Jump to content


Getting an "Insecure Connection" warning for Exisle? No worry

Details in this thread

World's Only Known Immortal...


  • Please log in to reply
18 replies to this topic

#1 QueenTiye

QueenTiye

    Behavior is not reproducible over multiple trials.

  • Islander
  • 24,326 posts

Posted 19 March 2010 - 04:46 PM

And she's a beauty: http://green.yahoo.c...tal-animal.html

turritopsis_rubra2.jpg

From the article:

Since it is capable of cycling from a mature adult stage to an immature polyp stage and back again, there may be no natural limit to its life span.

Quote

Scientists say the hydrozoan jellyfish is the only known animal that can repeatedly turn back the hands of time and revert to its polyp state (its first stage of life).

The key lies in a process called transdifferentiation, where one type of cell is transformed into another type of cell. Some animals can undergo limited transdifferentiation and regenerate organs, such as salamanders, which can regrow limbs. Turritopsi nutricula, on the other hand, can regenerate its entire body over and over again.

The article goes on to point out that the result is a species that is actually overpopulating - giving rise to my curiousity about what normally preys on it.  Especially now that we're having such a problem with jellyfish, I wonder if  these things are edible to humans.  

I love jellyfish (to look at) - they are just plain beautiful.  On a trip once to the Georgia Aquarium, I saw a star jellyfish just splay itself out for me - I was in awe of its sheer grace and beauty.  AND... for all that, I kept looking at it and thinking - those are probably edible...

QT

Een Draght Mackt Maght


#2 T_H_Phoenix

T_H_Phoenix
  • Islander
  • 792 posts

Posted 23 March 2010 - 01:00 PM

View PostQueenTiye, on Mar 19 2010, 05:46 PM, said:

The article goes on to point out that the result is a species that is actually overpopulating - giving rise to my curiousity about what normally preys on it.

Don't know about this particular species, but leatherback turtles and Ocean Starfish eat jellyfish.
Posted Image

#3 FlatlandDan

FlatlandDan

    Sophisticate

  • Islander
  • 8,824 posts

Posted 23 March 2010 - 03:00 PM

VERY COOL!!!  Thanks for posting QT|
My candle burns at both its ends;
It will not last the night;
But oh, my foes, and oh, my friends --
It gives a lovely light."
-Edna St. Vincent Millay

#4 QueenTiye

QueenTiye

    Behavior is not reproducible over multiple trials.

  • Islander
  • 24,326 posts

Posted 25 March 2010 - 03:24 PM

View PostT_H_Phoenix, on Mar 23 2010, 02:00 PM, said:

View PostQueenTiye, on Mar 19 2010, 05:46 PM, said:

The article goes on to point out that the result is a species that is actually overpopulating - giving rise to my curiousity about what normally preys on it.

Don't know about this particular species, but leatherback turtles and Ocean Starfish eat jellyfish.

Well, leatherback turtles and Ocean Starfish are apparently not abundant enough (or at all) in the various places that jellyfish are migrating to on our ships.  So, we absolutely have to find some other predators... and I'm thinking the only creatures I know of who can readily adapt predation habits just because we say so... is us.  That's why I'm really curious as to if there's a way to eat the danged things, or if there's something else useful we can do with them. Heck - I wonder if there's a way to keep them in home aquariums. They're very pretty.

View PostFlatlandDan, on Mar 23 2010, 04:00 PM, said:

VERY COOL!!!  Thanks for posting QT|

You're welcome! :)  Definitely click on the picture itself, as it links to a site with more cool pictures (of creatures in the same family).

Oh wait - no it doesn't.... let me go find the link.

QT

Een Draght Mackt Maght


#5 QueenTiye

QueenTiye

    Behavior is not reproducible over multiple trials.

  • Islander
  • 24,326 posts

Posted 25 March 2010 - 03:29 PM

Ok, here we go: http://www.ville-ge....a-directory.htm

And, here's another really awesome picture...

scrippsia_pacifica.jpg

Seriously- I think aquariums full of these would be very chic... ;)

QT

Een Draght Mackt Maght


#6 Cybersnark

Cybersnark

    NERV wants YOU!

  • Islander
  • 2,585 posts

Posted 26 March 2010 - 09:05 AM

View PostQueenTiye, on Mar 19 2010, 05:46 PM, said:

Turritopsi nutricula, on the other hand, can regenerate its entire body over and over again.
I guess it's too much to hope that the process involves a bright flash of light, outpouring of energy, and dramatic music. . .
"Hilarity ensues." --Seamus Harper

#7 Orpheus

Orpheus

    I'm not the boss of you!

  • Administrator
  • 17,824 posts

Posted 26 March 2010 - 06:52 PM

No, I suppose not. It was a bit unsporting, though -- I mean, how do I cut that thing's head off, if I can't find it?

#8 D.Rabbit

D.Rabbit

    Me and all my shadows.

  • Islander
  • 6,212 posts

Posted 26 March 2010 - 07:49 PM

I watch the documentary on the on coming jelly fish invasion.
They tried to slash them into pieces but the ones that escaped doubled or tripled their reproductive rate!

They are protein, but some species have deadly poisonous tendrils and they are the ones that are approaching land for some reason that the scientist can't fathom.

Just and idea: Easy enough to scoop them up in nets, hang up the nets, dry them out, run them through a grinder, and  use them as a type of grain. Jelly fish bread,  cakes and cookies?

I suppose removing their poisonous parts might prove tricky.
7 verses I know you're there behind the veil.

#9 gsmonks

gsmonks

    Tree Psychiatrist

  • Islander
  • 5,137 posts

Posted 27 March 2010 - 02:12 PM

Not so fast! Single-celled organisms which divide are also immortal.
Capitalism is a pyramid scheme run by the 1%.

#10 T_H_Phoenix

T_H_Phoenix
  • Islander
  • 792 posts

Posted 29 March 2010 - 08:04 AM

View PostQueenTiye, on Mar 25 2010, 04:24 PM, said:

Well, leatherback turtles and Ocean Starfish are apparently not abundant enough (or at all) in the various places that jellyfish are migrating to on our ships.  So, we absolutely have to find some other predators...

Sadly that is true.  Especially the Leatherback Turtle.  They are currently on the Critical Endangered species list.
Posted Image

#11 NeuralClone

NeuralClone
  • Islander
  • 23,092 posts

Posted 29 March 2010 - 09:15 PM

View Postgsmonks, on Mar 27 2010, 03:12 PM, said:

Not so fast! Single-celled organisms which divide are also immortal.
That isn't the same thing at all. That's a form of reproduction. Single cell organisms still have a life span.
"My sexuality's not the most interesting thing about me."
— Cosima Niehaus, Orphan Black, "Governed By Sound Reason and True Religion"

#12 Dark Jedi

Dark Jedi

    Revenge Of The Stiff

  • Islander
  • 315 posts

Posted 30 March 2010 - 06:53 AM

Immortal? Cool! Does that mean they can't be destroyed?

Who'd have thought the toughest motherf***ers on the planet would be JELLY-fish?!?

Edited by Dark Jedi, 30 March 2010 - 06:54 AM.

...better than before...
...Better, faster, stronger.
   The Sith's Million Dollar Man.  

RIP American scripted drama. 1930-2009 Posted Image

#13 Orpheus

Orpheus

    I'm not the boss of you!

  • Administrator
  • 17,824 posts

Posted 31 March 2010 - 12:34 AM

View PostNeuralClone, on Mar 29 2010, 10:15 PM, said:

View Postgsmonks, on Mar 27 2010, 03:12 PM, said:

Not so fast! Single-celled organisms which divide are also immortal.
That isn't the same thing at all. That's a form of reproduction. Single cell organisms still have a life span.
Well, in many ways, unicellular organism *can* be equally immortal. The 'limit' to life span is generally "senescence" (aging), which is actually something that is added in more complex organisms, and not found in more basic life forms.

The real distinction you may be thinking of is that when a single celled organism reproduces by fission, the original "organism" arguably ceases to exist. However single celled organisms don't *have* to reproduce, and many can live indefinitely, especially at low metabolic rates. Viable bacteria, etc. (not just spores) have been found in newly opened pyramids, and reproduction takes more metabolic feedstock and energy than <cue BeeGees> (ah ah ah ah) Staying Alive

Furthermore, just because an organism is unicellular doesn't mean it has to reproduce by fissioning. Many yeasts, for example, can reproduce by budding, in which there is a clear distinction between the daughter cell and the parent cell.

Though single-celled, yeasts are not bacteria, or even prokaryotes. They are eukaryotes, like us. In many ways, they are quite advanced. In fact, the evolutionary divergence between Schizosaccharomyces pombe (a fissioning yeast discovered in African Millet beer) and Saccharomyces cerevisiae (the main European brewing and baking yeast, which reproduces primarily by budding) has been said to be comparable to the divergence between either of those species and Man. Certainly they diverged from each other before there was any (known) life on land.

I mention this because many yeasts do have quite "advanced" cellular mechanisms, and some seem to experience a form of senescence [I don't know which ones, so I hesitate to single out any specific yeast as "immortal"]

Bacteria, on the other hand, have DNA replication and repair that is about 1000x more error prone than eukaryotes, so while a single bacterium *might* live for milennia or indefinitely, it would be quite different genetically than it originally was (and might die from accumulated genetic damage). Is it still the same "individual" that it once was? That's a question for deities far above my pay grade. I get confused enough by simple things like trees: Two different branches on the same 100-year old oak may have more genetic differences (and differ more from the trunk) than two separate saplings from two different acorns from the same branch. Imagine if your left and right hands were more genetically different from each other and your feet than you were from your brother.

The article alludes to this distinction, and it seems to draw the conclusion that because the jelly fish can revert to a more juvenile morphology it somehow overcomes the wear and tear effects (like genetic mutation) that every living organism experiences. I see no evidence that this is true, and indeed it would require a very radical (and fundamental) reworking of basic biochemistry and cell biology to do this. It's hard to see how one species/genus/whatever could develop such a successful mechanism, without throwing off evolutionary sibling branches with similar ability (and survive -- after all mutation is essential to evolutionary adaptation in the long term)

Based on what the article says, I could only conclude that the organism had an unusual life cycle, cycling between forms that are typically called juvenile and adult  in other organisms -- not that it was immortal. Think of "adulthood" as something  that we are merely *accustomed* of thinking of as fixed and permanent -- like gender. There are many known organisms where individual routinely change gender, often many times in a life, including "large" animals [where "large" is defined as "Hey! look at that X across the street"-sized, a size standard that the great majority of animals fail to meet]

This is really more an issue of not "maturing" permanently (a phenomenon commonly documented in spouses). To actually see if they age, you'd have to watch them for a long time, and I should note that Turritopsis nutricula has only been known for 153 years, and was not well studied (it was recently discovered to be several distinct species).

In point of fact, the reversion to the polyp state has only been seen to be triggered in a lab, never in the wild, and I have underwear that is older than the oldest known individual Turritopsis, whether in the wild or in a lab.

View PostDark Jedi, on Mar 30 2010, 07:53 AM, said:

Immortal? Cool! Does that mean they can't be destroyed?
Nah, in the real world they don't live very long at all.

BTW: T. nutriculae are much smaller than the photo suggests. 5mm [the size of the smallest watch battery made] is the upper end of their size range. You could fit over a dozen of even those 'big boys' on a dime ...even a Canadian dime

--Orpheus "Canadian dimes are larger than US dimes, and my oldest underwear are rarely found in the wild or in labs"

#14 QueenTiye

QueenTiye

    Behavior is not reproducible over multiple trials.

  • Islander
  • 24,326 posts

Posted 31 March 2010 - 09:06 AM

View PostOrpheus, on Mar 31 2010, 01:34 AM, said:

BTW: T. nutriculae are much smaller than the photo suggests. 5mm [the size of the smallest watch battery made] is the upper end of their size range. You could fit over a dozen of even those 'big boys' on a dime ...even a Canadian dime

--Orpheus "Canadian dimes are larger than US dimes, and my oldest underwear are rarely found in the wild or in labs"

So.... not edible.  Got it! LOL!

QT

Een Draght Mackt Maght


#15 SparkyCola

SparkyCola
  • Islander
  • 14,904 posts

Posted 31 March 2010 - 01:50 PM

Jellyfish creep me out... *shudders*
Able to entertain a thought without taking it home to meet the parents

#16 QueenTiye

QueenTiye

    Behavior is not reproducible over multiple trials.

  • Islander
  • 24,326 posts

Posted 31 March 2010 - 02:37 PM

Even these?

More_Star_Jellyfish.jpg

TBH, I remember them at the beach - big nasty looking blobs that could sting.  So I'm very sympathetic to the... "eww, creepy" sentiment.  But I do think some of them are just beautiful.

QT

Een Draght Mackt Maght


#17 SparkyCola

SparkyCola
  • Islander
  • 14,904 posts

Posted 31 March 2010 - 04:53 PM

I can see there's something beautiful about them, but I'd prefer not to be within 10 miles of one ...I think they are what put me off the sea and sealife in general (as well as general unfamiliarity I think. I have never lived anywhere near the sea. Spiders, bugs, rats, mice, etc. no problem - but crabs, jellyfish, squid...freak me out).

The first time I went to a beach as a little kid I was really excited, then some mean guy there told me to watch where I was walking because a type of big red jellyfish lived under the sand and if you trod on it you'd get stung. (Is there really such a jellyfish btw?) Then I didn't want to walk on the beach and the whole experience was ruined. I've always found them immensely sinister things.

Sparky
Able to entertain a thought without taking it home to meet the parents

#18 obsidianstorm13

obsidianstorm13
  • Islander
  • 1,118 posts

Posted 01 April 2010 - 06:06 AM

Aww Sparky... that was really mean thing to say to you, ruining your first beach experience.  I don't know if those exist or not... I do know that on the gulf side of Florida you have to do the stingray shuffle rather than take steps because during certain seasons they fill the shallow waters there.  But I have never heard of this jellyfish.

Sharks... they scare me and keep me out of the ocean... mostly!  I like swimming too much.

#19 D.Rabbit

D.Rabbit

    Me and all my shadows.

  • Islander
  • 6,212 posts

Posted 05 January 2020 - 09:23 PM

The jellyfish invasion and nuclear power plant endangerment is escalating.
This is the most recent finding that does not require me to let down my pop up blockers.
https://www.weforum....wreaking-havoc/

The best solution they can come up with is eating them.
I thought air lifting them to dry land and using the non toxic parts of the bigger ones for fertilizer might be an options.
They do come in various sizes, up to a 500 pounds like the Nomura of the pacific near Japan.

They are eaten in China but not Japan as of yet.

I'm pointing my finger at the Sushi eaters. Tuna loves to dine on Jellyfish.  The tuna stock is in decline due to the high price the Japanese are willing to pay. Indiscriminate fishing of tuna too young to reproduce is a fineable offense.

However with the threat to the nuclear power plants we are in a desperate situation. We need tuna farms set up any where jellyfish and power plants meet up.

In a world where we could meter the energy from the magnetic grid, we would not be having this problem. Global warming would slow. Would it not be wonderful if we had free energy and didn't have to eat Jellyfish?

They are not going to just go away. They can live in oceans with less oxygen and the .09 C rise in the ocean's temperature will give them more areas to multiply.

We can not mess with the Eco system of this planet and not expect repercussions.
Looks like we might be eradicated by the, "fast plants!"

Edit:
On the research camel, this video includes the star of the thread and recent research.
Don't know why it has less then 100 thumbs up?


Edited by D.Rabbit, 06 January 2020 - 12:02 AM.

7 verses I know you're there behind the veil.


0 user(s) are browsing this forum

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users