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 | 6 of 10
| Next »»
(AFP / Getty Images)
Biggest
The Nomura jellies that have plagued Japan in recent years are big, yes – 450 pounds and seven feet long, roughly the proportions of sumo wrestlers. But they are petite compared with the lion’s mane jellyfish. This cold-water species can reach over 100 feet long. Granted, most of its length is tentacles, but that’s no cause for relief – the flowing appendages pack a nasty punch. Indeed, this jelly emerges as the murderer in a classic Sherlock Holmes short story, “The Adventure of the Lion’s Mane.” Although the lion’s manes are often found farther north, the giant jellies are reportedly gracing the shores of Holmes’ native England this summer.
«« Previous | 6 of 10
| Next »»
Comments (21)
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
good
Posted by Ankita Mital on July 5,2010 | 10:19 AM
great photography
Posted by Ankita Mital on July 5,2010 | 10:19 AM
Acidic, warmer oceans will be sea jelly full, which we are well on our way to having, by way of extra CO2 in the atmosphere. Warming is just one part of disastrous changes we have already started in an extremely large system with great momentum.
Momentum is working against us both in the social change and earth weather departments. Think of how difficult it might be to steer a large oil tanker and multiply that momentum energy by billions. The energy stored in the moment is tremendous.
Likewise, most of the heat absorbed and not being reflected out is stored in the vast ocean. We are not likely to see the radical changes in the weather until it is too late to do anything about it.
How can we reverse this trend?
We may not be able to.
Is this a reason not to try?
No.
The scenario gets worse with every day we continue as we have. Destiny can be only be altered by way of a major change in the way humanity gets its power. We need to make this change ASAP.
Posted by sarah mcintee on July 4,2010 | 01:23 PM
I understand Jan's point, but I'm reasonably sure that sea horses aren't horses either! IMHO, if they can be named as such, starfish and jellyfish can keep their names as well. Most of us know perfectly well that these are not fish. But telling a friend about a "sea jelly" washed up on a beach, no matter how scientifically correct, just sounds strange and rather awkward to the average ear. I'm sure that is why the general public tends to stick with their outmoded nomenclature... not to mention how difficult it is to use a different term for something you've thought of as a "jellyfish" your entire life. Most people aren't scientists... give 'em a break. :)
Posted by r. g. on July 3,2010 | 11:50 PM
Hey Brainiac(Jan Williams), take a chill pill.
Why do you care if Sea Jellies are called Jellyfish? The word jellyfish is considered as a misnomer. A misnomer is a term which suggests an interpretation that is known to be untrue.
Posted by Melanie on July 2,2010 | 05:18 PM
Shouldn't there be some controls? 400 million??? We're going to ruin our own planet yet!
Posted by Sheryl Massey on July 1,2010 | 05:11 PM
There are sea horses and sea urchins. There are rock fish and cod fish. There are NO jelly FISH and NO star FISH. There are sea jellies and sea stars. Some people are using and trying to promote an accurate and honestly descriptive name. Others are continuing to use outmoded nomenclatures.
Posted by Jan Williams on June 30,2010 | 01:20 AM