How ultra-black fish disappear in the deepest seas(nytimes.com)
nytimes.com
How ultra-black fish disappear in the deepest seas
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/16/science/ultra-black-fish.html
33 comments
He's funny on Twitter.
"Call me when a bird does this": https://twitter.com/Sternarchella/status/1220928865591271424...
"Imagine dropping this hard. Birds could never." https://twitter.com/Sternarchella/status/1274179373235568641...
"Call me when a bird does this": https://twitter.com/Sternarchella/status/1220928865591271424...
"Imagine dropping this hard. Birds could never." https://twitter.com/Sternarchella/status/1274179373235568641...
If you can ever pick up the book Fly Pushing in some library (or if you're rich just buy), it's a great read about drosophila handling and genetics that is fascinating even if you don't intend to work with them. And they constantly bash worm people. The two are at odds with each other and it's an age-old battle. I'm constantly torn between the two organisms though. Some of the most "pleasurable" science I have done I did with these creatures.
Huh. I worked in fly the last 5 years and I’ve not noticed this (we work next to a worm lab). Fly are pretty low on the model species list (human, rat, mouse, fish), and with cell lines experimenting on human cells is becoming more prevalent. Fly researchers know they aren’t at the top and seem quite pleasant to work with. Still with orthologous gene mapping working with fly genetics still has lots of uses.
Twitter ;)
These ultrablack fish are on par with the blackest artificial pigments:
“A feat of engineering allowed humans to best them all with synthetic materials, some of which reflect only 0.045 percent of incoming light. (“Black” paper, on the other hand, returns a whopping 10 percent of the light it meets.)
Now, it seems fish may come close to trouncing them all.
One species profiled in the paper, a bioluminescent anglerfish in the genus Oneirodes, reflects as little as 0.044 to 0.051 percent of the deep-sea light it encounters. The other 99.95 percent, Mr. Davis and his colleagues found, gets lost in a labyrinth of light-swallowing pigments until it effectively disappears.”
The use of ultrablack combined with bioluminescence is especially interesting — the fish puts a glowing lure to attract other fish, and has ultrablack skin to stay nearly invisible as the prey approaches.
“A feat of engineering allowed humans to best them all with synthetic materials, some of which reflect only 0.045 percent of incoming light. (“Black” paper, on the other hand, returns a whopping 10 percent of the light it meets.)
Now, it seems fish may come close to trouncing them all.
One species profiled in the paper, a bioluminescent anglerfish in the genus Oneirodes, reflects as little as 0.044 to 0.051 percent of the deep-sea light it encounters. The other 99.95 percent, Mr. Davis and his colleagues found, gets lost in a labyrinth of light-swallowing pigments until it effectively disappears.”
The use of ultrablack combined with bioluminescence is especially interesting — the fish puts a glowing lure to attract other fish, and has ultrablack skin to stay nearly invisible as the prey approaches.
Fun pigment fact: everyone can use the "pinkest pink" except the inventor of the "blackest black" https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.wired.com/story/vantablack-...
He didn’t invent it, he purchased an exclusive license to use Vantablack in art.
Also, posting AMP links is treason, according to Friend Computer. Please report to the nearest suicide booth with clearance orange or lower for further processing. Using yellow suicide booths or higher will result in increased clone mortality.
Also, posting AMP links is treason, according to Friend Computer. Please report to the nearest suicide booth with clearance orange or lower for further processing. Using yellow suicide booths or higher will result in increased clone mortality.
Paranoia! most fun RPG ever. TRUST NOONE. KEEP YOUR LASER HANDY AT ALL TIMES.
once had beer with designer Greg Costikyan. (while Steve Jackson stood nearby plugging his ears.)
once had beer with designer Greg Costikyan. (while Steve Jackson stood nearby plugging his ears.)
Yup. Auto downvote for all AMP links
Does the suicide booth accept coins attached to a string? Or is it all crypto nowadays?
How can you publish an article about ultra-black fish without putting a picture of a fish in some recognizable environment?
Put it on a lab bench, next to a human hand and some printer paper. Or a banana. Anything the reader might recognize.
"While some ultra-black fish might appear brownish, it’s the product of camera overexposure and editing" Great. You know what does that mean? You need to find a better photo. That's what it means. What kind of lazy caption that is.
Put it on a lab bench, next to a human hand and some printer paper. Or a banana. Anything the reader might recognize.
"While some ultra-black fish might appear brownish, it’s the product of camera overexposure and editing" Great. You know what does that mean? You need to find a better photo. That's what it means. What kind of lazy caption that is.
https://www.sciencealert.com/one-of-nature-s-blackest-colour...
>Incidentally, this is what initially piqued Karen Osborn's interest. As a research zoologist at the Smithsonian's National Museum of Natural History, she grew frustrated trying to photograph a striking black fish that had been pulled from the deep sea. "It didn't matter how you set up the camera or lighting—they just sucked up all the light," says Osborn.
>Incidentally, this is what initially piqued Karen Osborn's interest. As a research zoologist at the Smithsonian's National Museum of Natural History, she grew frustrated trying to photograph a striking black fish that had been pulled from the deep sea. "It didn't matter how you set up the camera or lighting—they just sucked up all the light," says Osborn.
The photos in that article are full of nope.
It is literally impossible for us with our human eyes to perceive these fish in anything like their natural environment.
They aren't even black, to us. We evolved to see things in sunlight. These fish are black at the wavelengths present in the deep. That isn't sunlight but luminescence. Shine sunlight on them and they could be any colour, something irrelevant for a fish that may well live without ever seeing sunlight. So we have a black fish illuminated by a light our eyes were not designed to see, in a place so dark we see can see nothing. Those aren't great preconditions for an accurate photoshoot.
They aren't even black, to us. We evolved to see things in sunlight. These fish are black at the wavelengths present in the deep. That isn't sunlight but luminescence. Shine sunlight on them and they could be any colour, something irrelevant for a fish that may well live without ever seeing sunlight. So we have a black fish illuminated by a light our eyes were not designed to see, in a place so dark we see can see nothing. Those aren't great preconditions for an accurate photoshoot.
The article states: "“It’s like looking at a black hole,” Mr. Davis said."
Presumably Mr. Davis is a human, and is describing the black hole-ness of these fish as he perceived them. In the sunlight. With his eyes. I would like a picture of that. Because seeing is believing.
"They aren't even black, to us." You make this whole mythology up about how the fish are. I'm not sure why. Yes they are black. Anything with that reflectivity will be black to us. But we don't have to argue about that, we can just look at this picture of a Pacific Blackdragon: https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CwGT8egWEAAtdMf.jpg
Presumably Mr. Davis is a human, and is describing the black hole-ness of these fish as he perceived them. In the sunlight. With his eyes. I would like a picture of that. Because seeing is believing.
"They aren't even black, to us." You make this whole mythology up about how the fish are. I'm not sure why. Yes they are black. Anything with that reflectivity will be black to us. But we don't have to argue about that, we can just look at this picture of a Pacific Blackdragon: https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CwGT8egWEAAtdMf.jpg
... I'm trying to think of a witty comment on how he's never seen a black hole with his own eyes, either ...
>> You make this whole mythology up about how the fish are. I'm not sure why. Yes they are black.
Funny that the one in your picture isn't. The lighting is so poor in that photo. There is more shadow than illumination, and many parts of the fish are definitely not black.
Proper black looks more like this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SY4YX-ofE60
Funny that the one in your picture isn't. The lighting is so poor in that photo. There is more shadow than illumination, and many parts of the fish are definitely not black.
Proper black looks more like this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SY4YX-ofE60
Straight up nightmare fuel.
If there wasn't overexposure and editing, the fish would be just as black as the background, and you wouldn't be able to see them. Also, there may be none of those fish living in a more recognizable environment. A dead fish is too different from a living one, so it's not worth picturing them.
Those photos are actually very good. They show in clear detail how those fish look like, including colors (not all entirely black). They are indeed missing a clear indication of their size (that could be artificial), but otherwise there isn't much to improve.
Those photos are actually very good. They show in clear detail how those fish look like, including colors (not all entirely black). They are indeed missing a clear indication of their size (that could be artificial), but otherwise there isn't much to improve.
"If there wasn't overexposure and editing, the fish would be just as black as the background, and you wouldn't be able to see them."
Sure thing. In that environment that is true. I bet they didn't measure their reflectivity in the deep, but on a lab bench though.
"A dead fish is too different from a living one, so it's not worth picturing them."
Maybe so, except that's not true. Here is a picture of a common fangtooth: https://i.pinimg.com/originals/a6/cd/3f/a6cd3f0a9cc47b9794fa... And here is an other one: https://insider.si.edu/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/fangtooth-...
Any of these pictures would have been better to illustrate their colour.
Sure thing. In that environment that is true. I bet they didn't measure their reflectivity in the deep, but on a lab bench though.
"A dead fish is too different from a living one, so it's not worth picturing them."
Maybe so, except that's not true. Here is a picture of a common fangtooth: https://i.pinimg.com/originals/a6/cd/3f/a6cd3f0a9cc47b9794fa... And here is an other one: https://insider.si.edu/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/fangtooth-...
Any of these pictures would have been better to illustrate their colour.
Some relevant photos in this article linked from TFA.
Vantablack absorbs up to 99.96% and the species of fish absorbs 99.95%. They must be talking about certain cells or pigments rather than the entire fish since they do not appear ultra-black in the images I see.
Found in the paper:
> We used a back-reflectance probe calibrated to a 2% diffuse reflectance standard to measure the reflectance at perpendicular incidence from the blackest undamaged patches of skin.
Found in the paper:
> We used a back-reflectance probe calibrated to a 2% diffuse reflectance standard to measure the reflectance at perpendicular incidence from the blackest undamaged patches of skin.
The sublinked NYTime article on ultra-black does a good job explaining both biological and manufactured blackest-of-blacks (with carbon nanotubes):
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/11/science/black-fashion-phy...
Although predating the fish study.
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/11/science/black-fashion-phy...
Although predating the fish study.
[deleted]
Title might be a bit misleading: they disappear against the black background, it's not that their numbers are diminishing.
Our software decapitates some titles that have 'how' at the head. Usually they're less baity that way but occasionally a wrong meaning is created. We've re-howed this one.
But let's be honest, their numbers are probably diminishing too.
If they weren’t already, they will be now that humans have found them
I'm sick of reading internet arguments about polymorphism and browser monoculture and borrow checking and static linking. Someone please tell me where I can go on the internet to read biologists arguing about their favorite animals.