"The new paper doesn't determine what particles the lost dark matter might be made of, but strongly suggests that warm dark matter might have been made up of sterile neutrinos — particles that other physicists also believe are likely out there." My observation - Sterile neutrinos have been reported a number of times,
http://blogs.scientificamerican.com...22/cosmos-study-dashes-hope-for-new-neutrino/.
https://forums.space.com/threads/ri...the-mystery-of-why-the-universe-exists.29733/
I note this in the space.com report "That lost dark matter's mass would have represented a significant chunk of the total mass of the universe when it existed, leading to a different expansion rate when the CMB formed just after the Big Bang. Now, billions of years later, it would be long gone. And all the stars and galaxies we can measure would be moving away from us at speeds determined by the universe's current mass. "When you measure the local Hubble constant you're really measuring that thing: You're measuring how fast things are moving apart from one another, you're measuring how fast space is expanding," Hooper said. But translating the CMB data into an expansion rate requires using a model, such as the Lambda-CDM. "So if you get different measurements from the local measurements and the CMB measurement, maybe that model's wrong."
It seems such differences may change distance measurements calculated for objects with different z values observed today. E.g.
https://ned.ipac.caltech.edu/help/cosmology_calc.html in the BB model, perhaps.