AbbVie, partners in selling the drug, declined to comment.

WuXi Biologics also manufactures Jemperli, a GSK treatment approved by the Food and Drug Administration last year for some endometrial cancers. In combination with standard therapies, the drug improves survival in patients with advanced disease, said Dr. Amanda Nickles Fader, president of the Society of Gynecologic Oncology.

“This is particularly important because while most cancers are plateauing or decreasing in incidence and mortality, endometrial cancer is one of the only cancers globally” increasing in both, Dr. Fader said.

GSK declined to comment.

The drug that possibly captures WuXi’s most significant impact is Trikafta, manufactured by an affiliate in Shanghai and Changzhou to treat cystic fibrosis, a deadly disease that clogs the lungs with debilitating, thick mucus. The treatment is credited with clearing the lungs and extending by decades the life expectancy of about 40,000 U.S. residents. It also had manufacturers in Italy, Portugal and Spain.

The treatment has been so effective that the Make-A-Wish Foundation stopped uniformly granting wishes to children with cystic fibrosis. Trikafta costs about $320,000 a year per patient and has been a boon for Boston-based Vertex Pharmaceuticals and its shareholders, with worldwide revenue rising to $8.9 billion last year from $5.7 billion in 2021, according to a securities filing.

Trikafta “completely transformed cystic fibrosis and did it very quickly,” said Dr. Meghan McGarry, a University of California San Francisco pulmonologist who treats children with the condition. “People came off oxygen and from being hospitalized all the time to not being hospitalized and being able to get a job, go to school and start a family.”

Vertex declined to comment.

Two industry sources said WuXi plays a role in making Eli Lilly’s popular obesity drugs. Eli Lilly did not respond to requests for comment. WuXi companies also make an infusion for treatment-resistant H.I.V., a drug for advanced ovarian cancer and a therapy for adults with a rare disorder called Pompe disease.

WuXi is known for helping biotech firms from the idea stage to mass production, Dr. Kolchinsky said. For example, a start-up could hypothesize that a molecule that sticks to a certain protein might cure a disease. The company would then hire WuXi chemists to create or find the molecule and test it in petri dishes and animals to see whether the idea works — and whether it’s safe enough for humans.

“Your U.S. company has the idea and raises the money and owns the rights to the drug,” Dr. Kolchinsky said. “But they may count on WuXi or similar contractors for almost every step of the process.”

WuXi operates large bioreactors and manufactures complex peptide, immunotherapy and antibody drugs at sprawling plants in China.

WuXi AppTec said it has about 1,900 U.S. employees. Officials in Delaware gave the company $19 million in tax funds in 2021 to build a research and drug manufacturing site that is expected to employ about 1,000 people when fully operational next year, public records and company reports show.

Mayor Kenneth L. Branner Jr. of Middletown, Del., called it “one of those once-in-a-lifetime opportunities to land a company like this,” according to a news report when the deal was approved.

In 2022, the lieutenant governor of Massachusetts expressed a similar sentiment when workers placed the final steel beam on a WuXi Biologics research and manufacturing plant in Worcester. Government officials had approved roughly $11.5 million in tax breaks to support the project. The company announced this year that it would double the site’s planned manufacturing capacity in response to customer demand.

And in Philadelphia, a WuXi Advanced Therapies site next to Iovance Biotherapeutics was approved by regulators to help process individualized cell therapies for skin cancer patients. Iovance has said it is capable of meeting demand for the therapies independently.

By revenue, WuXi Biologics is one of the top five drug development and manufacturing companies worldwide, according to Statista, a data analytics company. A WuXi AppTec annual report showed that two-thirds of its revenue came from U.S. work.

Stepping away from WuXi could cause a “substantial slowdown” in drug development for a majority of the 105 biotech companies surveyed by BioCentury, a trade publication. Just over half said it would be “extremely difficult” to replace China-based drug manufacturers.

BIO, a trade group for the biotechnology industry, is also surveying its members about the impact of disconnecting from WuXi companies. John F. Crowley, BIO’s president, said the effects would be most difficult for companies that rely on WuXi to manufacture complex drugs at commercial scale. Moving such an operation could take five to seven years.

“We have to be very thoughtful about this so that we first do no harm to patients,” Mr. Crowley said. “And that we don’t slow or unnecessarily interfere with the advancement of biomedical research.”

Julian E. Barnes contributed reporting, and Susan C. Beachy contributed research.

The Biden administration will give up to $6.4 billion in grants to Samsung, one of the world’s largest chipmakers, the latest in a slew of awards intended to shore up domestic production of cutting-edge semiconductors.

The money will help Samsung, the South Korean company, fund its new chip manufacturing hub in Taylor, Texas, and expand an existing site in nearby Austin. Samsung will now build an additional manufacturing plant and upgrade a facility under construction in Taylor. It will increase its investment in Texas to roughly $45 billion, up from the $17 billion it announced more than two years ago, administration officials said on Sunday.

Federal officials said the grants would help create a U.S. hub for the development and production of leading-edge semiconductors. Aside from manufacturing chips, Samsung will now construct a research and development facility in Taylor as well as an advanced factory for packaging them, the final step before semiconductors can be used in electronic systems.

The announcement follows other awards that federal officials have made to semiconductor manufacturers in recent weeks. The initiative is funded by the CHIPS Act, which a bipartisan group of lawmakers passed in 2022 to strengthen the domestic supply of semiconductors, the vital components that power everything from phones and computers to cars and weapons systems. The legislation gave the Commerce Department $39 billion to dole out as grants as incentives to chipmakers to construct and expand plants in the United States.

The effort is intended to help reverse a decades-long decline in the U.S. share of global chip manufacturing. Although semiconductors were invented in America, only about 10 percent of the world’s chips are currently made in the United States.

The Samsung grant is the third big award aimed at increasing U.S. production of the most sophisticated semiconductors. Last week, federal officials said they would award up to $6.6 billion in grants to Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company, the leading maker of the most advanced chips. The administration also announced last month that Intel, a Silicon Valley chipmaker, would receive up to $8.5 billion in grants, which officials said would be the single largest grant under the new program.

Both Samsung and TSMC have committed to producing two-nanometer chips, using what is currently the world’s most advanced production technology, in the United States in the coming years.

Samsung’s investment also includes the construction of a new advanced packaging facility. Packaging typically involves encasing chips in combinations of plastic and metal that allow them to connect to other devices in a system. New packaging technologies have become a focal point for the industry as more companies have taken to bundling multiple small chips — sometimes called chiplets — in a package to boost computing power rather than trying to pack more capability into each semiconductor.

In addition, Samsung will build a research and development facility that will study advances in manufacturing processes, which add computing power and storage capability to chips. Among the largest chip manufacturers, only Intel currently conducts such research in the United States. Federal officials view Samsung’s new research and development facility as vital for ensuring the country’s access to cutting-edge developments in the field, senior Biden administration officials said.

As part of the award, Samsung will also directly supply chips to the Defense Department. The Austin facility’s expansion is intended to support the production of chips used in industries that are critical for national security, including aerospace, defense and automotive.

In addition to receiving the grants, Samsung is expected to claim federal tax credits that could cover 25 percent of the cost of building and outfitting the Texas factories with production equipment.

Samsung’s award brings the total announced federal grants to more than $23 billion. GlobalFoundries, Microchip Technology and BAE Systems received the first three awards.

The pandemic set off a global shortage of semiconductors that crippled major industries and shed light on the vulnerabilities in the domestic supply chain for chips, motivating lawmakers to pass the CHIPS Act.

Federal officials view the lack of domestic manufacturing capacity as a major national security risk, given that the components power missiles, satellites and fighter jets. Cutting-edge semiconductors are also critical for major technological industries like artificial intelligence.

Gina Raimondo, the commerce secretary, emphasized that much of the semiconductor supply chain — from research and development to packaging — was concentrated in a few Asian countries.

“That leaves the U.S. supply chain incredibly vulnerable to disruption,” Ms. Raimondo said on Sunday. “It’s unsafe and it weakens our national and economic security.”

Ms. Raimondo said the new investment would help create a “state-of-the-art semiconductor ecosystem” in Texas and re-establish the United States as a leader in the production of the most advanced semiconductors. In February, Ms. Raimondo said new investments would put the United States on track to produce roughly 20 percent of the world’s most advanced logic chips by the end of the decade. Currently, the United States produces none.

In November 2021, Samsung first announced that it would build a $17 billion semiconductor factory in Taylor, responding to a push by the Biden administration and U.S. customers to ramp up chip production in the United States. The company will now upgrade the facility’s manufacturing capacity. In addition to four-nanometer chips, the first plant will now produce two-nanometer chips. Samsung is expected to open the first facility in 2026, administration officials said.

The second plant will also manufacture two-nanometer chips and is slated to begin production in 2027, according to the officials. The research and development facility is expected to open in 2027, too, and the advanced packaging facility is set to open in 2028.

Lael Brainard, the director of the National Economic Council, said the Samsung award would be the “third and final leg” of the president’s plan to bring leading-edge chip manufacturing back to the United States. About $40 million in grants will be set aside for the company to develop and train its workers, Ms. Brainard said. Samsung’s investment is expected to create more than 4,500 manufacturing jobs and at least 17,000 construction jobs, federal officials said.

Similar to the other award recipients, Samsung will have to meet certain milestones before payments are made.

Samsung plays an unusually influential position in the industry by supplying two major varieties of semiconductors. It is the largest maker of memory chips, which store data in smartphones, computers and other products. But the company also makes and designs logic chips — a category that includes processors that handle calculations in electronic hardware. And the company offers a service that manufactures such chips to order for other companies.

Most of Samsung’s factories are in South Korea. But in 1996, the company built a facility in Austin, which initially produced memory chips and later shifted to logic chips for products such as Apple’s iPhone. In recent years Apple has frequently turned to TSMC to manufacture chips that Apple designs, though Samsung also boasts some of the industry’s most advanced production processes.

It was spring in Queensland, Australia, a season when many wild animals find themselves in trouble, and the Currumbin Wildlife Hospital was a blur of fur and feathers.

A groggy black swan emerged from the X-ray room, head swaying on its long neck. A flying fox wore a tiny anesthetic mask. An injured rainbow lorikeet squawked in its cage. (“Very angry,” a sign warned.)

“We see everything,” Dr. Michael Pyne, the hospital’s senior veterinarian. Also on the schedule for the day: three eagles, two carpet pythons, a blue-faced honeyeater, a short-eared brushtail possum and, Dr. Pyne said, “a whole heap of koalas.”

More than a dozen koalas were convalescing in open-air enclosures, wrapping their woolly arms around the trunks of eucalyptus trees. The wards were often full; in 2023, the hospital admitted more than 400 koalas, a fourfold increase from 2010.

The surge has been driven largely by the spread of chlamydia, a devastating bacterial infection. But the hospital was also seeing more koalas with traumatic injuries, including those caused by cars and dogs. Starving, dehydrated koalas came in during droughts; burned koalas appeared after wildfires. Occasionally, koalas even turned up with injuries caused by cows.

“That’s why they’re endangered,” Dr. Pyne said. “Everything’s against them.”

The koala, long an Australian icon, has become an unfortunate emblem of the country’s biodiversity crisis. The animals are threatened by deforestation, climate change and infectious disease. Together, these forces put the koala at the real risk of extinction. Although koalas are notoriously difficult to count, populations in some places have plummeted by as much as 80 percent, scientists estimate.

“We don’t know what the threshold is where there’s a point of no return,” said Tanya Pritchard, the senior manager for species recovery and landscape restoration at the World Wide Fund for Nature-Australia. “So we do need to act pretty urgently.”

Scientists and conservation groups are giving the koala everything they’ve got. Some are pursuing traditional time-tested strategies, including the protection of koala habitats and the advocacy of tougher conservation laws.

Others are trying more experimental approaches, from koala probiotics to tree-planting drones. Many of these projects are in the early stages, and none represent a complete solution. But given the wide array of threats that koalas are facing, saving them might require deploying every available tool.

“At this point,” Ms. Pritchard said, “every koala counts.”

Here are some of the tools in development.

Put shots in arms

Chlamydia, a common sexually transmitted infection in humans, is also widespread in the animal kingdom. How koalas were first infected is unknown, but one possibility is that the marsupials picked up chlamydia from the feces of livestock.

The disease, which can spread through sexual contact and from mothers to joeys, has become staggeringly widespread in parts of Australia. Chlamydia can cause urinary tract infections, blindness and infertility, suggesting that koalas could be in even worse shape than their declining numbers would indicate. “How many of those koalas that are out there can’t breed anymore because chlamydia has made them sterile?” Dr. Pyne said.

Scientists are now collaborating with the Currumbin Wildlife Hospital in Currumbin, Australia, to test a new chlamydia vaccine in wild koalas. So far, the vaccine is producing “quite spectacular results,” said Ken Beagley, an immunologist at the Queensland University of Technology who led the development of the vaccine.

Across two ongoing studies, more than 300 wild koalas have been vaccinated, and many vaccinated females have gone on to have healthy joeys, some of which have now had joeys of their own, Dr. Beagley said. “It was far better than we expected,” he said of the outcome.

Still, it will be challenging to inoculate thousands of wild koalas with the current vaccine, which requires two shots given 30 days apart. So Dr. Beagley and his colleagues are developing a delayed-release vaccine implant, which could be injected under the skin when a koala receives its first shot. Over the course of several weeks, the small capsule would slowly absorb water and then burst, thus delivering the second dose.

Koalas are notoriously picky eaters with highly unusual tastes. “They feed on a really unpalatable diet of eucalyptus leaves, which is high in fiber, low in protein, high in toxins,” said Michaela Blyton, a molecular ecologist and microbiologist at the University of Queensland.

Living on eucalyptus requires a cooperative community of gut microbes, which help digest the leaves. Dr. Blyton’s work suggests that these microbial communities are so finely tuned that they may dictate which eucalyptus species, of the many that dot Australia, an individual koala can eat. That microbial specificity could explain why koalas are sometimes unable to diversify their diets, even in the face of starvation.

In a 2019 study, Dr. Blyton showed that she could shift koalas’ microbiomes, and expand their diets, by giving them fecal transplants from koalas that dined on a different type of eucalyptus. (To perform the transplant, Dr. Blyton packaged fecal samples from donor koalas in small capsules, which were administered orally.)

Now, she is hoping to use the same approach to maintain microbial equilibrium in koalas taking antibiotics, which are the frontline treatment for chlamydia. The drugs can throw the gut microbiome out of whack, prompting koalas to stop eating altogether, with sometimes fatal results. “It’s a hard ask to get the animal going again, and a lot of the time we just can’t,” said Dr. Blyton, who collaborates with Currumbin and other wildlife hospitals.

Dr. Blyton has developed a technique for freeze-drying fecal samples from healthy koalas, yielding shelf-stable capsules that can be given to koalas with chlamydia as a sort of oral probiotic. Unfortunately, early trial results suggested that administering the capsules was stressful for sick koalas. So Dr. Blyton is now trying to turn the freeze-dried fecal samples into a powder that could be added to other nutritional supplements the animals already receive.

Deploy the drones

Koalas — sedentary, tree-dwelling animals — are tricky to spot in the wild, adding to the challenges of tracking how their populations are faring, identifying critical habitats and safeguarding the animals from threats.

Grant Hamilton, a quantitative ecologist at the Queensland University of Technology, has developed a new koala-spotting system that is powered by artificial intelligence. A drone equipped with a thermal camera flies over the treetops, looking for pockets of body heat hidden under the canopy. Machine learning algorithms can quickly process this footage, tallying the koalas. The scientists then use statistical models to estimate the total koala population in a given area.

The scientists are now teaching local conservation groups how to fly the drones in their own neighborhoods. Dr. Hamilton and his colleagues will then analyze the data to help these organizations identify critical koala habitats that might benefit from protection or restoration. “We can use A.I. to help people to manage their backyards or their parks,” he said. “That’s a really exciting idea.”

The World Wide Fund for Nature-Australia, which is currently running a campaign to save or plant two billion trees by 2030, is experimenting with using drones for habitat restoration. Over the course of eight hours, a single tree-planting drone can rain some 40,000 seeds across the landscape.

Drones aren’t suited for all environments, but they offer a way to “scale up this work,” Ms. Pritchard said. “To me, it’s a little bit symbolic of our own plight,” she added. “If we can’t save the koala, as our most important and most loved species, what does that mean for our own situation and the health of our own habitats?”

Harness solar (and people) power

Despite the threats they face, koalas do have one thing going for them. “They are one of the cutest animals on Earth,” said Dr. Romane Cristescu, a conservation ecologist at the University of the Sunshine Coast.

To harness the public’s natural affection for koalas, she and her colleagues are developing a suite of technological tools, including solar-powered, location-tracking ear tags, which send data to a mobile app. The app, which is still undergoing testing, aims to help Australians get to know the koalas that live in their neighborhoods — “where they go, who they meet, their children, their boyfriend,” Dr. Cristescu said. “We’re going to tell people, ‘Hey, look, that koala’s got a life.’”

Dr. Cristescu hopes that people who develop attachments to their local koalas will be more inclined to support conservation efforts and change their own behaviors, like choosing not to cut down the trees in their yards. “We have a lot more empathy for a koala that has a name and a story,” she said.

The app also encourages users to log koala sightings and to report sick koalas, data that can be sent to scientists and wildlife care teams, she said.

The ear tags could be used for other purposes, too, said Dr. Cristescu, who also leads a research program that uses trained dogs to sniff out koalas and koala scat. After Australia’s catastrophic wildfires in 2019 and 2020, her team used dogs and drones to find and rescue injured koalas. The location-tracking ear tags could provide a quicker way to find koalas in danger, she said.

Gov. Chris Sununu of New Hampshire said on Sunday that former President Donald J. Trump “absolutely contributed” to an insurrection and that Mr. Trump’s efforts to overturn the 2020 election were “absolutely terrible” — but that nothing, not even felony convictions, would stop him from voting for Mr. Trump because the economy, border security and “culture change” were more important.

The interview, on ABC News’s “This Week,” showcased Mr. Sununu’s transformation from Trump critic — while supporting Nikki Haley in the Republican primary, he said Mr. Trump was “worried about jail time” and “not a real Republican” — to loyal foot soldier.

It is a transformation that has repeated itself time and again within the Republican Party, and one that Mr. Sununu previewed in January, when he was campaigning for Ms. Haley but said he would support Mr. Trump if he won the nomination.

“No one should be surprised by my support,” he said on Sunday. “I think the real discussion is, you know, Americans moving away from Biden. That’s how bad Biden has become as president. There’s just no doubt about it, right? You can’t ignore inflation. You can’t ignore the border and say that these issues in the courthouse are going to be the one thing that brings Biden back into office.”

The interviewer, George Stephanopoulos, pressed Mr. Sununu on why he was supporting a man who he said had “contributed to the insurrection” on Jan. 6.

Mr. Sununu affirmed that he still believed that. But he said it shouldn’t surprise anyone that a Republican governor would support a Republican nominee, and suggested that Mr. Stephanopoulos was out of touch with public opinion if he thought concerns about democracy or felony convictions would sway voters.

“You believe that a president who contributed to an insurrection should be president again?” Mr. Stephanopoulos asked.

“As does 51 percent of America, George,” Mr. Sununu said. “I mean, really. I understand you’re part of the media, I understand you’re in this New York City bubble or whatever it is, but you got to look around what’s happening across this country.”

He went on: “It’s not about just supporting Trump. It’s getting rid of what we have today. It’s about understanding inflation is crushing families. It’s understanding that this border issue is not a Texas issue, it’s a 50-state issue that has to be brought under control. It’s about that type of elitism that the average American is just sick and tired of, and it’s a culture change. That’s what I’m supporting.”

Inflation has declined sharply from its 2022 peak, but was higher than expected in a report released last week.

Mr. Sununu said that Americans’ desire for “culture change,” a phrase he used eight times but did not concretely define, outweighed concerns about Mr. Trump’s efforts to overturn the election or the four criminal trials he faces, the first of which begins this week.

While Mr. Trump as the Republican nominee wasn’t what he wanted, “we’ll take it if we have to,” Mr. Sununu said. “That’s how badly America wants a culture change.”

Mr. Stephanopoulos pushed back once more.

“So just to sum up, you would support him for president even if he was convicted in classified documents,” he said. “You support him for president even though you believe he contributed to an insurrection. You support him for president even though you believe he’s lying about the last election. You’d support him for president even if he’s convicted in the Manhattan case. I just want to say, the answer to that is yes, correct?”

“Yeah,” Mr. Sununu said. “Me and 51 percent of America.”

Don Wright, a two-time Pulitzer Prize-winning editorial cartoonist whose pointed work punctured duplicity and pomposity and resonated with common-sense readers, died on March 24 at his home in Palm Beach, Fla. He was 90.

His death was confirmed by his wife, Carolyn Wright, a fellow journalist.

In a 45-year career, Mr. Wright drew some 11,000 cartoons for The Miami News, which folded in 1988, and then The Palm Beach Post, where he worked until he retired in 2008. But he reached a readership far beyond Florida: His cartoons appeared in newspapers nationwide through syndication.

Mr. Wright’s readers knew where he stood, and especially what he was against, whether it was the Vietnam War; Israel’s military support for the pro-apartheid regime in South Africa (he depicted a menorah with missiles in place of candles); sexual abuse by clergymen; the John Birch Society, the anti-Communist fringe group; and racial segregationists, notably the violent Ku Klux Klan.

The morning after winning his first Pulitzer, in 1966, Mr. Wright received a telegram from George C. Wallace, the segregationist governor of Alabama. “Sometimes even the meanest cartoonists are unaccountably decorated for their work,” it said. “If the shoe fits, wear it.” Mr. Wright kept the telegram framed in his home.

That first prizewinning cartoon — published during the Cold War, when the world was on tenterhooks fearing nuclear Armageddon — depicted two men in tatters encountering each other on a barren landscape cratered by bombs. “You mean,” one asks the other, “you were just bluffing?”

His 1980 Pulitzer-winning entry depicted two Florida State prison guards carrying a corpse away from the electric chair. One asks, “Why did the governor say we’re doing this?” The other replies, “To make it clear we value human life.”

Mr. Wright was also a Pulitzer finalist five times and the author of three books, including “Wright On! A Collection of Political Cartoons” (1971) and “Wright Side Up” (1981).

His cartoons were syndicated first by The Washington Star, then by The New York Times and finally by Tribune Media Services.

For all the ink, graphite and crayon he would meticulously combine on an illustration board late into the night in his efforts to pierce celebrity blowhards in politics, sports and beyond, Mr. Wright often said the single cartoon that generated the strongest response from readers was a sentimental one that he drew after the death of Walt Disney in 1966. It depicted Mickey Mouse and other Disney characters in tears.

Mr. Disney’s widow, Lillian Disney, requested Mr. Wright’s original drawing for the cartoon and, when she died in 1997, bequeathed it to the Library of Congress.

In 1989, The New Yorker reported that Mr. Wright was among several American cartoonists whose work had helped inspire Chinese intellectuals and businessmen in their support for the student uprising that year in Tiananmen Square.

Donald Conway Wright was born on Jan. 23, 1934, in Los Angeles to Charles and Evelyn (Olberg) Wright. His father was an airline maintenance supervisor, and his mother managed the household.

The family moved to Florida when Don was a child. He always enjoyed drawing, and, after graduating from Edison High School in Miami in 1952, he applied for a job in the art department of The Miami News. Instead, although he was already enamored of cartoons, the paper hired him for the photo department and gave him a camera.

He went on to capture classic images of a triumphant Fidel Castro entering Havana, a sizzling Elvis Presley, an imposing Cassius Clay in a Miami Beach gym before he converted to Islam and changed his name to Muhammad Ali, and an ambitious Senator John F. Kennedy in a hotel room wearing a suit jacket, a tie and boxer shorts.

Self-taught as both a photographer and an illustrator, Mr. Wright combined a photographer’s craftsmanship and eye for detail with an illustrator’s creativity.

“He was always drawing, he was always scribbling,” recalled Ms. Wright, his wife, who was a reporter at The Miami News when they met.

After serving in the Army, Mr. Wright returned to The Miami News and, when the paper’s editors became concerned that he would leave if he wasn’t transferred, began publishing some of his cartoons and assigned him to the art department as a graphics editor. By 1963 his cartoons were appearing regularly on the editorial page.

In 1989 he was hired by The Post, which was owned, as The News had been, by Cox Newspapers.

In addition to his wife, Mr. Knight’s survivors include a younger brother, David.

Mr. Wright acknowledged that not every cartoon of his was a home run.

“You’re on a deadline,” he told The Times in 1994, “and you have three ideas, and you throw out the first one, and you throw out the second, and you’re running out of time, and before you know it, the cliché is looking better.”

When he retired from The Post, he explained that although his cartoons often had a punchline, his goal was not to be humorous.

“I’m sometimes baffled by the number of readers who believe that cartoons should be lightweight and entertainingly ‘funny,’” Mr. Wright said. “Humor has a lot of relatives — wry, subtle, slapstick and even black — all aimed at the endless Iraq War, inept and corrupt politicians, rising unemployment, recession, Americans losing their homes, and on and on.”

“But think about it for a moment,” he added. “How funny are those?”

A group of major news organizations — including The Associated Press and the five big broadcast and cable networks — issued an unusual joint statement on Sunday urging President Biden and former President Donald J. Trump to commit to participating in televised debates before Election Day.

“General election debates have a rich tradition in our American democracy,” the group wrote. “There is simply no substitute for the candidates debating with each other, and before the American people, their visions for the future of our nation.”

Media organizations rarely weigh in so explicitly on the campaign plans of presidential candidates. The statement underscores just how much uncertainty surrounds whether this year’s debates will occur.

Mr. Biden has declined to commit to the three debates scheduled for September and October. His allies have expressed concerns about the Commission on Presidential Debates, the nonpartisan group that has organized the events since 1988, and its ability to enforce its rules when Mr. Trump participates.

Mr. Trump has promised to debate and regularly taunts Mr. Biden for not following suit. But in 2020, Mr. Trump forced the cancellation of the second scheduled debate by pulling out at the last minute. Last year, Mr. Trump refused to debate his Republican primary opponents, and he has accused the debate commission of pro-Biden bias.

If no debate is held in 2024, it would break a streak that dates back to the Jimmy Carter-Gerald R. Ford election of 1976. Presidential debates remain America’s largest mass gathering outside of sports: In 2020, an average of 68 million people tuned in for the two Biden-Trump debates, significantly more than watched the party nominating conventions.

The news outlets’ plans to issue a joint statement were reported by The New York Times last week.

In addition to ABC, CBS, CNN, NBC and Fox News, the following news organizations also endorsed the statement: The Associated Press, C-SPAN, NewsNation, NPR, PBS NewsHour, USA Today and Noticias Univision, the news division of the Spanish-language network.

(A spokesman for Newsmax volunteered to The Times last week that the right-leaning news channel was in agreement with the statement, although it is not an official signatory.)

The statement noted that dates and eligibility requirements for this year’s matchups were previously announced by the debate commission.

“Though it is too early for invitations to be extended to any candidates, it’s not too early for candidates who expect to meet the eligibility criteria to publicly state their support for, and their intention to participate in, the commission’s debates planned for this fall,” the statement reads.

President Biden and his team, hoping to avoid further escalation leading to a wider war in the Middle East, are advising Israel that its successful defense against Iranian airstrikes constituted a major strategic victory that might not require another round of retaliation, U.S. officials said.

The interception of nearly all of the more than 300 drones and missiles fired against Israel on Saturday night demonstrated that Israel had come out ahead in its confrontation with Iran and proved to enemies its ability to protect itself along with its American allies, meaning it did not necessarily need to fire back, the officials said.

Whether Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel and his government will agree to leave it at that was not immediately clear. Although damage from the attack was relatively light, the scope of the strikes went well beyond the small-bore tit-for-tat shadow war between Iran and Israel in recent years, crossing a red line by firing weapons from Iranian territory into Israeli territory. Had defenses not held, scores or hundreds could have been killed.

Emotions were running high among Israeli officials during phone calls with American partners late into the night, and the pressure to fire back was consequently strong. The U.S. officials, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to describe sensitive discussions, stressed that the decision was ultimately up to Israel. Israeli jets early Sunday hit structures in Lebanon controlled by Hezbollah after the Iranian-backed militia sent two explosive drones into Israel, but it was not clear how related that was to the Iranian airstrike.

Mr. Biden spoke with Mr. Netanyahu on Saturday after the Iranian attack and repeated his “ironclad commitment” to Israel’s security. While the president did not publicly disclose any advice he offered, in a statement released after the call, he hinted at a desire for restraint.

“I told him that Israel demonstrated a remarkable capacity to defend against and defeat even unprecedented attacks — sending a clear message to its foes that they cannot effectively threaten the security of Israel,” Mr. Biden said.

He vowed to convene the leaders of the Group of 7 major industrial democracies on Sunday to coordinate a “united diplomatic response,” a sign of his preferred path forward after the attack. The United Nations Security Council will also meet in an emergency session on Sunday.

“Taken together, @JoeBiden’s message is designed to gently persuade #Israel not to pursue further escalation,” Robert Satloff, the executive director of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, wrote on social media.

That will generate criticism of Mr. Biden from conservatives, who quickly went public urging a powerful military reprisal against Iran — not only by Israel, but by the United States, as well. “We must move quickly and launch aggressive retaliatory strikes on Iran,” Senator Marsha Blackburn, Republican of Tennessee, said in a statement posted online.

Speaker Mike Johnson blamed the Iran strike partly on the Biden administration because of its “undermining of Israel and appeasement of Iran” without mentioning that he himself has so far failed to permit a floor vote on bipartisan legislation passed by the Senate providing security aid to Israel and Ukraine. Representative Steve Scalise of Louisiana, the House Republican leader, said that “in light of Iran’s unjustified attack on Israel,” the House this week would consider aid to Israel, but he gave no details.

The eruption between Israel and Iran came at a time of great tension between Mr. Biden and Mr. Netanyahu. In a call only 10 days ago, the president threatened to rethink his support for Israel’s war in Gaza if Mr. Netanyahu did not do more to alleviate civilian suffering in the enclave, leveraging American backing for the first time since the Oct. 7 Hamas-led terrorist attack on Israel.

At the same time the two leaders clashed, Israel had just executed an airstrike against the Iranian Embassy complex in Damascus, Syria, killing seven Iranian officers involved in covert operations in a move that threatened the escalation Mr. Biden had long feared. Even so, the president made clear that his support for Israel’s security was still unwavering and warned Iran not to respond.

American and Israeli officials spent the past few days coordinating military operations in case Iran did act, and Mr. Biden ordered aircraft and ballistic missile defense destroyers to the region. Administration officials were elated at the results on Saturday as U.S. and Israeli forces knocked down nearly everything thrown at Israel by Iran, including more than 100 ballistic missiles, a feat that one official said may be unmatched in military history. Jordan intercepted projectiles crossing its airspace, saying it was guarding its own security.

Even though Iran did little tangible damage, it signaled after Saturday night’s strike that it was ready to stand down — and clearly hoped to avoid direct engagement with the United States. “The matter can be deemed concluded,” the Iranian Mission to the United Nations said in a statement. “However, should the Israeli regime make another mistake, Iran’s response will be considerably more severe. It is a conflict between Iran and the rogue Israeli regime, from which the U.S. MUST STAY AWAY!”

While the number of drones and missiles fired at Israel was extraordinary, it did not go unnoticed that Iran telegraphed its intentions to attack for more than a week and announced the launch of the drones hours before they actually reached Israeli territory, giving plenty of notice for defenses. Some analysts interpreted that as meaning that Iran wanted to put on a show of force to save face after the killing of its officers, but did not want a full-fledged war with Israel or the United States.

The situation was reminiscent of when in 2020 President Donald J. Trump ordered an airstrike in Iraq to kill Maj. Gen. Qassim Suleimani, who led the powerful Quds Force of the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps. Iran retaliated by firing missiles at well-defended U.S. bases in Iraq with relatively little damage, though about 100 U.S. military personnel were injured. It then sent a private message saying it was done. Mr. Trump chose not to retaliate, and fears of a cycle of escalation faded.

In the days leading up to Saturday’s attack on Israel, Mr. Netanyahu warned Tehran not to act, saying, “Whoever hurts us, we hurt them.” But because Israel was not especially hurt, Mr. Netanyahu may have some room to declare victory and move on. Israeli officials were not clear on their intentions.

“The campaign is not over yet — we must remain alert and attentive to the instructions published by the I.D.F. and Homefront Command,” said Defense Minister Yoav Gallant, referring to the Israel Defense Forces. “We must be prepared for every scenario. Having said this, we have thwarted the most significant wave” of the attack, “and we did so successfully.”

The American argument was that because Israel also successfully took out those senior Iranian officers in Damascus two weeks ago without paying a significant price, another round of military action could be deemed unnecessary.