Giant Squid In Mexico - Science 2.0 (blog)

octobot

Robotic Staff
Staff member
Robotic Staff
Joined
Oct 15, 2005
Messages
8,478
#1
[TABLE]
[TR]
[TD="width: 80, align: center"]

[SIZE=-2]Southern Fried Science[/SIZE]
[/TD]
[TD="class: j"]

Giant Squid In Mexico
[SIZE=-1]Science 2.0 (blog)[/SIZE]
[SIZE=-1]His list may not have reached (anywhere near) 101 uses, but obviously the most important use is determining the range of the giant squid. Apparently, blue sharks caught off Ensenada, Mexico, were found to have giant squid beaks in their tummies. ...[/SIZE]
[SIZE=-1]101 Uses for Shark Puke[SIZE=-1]Southern Fried Science[/SIZE][/SIZE]
[SIZE=-1][/SIZE]
[SIZE=-1]all 2 news articles[/SIZE]
[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]


More...
 

DWhatley

Certified Ceph Head For Life
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Sep 4, 2006
Messages
20,172
Location
Gainesville, GA
#2
SteveO SAID they SHOULD be in Mexico ... (NatGeo Doco last weekend).
 

OB

Colossal Squid
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Oct 19, 2003
Messages
3,086
#3
Son of Monsterquest :wink:
 

OB

Colossal Squid
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Oct 19, 2003
Messages
3,086
#5
Next thing, they'll be pulling out Carcharocles megalodon by the London doubledecker busload in Baja!
 

Steve O'Shea

TONMO Supporter
Supporter
Joined
Nov 19, 2002
Messages
4,668
#6
Certainly DID NOT find GS beaks in the shark - it had been dining on Dosidicus. I haven't seen it yet ... was it ok? apparently it can be downloaded on itunes, but I'm just not that smart (I've never done this before).
 

OB

Colossal Squid
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Oct 19, 2003
Messages
3,086
#7
They got the data from this publication, fairly reputable, what makes you doubt their conclusions? Or, are you merely stating that you found no GS beaks whilst going through stomach contents?
 

neurobadger

Vampyroteuthis
Registered
Joined
Apr 19, 2010
Messages
478
#8
Is the shark large enough to munch on architeuthids, and does it dive down enough?

Blue sharks are only found down to 350 meters and are only 12 feet long at most. Giant squid are believed to occupy 300-1000 meters and have a mantle length of 6-7 feet with a total possible length of about 45 feet. There's very little range overlap there and giant squid are not wussy.
 

DWhatley

Certified Ceph Head For Life
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Sep 4, 2006
Messages
20,172
Location
Gainesville, GA
#9
I haven't seen it yet ... was it ok?
Definitely a fun watch and both CaptFish and I gave it a thumbs up. SOOOO envious of your student's swim with the whale shark!
 

WhiteKiboko

TONMO Supporter
Supporter
Joined
Feb 15, 2003
Messages
2,702
Location
Charleston
#10
neurobadger;178777 said:
Is the shark large enough to munch on architeuthids, and does it dive down enough?

Blue sharks are only found down to 350 meters and are only 12 feet long at most. Giant squid are believed to occupy 300-1000 meters and have a mantle length of 6-7 feet with a total possible length of about 45 feet. There's very little range overlap there and giant squid are not wussy.
I'm inclined to agree with OB, not just because he plies me with booze. Probabilities would favor gigas, but at the same time blues do school. Since it was on the Pacific side of baja, the archi could've been whale leftovers or anything else.

Also of note: only 2 beaks out of 893 stomachs. Also that vapyroteuthis were significant.

That being said, I only read the abstract and aint no high falutin' akydemic.
 

DWhatley

Certified Ceph Head For Life
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Sep 4, 2006
Messages
20,172
Location
Gainesville, GA
#11
What is the range of the sharks? If they travel like some of them, the squid beak could have come from somewhere other than Baja.
 

neurobadger

Vampyroteuthis
Registered
Joined
Apr 19, 2010
Messages
478
#12
Was the beak big enough to be undisputably Architeuthis?

OB, it is entirely possible to publish utter bullsh*t in a reputable journal, though the frequency is relatively low.
 

OB

Colossal Squid
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Oct 19, 2003
Messages
3,086
#13
neurobadger;178847 said:
Was the beak big enough to be undisputably Architeuthis?

OB, it is entirely possible to publish utter bullsh*t in a reputable journal, though the frequency is relatively low.
Two things: the beak needn't be large, merely the right morphology, there is a little notch on the beak that is typical of Architeuthis, even found on the much smaller males of the species. Steve once asked me to guess a species from beak alone, and I totally missed the male Architeuthis for not expecting it to be so small, not my finest hour as a biologist....

Secondly, I've myself published six scientific journals in all and can therefore wholeheartedly agree with your statement relating to the prevalence of moo poo in Academic publications :wink:
 

Members online

No members online now.

Forum statistics

Threads
19,357
Messages
201,853
Members
8,274
Latest member
Mcorbell

Monty Awards

TONMOCON IV (2011): Terri
TONMOCON V (2013): Jean
TONMOCON VI (2015): Taollan
TONMOCON VII (2018): ekocak

About the Monty Awards
Top