Hail to the Squid – New Species of Extinct Vampire-Squid-Like Cephalopod With 10 Arms Named After Biden

Vampyropod Reconstruction Crop

Hail to the squid — A vampyropod fit for a president

Researchers at Yale and the American Museum of Natural History have identified the earliest known relative of octopuses and vampire squid — and named it after the 46th president of the United States.

Syllipsimopodi bideni had 10 arms, fins, and rows of suckers to grasp prey. It lived 328 million years ago and represents a new species of vampyropod, the group of marine animals that includes modern octopuses and vampire squid.

The researchers named the animal after President Joseph R. Biden to honor the new president, who had just been inaugurated at the time the study was submitted for publication, and to recognize his commitment to science.

But the presidential name is just one part of the animal’s significance.

“Our findings suggest that the earliest vampyropods, at least superficially, resembled squids that are living today,” said Christopher Whalen, a National Science Foundation postdoctoral fellow in Yale’s Department of Earth & Planetary Sciences and at the American Museum of Natural History.

Vampyropod Reconstruction

An artistic reconstruction of the newly described 328-million-year-old vampyropod. Credit: © K. Whalen

Whalen is lead author of a study in the journal Nature Communications about the discovery.

Syllipsimopodi bideni also challenges the predominant arguments for vampyropod origins and offers a new model for the evolution of internally-shelled cephalopods,” he said.

Whalen and co-author Neil Landman of the American Museum of Natural History made the identification from a specimen originally discovered in central Montana, which is now part of the collection of the Royal Ontario Museum.

Syllipsimopodi bideni extends the fossil record for vampyropods by nearly 82 million years. It is the only known vampyropod to have 10 functional arms. By contrast, octopods have eight arms, and modern vampire squid have eight arms and two filaments. Other modern squids and cuttlefish have 10 arms.

Early vampyropods such as Syllipsimopodi bideni also possessed a piece of anatomy called a gladius — the flattened, semitransparent remnant of an internal shell.

“Today, only squids and their relatives, and vampire squid, have a gladius,” Whalen said. “Octopods have reduced it to a fin support or stylets, which are small, hard, bar-shaped structures.”

Whalen said Syllipsimopodi bideni had a torpedo-shaped body. Its fins were large enough to perhaps function as stabilizers and to help it swim. One pair of its arms was considerably longer than the other four pairs, similar to the two elongated tentacles of modern squids. The researchers speculate that Syllipsimopodi bideni used its longer arms to capture prey — smaller, shelled animals, perhaps — and its shorter arms to confine and manipulate prey.

As for why the researchers named the animal after Biden, Whalen said the publication was accepted soon after the president’s inauguration and the January 6 insurrection at the Capitol.

“I wanted to somehow acknowledge the moment in a way that was more positive and forward-looking,” he said.

“I was encouraged by the plans President Biden put forward to counter anthropogenic climate change, and his general sentiment that politicians should listen to scientists,” Whalen added.

Reference: “Fossil coleoid cephalopod from the Mississippian Bear Gulch Lagerstätte sheds light on early vampyropod evolution” by Christopher D. Whalen and Neil H. Landman, 8 March 2022, Nature Communications.
DOI: 10.1038/s41467-022-28333-5

Grants from the National Science Foundation’s Postdoctoral Research Fellowship in Biology Program and the Paleontological Society funded the research.

24 Comments on "Hail to the Squid – New Species of Extinct Vampire-Squid-Like Cephalopod With 10 Arms Named After Biden"

  1. How apropos to name a 328 million yr old vampyropod after Biden.

  2. Babu G. Ranganathan | March 9, 2022 at 8:21 am | Reply

    Babu G. Ranganathan*
    (B.A. Bible/Biology)


    JUST BECAUSE something exists in nature does not mean it was invented by nature. If all the chemicals (i.e. amino acids, nucleic acids, etc.) necessary to make a cell were left to themselves, “Mother Nature” would have no ability to organize them into a cell. It requires an already existing cell to bring about another cell. The cell exists and reproduces in nature but nature didn’t invent or design it! Nature didn’t originate the cell or any form of life. An intelligent power outside of nature had to be responsible.

    Miller, in his famous experiment in 1953, showed that amino acids (the building blocks of life) could form by chance. But, it’s not enough just to have amino acids. The various amino acids that make-up life must link together in a precise sequence, just like the letters in a sentence, to form functioning protein molecules. It has never been shown that various amino acids can bind together into a sequence by chance to form protein molecules.

    Natural laws may explain how an airplane or cell works, but it’s not rational to believe that undirected natural laws can bring about an airplane or a cell.

    ONCE YOU HAVE a complete and living cell then the genetic program (or code) and biological machinery exist to direct the formation of more cells, but how could the cell have originated naturally when no directing code and mechanisms existed in nature?

    Mathematicians have said any event in the universe with odds of 10 to 50th power or greater is impossible! The probability of just an average size protein molecule arising by chance is 10 to the 65th power. Even the simplest cell is made up of many millions of various protein molecules along with and DNA/RNA..

    The late great British scientist Sir Frederick Hoyle calculated that the odds of even the simplest cell coming into existence by chance is 10 to the 40,000th power! How large is this? Consider that the total number of atoms in our universe is 10 to the 82nd power.

    The cell didn’t evolve. A partially evolved cell would quickly disintegrate, not wait millions of years to become complete and living.

    WHAT ABOUT EVOLUTION? Only evolution within “kinds” is genetically possible (i.e. varieties of dogs, cats, horses, cows, etc.), but not evolution across “kinds” (i.e. from sea sponge to human). How could species have survived if their vital tissues, organs, reproductive systems were still evolving? Survival of the fittest would actually have prevented such evolution! Only limited evolution, variations of already existing genes and traits, is possible. Nature is mindless and has no ability to design and program entirely new genes for entirely new traits.

    WHAT ABOUT NEW SPECIES: Although new species have come into existence, they don’t carry any new genes. They’ve become new species only because they can’t be crossed back with the original parent stock for various biological reasons. A biological “kind” allows for new species but not new genes. Nature has no ability to invent new genes for new traits. Only limited variations and adaptations are possible in nature, and all strictly within a biological “kind” (i.e. varieties of dogs, cats, etc.).

    All species of plants and animals in the fossil record are found complete, fully formed, and fully functional. This is powerful evidence that all species came into existence as complete and fully formed from the beginning. This is only possible by creation.

    What about natural selection? Natural selection doesn’t produce biological traits or variations. It can only “select” from biological variations that are possible and which have survival value. That’s why it’s called natural “selection.” The real issue is what biological variations are possible, not natural selection. Only variations and mutations of already existing genes or traits are possible.

    Dr. Randy J. Guliuzza’s extensive research points to a better explanation than natural selection for variation and adaptation in nature. Dr. Guliuzza explains that species have pre-engineered mechanisms that enable organisms to continuously track and respond to environmental changes with system elements that correspond to human-designed tracking systems. This model is called CET (continuous environmental tracking). His research strongly indicates that living things have been pre-engineered to produce the right adaptations and changes required to live in changing environments. It’s much like a car that’s been pre-engineered so that the head lights turn on automatically when day changes to night.

    Modern evolutionists believe and hope that over, supposedly, millions of years, random mutations in the genetic code caused by environmental radiation will generate entirely new genes for natural selection to use. This is total blind and irrational faith on the part of evolutionists. It’s much like believing that randomly changing the sequence of letters in a romance novel, over millions of years, will turn it into a book on astronomy! That’s the kind of blind faith macro-evolutionists have.

    Mutations are accidents in the genetic, are mostly harmful, and have no capability of producing greater complexity in the code. Even if a good accident occurred, for every good one there would be hundreds of harmful ones with the net result, over time, being harmful, even lethal, to the species. Even if a single mutation is not immediately harmful, the accumulation of mutations over time will be harmful. At best, mutations only produce further variations within a natural species. Most biological variations are not due to mutations but from new combinations of already existing genes.

    What about genetic and biological similarities between species? Genetic information, like other forms of information, cannot happen by chance, so it is more logical to believe that genetic and biological similarities between all forms of life are due to a common Designer who designed similar functions for similar purposes. It doesn’t mean all forms of life are biologically related! Only genetic similarities within a natural species proves relationship because it’s only within a natural species that members can interbreed and reproduce.

    The actual similarity between ape and human DNA is between 70-87% not 99.8% as commonly believed. The original research stating 99.8% similarity was based on ignoring contradicting evidence. Only a certain segment of DNA between apes and humans was compared, not the entire DNA genome.

    All the fossils that have been used to support human evolution have been found to be either hoaxes, non-human, or human, but not non-human and human (i.e. Neanderthal Man was discovered later to be fully human).

    There has never been unanimous agreement among evolutionary scientists on ANY fossil evidence that has been used to support human evolution over the Many years, Including LUCY.

    Also, so-called “Junk DNA” isn’t junk. Although these “non-coding” segments of DNA don’t code for proteins, they have recently been found to be vital in regulating gene expression (i.e. when, where, and how genes are expressed, so they’re not “junk”).

    Read the author’s Internet article, NO MEAT-EATING ANIMALS EXISTED IN THE BEGINNING

    Visit my latest Internet site: THE SCIENCE SUPPORTING CREATION (This site answers many arguments, both old and new, that have been used by evolutionists to support their theory)


    * I have had the privilege of being recognized in the 24th edition of Marquis “Who’s Who In The East” for my writings on religion and science, and I have given successful lectures (with question and answer time afterwards) defending creation from science before evolutionist science faculty and students at various colleges and universities.

  3. ShakingMyHead | March 9, 2022 at 9:15 am | Reply

    This is beyond stupid. Yeah, give people fuel to prove that scientists possibly have a political agenda.

  4. To Babu G. Ranganathan:

    I am curious, why would you read an article that clearly offends you and you refuse to accept? I think it’s kind of sad you seem to be wasting great opportunity to actually learn something based on evidence.

    No offense, but it feels like you are reading the article because it makes sense to you but you feel like it is a betrayal to your beliefs. You are entitled to believe in the tooth fairy or Santa clause etc. But faith is just that, faith. Facts are never going to lead you off the track really. After all “the truth will set you free and all that’l. No?

    Facts don’t lie. Bibles… I still haven’t seen the evidence. Just saying.

    Have a good one.

  5. Paul Dante Jamison | March 10, 2022 at 4:49 am | Reply

    How utterly stupid to think that this earth has a history that includes 320 million years.!!! This planet, as has been shown over and over again cannot possibly be more than 50,000 years old. For a more accurate idea of how old this planet is: try following the biblical account of creation by Almighty God,
    But next time, try not to honor a corrupt, crooked lying moron that doesn’t give a damn about regular Americans.!!!

  6. Clyde Spencer | March 10, 2022 at 7:21 am | Reply

    What special training does a paleontologist receive to allow them to professionally evaluate the evidence to support the claim of anthropogenic global warming?

    If they aren’t using the Scientific Method, then they are deferring to authority, which ISN’T science. Therefore, they are implicitly denying science with their cute stunt. They are in the same category as Paul Dante Jamison who appeals to authority for what he believes to be true.

  7. Well Biden is sucking the life out of all Americans. Seems about right.

  8. A slimy bloodsucker hiding in the dark…. Seems apptly named.

  9. Jupiter Pluvius | March 11, 2022 at 3:19 pm | Reply

    I have a question.
    Why are all these off-topic comments permitted here?
    I am not referring to the perpetual Creationism vs. Evolution arguments…They have some place in an article concerning biology, (not a realistic one, but I do enjoy Creationists’ views, even if they’re not likely to have any more validity than any other myth) I’m referring to the brain-free, thought-free comments by children like pokie, Samou, Dude, United Statian, Clyde Spencer, Rob, who post trash that has no relationship whatsoever to the topic of the article.

  10. I would have just named it Cthulhu

  11. Donnita Elledge Linder | March 11, 2022 at 9:22 pm | Reply

    I feel sorry for the squid. I wonder if they could legally change its name?

  12. Nice, we all know Biden is a blood sucking cheat. A perfect name for a vampire like squid.

  13. Poopyhead9000 | March 12, 2022 at 9:18 pm | Reply

    How about all the braindead sheep stop being political and stop talking about completely unrelated subjects😳

  14. Blood sucking creature without a backbone? Yeah that makes sense

  15. I totally understand the vampire name…he is sucking up all that America stands for.

  16. Naming this vampire squid after Biden really does honor him. His administration is sucking the spirt out of America. LET’S GO BRANDON!

  17. Ironic to name a scientific discovery after a man who changes the science when the polls change.

  18. A Vampire Squid Named after Ol Sleepy Joe… how appropriate seeing as he has sucked the life out of America…. Well done sir.. well done

  19. how dumb are leftys to believe this,
    it’s got to be a meme, and the namer has to be a savage, this has to be a joke, a clowning if you will,
    it’s ancient, slimy, and blood sucking,,,,,,,,,I mean come on man, this has to be a joke to cover this in a serious way and it not be them mocking him,

    now if they seriously did this without trying to say that,and it’s actually some kind of legit respect, and truly a positive story, then wow, just wow, if that was the case what can leftys truly understand,

    but ima go with this being a savage making an amazing comparison,
    I love it

Leave a comment

Email address is optional. If provided, your email will not be published or shared.