Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

New Shrew Has Spine of Steel

Unknown Lamer posted about a year ago | from the loki-shrew-harder-to-find dept.

Science 93

sciencehabit writes "It's the size of large rat, but it can reportedly withstand the weight of an adult man standing on its back. Meet the hero shrew, a molelike creature that owes its near-mythological status to a remarkable spine, thickened by extensions of bone that interlock like fingers. The structure was thought to be unique among mammals — until now. An international team of researchers in the village of Baleko, in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, made a surprising find: a slightly different shrew with a similarly 'heroic' backbone. Today in Biology Letters, they introduce Thor's hero shrew (S. thori), named for mammalogist Thorvald Holmes, but invoking the Norse god of strength. The researchers don't yet know how its strength compares to that of S. somereni. After exploring the shrews' swampy palm forests habitat, the researchers also have a new guess about why the spine evolved: They suggest that the creatures might wedge themselves between the trunk of a palm tree and the base of its leaves, then use the strength and flexion of their muscular spine to force open this crevice, revealing insect larvae—a food source that other animals can't access."

cancel ×

93 comments

I'm certain .. (-1, Offtopic)

ackthpt (218170) | about a year ago | (#44372291)

The snakes which prey upon it appreciate all of its better qualities.

By Thor's Hammer! (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44372319)

There will be no taming of this shrew!

Re:By Thor's Hammer! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44372379)

It's pretty much my favorite animal.

Re:By Thor's Hammer! (1)

Fieryphoenix (1161565) | about a year ago | (#44373243)

It has excellent backing skills.

Re:By Thor's Hammer! (5, Funny)

ArcadeX (866171) | about a year ago | (#44372393)

thor's hammer gets all the credit, no one stops to remember grabthar's hammer...

Re:By Thor's Hammer! (2)

OhSoLaMeow (2536022) | about a year ago | (#44372879)

thor's hammer gets all the credit, no one stops to remember grabthar's hammer...

You shall be avenged.

Re:By Thor's Hammer! (1)

Mitchell314 (1576581) | about a year ago | (#44373201)

Or Gungir.

Re:By Thor's Hammer! (1)

Randle_Revar (229304) | about a year ago | (#44373309)

How about Grignr [york.ac.uk] ?

Re: By Thor's Hammer! (1)

turbidostato (878842) | about a year ago | (#44374739)

Not to talk about mc hammer!

Re:By Thor's Hammer! (2)

flyingfsck (986395) | about a year ago | (#44372643)

Hmm, don't screw with this shrew.

Occam's Razor (0)

girlintraining (1395911) | about a year ago | (#44372325)

They suggest that the creatures might wedge themselves between the trunk of a palm tree and the base of its leaves, then use the strength and flexion of their muscular spine to force open this crevice, revealing insect larvaeâ"a food source that other animals can't access."

Yeah.. it could be that. Or, "ZOMFG WHAT IS THAT!?" (stomp) "ITS NOT DYING! DAMN YOU EVOLUTION... Daaaaaamn yoooouuuuuuu...."

Re:Occam's Razor (0)

cusco (717999) | about a year ago | (#44372479)

I think that's more likely to be Florida's "palmetto bugs" (4 inch long cockroaches that fly). I've stepped on the things with a flat-bottomed shoe, twisted my foot to make sure, lifted my foot up, and had the damn things run away. The only way to get rid of them is to get a ferret (roaches make great toys, and when the toy breaks they make great snacks!) Of course now you've got a ferret running around, which is not that much of an improvement.

Re:Occam's Razor (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44372571)

I think that's more likely to be Florida's "palmetto bugs" (4 inch long cockroaches that fly). I've stepped on the things with a flat-bottomed shoe, twisted my foot to make sure, lifted my foot up, and had the damn things run away. The only way to get rid of them is to get a ferret (roaches make great toys, and when the toy breaks they make great snacks!) Of course now you've got a ferret running around, which is not that much of an improvement.

Get a gorilla. Duh.

Re:Occam's Razor (0)

h4rr4r (612664) | about a year ago | (#44372609)

Call the orkin man.

I lived in the south for a while, Georgia has the same things. They spray around the house and it keeps them from ever infesting. If they already infest your home surely some kind of poison can kill them.

Re:Occam's Razor (1)

Grishnakh (216268) | about a year ago | (#44373611)

Ferrets are really cute and friendly animals. However they smell absolutely horrible, which makes them difficult to live with as pets.

Re:Occam's Razor (1)

cusco (717999) | about a year ago | (#44373755)

I actually like their musky scent, but they're incredibly destructive, steal things, and rather than being litter trained they train YOU where to put the litter box(es). They'll dig to the bottom of every house plant, open drawers and strew the clothes around, climb to the top of things you thought unscalable, push everything off every shelf, and fill the space under the refrigerator with their stolen "treasures". I loved my ferret, but no one else would have ever put up with him.

Re:Occam's Razor (1)

Grishnakh (216268) | about a year ago | (#44374171)

Wow, that sounds like a total PITA. I had one briefly, for a few days, which I found outside (probably someone's escaped pet). It was really nice, and we kept it in a bathroom, where it made a bed in the trash can. We gave it to a ferret rescue person as soon as we could. Being locked in the bathroom (to keep it away from our cats), we never saw those other issues, but I just couldn't get over the smell.

Re:Occam's Razor (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44376149)

It was probably marking and peeing all over your bathroom because it missed its home and it's stuck in a toilet room that smells like you, your pee splashes, your cats and their face oil, and probably some of their pee too

Re:Occam's Razor (1)

Grishnakh (216268) | about a year ago | (#44376389)

Nope, that bathroom was never visited by the cats, and only rarely by humans. It was a spare bathroom and didn't get much use. That's why we locked him in there. Also, it was tile, so it was very easy to clean up. And I don't remember him peeing in there at all or making any kind of mess; he happily used the little litter box I made for him. When we let him run around the rest of the house, around the cats (for supervised play), he didn't cause any problems at all. If it weren't for the smell (of the ferret himself, not his pee) I probably would have wanted to keep him.

Re:Occam's Razor (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44374341)

Bonus points if you get one of these - http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2305310/Man-gets-shock-toy-poodles-turn-GIANT-RODENTS-steroids.html. Daily Whale alert.

Re:Occam's Razor (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44372747)

I've noticed pseudo intellectual liberal types love to use Occams razor, why? Its annoying to thinking people.

Re:Occam's Razor (2)

eth1 (94901) | about a year ago | (#44372843)

They suggest that the creatures might wedge themselves between the trunk of a palm tree and the base of its leaves, then use the strength and flexion of their muscular spine to force open this crevice, revealing insect larvaeâ"a food source that other animals can't access."

Yeah.. it could be that. Or, "ZOMFG WHAT IS THAT!?" (stomp) "ITS NOT DYING! DAMN YOU EVOLUTION... Daaaaaamn yoooouuuuuuu...."

As someone who's had pet rats before, I can totally believe that quote. If I was sitting on the floor, and he wanted to get on the other side of my leg, for example, he'd go UNDER it. Never mind that there was zero space, he'd just wedge his nose under, heave my leg off the floor, and keep going like that until he could squeeze through. They're quite strong that way.

Re:Occam's Razor (1)

girlintraining (1395911) | about a year ago | (#44374125)

As someone who's had pet rats before, I can totally believe that quote.

Yes, but slashdot moderators, ever eagle-eyed for someone to attempt humor, have stomped on my comment. I suppose it's just further proof that while voles can evolve, moderators cannot.

Re:Occam's Razor (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44374799)

As someone who's had pet rats before, I can totally believe that quote.

Yes, but slashdot moderators, ever eagle-eyed for someone to attempt humor, have stomped on my comment. I suppose it's just further proof that while voles can evolve, moderators cannot.

Sounds to me like it's your attempts at humour that need to evolve. Sheesh, some people just can't take the selection pressure.

Re:Occam's Razor (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44373491)

Occam's Razor does not mean the simplest thing that pops into your head is likely correct. Not many natural predators kill them by stomping on them. Even if their spines are strong, I'd bet that their stomaches are still pretty fleshy and can be eaten that way. Even if a predator bites them in the back, they are still pretty fucked. The strongest pressures for most animals is reproductive, eating, and fighting other member's of it's species.

Re:Occam's Razor (1)

Synerg1y (2169962) | about a year ago | (#44374859)

When I clicked the title... I thought they had replaced the shrew's spine with metal. I was expecting a date for when they could replace mine. Damn!

way to go slashads (-1, Offtopic)

ArcadeX (866171) | about a year ago | (#44372425)

spinal compression add on the side bar... if only a tenth of the time / money put into advertising was diverted to FOSS. spent hours in a meeting yesterday for software to monitor aquatic mammals, and they kept going on and on about how you have to have a trained operator. kept showing screen shots of hydrophone input with obvious patterns, but when i asked if they were developing software to take the human factor out i was told the technology doesn't exist which is bs. PS. i mod myself off topic.

Re:way to go slashads (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44372495)

what

Re:way to go slashads (0)

TheSkepticalOptimist (898384) | about a year ago | (#44372575)

I get an ad for the Mazda 5. It really doesn't inspire that much rage out of me.

Re:way to go slashads (1)

ethanms (319039) | about a year ago | (#44372693)

My ad is for a "water hammer arrestor" device that screws into a washing machine... ...that started me wondering just how powerful Thor's Water Hammer would be... blow the faucets right off the tops of the sink... fire the shower mixing valve out of the wall at high speed right into your junk...

Re:way to go slashads (1)

uncqual (836337) | about a year ago | (#44373061)

There are ads on /.?

Re:way to go slashads (1)

Mitchell314 (1576581) | about a year ago | (#44373231)

All I see is an add for adblock plus.

Re:way to go slashads (1)

pla (258480) | about a year ago | (#44373321)

What, next to the row of little blue Pac-Man ghosts?

Phhh (1)

Sparticus789 (2625955) | about a year ago | (#44372429)

Somewhere in a top secret government research lab, nestled in the hills of Canada next to a hydroelectric power plant, lies an organization that is grafting adamantium to the spine of these poor shrews.

Re:Phhh (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44372657)

Now if we could only give American men a spine of steel. Poor bastards, most at like children or are very feminie.

Came here for cyborg Soricomorpha... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44372455)

Left disappointed.

Does that make my dog a supervillain? (0)

Jethro (14165) | about a year ago | (#44372469)

My dog loves shrews. She hunts them relentlessly. She likes rodents in general but shrews seem to be her favourite. There was a week last winter where she was eating two or three of them a day. It's disgusting but hey, she's a dog.

The funny thing is shrews fight back. Of all the rodents she's hunted over her long, illustrious life, shrews are the only ones that ever bit her back. Well, that snapping turtle got her but she wasn't trying to eat it, she was just curious. And she only got too close because I was patting it so she thought it was safe.

(yes I know it's a different species of shrew, but that's less funny)

Re:Does that make my dog a supervillain? (2)

h4rr4r (612664) | about a year ago | (#44372633)

Shrews are not rodents.

Re:Does that make my dog a supervillain? (1)

Jethro (14165) | about a year ago | (#44372721)

Hey, she's a dog, they look like rodents to her.

Re:Does that make my dog a supervillain? (2)

h4rr4r (612664) | about a year ago | (#44372739)

They might, but you should know better. How else will you teach her?

Re:Does that make my dog a supervillain? (1)

Jethro (14165) | about a year ago | (#44372833)

I have already instilled in her a fine sense of irony. I think that's pretty good.

Re:Does that make my dog a supervillain? (1)

XxtraLarGe (551297) | about a year ago | (#44372805)

Hey, she's a dog, they look like rodents to her.

The look like rodents to me too. ;-)

I remember the first time I came across a shrew in the wild. I was deer hunting, trying to sit still in my blind and could hear something scurrying about in the leaves. Eventually I felt something on my foot, so I looked down, and there was a shrew gnawing on the tip of one of my boot laces. I gave it a little shake, which seemed to discourage it temporarily, but it came back a few times. They don't seem to frighten very easily.

Re:Does that make my dog a supervillain? (1)

Jethro (14165) | about a year ago | (#44372871)

I've occasionally had mice in my house. They've never done any damage and the cats/dog eventually get them.

One time there was (I assumed) a mouse that was just ripping things up and eating them, getting into (never opened) things of dog/cat treats, and being smart enough to stay in the cabinets.

Eventually I made a makeshift trap (i.e. a big enough box) and caught it myself and the first thing I thought was "WHAT THE HELL IS THAT???" It looked like a mouse and a mole had a baby. I guessed that it was a shrew for some reason. Then I let it go in a park.

hi (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44372481)

my classmate's step-mother makes $77 every hour on the computer. She has been without wovrk for 5 months but last month her income was $15088 just working on the computer for a few hours. Read more on this web site...... bay92.com

Re:hi (1)

St.Creed (853824) | about a year ago | (#44374329)

Really? Wow. That stepmother should really meet my Nigerian cousin-in-law. He needs someone that can help him transfer his inheritance out of the country. If you fax me your personal details we can set something up.

Shrews are mamals (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44372533)

"The structure was thought to be unique among mammals — until now."

-_-

Re:Shrews are mamals (1)

amicusNYCL (1538833) | about a year ago | (#44372589)

The structure in the first mammal was thought to be unique among all mammals, until they found a second mammal with the same structure.

Re:Shrews are mamals (0)

Attila Dimedici (1036002) | about a year ago | (#44372613)

You need to take a reading comprehension class. They did not say that the structure was thought to be "unique to mammals", they said it was thought to be "unique among mammals." The second wording (which was used in the summary) would indicate that they thought there was only one type of mammal which had this spine structure and have now discovered that there is another type of mammal with that spine structure.

Experimentation time! (2)

SailorSpork (1080153) | about a year ago | (#44372573)

The researchers don't yet know how its strength compares to that of S. somereni.

In other words, they are currently writing up a research grant proposal that allows them to travel the world stepping on shrews. FOR SCIENCE!!!

Re:Experimentation time! (2)

tinkerghost (944862) | about a year ago | (#44373325)

Hmm, the origins of Weasle Stomping Day?

Re:Experimentation time! (1)

Gilmoure (18428) | about a year ago | (#44373579)

What about whacking day? What if snakes develop shrew backbones?

Re:Experimentation time! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44382767)

Throw them in a ring and settle this once and for all.

link fail (5, Insightful)

Gravis Zero (934156) | about a year ago | (#44372585)

seriously, is nobody trying to actually RTFA?

Re:link fail (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44372677)

You must be new here.

Re:link fail (1)

girlintraining (1395911) | about a year ago | (#44372679)

seriously, is nobody trying to actually RTFA?

Which FA would you like us to read? The one that talks about the shrew, or the link to the website that appears to have its entire backend offline? I'm no genius, but if there are two options presented, one of which leads directly into a pit of despair, the other of which leads to a library containing the information I seek... I generally don't throw myself into the pit on the off chance the library is a trap.

Re:link fail (0)

steelfood (895457) | about a year ago | (#44372707)

TFA cannot beat supershrew.

Re:link fail (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44373525)

A shrew so legendary, even news of it is a myth.

Re:link fail (1)

HornWumpus (783565) | about a year ago | (#44373555)

You infer the contents of TFA from the other posts. Duh.

Thorvald Holmes (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44372621)

You're burying the lede. The real discovery here is the name Thorvald Holmes.

Re:Thorvald Holmes (1)

Gilmoure (18428) | about a year ago | (#44373603)

Sherlock Holmes' stronger brother? Ian Holmes' weirder brother? Katie Holmes' less winning brother?

Nit Picking (2)

NormHome (99305) | about a year ago | (#44372637)

Sorry article but Thor is not the Norse god of strength, that's Magni the god of strength and brute force and son of Thor with is the Norse god of thunder.

Re:Nit Picking (1)

Valdrax (32670) | about a year ago | (#44372999)

He is the god known for eating his immortal goats over and over again, which he can only do if he doesn't break their bones. So, I guess he's semi-relevant to bones.

(That said, what a horrible life for his goats!)

Re:Nit Picking (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44373625)

In this context, this would be nut picking.

Re:Nit Picking (1)

dkleinsc (563838) | about a year ago | (#44374217)

The whole "[deity] is the god of [aspect]" is a little bit misleading when you're talking about ancient myth. Norse gods all have a bunch of different characteristics, and many of those characteristics were shared among more than one deity. For example, both Loki and Odin can be effective tricksters.

The idea of Thor as a fellow who is exceptionally strong but not particularly smart is fully in keeping with Norse myths about him, since he spends most of his time either whomping giants and monsters on the head with his hammer or getting fooled by smarter characters.

Re:Nit Picking (1)

Hypotensive (2836435) | about a year ago | (#44378211)

Right, so Thor being described as "the god of strength" is about as accurate as Zeus being described as "the god of swans" since he was known to manifest himself as a swan.

i.e. not very accurate at all.

Re:Nit Picking (1)

gl4ss (559668) | about a year ago | (#44374425)

well.. considering how the animal uses it's spine.. atlas would have fit.

Re:Nit Picking (1)

ByteSlicer (735276) | about a year ago | (#44374507)

It's not the only factual error.
In the first line they call it "the size of a large rat", but its body length (without tail) is actually only 150 mm (6 inch) [umich.edu] long.
That's pretty small for a rat: the common brown rat has a typical body length of 10 inch, and there are much larger species.

Something that gets me... (4, Insightful)

mmcxii (1707574) | about a year ago | (#44372639)

Here's the thing I don't like about how evolution is presented...

researchers also have a new guess about why the spine evolved: They suggest that the creatures might wedge themselves between the trunk of a palm tree and the base of its leaves, then use the strength and flexion of their muscular spine to force open this crevice, revealing insect larvae

Um, no. The spine did not evolve to meet the needs of the animal, the animal is alive because it had the traits needed to live. This would make much more sense if the statement was that "researchers also have a new guess about why the species thrived while others died."

The way evolution is presented by most media makes it seem like after a species goes for a few generations it gains some ability like how one can gain a power up in a video game; "Ok... humans make it to the next level... they can either run faster, see further or have faster reflexes.... what will it be?"

If this animal didn't have the ability to do what it does then it would have probably failed and we would know it now as a collection of bones in some natural history museum instead of a living creature. Now, this is also to say that those with mutations that gave them a stronger spine would be more likely to survive but it's not as if the species had control over the evolution of the spine itself.

Re:Something that gets me... (2)

Sir or Madman (2818071) | about a year ago | (#44372823)

Or maybe they just meant that an early version of this spine provided a marginal wedging advantage, which allowed the current "power-up" version of the spine to evolve.

Re:Something that gets me... (1)

luis_a_espinal (1810296) | about a year ago | (#44372941)

Here's the thing I don't like about how evolution is presented... researchers also have a new guess about why the spine evolved: They suggest that the creatures might wedge themselves between the trunk of a palm tree and the base of its leaves, then use the strength and flexion of their muscular spine to force open this crevice, revealing insect larvae Um, no. The spine did not evolve to meet the needs of the animal, the animal is alive because it had the traits needed to live.

And how did the animal acquired said traits. Natural selection. By random mutations some animals had traits that provided a slight advantage over others, surviving longer, procreating more often and passing those genes downs where further refinements in the typical life-and-death struggle would reinforce those traits. In the case of this shrews, it started with a slightly stronger back, which throughout generations lead to the unique and amazing spine structures they now posses.

Your statement is neither more accurate than what the article (and the media) say, nor does it paint a full picture of evolution. Their statements and yours are complimentary. It's a goddamned feedback loop. The animals are alive today because their traits allowed them to survive. And those traits took place and refine/reinforce themselves (sometimes to the detriment of others) because they help the animals meet their needs.

Re:Something that gets me... (1)

cusco (717999) | about a year ago | (#44372955)

No, the spine almost certainly did "evolve to meet the needs of the animal". The needs of the animal are to eat and reproduce. The animal eats bugs in the palm fronds. Shrews with strong backbones can move palm fronds further, thus accessing more food. They reproduce better. Wash, rinse, repeat. The eventual result is shrews with amazingly strong backbones. It's unlikely that the strong backbone appeared unprompted, and the shrews then started to move palm fronds.

Re:Something that gets me... (4, Informative)

Valdrax (32670) | about a year ago | (#44373043)

In no way did their statement imply direction or control over their evolution. They merely described the selective pressure under which the mutations would have given them a survival advantage. Don't hijack their words to air your quibbling, semantic pet peeves.

Re:Something that gets me... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44486745)

You are wrong. The statement explicitly said that the spines evolved for a teleological purpose. The operative word in the quoted line is *why*.
And you may be knowledgeable enough about biology to filter this out and not even notice, but I've talked to enough friends and cow-orkers to know that Mmcxii's judgement on how this will be interpreted by the general public is spot on.

Re:Something that gets me... (1)

solios (53048) | about a year ago | (#44373335)

This would be why I snort derisively at rapture-like interpretations of The Singularity - evolution is an endless process of optimization, not a directed A to B to C progression. Animals that haven't evolved in millennia - sharks, for example - aren't "Evolutionary dead ends," they are in fact optimized for survival in their habitats.

So its the chicken (1)

future assassin (639396) | about a year ago | (#44373449)

not the egg?

Re:Something that gets me... (1)

Livius (318358) | about a year ago | (#44374109)

Or those are just two different perspectives on the same process and you're being needlessly pedantic.

Re:Something that gets me... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44375227)

Nit-picking, surely?

Re:Something that gets me... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44374321)

The way evolution is presented by most media makes it seem like after a species goes for a few generations it gains some ability like how one can gain a power up in a video game; "Ok... humans make it to the next level... they can either run faster, see further or have faster reflexes.... what will it be?"

sigh... epigenetics?

Re:Something that gets me... (1)

jrumney (197329) | about a year ago | (#44376331)

If this animal didn't have the ability to do what it does then it would have probably failed and we would know it now as a collection of bones in some natural history museum instead of a living creature.

There are plenty of other shrews in the Congo Basin that do not have this trait, and yet are able to survive.

I am waiting (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44372711)

and still waiting for the Stainless Steel Rat movies,

Please

Re:I am waiting (0)

Talderas (1212466) | about a year ago | (#44372937)

Stainless Shrewnado?

Re:I am waiting (1)

HornWumpus (783565) | about a year ago | (#44373605)

God no. Don't ruin the books. Want to bet they go straight to 'the grey men' who wind up looking like Nazis, not grey at all.

Re:I am waiting (1)

Gilmoure (18428) | about a year ago | (#44373775)

Casting:

James B. diGeiz: George Cloony
Angelina diGriz: Angelina Jolie
James and Boliver diGriz: James and Oliver Phelps
Inskip: Bruce Willis
Prof Coypu: Will Wheaton

Enough about Hillary... (-1, Flamebait)

OakDragon (885217) | about a year ago | (#44372775)

...and she's not a *new* shrew by any measure.

Is a mammal (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44372839)

Shrew, that is; article naught.

Corrected Link (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44372991)

http://news.sciencemag.org/evolution/2013/07/scienceshot-new-shrew-has-spine-steel

True Facts About the Steel Spine Shrew (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44373423)

Anyone else read that in Morgan Freeman's voice?

True Facts [youtube.com]

Thats a (4, Funny)

future assassin (639396) | about a year ago | (#44373425)

> They suggest that the creatures might wedge themselves between the trunk of a palm tree and the base of its leaves, then use the strength and flexion of their muscular spine to force open this crevice, revealing insect larvae—a food source that other animals can't access."

shrewd move

Re:Thats a (1)

St.Creed (853824) | about a year ago | (#44374359)

You win. Thread's over.

Not Thor (1)

meglon (1001833) | about a year ago | (#44374807)

....but invoking the Norse god of strength.

Magni, son of Thor, was the Norse god of strength... not Thor. Magni was stronger at 3 nights old, then Thor was in his prime.

Shrew != Mammal? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44376197)

The structure was thought to be unique among mammals — until now.

How does the Shrew change that? Isn't it a mammal?

Slippery Jim diGriz (1)

opentunings (851734) | about a year ago | (#44379409)

Now that society is all ferrocrete and stainless steel there are fewer gaps in the joints...Only a stainless steel (shrew) can be at home in this environment.

Thanks to Harry Harrison for predicting this one.

Check for New Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...