Unknown Phylum. Any suggestions?
- Thread starter Steve O'Shea
- Start date
-
- Tags
- identification mystery unknown
- Joined
- Nov 19, 2002
- Messages
- 4,674
Greg, you're not calling that a slug are you? No, No, No, No, No ....
- Joined
- Apr 3, 2007
- Messages
- 185
I don't see it...
- Joined
- Nov 19, 2002
- Messages
- 4,674
No, No, No, No, No, No, No .....!!
Time to call in the man himself, Dr Bill Rudman. That's no nudibranch. Now, how to dial the man .....
If that's a nudibranch then I'll shout you all weekend at TONMOcon!
Time to call in the man himself, Dr Bill Rudman. That's no nudibranch. Now, how to dial the man .....
If that's a nudibranch then I'll shout you all weekend at TONMOcon!
- Joined
- Feb 18, 2007
- Messages
- 76
That is definitely very cool. I thought the second picture looked like some kind of a Nautilus, but the others certainly did not. It would be really neat if it turns out to be something yet to be named.
- Joined
- Nov 19, 2002
- Messages
- 4,674
cthulhu77;91700 said:
What would you prefer? A shout, a drink, or a cuddle?
I cast my vote in Greg's direction. Nudi/slug was my immediate first impression. Unfortunately, my vote doesn't count as my exposure is almost non-existent.
- Joined
- Nov 19, 2002
- Messages
- 4,674
Eeeeek.
I've had a pm exchange with someone (work account) from a museum with the suggestion that it was some variety of pelagic holothurian. It is equally possible ... certainly has me scratching my head.
I haven't heard back from Dr Rudman yet, although did drop him a line. It is Easter, so I sincerely hope he is not at work (unlike my sad self!). On that note I think it is time for me to trundle on home.
I've had a pm exchange with someone (work account) from a museum with the suggestion that it was some variety of pelagic holothurian. It is equally possible ... certainly has me scratching my head.
I haven't heard back from Dr Rudman yet, although did drop him a line. It is Easter, so I sincerely hope he is not at work (unlike my sad self!). On that note I think it is time for me to trundle on home.
- Joined
- Mar 8, 2004
- Messages
- 4,883
The deuce, you say!
Although I think the odds may be with Greg (although it doesn't look like any spanish dancer pic I've ever seen), I would be pleased mightily by this, since googling for "pelagic holothurian" primarily yields Burgess Shale references like Eldonia. (like here )
Of course, there is some stuff on modern swimming cucumbers, too, for example, this pdf from the Smithsonian... they look about as much like our mystery animal as the Spanish Dancer pics do, although the pics aren't as good. But the mystery animal doesn't seem so radially symmetric...
- Joined
- Apr 6, 2007
- Messages
- 1
I would like to offer an identification of this creature. In fact, I can hardly contain my excitment at these photos. This appears to be exactly the creature I have been hypothesizing for years as the true identity of both typical Lake Monsters and Sea Serpents.
I am currently writing a book titled "A Wizard's Bestiary," with extensive chapters on the Kraken, Sea Serpents, and Lake Monsters. Here is an excerpt from my chapter on Lake Monsters, which I consider to be a freshwater variant of a group of as-yet-unrecognized marine Opisthobranchs (for the referenced figures, you'll just have to wait until December, when the book comes out!).
However, I would very much like to include some of these photos and description in my book--what a fantastic Appendix it would make! If Miss Gwenith Penry is on this forum, would you please contact me regarding permission? thank you!
--Oberon Zell
__________________________________________
In studying accounts of Lake Monster sightings, especially close-up encounters, it is striking how often the creatures are described as “wormy,” “slimy,” and “repulsive” in texture. Of the creature she saw swimming up Logh Fadda in 1954, Georgina Carberry reported: It was “…wormy. You know—creepy. The body seemed to have movement all over it all the time.”4 George Spicer, who, with his wife, saw the Loch Ness Monster crossing the road on July 22, 1933, said the animal was “horrible—an abomination;” its skin was a “terrible, dark elephant grey, of a loathsome texture, reminiscent of a snail.” Regarding his sighting of creature on shore of Loch Ness, on Sept. 30, 1974, Dick Jenkyns said: “I felt that the beast was obscene. This feeling of obscenity still persists and the whole thing put me in mind of a gigantic stomach with a long writhing gut attached.”4 Spicer said it had “an undulating sort of neck, a little thicker than an elephant’s trunk,” which was contorted into half-loops, and that it looked like “a huge snail with a long neck.”
Another feature that becomes apparent upon examination of many reports and drawings is the rubbery elasticity of the neck and body, which may extend to become long and thin, or contract to become short and stubby. The length of the neck, in particular, may vary “from two or three feet to as much as ten feet in length, and a foot in diameter.”9 Rare sightings of the creatures on land often describe their movements as “caterpillar-like.” During the night of Sept. 30, 1965, two motorists independently saw a 20-ft-long creature “humped like a giant caterpillar” moving slowly on the road verge, not far from the River Tay on the A85 road between Perth and Dundee in Scotland.
This flexibility is clearly apparent from the series of drawings made by Torquil MacLeod of his sighting through binoculars of the creature partially out of the water upon the opposite shore of Loch Ness, on Feb. 28, 1960.9 (Fig. 18) Similar proportions and apparent flexibility can be seen in one of the few unambiguously authentic photos of Nessie, taken by Hugh Gray in November of 1933.
Also, both eyewitness reports and photos of the head (Fig. 20) have indicated extensible horn-like antennae similar to those of snails and slugs. (Fig. 21) Indeed, Tim Dinsdale notes that “sometimes, on top of the head two small projections are seen like ‘the horns on a snail,’ and the eyes (which are not often seen) are like ‘slits in a darning needle,’ and they are ‘bright and glittering.’” Regarding a sighting of Feb. 22, 1968 in beat bog called Lough Nahooin in Connemara, Ireland: “Both Mr and Mrs [Stephen] Coyne agreed that the creature was about 12 feet long and both agreed that they saw no eyes. Mrs Coyne told us that she noticed two horn-like projections on top of the head.” 4 Regarding a sighting in Loch Ness on Nov. 17, 1976, which he photographed, Cornish Wizard Tony “Doc” Shiels noted: “The head had horns, stumpy little things…the head was extremely ugly, like a big snail’s head with those odd little stalks.”
And perhaps most telling of all, a Welsh legend of a local “Wyvern” first translated into English in 1921, states: “At times one could see it creeping with hateful, stealthy movements, here and there upon the fertile slopes of Moel Offrum, jerking its cumbersome form into uncanny humps as it made its way in quest of food, and leaving a slimy trail behind it.” Such “slimy trails” are uniquely characteristic of snails and slugs.
For these reasons, I conclude that “Nessie,” “Chessie,” “Champ,” “Morag” and the like are probably giant aquatic slugs, long-necked and “horned” like a garden snail, perhaps with a variety of subspecies.
The Opisthobranchia (sea slugs) are a highly-evolved order of gastropods, with hundreds of radically diverse species of which only marine forms are currently recognized. They have small eyes and several sensitive horn-like feelers at the front of their heads, used for orientation and olfaction. The sides of the foot have evolved into parapodia, fleshy winglike outgrowths. In several suborders, such as the Thecosomata and Gymnosomata, these are used like fins to move in a swimming motion.
In 1975, based upon underwater photos obtained in 1972 by the Academy of Applied Science (Fig. 22), the official name of Nessiteras rhombopteryx (“Ness wonder with diamond-shaped fins”) was bestowed upon the Loch Ness Monster by Sir Peter Scott. Interestingly, the Greek word pteras (“fin”) also means “wing,” suggesting a basis for legends of “winged” dragons. But if these creatures are actually aquatic mollusks, as I believe them to be, the highly-positioned diamond-shaped “fin” for which they are named would probably be an operculum (Latin: “little lid”), a flap covering the gill opening, which in sea slugs is located below the neck and just behind the heart, rather than behind the head as in fish and amphibians. Exactly the position indicated in photos, drawings, and eyewitness reports.
A Reconstruction
In 1987, I sculpted a model of the Loch Ness Monster based on a synthesis of all recorded descriptions and drawings. (Fig 23) I believe it to be as accurate a representation as possible until we can manage to obtain a physical specimen. Furthermore, I believe that the erroneous assumption that these creatures are vertebrates (especially plesiosaurs) has misdirected previous attempts at capture. Future efforts might more productively search for larval stages by dredging the bottom muck of the lochs—or even better, some of the many Irish bogs and marshes rumored to harbor smaller and probably related “bog-dogs,” “horse-eels,” or Kelpies. This is the approach currently being undertaken by marine biologist Steven O’Shea in his successful search for Architeuthis (giant squid) larvae amid the oceanic zooplankton.
Assuming that these creatures are actually gigantic freshwater aquatic slugs, what other correlations may possibly be made with historical traditions of “Orms”? One of these is their vile toxicity, which is said to burn the skin and poison wells, springs, pools, and the very ground beneath them. The slimy skin of many opisthobranchs contains distasteful and sometimes toxic chemicals as a defense against predation. Others have special stinging cells or toxic glands, which in some cases are used to paralyze their prey.
A recurring theme in myths is that of “dragon’s teeth”—seemingly the only recoverable remains, as no skulls, skins, or other expected trophies of slain orms or dragons have ever been exhibited. A slug’s teeth—its only hard parts—are not in jaws as in vertebrates, but on a flexible tongue or radula, which is a ribbon of precisely arranged teeth like a rasp, used for scraping or grasping its food.17 A dead slug simply dissolves into a pool of goo, and only the teeth remain.
The keeled humps reported in virtually all sightings of lake monsters are particularly interesting in this context. (Fig. 14) The number of these varies with the length of the animal, as there seems to be a maximum size limit of about 5-ft for each hump. “Most peculiar of all, people have actually reported the humps changing shape.”9 Since the creatures are commonly reported to rise and sink vertically, these humps are most likely to be gas-filled flotation chambers, much like the swim bladders of fishes. (Fig. 24) In fish, these closed organs are precursors of lungs, and are filled with respiratory air extracted from the water. But in gigantic muck-dwelling aquatic slugs, the gas which fills such chambers would more likely be derived from the digestive process, and would therefore consist of methane, or “marsh gas.” And, as everyone knows, this gas is highly flammable. In order to sink vertically, the creature would have to evacuate gas, and the most logical orifice would be the mouth, which is not used for breathing. And if these creatures happen to possess bioelectrical faculties like those found in certain eels and other fish which inhabit murky waters (utilizing electrical discharges both to navigate and to stun prey), then electric sparks could be used to ignite the expelled gas, and we would have fire-breathing dragons. What an impressive defense mechanism that would make!
And finally, when the gas-filled “humps” are evacuated, they would flatten into the apparent dorsal “fin” occasionally reported, as in the monster of Lake Khaiyr, Russia.
I am currently writing a book titled "A Wizard's Bestiary," with extensive chapters on the Kraken, Sea Serpents, and Lake Monsters. Here is an excerpt from my chapter on Lake Monsters, which I consider to be a freshwater variant of a group of as-yet-unrecognized marine Opisthobranchs (for the referenced figures, you'll just have to wait until December, when the book comes out!).
However, I would very much like to include some of these photos and description in my book--what a fantastic Appendix it would make! If Miss Gwenith Penry is on this forum, would you please contact me regarding permission? thank you!
--Oberon Zell
__________________________________________
In studying accounts of Lake Monster sightings, especially close-up encounters, it is striking how often the creatures are described as “wormy,” “slimy,” and “repulsive” in texture. Of the creature she saw swimming up Logh Fadda in 1954, Georgina Carberry reported: It was “…wormy. You know—creepy. The body seemed to have movement all over it all the time.”4 George Spicer, who, with his wife, saw the Loch Ness Monster crossing the road on July 22, 1933, said the animal was “horrible—an abomination;” its skin was a “terrible, dark elephant grey, of a loathsome texture, reminiscent of a snail.” Regarding his sighting of creature on shore of Loch Ness, on Sept. 30, 1974, Dick Jenkyns said: “I felt that the beast was obscene. This feeling of obscenity still persists and the whole thing put me in mind of a gigantic stomach with a long writhing gut attached.”4 Spicer said it had “an undulating sort of neck, a little thicker than an elephant’s trunk,” which was contorted into half-loops, and that it looked like “a huge snail with a long neck.”
Another feature that becomes apparent upon examination of many reports and drawings is the rubbery elasticity of the neck and body, which may extend to become long and thin, or contract to become short and stubby. The length of the neck, in particular, may vary “from two or three feet to as much as ten feet in length, and a foot in diameter.”9 Rare sightings of the creatures on land often describe their movements as “caterpillar-like.” During the night of Sept. 30, 1965, two motorists independently saw a 20-ft-long creature “humped like a giant caterpillar” moving slowly on the road verge, not far from the River Tay on the A85 road between Perth and Dundee in Scotland.
This flexibility is clearly apparent from the series of drawings made by Torquil MacLeod of his sighting through binoculars of the creature partially out of the water upon the opposite shore of Loch Ness, on Feb. 28, 1960.9 (Fig. 18) Similar proportions and apparent flexibility can be seen in one of the few unambiguously authentic photos of Nessie, taken by Hugh Gray in November of 1933.
Also, both eyewitness reports and photos of the head (Fig. 20) have indicated extensible horn-like antennae similar to those of snails and slugs. (Fig. 21) Indeed, Tim Dinsdale notes that “sometimes, on top of the head two small projections are seen like ‘the horns on a snail,’ and the eyes (which are not often seen) are like ‘slits in a darning needle,’ and they are ‘bright and glittering.’” Regarding a sighting of Feb. 22, 1968 in beat bog called Lough Nahooin in Connemara, Ireland: “Both Mr and Mrs [Stephen] Coyne agreed that the creature was about 12 feet long and both agreed that they saw no eyes. Mrs Coyne told us that she noticed two horn-like projections on top of the head.” 4 Regarding a sighting in Loch Ness on Nov. 17, 1976, which he photographed, Cornish Wizard Tony “Doc” Shiels noted: “The head had horns, stumpy little things…the head was extremely ugly, like a big snail’s head with those odd little stalks.”
And perhaps most telling of all, a Welsh legend of a local “Wyvern” first translated into English in 1921, states: “At times one could see it creeping with hateful, stealthy movements, here and there upon the fertile slopes of Moel Offrum, jerking its cumbersome form into uncanny humps as it made its way in quest of food, and leaving a slimy trail behind it.” Such “slimy trails” are uniquely characteristic of snails and slugs.
For these reasons, I conclude that “Nessie,” “Chessie,” “Champ,” “Morag” and the like are probably giant aquatic slugs, long-necked and “horned” like a garden snail, perhaps with a variety of subspecies.
The Opisthobranchia (sea slugs) are a highly-evolved order of gastropods, with hundreds of radically diverse species of which only marine forms are currently recognized. They have small eyes and several sensitive horn-like feelers at the front of their heads, used for orientation and olfaction. The sides of the foot have evolved into parapodia, fleshy winglike outgrowths. In several suborders, such as the Thecosomata and Gymnosomata, these are used like fins to move in a swimming motion.
In 1975, based upon underwater photos obtained in 1972 by the Academy of Applied Science (Fig. 22), the official name of Nessiteras rhombopteryx (“Ness wonder with diamond-shaped fins”) was bestowed upon the Loch Ness Monster by Sir Peter Scott. Interestingly, the Greek word pteras (“fin”) also means “wing,” suggesting a basis for legends of “winged” dragons. But if these creatures are actually aquatic mollusks, as I believe them to be, the highly-positioned diamond-shaped “fin” for which they are named would probably be an operculum (Latin: “little lid”), a flap covering the gill opening, which in sea slugs is located below the neck and just behind the heart, rather than behind the head as in fish and amphibians. Exactly the position indicated in photos, drawings, and eyewitness reports.
A Reconstruction
In 1987, I sculpted a model of the Loch Ness Monster based on a synthesis of all recorded descriptions and drawings. (Fig 23) I believe it to be as accurate a representation as possible until we can manage to obtain a physical specimen. Furthermore, I believe that the erroneous assumption that these creatures are vertebrates (especially plesiosaurs) has misdirected previous attempts at capture. Future efforts might more productively search for larval stages by dredging the bottom muck of the lochs—or even better, some of the many Irish bogs and marshes rumored to harbor smaller and probably related “bog-dogs,” “horse-eels,” or Kelpies. This is the approach currently being undertaken by marine biologist Steven O’Shea in his successful search for Architeuthis (giant squid) larvae amid the oceanic zooplankton.
Assuming that these creatures are actually gigantic freshwater aquatic slugs, what other correlations may possibly be made with historical traditions of “Orms”? One of these is their vile toxicity, which is said to burn the skin and poison wells, springs, pools, and the very ground beneath them. The slimy skin of many opisthobranchs contains distasteful and sometimes toxic chemicals as a defense against predation. Others have special stinging cells or toxic glands, which in some cases are used to paralyze their prey.
A recurring theme in myths is that of “dragon’s teeth”—seemingly the only recoverable remains, as no skulls, skins, or other expected trophies of slain orms or dragons have ever been exhibited. A slug’s teeth—its only hard parts—are not in jaws as in vertebrates, but on a flexible tongue or radula, which is a ribbon of precisely arranged teeth like a rasp, used for scraping or grasping its food.17 A dead slug simply dissolves into a pool of goo, and only the teeth remain.
The keeled humps reported in virtually all sightings of lake monsters are particularly interesting in this context. (Fig. 14) The number of these varies with the length of the animal, as there seems to be a maximum size limit of about 5-ft for each hump. “Most peculiar of all, people have actually reported the humps changing shape.”9 Since the creatures are commonly reported to rise and sink vertically, these humps are most likely to be gas-filled flotation chambers, much like the swim bladders of fishes. (Fig. 24) In fish, these closed organs are precursors of lungs, and are filled with respiratory air extracted from the water. But in gigantic muck-dwelling aquatic slugs, the gas which fills such chambers would more likely be derived from the digestive process, and would therefore consist of methane, or “marsh gas.” And, as everyone knows, this gas is highly flammable. In order to sink vertically, the creature would have to evacuate gas, and the most logical orifice would be the mouth, which is not used for breathing. And if these creatures happen to possess bioelectrical faculties like those found in certain eels and other fish which inhabit murky waters (utilizing electrical discharges both to navigate and to stun prey), then electric sparks could be used to ignite the expelled gas, and we would have fire-breathing dragons. What an impressive defense mechanism that would make!
And finally, when the gas-filled “humps” are evacuated, they would flatten into the apparent dorsal “fin” occasionally reported, as in the monster of Lake Khaiyr, Russia.
- Joined
- Jun 8, 2003
- Messages
- 290
Oberon Zell;91721 said:
Equally interesting is that "Nessiteras rhombopteryx" is an anagram of "Monster hoax by Sir Peter S"
cheers
- Joined
- Nov 19, 2002
- Messages
- 3,031
I plump for a Sea Hare. Compare the patterning with the picture on the top right in this link, click here. Also have a look at this, and this.
However, I think I may have actually found a specific species that looks even closer via patternation. The Sea Hare Aplysia brasiliana bears a remarkable resemblance. Imagine the fins on the following image tucked in around the head with it held in a downwards posture below them masking it from view, thus appearing to foreshorten the animal to the viewer.
Also worth a look.
However, I think I may have actually found a specific species that looks even closer via patternation. The Sea Hare Aplysia brasiliana bears a remarkable resemblance. Imagine the fins on the following image tucked in around the head with it held in a downwards posture below them masking it from view, thus appearing to foreshorten the animal to the viewer.
Also worth a look.
Attachments
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.