Giant Isopod Dies After 5-year Hunger Strike

Giant isopod dies after 5-year hunger strike

The huge deep sea crustacean was kept at a Japanese aquarium and hadn't eaten for 1,869 days.

The peculiar creature sprung to fame after footage of it appeared online and the story of its sudden refusal to eat went viral. One of nine giant isopods kept at Japan's Toba Aquarium, the last thing it was thought to have eaten was some fish back on January 2nd 2009.

Measuring an average of up to 36cm in length, giant isopods are rarely seen but are thought to be abundant in the cold depths of the Atlantic, Pacific and Indian Oceans. A relative of the common woodlouse, the isopods are of little interest to fishermen and the few that are caught tend to end up being scavenged before they can be reeled in.

This makes my 3 -day juice cleansing diet seem like a walk in the park.
I am always in awe as to what these deep sea creatures are capable of. 5 years!!!
How on earth is that even possible?
Apparently they tried feeding it , but in vain.

Gosh, this really fascinated me but at the same time ruined my appetite... I made shell pasta in white sauce today.
I think my husband can have it all.

Original source from : the-japan-news.com...

Second source: www.unexplained-mysteries.com...

Have a great day everyone,
RR

That's interesting. I wonder what its normal life span is, and presuming there will be a post mortem exam whether they will release their findings.

reply to post by Rainbowresidue


Those things are utterly horrifying.

Some of them will eat the tongue of a fish, and then live inside the fish's mouth, replacing the tongue with itself.

Tongue Eating Isopod

This parasite enters fish through the gills, and then attaches itself at the base of the fish's tongue.

...

The parasite destroys the fish's tongue, and then attaches itself to the stub of what was once its tongue and becomes the fish's new tongue.

Ew!

Scary!

Run!

Squish!

Apparently, captivity is abhorrent to all creatures.

reply to post by AliceBleachWhite


Thanks for the extra information AliceBleachWhite.

Though I must say, I wouldn't go near that thing in a million years.
And poor fish, I had no idea these creatures were parasitic too.


Bleh!

reply to post by kosmicjack


So true!
Still I wonder how it managed to do it. That's too long a time to be considered something similar to hibernation, isn't it?
I'm not a biology teacher,hence my lack of knowledge,sorry.

reply to post by AliceBleachWhite


I thank you in advance for the nightmares that photo will give me :/

The necropsy ought to be interesting, I've love to know how it handled not eating for so long (and whatever light it may shed on it's age)

reply to post by Rainbowresidue


RIP peace little one, just goes to show how their intelligence far out reaches what we humans understand about that which exists above intelligence.

This little one its fate and perhaps even the fate of its genetic families future, this one chose to die rather than live with that understanding, that higher truth and prophecy.

reply to post by Rainbowresidue


Also, I think they are naturally perfect, beautiful and divine looking.

antar
reply to post by Rainbowresidue

 

Also, I think they are naturally perfect, beautiful and divine looking.

I don't know.I am really trying my hardest to respect all creatures but this one looks like it came straight out of that Aliens movie.

It does have a 'well designed' look to it, I'll give you that.

And yes,I feel sorry - no matter how ugly I think it looks-that it starved itself to death. A lot of animals start harming themselves or get sick in captivity.

Thanks for sharing your thoughts, much appreciated.

If someone saw this little critter on Mars the world would go nuts. It never ceases to amaze me to see people look so hard for alien life among the stars when they are already here.

Is anybody 'else going to eat that?

reply to post by Rainbowresidue


Thanks. Interesting. Captivity hurts - even lice.

F&S

Just an FYI for those who like facts put into USA terms: 36 cm = 14.1732 inches! Over a foot in length! The pic of the isopod attaching itself to that fish's tongue, I am assuming, is a normal-sized isopod, not a giant isopod?! Or.....that is one big fish!!

Could the Pacific isopod be the ocean's cockroach? Sure looks an acts like it.

reply to post by AliceBleachWhite


It's a crustacean!!! I EAT Crustaceans!!!! That thing looks YUM with a bit of Garlic butter.

A bit like our Morton Bay Bug here in Australia.

Since it was in water 24/7, it could have been living on microscopic stuff in the water; if it didn't get appreciably smaller in that amount of time, it was sure as heck eating something, if only algae and plankton.

Question is why? What did this prove? Certain animals in captivity will starve themselves, is it shocking that an isopod would starve itself? As the article mentions, they had others of it's kind, that did eat, to observe. You'd think after, I don't know..., two years if it was not eating, they'd return it to it's natural environment. I'm guessing they will find it survived for five years because it's body was eating itself after a while, after the initial stages of starvation.

Its fun to watch these things with a flashlight in reef tanks at night! Theres sooo many of them (isopods & copepods)

Albeit, just tiny compared to this monster. Good to know they can survive 5yrs! Humans can barely survive 5 DAYS in practice.

1,800 days without nourishment and it was active as well as moving during that time? The article seems to suggest it was quite a popular attraction, so I'd also guess it was far from hibernation in it's appearance.

Now if we temporarily set aside what is "known" by those I swear make more of a living at being right than being correct at times.....1 of two things is true here.

#1. It was burning energy (and all things that are active in any form..burn energy) for 1800+ days without replenishment and would seem to be a world's record holder for consuming more than it took in ..obviously..like a real life energizer bunny. ...and going...and going...and going...

or

#2. Critters have more than one way of taking in nourishment and more than one thing, quite possibly serves as that for them. I think it's more likely it went on a 5 year diet in ways we don't yet understand for this creepy crawly. The article says they are known of but rarely studied (or cared about) or known of in great detail.

The roaches of the deep, I guess.

Maybe they draw from the water itself at times or, being ATS and all for theories...maybe they draw energy from other critters as something equally useful as opposed to eating them. It seems more logical and likely than an 1,800+ day hunger strike.

Just sayin'..