Extreme Jellyfish
There are some 2,000 species of jellyfish. Some are tasty, others will kill you with the tap of a tentacle. Here are nine varieties that really stand out
- By Abigail Tucker
- Smithsonian.com, August 01, 2010
«« Previous | 8 of 10
| Next »»
(Kevin Raskoff)
Best Dead Ringer for Darth Vader
On Arctic collecting trips in 2002 and 2005, Kevin Raskoff, a jelly expert at Monterey Peninsula College, spied a little deep-sea jellyfish that turned out to represent not only a new species, but a new genus as well. He christened it Bathykorus bouilloni, a tribute to the late marine scientist Jean Bouillon, but many have noticed its striking resemblance to the former Anakin Skywalker.
«« Previous | 8 of 10
| Next »»
Comments (21)
+ View All Comments
They are intoxicating to watch. I have a collection of abstract jellyfish photos from my recent trip to the Monterey Bay Aquarium, if you are interested: http://www.pathosphotos.com/archives/799
Posted by Christian on June 30,2011 | 01:32 PM
Eduardo,
the common name of any species is actually the opposite of taxonomy. Squabbling over common names is not only not taxonomical, it's not even biology. Yet, to get to know and truly appreciate any species one must start with its taxonomical designation.
As for getting lost in taxonomy, one can certainly spend too much time on it but the notion of getting lost in an academic space that is essentially a living map for the rest of biologists to start their own scientific investigations is total nonsense! ;D
TV
Posted by timothy vogel on October 6,2010 | 02:16 PM
I love the pictures. and the story about star fish, and jellyfish.keep up the good work.
Posted by dot raines on August 25,2010 | 02:28 PM
Eduardo J Rivas,
I couldn't have said it better!
Posted by Joshua V. Busico on July 31,2010 | 05:21 PM
Don't get lost in taxonomy, Just let your eyes enjoy the beauty and embrace the moment. Look at the beautiful box jelly , but don't touch, then of course reality will come crashing into your life. Let your imagination loose, with great care of course, as with all life , The most brightly colored and beautiful packs the most punch.
Posted by Eduardo J Rivas on July 16,2010 | 06:45 PM
Check the Oxford English Dictionary--historically, any animal living in the water has been called a "fish." Narrowing (or broadening for that matter) words' meanings is a well-known mechanism for linguistic change. Think of Shakespeare's usage King Lear: "...but rats and mice and such small deer [from German 'tier,' 'animal'] have been Tom's food for many a long year." It changes little by little, of course, not all at once one bright morning. Fasten your seatbelts, folks, English is alive!
Posted by Diana Werner on July 10,2010 | 02:44 PM
I would have liked some size indication on most of these, that don't have something else in the picture. But great photos!
Posted by Jeanne Hartzog on July 9,2010 | 01:29 AM
A rose is a rose is a rose, ETC!
Changing accepted names & terms is usually asinine.
For example, why was cycles-per-second
'CPS' -- [electronics] changed to "Hertz"? I refuse to knuckle-under to someone's whim . . . . . . .
Posted by WxBY on July 9,2010 | 07:42 PM
A rose by any other name would still smell as sweet... a Sea Jelly or a "Jellyfish" still makes for a lousy vacation when you're trying to swim at the beach!!!
Posted by Sandra Kelley on July 7,2010 | 06:29 PM
Jan, if your point is that they are not fish you may as well point out that they are not made of Jelly either!!
Posted by James Wynne on July 6,2010 | 10:55 AM
Jan, misnomers happen. Take the Orca which has been named a killer whale although technically a dolphin, and insects dubbed bugs although they are not (bugs being a selection of insects having sucking mouth parts).
JellyFISH are ace!
Posted by Miffy on July 6,2010 | 07:32 AM
Jan: medusozoa and echinoderms, surely?
Posted by Neil on July 6,2010 | 05:50 AM
In response to Jan Williams:
If you mentioned a "Cod fish" in any country other than America, people would laugh at you. Here in England they are simply "Cod". Likewise, "Sea Jelly" and "Sea Star" are equally as alien, and as names sound very childish. In what way is jelly any more scientifically correct than fish?
My point is that common naming traditions are hardly inaccurate. Americans are in the minority with their names for these animals, which to me are inaccurate and non-descriptive. What's in a name anyway?
Posted by Landon Smith on July 5,2010 | 02:56 PM
@Jan Williams:
Yeah, but...what if they don't live in the sea? Eh? What THEN?
Posted by Gill on July 5,2010 | 01:44 PM
+ View All Comments