A team made up of 40 researchers, participants in the project to study sharks and rays in the waters of Montenegro, signed a scientific article in the Mediterranean Marine Science magazine in May 2022 in which they presented various species recently found for the first time in the Mediterranean. Among the novelties, four scientists from Italy, Greece and Lebanon presented in this article the discovery of a goblin shark specimen (or goblin shark, Mitsukurina owstoni).
The discovery of this curious specimen was documented with a photograph taken on the island of Amalfi (Greece) in August 2020, which the researchers had received from an amateur naturalist. From this single image, the four co-authors of this section of the article had deduced that it was the carcass of a young goblin shark, a relatively common species in various parts of the planet but unknown to date in the Mediterranean.
Over the past few months, the journal Mediterranean Marine Science and the study authors have received a number of comments from other shark experts questioning whether the published photograph was of a goblin shark. The shape of the fins, the lack of visible teeth in a supposedly adult specimen, or the size intuited in the image did not correspond to the known characteristics of this species of lamniform elasmobranch of the Mitsukurinidae family.
Scientific practice has these things: the results of the investigations are published in specialized journals (in many cases, after review by other experts in the field) and are subjected to subsequent scrutiny. If a colleague doubts -justifiably- the published results, he forces the review of the study and, as has happened in the case of this goblin shark, he forces the authors to retract what was published.
And where I said, I say Diego because the authors have been forced to retract what was written.
The straw that broke the camel’s back was an article-commentary published this March in the same magazine, signed by four researchers from Germany, France and Norway, in which 10 reasons why they doubt that the photo in question are exposed corresponds to a natural specimen (neither alive nor dead, neither young nor adult) of a goblin shark.
After the devastating criticism, the objectors suggest to the original authors that they provide more data if they want to maintain their statements… Which they have not done, preferring to withdraw.
The original scientific article is still available but the section on the goblin shark has been deleted and in its place appears a text explaining that the authors have retracted that content, with reference to the article-commentary in which the reasons for the doubts are explained. .
If it wasn’t a goblin shark, what was in the photo supposedly taken in Amalfi? The authors of the article-comment that triggered the retraction do not mention any alternative but some media outlets, including The New York Times, have echoed one of the strangest possibilities: that it is a plastic toy, simulation of a goblin shark
This supposed ludic-pedagogical explanation has several alternatives, according to comments spread on social networks. One of these versions refers to the collection of small shark figures marketed in various countries by the DeAgostini firm, under the generic name Sharks.
