Friday Cephalopod: underwater astonishments

Here's a question I've wanted to ask for a while - I've read in several places that cuttlefish color vision is somewhat limited - they don't see red, for instance - but the colors they supposedly don't see seem to be part of their camouflage and flash repertoire. I used to think that it might be that "red" works differently at depth (the tested red might be in wavelength frequencies that don't penetrate to the specimens' natural environments), but it seems to be really red to my vision in the footage.

How reliable are the color vision tests?

OK, that color/camouflage stuff was amazing.

Wow, those squid are really something. I'll say, they're in action! LOL

in the comments for the vid:

proves how ridiculous the theory of evolution is

*sigh*

Thanks for this post! That octopus at the end was one of the most incredible things I've ever seen.

Underwater creatures are so awesome. It's amazing which bizarre and yet wonderful animals Nature has created over time :)

That was great, but do all the TED videos use that format? It was really annoying to have to stop and watch the spinning pineapple slice while I waited for the next few seconds to load.

I had to sign in just to slap around the two creationist fools who logged in to demonstrate their stupidity.

Their cluelessness is evinced by their hit-and-run comments.

I'm starting to fear what I might do if I ever run into morons like this in person. Speaking of the evolution of the blood-clotting cascade....

I agree Patrick Quigley, I was just about to slide the video back and watch it again when they obligingly ran the video backwards. Watching octopus do that sort of thing will never cease to amaze and enthrall me.

P-Zed,
off topic: interesting article here in today's Guardian about that stupid Answers In Genesis "Answers Research Journal".

So how did the octopus do the disappearing act? What struck me most was the pattern matching, not just the colour. Do those particular species specialise in hiding in those particular places, or can they adapt to any hiding place, and any pattern?

Octopodes have pretty good eyes and a good brain to match them.

I've read a story long ago about octopus which was fished by marine biologists. They thought it was dead and put it on a newspaper to cut. And suddenly octopus changed its colors into black-and white stripes. It was mimicking the newspaper!

uh...
...did anyone else notice the ID banner on the screen before the speaker began to show his footage?

what the hell?
(perhaps i'm missing something: it's very early...)

I've watched the video like 7 or 8 times now. And every time I'm left thinking, "That's so amazing." Very cool shit.

Yeh I noticed the banner that said "intelligent design" at about 14 seconds into the video. Shame that someone would use such cool videos to lie about the natural world.

A couple of people noticed the "Intelligent Design" banner at the beginning of the talk... for those of you that aren't familiar with TED, it stands for Technology Entertainment Design. That banner was not the title of Gallo's talk (it was the title of the session, which would have been made up of several talks - e.g. John Meada and Maira Kalman both talk in a March 2007 session called Simplicity), and had nothing to do with "Intelligent Design" as most of the people reading this blog would understand it - it was just a slightly unfortunate reference to the 'Design' part of the acronym.

Additionally, it doesn't seem to be consistent with Gallo's research articles on ocean ridges and tectonics, and the talk actually fits into TED's "Evolution's Genius" theme on their website.

Re #13, #15, #16

If you look at TED's "Evolution is Genius" you actually something a little more disturbing.

"About this theme

TED adores great design. A growing number of speakers focus their Talks on the most elegant designs that exist: those in the natural world."

Someone I read every-now-and-then once made a prediction (one I agree with), the next rebranding of creationism won't be ID, it will be "evolution".

I admire them for reclaiming design. There IS design in nature, the point of evolution is not that it knocked the fact of design out of the ring. It is that evolution tells you how you get the work of design without a designer.

Also, have you thought that someone surfing the net for biological design would be almost guaranteed to run across TED's site? In that sense it is a honeypot and I say good on them for it.

It is that evolution tells you how you get the work of design without a designer.

indeed.

http://www.pnas.org/cgi/content/full/104/suppl_1/8567

Re #17

I think you're reading way too much into the references to design. Check out the list of speakers for TED conferences (you'll notice Dan Dennett, Richard Dawkins, Michael Shermer... the list goes on). Suggesting that TED's design references are pushing an ID agenda is a massive stretch.

Putting this into a cephalopod-related thread, I'm wondering just how late I am in coming upon the advertisement for the wonderful "Tentacle Arm" and telling you about it? Has everyone else already seen it, or am I spreading the joy further?

http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2008/01/must_have_tentacles.php