No, this is about baryonic (normal) matter entirely. We basically have different ways of determining what the matter makeup of the Universe is which are indepen

No, this is about baryonic (normal) matter entirely. We basically have different ways of determining what the matter makeup of the Universe is which are independent of direct observations. Those techniques actually indicated a higher proportion of atomic (baryonic) matter in the Universe than had been directly detected so far, while still indicating that the vast majority of the matter/energy balance of the Universe is in the form of dark energy (which we are pretty in the dark on its composition) and "cold dark matter" (which has been narrowed down to being primarily made up of "weakly interacting massive particles" of a type or types that are currently outside our understanding of particle physics). Specifically, those lines of evidence say that the expected balance of the density of matter/energy on cosmological scales comes out to 69% dark energy, 26% cold dark matter, and the remainder (actually a bit under 5%) being baryonic matter. However, we've only detected about half of that expected 5% density of matter (in the form of stars & planets, black holes, giant interstellar gas and dust clouds, etc.) This recent discovery shows that much of the undetected baryonic matter is in the form of huge warm gas clouds surrounding galaxies.