|  |  | 
March 27th, 2009
|
| | Fish Keeper
| They dont appear to have changed much at all in a long time. Interesting. | 
| | |
March 27th, 2009
|
| | Fish Master
| Wow, that's nuts. | |
| | |
March 27th, 2009
|
| | Fish Master
| daaaang..... | |
| | |
March 27th, 2009
|
| | Fish Keeper
| Quote:
Originally Posted by meg1220  I wonder how this happened? Must have been a very special set of circumstances that allowed for a fossil of something that has no bones. | If they get buried rather quickly in very fine sediments and are not disturbed afterwards, it's extremely possible although rare. Google 'Burgess Shale fossils'  | |
| | |
March 27th, 2009
|
| | Fish Master
| Hehe, octopus jelly..... | |
| | |
March 27th, 2009
|
| | Moderator
| The Science Museum of MN has some fossils of giant green algae balls that are formed in pretty much the same way.
It definitely is rare for something like that to happen, but it's bound to happen periodically.
Last edited by sirdarksol; March 27th, 2009 at 03:28 PM.
| |
| | |
March 27th, 2009
|
| | Fish Keeper
| Thats pretty cool. Thanks for sharing. | |
| | |
March 27th, 2009
|
| | Fish Keeper
| Quote:
Originally Posted by KyWildFish They dont appear to have changed much at all in a long time. Interesting. | Actually they are quite different from modern octopuses. Having a body and eight arms may give it the appearence that it hasnt changed much...but just think how broad and overly simplistic that characterization is.
In paticular, look at the gladius in the drawing (the two clam-shell looking thingies at the top of the octopus' head). Octopuses are cephalopods and cephalopods are molluscs. Like all molluscs they have shells. The gladius in this case is just that. If you look in modern cephalopods, most of them have small spindle like gladiuses that are also located laterally in the body compared to the ancient one here, with a posterior postion and rotation. From other octupus fossils, you can actually trace the change of the gladius in shape and position with time. So this fossil actually falls nicely within a broader picture as well!
Oh...I have a cephalopod obsession....  | |
| | |
March 27th, 2009
|
| | Fish Master
| Wow, that's amazing. | |
| | |
March 27th, 2009
|
| | Fish Master
| Quote:
Originally Posted by jgon_ Actually they are quite different from modern octopuses. Having a body and eight arms may give it the appearence that it hasnt changed much...but just think how broad and overly simplistic that characterization is.
In paticular, look at the gladius in the drawing (the two clam-shell looking thingies at the top of the octopus' head). Octopuses are cephalopods and cephalopods are molluscs. Like all molluscs they have shells. The gladius in this case is just that. If you look in modern cephalopods, most of them have small spindle like gladiuses that are also located laterally in the body compared to the ancient one here, with a posterior postion and rotation. From other octupus fossils, you can actually trace the change of the gladius in shape and position with time. So this fossil actually falls nicely within a broader picture as well!
Oh...I have a cephalopod obsession.... |  | |
| | |
April 1st, 2009
|
| | Fish Keeper
| Do you have a link of what an early transition state octapus might look like, I'm curious now? Also, isn't is octapi not octapuses? | |
| | |
April 1st, 2009
|
| | Moderator
| Quote:
Originally Posted by KyWildFish Do you have a link of what an early transition state octapus might look like, I'm curious now? Also, isn't is octapi not octapuses? | Dictionary.com says either is acceptable, except it's oct opi.  | |
| | |
April 1st, 2009
|
| | Fish Keeper
| Octopuses would be more proper since the word is derived from the Greek, Octopothi. Though in the Greek, the plural is octopothia, most Greek words that don't end in vowels, -s is the appropriate ending (and why its used for Octopus). Using an -i ending to indicate a plural would be appropriate for words derived from Latin. Like how radius would become radii.
These images are from the paper that was published about the fossils.   | |
| | |
April 1st, 2009
|
| | Moderator
| Quote:
Originally Posted by jgon_ Octopuses would be more proper since the word is derived from the Greek, Octopothi. Though in the Greek, the plural is octopothia, most Greek words that don't end in vowels, -s is the appropriate ending (and why its used for Octopus). Using an -i ending to indicate a plural would be appropriate for words derived from Latin. Like how radius would become radii | The Greek version I found is octopous, with the plural being octopodes.
However, the reason for octopi vs octopuses has nothing to do with Greek. It has to do with repetition of the sibilant sounding odd to the English speaker, so many words that end with a sibiliant have a variant plural. | |
| | |
April 1st, 2009
|
| | Moderator
| Ah, and the Greek that I was quoting is from the 16th century origins of the word, so that explains that difference. | |
| | |
April 1st, 2009
|
| | Fish Helper
| Quote:
Originally Posted by jgon_ | Nice, thanks for this.
I just told my coworker, who didn't believe me. Tried to tell me it was an April Fool's joke. I had to find a couple of other resources to prove it. | |
| | |
April 2nd, 2009
|
| | Fish Master
| neat :P | |
| | |
April 3rd, 2009
|
| | Fish Keeper
| Oh my I opened a can of worms. Nerd on fellow nerds, nerd on.
(side note: Spelling never was my forte, I'm much more of a number and figure guy) | |
| | | |
Similar Aquarium Fish Forum Threads 
