I dont mean to tread on anyones feet by suggesting this, but is it possible steve that you guys just dont know as much as we think you do about the habits of archi?
[Featured]: Architeuthis (Giant Squid) Sightings
- Thread starter Whitey
- Start date
- Joined
- Nov 19, 2002
- Messages
- 4,674
No toe-treading at all WK; it's all guesswork when we're in the dark.
What we do know is that they migrate into NZ waters to breed; from where they come we wouldn't have a clue.
We know that the larvae are found at point x and time y, but after that we wouldn't have a clue where they go (depth and location).
We believe that the adults are only ~ 1.5 years old, but the techniques we're using have not been validated (but are about to be).
We know that the adults are ammoniacal, but we don't know whether this is true of the larvae (and it is unlikely to be the case).
We know that the larvae occur in the shallows (upper metre or so) [at night] and we know that the adults aren't found (locally) shallower than 275 metres, but we don't know where the intermediate-sized animals live (is it 30m, 100m, 1000m....).
We now recognise no evidence for more than 1 world-wide species.
We know that the juveniles eat large prey (relatively speaking), probably 1-1.5 times the size of the larva, and we know that the adults eat small prey (relatively speaking), primarily squid several orders of magnitude smaller than the Architeuthis (in press right now), but we don't know what the intermediate-sized animals are eating, where they eat, what depth they occur at, and even where they are found. Humungous holes in our knowledge. All we can tell you is where the juveniles/immature individuals DO NOT occur (limited by sampling intensity).
The frightening thing is that this lack of knowledge applies to almost every squid (and octopus) species. We really are in the dark. ... and we probably know a lot more about Architeuthis than we do about the majority of other squid species!
I don't view this as a negative. A few years ago the larval Architeuthis was completely unknown to science, they were saying the adults were found in Kaikoura Canyon, that they ate orange roughy, assumed they resided in NZ waters throughout the year, lived at depths 1000-1500 metres (and probably deeper), that there were up to 19 species, then down to three, .... and the two greats, that they grew to lengths of 20 metres and weights of a ton or so. They also said it was the largest squid ..... And the one that really smarts, that I'd never be able to keep deep-sea squid alive in captivity!
Not bad for a couple of years I say; I just need a little more help down under, and a few more breaks (luck is a major contributing factor).
WK/all, I'm the first to admit that we're stabbing in the dark in the absence of hard data, and the first to admit that I got something wrong - and man-oh-man have I screwed up big time along the way.
.... and we probably know a little bit more about Archi than the synopsis above would indicate.
O
What we do know is that they migrate into NZ waters to breed; from where they come we wouldn't have a clue.
We know that the larvae are found at point x and time y, but after that we wouldn't have a clue where they go (depth and location).
We believe that the adults are only ~ 1.5 years old, but the techniques we're using have not been validated (but are about to be).
We know that the adults are ammoniacal, but we don't know whether this is true of the larvae (and it is unlikely to be the case).
We know that the larvae occur in the shallows (upper metre or so) [at night] and we know that the adults aren't found (locally) shallower than 275 metres, but we don't know where the intermediate-sized animals live (is it 30m, 100m, 1000m....).
We now recognise no evidence for more than 1 world-wide species.
We know that the juveniles eat large prey (relatively speaking), probably 1-1.5 times the size of the larva, and we know that the adults eat small prey (relatively speaking), primarily squid several orders of magnitude smaller than the Architeuthis (in press right now), but we don't know what the intermediate-sized animals are eating, where they eat, what depth they occur at, and even where they are found. Humungous holes in our knowledge. All we can tell you is where the juveniles/immature individuals DO NOT occur (limited by sampling intensity).
The frightening thing is that this lack of knowledge applies to almost every squid (and octopus) species. We really are in the dark. ... and we probably know a lot more about Architeuthis than we do about the majority of other squid species!
I don't view this as a negative. A few years ago the larval Architeuthis was completely unknown to science, they were saying the adults were found in Kaikoura Canyon, that they ate orange roughy, assumed they resided in NZ waters throughout the year, lived at depths 1000-1500 metres (and probably deeper), that there were up to 19 species, then down to three, .... and the two greats, that they grew to lengths of 20 metres and weights of a ton or so. They also said it was the largest squid ..... And the one that really smarts, that I'd never be able to keep deep-sea squid alive in captivity!
Not bad for a couple of years I say; I just need a little more help down under, and a few more breaks (luck is a major contributing factor).
WK/all, I'm the first to admit that we're stabbing in the dark in the absence of hard data, and the first to admit that I got something wrong - and man-oh-man have I screwed up big time along the way.
.... and we probably know a little bit more about Archi than the synopsis above would indicate.
O
- Joined
- Nov 19, 2002
- Messages
- 4,674
Tiz A. dux Col; you'll sometimes hear of two others, A. japonica and A. sanctipauli.
Analyses of beak and body morphology, and genetics throughout the range of these species doesn't support the existence of multiple species, so we go for the first named, A. dux, as the most appropriate name and treat them all as one.
Analyses of beak and body morphology, and genetics throughout the range of these species doesn't support the existence of multiple species, so we go for the first named, A. dux, as the most appropriate name and treat them all as one.
- Joined
- Apr 3, 2003
- Messages
- 29
Woot, I was right about the line and tackle. 
I've helped science! Kinda. It'll be interesting to see where these developments lead. Could the capture of a live, mature giant squid be around the corner?
I do find it amusing and ironic that everything we learn about Architeuthis only seems to point up exactly how little we know about them! :P
I've helped science! Kinda. It'll be interesting to see where these developments lead. Could the capture of a live, mature giant squid be around the corner?I do find it amusing and ironic that everything we learn about Architeuthis only seems to point up exactly how little we know about them! :P
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2003
- Messages
- 28
I have to say that comming to these boards makes me feal like a kid again. This is amazing... I am wondering if Discovery is thinking about sending a documentry crew to get footage of that squid.
- Joined
- Sep 1, 2003
- Messages
- 104
Bald Evil wrote:
Whoohoo! Someone mentioned the Humboldt!
Whoohoo! Someone mentioned the Humboldt!
- Joined
- Sep 1, 2003
- Messages
- 104
Try eating them.
- Joined
- Apr 17, 2003
- Messages
- 17
Quite something....
This truely is remarkable stuff. I think its exciting that there is still so much to learn about A.Dux, just let your imagination run riot about what we may find out next!
Guys, I have a question. I don't know enough about ceph anatomy (still learning as quick as I can), but what is the 3rd arm keel exactly? I can see it on the photos, but what is its significance? is it found on all or some cephs?
I look forward to your reply(s).
This truely is remarkable stuff. I think its exciting that there is still so much to learn about A.Dux, just let your imagination run riot about what we may find out next!
Guys, I have a question. I don't know enough about ceph anatomy (still learning as quick as I can), but what is the 3rd arm keel exactly? I can see it on the photos, but what is its significance? is it found on all or some cephs?
I look forward to your reply(s).
- Joined
- Nov 19, 2002
- Messages
- 4,674
I pondered this yesterday when looking at the squid here. The keel is a flange that extends the length of the third arms.
When a squid hovers/suspends itself in the water column the funnel is projected ventrally, squirting ventrally, providing uplift (it is of course oriented anteriorly when the animal is in its jet-propulsion mode, shooting backwards when the mantle musculature contracts rapidly).
The keels give the animal stability in both forward and backward motion. When targetting a prey item the squid's arms attenuate anteriorly, the squid scrunches its eyes forward and sights the prey up along the arms/tentacles (that are drawn out into an acute point). When the prey moves so too does the attenuated point of the arms, and then the body of the squid itself moves to compensate (its very clever what these animals can do), using these keels much like rudders/wings. I think the lunge forward is driven more by rapid fin activity than it is by jet propulsion (using the funnel, projected posteriorly, and mantle contraction); the keels, during this final lunge forward, probably serve to stabilise the anterior-jetting squid, and allow for rapid changes in direction by subtle changes in inflection.
A squid using the funnel to jet forward (they do do this; it looks quite weird) has the same jerky motion that would be expected from funnel-driven locomotion. The motion of a squid in the milliseconds prior to a lunge, and during the lunge, is smooth (hence a fin-driven lunge towards the prey). The high-speed film shot last week will answer some of these questions.
... just ideas; not sure how much truth there is in all of this.
O
When a squid hovers/suspends itself in the water column the funnel is projected ventrally, squirting ventrally, providing uplift (it is of course oriented anteriorly when the animal is in its jet-propulsion mode, shooting backwards when the mantle musculature contracts rapidly).
The keels give the animal stability in both forward and backward motion. When targetting a prey item the squid's arms attenuate anteriorly, the squid scrunches its eyes forward and sights the prey up along the arms/tentacles (that are drawn out into an acute point). When the prey moves so too does the attenuated point of the arms, and then the body of the squid itself moves to compensate (its very clever what these animals can do), using these keels much like rudders/wings. I think the lunge forward is driven more by rapid fin activity than it is by jet propulsion (using the funnel, projected posteriorly, and mantle contraction); the keels, during this final lunge forward, probably serve to stabilise the anterior-jetting squid, and allow for rapid changes in direction by subtle changes in inflection.
A squid using the funnel to jet forward (they do do this; it looks quite weird) has the same jerky motion that would be expected from funnel-driven locomotion. The motion of a squid in the milliseconds prior to a lunge, and during the lunge, is smooth (hence a fin-driven lunge towards the prey). The high-speed film shot last week will answer some of these questions.
... just ideas; not sure how much truth there is in all of this.
O
Steve O'Shea said:
How?? What?? Where?? When??...........................Tell me more!!!!!!!!
Steve O'Shea said:
Sock it to 'em Steve!
J
- Joined
- Nov 19, 2002
- Messages
- 4,674
.... over the next two months. I'll either have my sock in my mouth or a big grin
- Joined
- Apr 6, 2003
- Messages
- 1,839
Steve,Steve O'Shea said:
Either way, stock up on Altoids.
Clem
Clem said:
Huh
breath mints.... theyre advertised as being "curiously strong"
Similar threads
Shop Amazon
Shop Amazon; support TONMO!
We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon and affiliated sites.