(Article)" Rare 'supergiant' crustaceans pulled from depths of sea"

[Camden]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/46243225/ns/technology_and_science-science/?gt1=43001#.Tyszolx2Rm0

Just read this article that was posted on MSN news, has anyone ever heard about these before?

The article doesn't give an exact spot on where they found them, but it states something about going and looking again in New Zealand.

Anyway, just felt like people would find this interesting.

 

[Bugs In Cyberspace]

We've seen this topic and photos of giant marine isopods on the forum before, but this is my favorite so far. Really, really fun read, except that one line:

Nobody has ever really mentioned them since," Jamieson said. "They're one of these strange deep-sea anomalies."

I do hope there are plenty more down there, and there must be, but isn't it more anomalous that a land-bound species goes there and has, after only millions of years, contrived boats and traps that catch them?

 

[Stan Schultz]

... The article doesn't give an exact spot on where they found them, but it states something about going and looking again in New Zealand. ...

"The pale, leggy creatures were found 4 miles (6 kilometers) down in the Kermadec Trench, off the northeast coast of New Zealand, one of the deepest trenches on Earth." It stretches all the way from northeastern New Zealand to American Samoa.

They look like they'd go good with cocktail sauce! :roflmao:

They and the little fish the research team was looking for surely made someone's career!

 

[Camden]

We've seen this topic and photos of giant marine isopods on the forum before, but this is my favorite so far. Really, really fun read, except that one line:

Nobody has ever really mentioned them since," Jamieson said. "They're one of these strange deep-sea anomalies."

I do hope there are plenty more down there, and there must be, but isn't it more anomalous that a land-bound species goes there and has, after only millions of years, contrived boats and traps that catch them?

You could really safely assume theres more, they found 7 of them (I think.) Is this a case of its best to let nature take its course and let them breed naturally?
Or is it better to isolate them and try to breed them in captivity, just for the sake of the species?

 

[zonbonzovi]

Being that they live in/near deep ocean trenches I think we can safely assume that they'll do OK on their own, unless Donald Trump gets bored with annoying the hell out of all of us and sees fit to colonize the deep sea trenches. I wonder if they are similar to their terrestrial counterparts and rely on mostly ocean detritus for food or if they filter plankton and such. Awesome looking creature, nonetheless.

 

[wlutman]

Funny, I had just posted this to facebook!

 

[BiologicalJewels]

Zonbonzobi, that would be Branson... Not Trump ;-)

 

[llamastick]

You could really safely assume theres more, they found 7 of them (I think.) Is this a case of its best to let nature take its course and let them breed naturally?
Or is it better to isolate them and try to breed them in captivity, just for the sake of the species?

I really doubt that they're actually rare in nature; probably just rarely found in the places humans look.

 

[zonbonzovi]

Zonbonzobi, that would be Branson... Not Trump ;-)

Haha, thanks for reminding me of yet another glad-handing billionaire that theoretically uses his wealth for good of all mankind:sarcasm::barf:

 

[Bugs In Cyberspace]

I didn't mean to suggest they are rare. It was this sentence:

Nobody has ever really mentioned them since," Jamieson said. "They're one of these strange deep-sea anomalies."

That humans don't mention these animals very often is potentially an interesting comment because they are rarely encountered by humans and we understand so little about them. However, when that sentence is taken into context with the following sentence about these animals being "deep sea anomalies", it suggests they only exist to the extent we understand them. So, my point was that, in the context of the life and anomalies, the real anomaly is that there is a sentient being hauling them into a synthetic craft and judging them to be anomalous simply on account of how infrequently they are mentioned by other sentient, land-dwelling beings.

For most people outside the hobby, for example, nocturnal pill bugs in their backyards are anomalous. If they dredged up a chest full of gold, I'm sure that funding for further research would be increased.

This isn't so much a rant. Just having a little fun with perspectives.

 

[Vermis]

We've seen this topic and photos of giant marine isopods on the forum before

Not isopods - amphipods. A different but closely related order of crustacea. My honours project (such as it was) involved the tiny, native, freshwater versions. More commonly known as freshwater shrimp, 'scuds' in America, or the Gammarus that are dried and fed to fish and turtles.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amphipoda

 

[Bugs In Cyberspace]

Thanks for the clarification, Vermis. The ones that are usually discussed on this forum are these giant marine isopods:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Giant_isopod

I realize now that my comment seemed less relevant than bringing up cockroaches in the middle of a discussion about mantises, to anybody who has done an honors project on them.

I'm sure I'm not the only person here who would like to hear a bit about your project!

 

[zonbonzovi]

Yeah, Vermis, I was thinking of the little beasts that get confused with isopods but resemble sand shrimp. I can't seem to keep them straight..."lawn shrimp", landhoppers, rock slaters...haha.

I, too, would be interested in your project.

 

[Vermis]

To be honest there's not much to tell, and it might not be that interesting. My reply was more of a 'hey, I know those guys!' than any claim of expertise. But anyway...

I said 'native', but I was working with the invasive species Gammarus pulex. One of my lecturers has been keeping an eye on them for for a while, so no doubt that's why it was included in the University's project selection list. The aim, what became my job, was to investigate the effects of food availability on growth at different life stages.

So, off to a nearby stream to disturb rocks and sweep up netfuls of shrimp, stored in an aerated tray of water with a load of food (decomposing leaves). Then I selected about 100 individuals, seperated into three weight groups and three food-mass groups, each one kept in it's own plastic dixie cup with a regular partial water change. The standard unit of food was a disc cut out of said rotting leaves with a paper hole punch, and each specimen got a number of these every couple of days, according to which food group it was in. Then all that was left for the next couple of months was to carry trayfuls of dixie cups from the live storage room in the basement, up a few floors to the lab, and weigh each shrimp in the tray. Catch it without smashing it (those things are fast and wriggly; roaches are almost easier to catch), dry it off, and set it on the scales before it can squirm and hop off across the floor. Repeat three times for each shrimp. Then back to the basement to get the next trayful.
I can't say it was a magical, life-affirming experience. Might've been worth it if I could get useful results and information at the end; but so many needed replacing after they died from stagnation, starvation, or some other factor*, that the final conclusion was a resounding 'mmidunno'.

*Before I get any stern mail: the experiment plan was guided and approved by higher-ups. There are things I would've done differently to keep them alive and glean better results, but hindsight is 20:20.

The supergiants aren't too surprising, after seeing giant marine isopods, but are fantastic all the same. I wonder what they do down there. Detrivores? Predators? G. pulex is plenty rapacious for it's size; imagine what one of those is like, chasing down prey.

 

[zonbonzovi]

Ah, the 50s and naive human intervention. Feeding the trout because they hadn't been able to feed themselves for eons without our help. Sigh. Reminds me vaguely of introducing non-native trout to New Zealand and the impact it has had on the native eel or nutria farming in the NW US(& elsewhere).

It's interesting to see a bit of the behind the scenes, so thanks. I know working in the field and in the lab gets glamorized here sometimes. Good to have a reminder that a lot of data comes from tedious and repetitive work(although I'd probably trade jobs in a heartbeat).

 

[Bugs In Cyberspace]

Thanks, Vermis! That was a really interesting piece and it helps motivate me to try culturing some of our local, freshwater aquatics again a few months from now. I didn't give them the attention they needed when I tried them a summer or two ago.

Is there some significance to using an aerated tray during the one step, or was that just what you had on hand?

 

[Amoeba]

When this article was first presented in chat TravisK brought up the line

"In 1983, an albatross regurgitated a supergiant amphipod"

Anyone want to comment as to how an albatross got its hands on one of these little buggers?

 

[zonbonzovi]

Trawling, bycatch, floaters, deep sea albatross, aliens disguised as amphipods, science prankery, magic, or...?

 

[Vermis]

I know working in the field and in the lab gets glamorized here sometimes. Good to have a reminder that a lot of data comes from tedious and repetitive work(although I'd probably trade jobs in a heartbeat).

I was probably too whiny in my last post. I think I had the same problem you mentioned - a slightly romanticised ideal of research and lab work, making great discoveries with little more work than a movie montage. That stool was quickly kicked away from under me; but looking back, I feel sort of nostalgic about it. As 'work', it really wasn't that bad.

Is there some significance to using an aerated tray during the one step

Yes; to keep the stock alive. Just a regular aquarium air-stone in a relatively deep tray of water. That's why I think so many popped off in the small, still cups.