I remember many years ago reading a rule of journalism, that stated that, if an article asks a question in the title, the answer is almost always "No." That's because the question is usually something outrageous or controversial that's meant to pull the reader's attention, but leaving it as a question doesn't commit the author to actually sound like they're backing said statement. They're just asking questions.
In this case, the answer is, again, most likely "no." A shark is almost certainly not the father.
Yes, Charlotte, the ray in question, is, in fact, pregnant with pups. No, she has not been housed with a male for such a long time as to make a previous pairing unlikely to have been the father. Yes, she is housed with sharks - white-spotted bamboo sharks, to be specific - two of which are males and at least one of which appears to have mated with her, as evidenced by some telltale love-bite marks. Mating, however, does not equal a pregnancy, especially between separate species.
"I give a shark the same odds of being the father that I would give Elvis or Bigfoot of being the father - zero," says Demian Chapman of Mote Marine Lab and Aquarium, whereas Kady Lyons of Georgia Aquarium plays down the possibility of any "shark-ray shenanigans" (which is such a fun phrase).
The answer is much more likely to be parthenogenesis, or virgin birth, a phenomena which has been seen a wide variety of species. Despite its prevalence (in some species it's the default form of reproduction, in others, an extreme rarity), the media insists of treating it like some sort of absolute mystery ("Scientists are shocked by...") whenever a zoo or aquarium announces that their snake or shark or what-have-you has produced offspring without the aid of a male. Even though these "shocking" occurrences, which don't really shock anyone in the field, happen with some regularity.
Which reminds me of another rule of journalism. Sensationalism sells.
No comments:
Post a Comment