A funny discussion that has taken the field of marine biology by storm: A group of scientists claims to have identified an elusive goblin shark species for the first time in the Mediterranean, but their colleagues argue that the supposed animal is probably a plastic toy.
The controversy began in August 2020 when a citizen named Giannis Papadakis reported that a dead and well-preserved goblin shark washed up on a beach in Greece, a country where this creature had not been spotted before.
Goblin Sharks (mitsukurina owstoni) are mysterious and rather elusive fish that often live hundreds of meters below the ocean’s surface. They have long, spade-shaped snouts, fearsome teeth, and mouths that can protrude or retract depending on the circumstances. According to Lauren Leffer of Gizmodo, scientists still don’t know much about this species, which lives in parts of the Indian, Atlantic, and Pacific oceans.
After it was ‘found’, Papadakis supposedly placed the shark on some rocks, took a photo of it and sent the image to a group of scientists. in May 2022 Based solely on this image and a brief description by Papadakis, the researchers incorporated this view into a scientific paper. On several species found for the first time in the Mediterranean.
That’s when the discussion started. Article published in the journal Mediterranean Marine ScienceIt caught the attention of several shark experts, who began to share their doubts about the plausibility of the goblin shark discovery.
A suspiciously similar toy
Even photos of a plastic goblin shark toy suspiciously similar to the example seen in Greece were circulating on social media. Some internet detectives have even gone so far as to draw detailed comparisons between a toy shark and a supposedly real shark, pointing to what appears to be a plastic mold seam near the mouth.
In November, shark researchers got together to publish a commentary on it in the same journal where the original ‘discovery’ was made. They listed ten reasons to doubt its veracity, Including the protruding jaws of the Mediterranean specimen, the number of gill slits, and the length and shape of the fins. They also questioned whether the researchers included only a single photograph of the shark in the article.
“We have doubts that the sample is a natural sample,” they wrote. “We want to encourage the authors to provide additional evidence to strengthen their hypotheses.”
Folks https://t.co/ViIsSoEn3t pic.twitter.com/N7fM0OooIP
David Shiffman (@WhySharksMatter) 15 March 2023
The original researchers responded by writing their own comments. rebuttal in which they doubled down on their original claim. However, they reduced their estimated size for the shark from 80 centimeters (31.5 inches) to 17 to 20 centimeters (about 6.5 to 8 inches). tiny sample could be an embryo. However, this explanation did not satisfy the skeptics either; In fact, it just added fuel to the fire.
“For me, this was proof that something wasn’t quite right,” Will White, senior director of the Australian National Fish Collection, told Live Science’s Sascha Pare. “A specimen that is 17 centimeters long looks very different from a newborn specimen. It would be much less well-formed and have very thin translucent skin.”
correction
The long strife reached its climax a few days ago. original scientists they withdrew both goblin shark entries in his first article as of your rebuttal comment. As Joanna Thompson reported for The Daily Beast, the original authors still believe the goblin shark is real and blame it directly on their skeptical friends.
“Although we have every reason to assume that the finding is true (A few experts on sharks from the Mediterranean and [dos] anonymous critics accepted and supported the publication of this article!), other colleagues sparked a completely unethical debate and claimed, for example, that it was a discarded plastic figurine,” writes Frithjof Kuepper, a marine biodiversity researcher and co-author of the original article. In an email to the Daily Beast at the University of Aberdeen. “To prevent further damage and because the sample was not kept by the citizen, we decided to withdraw the article.”
Researchers criticizing the original article later they also blamed the magazine that published it.. They say the event illustrates the flaws in the scientific peer review process.
“The problem and responsibility lies with the journal editor and critics,” Jürgen Pollerspöck, an independent shark researcher and editor of the Shark References database, tells Annie Roth of the New York Times.
Reference article: https://www.thedailybeast.com/ultra-rare-goblin-shark-discovery-is-really-a-toy-argue-scientists
……
Contact address of the environment department: [email protected]