Talk:Giant squid/Archive 1

I took the libery of deleting the paragraph describing colossal squid as it is a sperate species with its own page in wikipedia 138.251.202.128 16:05, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

Is this what (nameless person who took out the stuff about the "right-angled" squids [Science, v294 p2505, 21 Dec 2001]) means by "talk"? Is there any way to do this off-line - I return ashore in a couple of days where I've more important things to do than wait 20 minutes for pages to open? A.Karley email the hotmail account (should be guessable) if there's no mailing list functions on this thing.

"it has been known to attack and eat whales"

Bolocks. Most proofs of giant squid existance came from sperm whale stomachs before intact specimens where found dead on shore... -- JidGom 14:07, 26 Aug 2003 (UTC)

-

I've long suspected that octopuses, and moreover, squid, were the next big toolmaker species on earth. They have the brains and the physical endowment to do so...

Besides octopuses, I'd really like to see some of the larger squid, especially Architeuthis, the Giant Squid, playing around and demonstrating their intelligence.

An large octopus' brain is about the size of a dog's, whereas the Giant Squid's is around the size of an elephant's (which is very very large. Though considering the architecture of a cephalopod brain and body, I'd assume that the squid is a more able toolmaker than the elephant, which has only one opposable 'limb')...

Have you ever wondered why exactly they're so elusive? Perhaps it's due to their intelligence?

(I've gone as far as wondering whether they already exist in their equivalent to the Paleolithic age and already do use tools of some kind... Scientists currently suspect that they're solitary, but I have my doubts about this claim...)

(I don't appreciate much how they refer to them as 'the lowly mollusk'... Hopefully our further knowledge about squid and octopus intelligence won't prompt us to completely fuck up their society like some older species apparently did/is doing to ours...)

Khranus


 * It could be because cephalopods typically have such a short life-span. Intelligence isn't the only requisite for toolmaking. Longevity and a certain degree of socialization both are factors in toolmaking. - UtherSRG 13:10, 28 Apr 2004 (UTC)

user:Trent

Interesting... it shows how we can have very advance technology as a society but still cant see some animals alive.

"Adam Siefkas, Ph.D., is credited with having revolutionized the study of the giant squid."
 * - without elaboration, this doesn't seem relevant. I suspect the presence of one of the good doctor's admiring pupils.  User:Palefire


 * I suspect you are correct, and I'll remove that line. - UtherSRG 11:48, 26 Oct 2004 (UTC)

One had best update the 'the search for the giant squid...' bit, as they have indeed captured live young now and they are in captivity. ^_^ score one for us. I saw it on Discovery

Giant Squids are sweet
Giant Squids are sweet, and i'm pretty sure that they have the real ultimate power. Cephalopods in general are pretty sweet, too. Thanks for having such a nice resource here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Atog (talk • contribs) 23:53, 18 April 2005 (UTC)

Maximum size?
"... recent estimates put the maximum size at 10 m (33 ft) for males and 13 m (43 ft) for females ... However, there are reported claims of specimens of up to 20 m (66 ft), but none have been scientifically documented. ... A 17 m (55 ft) giant squid specimen washed ashore in Glover's Harbour, Newfoundland on November 2, 1878."

So does that last report not count as as scientifically documented, or what? &mdash;wwoods 17:59, 27 May 2005 (UTC)

Subspecies
I believe that the idea of there being eight separate species is insupportable. Sightings of any even near-complete specimens was so rare that each one was described all over again, and a name given based on where it was found. But I don't think anyone has ever pointed out a single observed taxonomic difference between dux and japonica and santipauli and all the rest of them, or even tried. I think it's almost certain that all of these animals belong to the same species.

After some discussion, I've cautiously made some edits to reflect what I believe is the best NPOV interpretation of Architeuthis taxonomy. Comments or improvements, please. Ben-w 8 July 2005 06:52 (UTC) -- btw I've also redirected "Atlantic giant squid" here as there was no useful content. --- and, PPS, I removed the number "eight" from the opening line.


 * I've restored the original format, but made amendments to show the classification has some disagreement. Please review the other existing articles in WP:CEPH to see that redlinks for unwritten articles is standard. Also, it's not tru that these articles can nev er be created. Someone wih the time and patience can research what was written about each one and create a moderately detailed but small article for each species. - UtherSRG July 8, 2005 23:03 (UTC)


 * I'll buy you a calamari dinner if any of those articles ever contains any unique information beyond the details of the retrieval of the type specimen.

giant squid filmed alive for the first time
Then wikipedia article will need updating ie. 'no one has ever seen one alive' is no longer correct.

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/09/28/science/28squid.html?ei=5094&en=f6e2dacf29b9c0ff&hp=&ex=1127880000&partner=homepage&pagewanted=print

September 28, 2005 Legendary Monster of the Deep, 26-Foot Squid, Captured on Film

I do not know how to properly put this into a wikichat format, but a Giant squid has been seen alive! here is an yahoo link: http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20050927/sc_afp/scienceanimalssquid;_ylt=Aio1xySg5upw3zlKIx4zrawPLBIF;_ylu=X3oDMTBiMW04NW9mBHNlYwMlJVRPUCUl

Can someone please update the page with all relevant information? and what about a link to where we might see more pictures?
 * Pictures here: http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2005/09/photogalleries/giant_squid/index.html


 * This is really exciting and I don't doubt the claims for one second, but the pictures aren't terribly convincing. There's absolutely no sense of scale, so for all we know by just looking at them, the squid might as well be tiny. Are there objects in the shots that could be used to give a sense of proporitions?
 * Peter Isotalo 18:48, 28 September 2005 (UTC)


 * There are actually a few photos of a different live giant squid, but this one apparently was ill or dying when found on the sea's surface, and was dragged into a small tide pool, where it was photographed before it died. Since the pictures are not taken in the giant squid's natural habitat, they aren't really in the same class as those published by the Royal Society, but it is definitely alive.  They can be seen at these two links to the Kyoto Prefecture Web Site (both in Japanese): http://www.pref.kyoto.jp/kaiyo/2-topicnews/news/2002/02-02-01/mega-squid/mega-squid-01.html and http://www.pref.kyoto.jp/kaiyo/2-topicnews/news/2002/02-02-01/mega-squid/mega-squid-02.html
 * User:wowbobwow12 Oct. 1, 2005

Taxonomy Redux
I think it's almost certain that there is only one species of Giant Squid. Almost certain. I think it's almost impossible that there are eight species all living in specific zones of the world's oceans, or that there are eight species distributed such that the handful of specimens observed have happened to provide us with a representation of each one so well. No-one has ever even tried to suggest anything about color, habits, sucker size, length, mantle shape, beak size, eye diameter, or anything -- anything at all -- that is different in dux than in sanctipauli. Or said that there's an alelle on chromosome 12 that differs between kirkii and japoni. I think the list of species should be caveated pretty strongly. Certainly the idea that each of eight species are likely to be diverse enough and well enough understood to merit a separate article any time in the foreseeable future I find extremely hard to believe. So that's why I've changed that bit. Ben-w 07:59, 8 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Did you take a look at this PDF which lists all of the cephalopod species, and indicates their current status? It's where I got the markings I used in my previous edit to indicate species which are questionable. Please take a look and try to merge your recent edit with the markings and text I had in place. - UtherSRG (talk) 13:46, 8 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Yes, I have seen that document. It does an excellent job of listing the names of various people who saw a Giant Squid and where they were at the time. Again, if anyone can say what makes Arciteuthis martensi definitely a separate species, unquestionably, but A. kirkii not, I'd love to hear it. Is it a physical difference? No-one has suggested it is. Is it a difference of genotype? No-one has done the analysis. Is it a reproductive incompatability? Did someone try to breed A. martensi and A. dux and got mule squid? No. There is nothing. The literature is patchy and has thus allowed this list to become established and it should be repeated for this reason. But the list is not accepted by many teuthists, it has all the problems I have listed, no-one has attempted to address these problems, and thus I feel that the heavy caveating of the list is well-warranted. Ben-w 17:43, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

Squid in Culture
This section is getting a little bloated -- any objections to spinning it off as a separate article? Ben-w 02:08, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
 * I'm good with that. - UtherSRG (talk) 02:17, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Et voila. I sectioned it up a bit. Ben-w 01:23, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

Can we archive?
Is there anything here that we need to discuss further? If not, I think it would benefit the article if we started a new Talk: page. Ben-w 13:14, 18 February 2006 (UTC)