Welcome to ScubaBoard, an online scuba diving forum community where you can join over 185,000 divers from around the world discussing all things related to Scuba Diving. To gain full access to ScubaBoard (and make this large box go away) you must register for a free account. As a registered member you will be able to:
Participate in over 500 dive topic forums and browse from over 5,500,000 posts.
Communicate privately with other divers from around the world.
Post your own photos or view from well over 100,000 user submitted images.
Gain access to our free classifieds marketplace to buy, sell and trade gear, travel and services.
Use the calendar to organize your events and enroll in other members' events.
All this and much more is available to you absolutely free when you register for an account, so sign up today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact the ScubaBoard Support Team.
Interesting headline and story. I'm new to scuba and am learning about marine life as well so please forgive me if this was obvious to you all, but I thought it was an interesting read.
Pretty interesting little article, thanks. I have read a little on the subject of venoms, and I was struck by this sentence:
The team will now work on understanding why very different types of venomous animals seem to consistently settle on the similar venom protein composition, and which physical or chemical properties make them predisposed to be useful as toxin.
I guess they are talking about tetrodotoxin, which seems to turn up in a vast array of marine venoms. Has it evolved independently in all these organisms? Or have they somehow borrowed from each other? You'd think there'd be some evolutionary advantage in using different toxins, since potential victims are probably busy evolving immunities, and, indeed, at least some of them have a kitchen sink approach, wielding a smorgasbord of toxins in their venom. Anyway, I find the natural biochemical warfare fascinating.
I was surprised at this. To my knowledge it is not true (and I have checked with a cephalopod expert on this). Of course it may depend on how you define venomous... one critter's poison is another's mild irritant. Of course what is venomous to some prey species may be totally harmless to other species and humans.
I was surprised at this. To my knowledge it is not true (and I have checked with a cephalopod expert on this). Of course it may depend on how you define venomous... one critter's poison is another's mild irritant. Of course what is venomous to some prey species may be totally harmless to other species and humans.
My first reaction was what's new but I guess it's as you say how you define venomous. They all use their beak to make a hole as well as using their radula and secrete a "substance" that breaks down muscle tissue and paralyzes I believe. That's venomous to me.
To me it depends... is it "venomous" if it doesn't affect humans? Most uses of words like venomous or toxic often relate directly to humans rather than to other species. Interesting question. I certainly don't worry about octopus that are non-toxic to humans. The clams probably worry a lot.
It is amazing the things they are finding out and all the un-knowns of the other world we live in underwater as divers. I am always in ah of the life of even the smallest of creatures under there and think of what a day to day life must be to them - so unlike ours here on land.
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by mrfixitchapman
