Talk:Blue-ringed octopus

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 16 January 2021 and 5 May 2021. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Destinyxecology.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 16:00, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Difficult to believe

" After no female kills the babies and then dies." What?

Dumping useful websites

I'm just dumping them ad I find them at the moment. I'll add to the article later.

[1][2][3][4] theresa knott 15:10, 6 May 2004 (UTC) HI THIS MAKES NO SCENCE —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.77.20.158 (talk) 22:07, 25 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Common names

'Hapalochlaena nierstraszi' doesn't have a common name given here or in any of the databases referred to by the Cephalopod WikiProject - should I go ahead and mention that it doesn't have one, period? As it is, it looks sort of sloppy and unfinished with three species having their common names given and then one with just the scientific. Tinderblast 00:55, 15 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Fine by me. Any ideas as to why it doesn't have a common name? Is it really rare? Theresa Knott (a tenth stroke) 00:59, 15 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

There is no common name given to all species. CephBase lists common names for many species, but not for all. Whether it is because the species is rare or recent or disputed varies by species. In this case (and I'm lax in adding this level of distinction) is because the species validity is in dispute. - UtherSRG 20:13, July 15, 2005 (UTC)

Robson

After much googling i can't find any sort of biographical details for Robson except that his name is Guy C Robson and he worked at some stage with or for the British museum. Hopefully this is a leg up for the next person who goes searching for Robson. The bellman 09:23, 5 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

ink sack -> home aquariums

according to this site either Southern Blue-ringed or all blue-ringed octopuses lack ink sacks and thus make popular home aquarium pets (one of the major problems with keeping cephalopods is them inking because they are stressed and then drowning in their own ink). So is it just the southern blue-ringed or all blue-ringed who lack an ink sack? The bellman 13:59, 15 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Most toxic?

I've heard the "most toxic sea creature" claim made about other animals as well. Shouldn't there be a source for this claim? 63.229.19.124 04:35, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. Adding uncited after the claim. Thorprime 22:05, 9 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I believe this claim is false for the blue-ringed octopus, could be better attributed to Chironex fleckeri. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 131.111.225.57 (talk • contribs) .

Pictures for BRO

My wife (Jenny) works at AQWA (Underwater World -style) in Perth, W.Australia. They have a BRO but is struggling to get it close to the glass for a shot. She maintains a series of educational web pages starting at http://users.bigpond.net.au/je.st/index.html The pages are designed for high school level readers. I have linked the BRO page to the external references. The photos on her pages reference the photo owners, other than her own ones. --Glandelf 13:23, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Have added picture of the Greater blue-ringed octopus, and even took the liberty of replacing the one in the taxobox. Still need pics of the other two species though. How can I check who made the request so I can notify them? Jnpet 07:09, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Check the history of where the request was made. - UtherSRG (talk) 12:25, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What is this?

I just snapped this photo while diving today, is it possibly one of the species missing a photo? BRO image

Envenomation

The article isn't clear about how envenomation happens. It mentions biting, but doesn't say whether the bite is lethal. Can the toxin be absorbed through skin? Is one bite sufficient for lethal dose?

erm..it mentions that it has enough venom o kill 26 adult humans. It also says the bite is lethal. 24.77.19.12 (talk) 02:33, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'll put this here, because I'm not an octopus expert. From http://www.barrierreefaustralia.com/the-great-barrier-reef/blueringedoctopus.htm "The poison is not injected but is contained in the octopus's saliva, which comes from two glands each as big as its brain. Poison from the one is used on its main prey, crabs, and is relatively harmless to humans. Poison from the other gland serves as defense against predators. The blue-ringed octopus either secretes the poison in the vicinity of its prey, waits until it is immobile and then devours it, or it jumps out and envelops the prey in its 8 tentacles and bites" Not going to put it in the article because I'm not an expert, you guys write better biology, and I just don't want to meddle. Jjdon (talk) 23:57, 6 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is intended to be read by anyone needing information. "Envenomation" is an obscure term and may confuse those with limited vocabulary, or whose English is limited - what is wrong with "poisoning"? Eschew obfuscation! JMBryant (talk) 05:12, 31 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

How does it glow?

Inquiring minds want to know! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.94.149.156 (talk) 05:36, 7 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Deaths? Size?

The article doesn't mention:

Size. I found "Maximum length: 24 cm (9 in) Maximum height: 28 cm (11 in)"[5]
Number of deaths. I found an unsourced comment online that they kill 3 people per year in Australia. I'm from Sydney, have been a regular beachgoer at times, and never seen. I thought that they hardly ever killed anyone, as they hide around rocks, and only use their bite on humans in self-defence - but I don't actually know. Some facts would be good. --Chriswaterguy talk 02:54, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

About size of a golf ball. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ilovemaria (talk • contribs)

This conflicts with the figures we already have, which give a range of about 12-20cm; a regulation golf ball is only about 4cm. --GenericBob (talk) 20:36, 24 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Are these size variations from comparing full size to just the body (i.e. no arms) size? 58.6.130.208 (talk) 11:22, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

merge with Octopus attacks in Australia

Suggest hese two article be merged into this one;

there is no coverage of fatalities cause by the species in this article,
very few occassions when such fatalities have occured they dont warrant a stand a lone article

Given the toxicity of the venom its logical to have some information on the circumstances of deaths caused by this animal, there just isn't need to have two articles about it. Gnan garra 14:06, 24 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Support. Despite the small number of people actually killed by BROs, the venom is their main claim to fame. Without it they'd be just another under-appreciated cephalopod. It should be covered directly in the main article. --GenericBob (talk) 23:09, 24 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Support. If the attacks page referred to a number of species of octopus, instead of simply the blue-ringed variety, it would make sense to stand alone as an article. This isn't the case, so merging seems like a great idea. Iciac (talk) 02:59, 25 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Support parent article is plenty small enough to accommodate material. Casliber (talk · contribs) 12:58, 25 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Support Orderinchaos 17:35, 25 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Not Support The attacks in the newspapers do not mention the species James4750 (talk) 22:00, 25 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

...which is exactly why they should be included on the main Blue-ringed octopus page which covers the four species of Blue-ringed octopus. James, this material would buff up and help what could be a really good article on Blue-ringed octopuses. The best way to promote the material (where moer people will actually read it) is by doing this and aiming for Good Article or Featured Article status. cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 23:03, 25 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Blue ringed octopus are in other countries, this information is more specific to Australia. James4750 (talk) 00:50, 26 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Okay then, why should attacks in Australia be split off from possible attacks elsewhere? Why not. have a comprehensive article which covers the topic in detail so all material can be seen on the one page? Casliber (talk · contribs) 00:56, 26 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. We could in theory have sub-pages on "blue-ringed octopus attacks in Australia during the day on men under 25" and so on, but it wouldn't add value to WP. I don't see the need to go beyond the basic BRO page here. --GenericBob (talk) 08:54, 26 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Support as per others. --AussieLegend (talk) 05:07, 26 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Support but Suggestion. This animal is discussed in the Animal attacks in Australia briefly. Perhaps it could go there instead... though I think it would need expansion, at least it is more related to the article at hand. Avalik (talk) 11:04, 26 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Support The article is very small and it seems just to cover the Blue Ring Octopus Scizor2 (talk) 23:04, 3 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Support. Once the non-notable content about non-fatal "attacks" is removed (as I and Gnangarra have both done now), there is no content that is not in Animal attacks in Australia. --Merbabu (talk) 23:52, 14 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I merged it to Blue-ring octopus per apparent universal agreement (except for article creator). Animal attacks in Australia has all this info anyway - so maybe that is a better redirect? What do you think? --Merbabu (talk) 01:28, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

After thinking about it, the octopus attack information seems to fit better with the animal attacks article. Scizor2 (talk) 10:00, 29 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Question on male Blue Ring Octopi

I have a question that has come up from the "Reproduction" section of this article. I am wondering if males have a 1 year life span like the females. The female dies because she doesn't eat for a period of time while keeping eggs safe. It says nothing on the males in this section. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.110.227.101 (talk) 18:54, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Improvements to Venom topic

I read the section on venom and found some of the sentences to be way to long and grammatically incorrect. It can be very confusing to someone who knows little about an octopus and having to go to the sources to clear up what is being stated defeats the purpose of having wikipedida. Here is an example of something that probably would do better if it was shortened to smaller and more concise sentences, it also could be the result of typos or poor spelling but sometimes less can actually do a better job of describing something:

"The major neurotoxin component of blue-ringed octopus is venom was originally known as maculotoxin but was later found to be identical to tetrodotoxin,[4] a neurotoxin also found in pufferfish and some poison dart frogs[5] that is 10,000 times more toxic than cyanide.[6]" — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.226.196.247 (talk) 18:15, 25 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalised

Can someone more experienced than I restore the page?

John Spraggs (talk) 23:48, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Reference in popular culture

I suggest an additional section.

Reference in popular culture: The Blue-ringed Octopus is the prominent symbol of the secret order of female bandits and smugglers in the James Bond film Octopussy, appearing in an aquarium tank and on silk robes and as a tattoo on women in the order.

References: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0086034/trivia http://www.cbsnews.com/news/tiny-but-deadly-spike-in-blue-ringed-octopus-sightings-sparks-fear-of-invasion-in-japan/ (the appearance in the tank is not described in the references, but it is directly observed in the tank in the film on several occasions)

Swatson42 (talk) 11:11, 5 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Behavior During Agitation

The second paragraph states that the brown patches darken when the octopus is agitated, yet the Behavior section states that the brown patches lighten to yellow when the octopus is agitated. Which one is it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mddsteve (talk • contribs) 16:40, 6 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I think you might have mis-read something. It is the body that becomes yellow, not the dark patches. DrChrissy ^(talk) 19:43, 6 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Blue-ringed octopus. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:42, 4 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Blue-ringed octopus. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090218092057/http://animal.discovery.com/convergence/oceans-deadliest/deadliest-creatures/deadliest-creatures_05.html to http://animal.discovery.com/convergence/oceans-deadliest/deadliest-creatures/deadliest-creatures_05.html
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.weichtiere.at/Mollusks/Kopffuesser/blauring.html
Corrected formatting/usage for http://lifeinthefastlane.com/2009/04/toxicology-conundrum-011/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:41, 22 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 9 August 2017

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Change the word envenomated to envenomed in the "Toxicity" section. 130.215.119.110 (talk) 19:52, 9 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Not done: The wikilink for this change leads to the article for Envenomation, which conflicts here. jd22292 (Jalen D. Folf) (talk) 20:02, 9 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Wet suit. Divers.

Can the bite penetrate a diver’s wet suit? MBG02 (talk) 10:29, 24 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Plural form: octopi vs octopuses

We've had at least 6 months of back and forth between "octopi" and "octopuses" with at least one attempt to add the Greek "octopodes". Both "octopi" and "octopuses" are accepted English plurals, whereas "octopodes" is not. I don't care which of the two standard plurals we use as long as the article is consistent and we stop changing the usage. Let's reach consensus on which we are going to use, and then we can refer any future change attempts to the talk page.

Unless someone has some compelling reason to chose one over the other, I suggest that we.just use the variant that was first used in this article. That appears to be "octopuses" from this 2004 edit by user:UtherSRG. Meters (talk) 07:49, 10 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Support a consensus-based end to the disruption. "Octopuses" is the original variant used in the article, which is a good reason to keep it in the spirit of RETAIN. (Full disclosure: it's also my preferred variant.) Thanks for raising this Meters. GirthSummit _(blether) 08:00, 10 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Support and also note Octopus#Etymology_and_pluralisation. - UtherSRG (talk) 02:54, 11 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Good link. I'll use it when I make the change (assuming no spectacular argument against comes up n the next few days). Meters (talk) 04:13, 11 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Support octopuses

octopi is so unusual as to be jarring and seem like hypercorrection, or even jocular
RETAIN
Etymological correctness adds a little more weight (though it should be ignored if octopi were common usage -- which it isn't)

catslash (talk) 18:22, 11 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Support octopuses. mostly for reasons outlined above. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:55, 10 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]