GabyThe legendary creature believed to inhabit the waters of Scotland’s Loch Ness continues to be a popular topic of discussion. Despite numerous debunkings, this semi-mythical animal still sparks a wide range of speculation. The Loch Ness Monster: Between Myth and Science. Recently, yet another plausible explanation for the Loch Ness creature has emerged. However, researcher Flo Foxon has dismissed this theory, concluding after thorough investigation that the Loch Ness Monster is unlikely to be a giant eel. According to Foxon, contrary to popular belief, the relationship between folklore and zoology can be subjected to scientific analysis. This has the potential to yield valuable insights into anthropozoological phenomena. Mr. Foxon notes that his research also supports this connection.
The Loch Ness Monster first appeared in Scottish mythology in the 1930s. It was during this time that visitors to the freshwater lake began reporting sightings of some extraordinary creature. The monster, affectionately named Nessie, was said to resemble a plesiosaur or a sea serpent. A famous photograph taken by surgeon Robert Kenneth Wilson in 1934 depicted a creature with a long, elegant swan-like neck. This monster bore a striking resemblance to a plesiosaur. Today, that photograph is widely regarded as a hoax orchestrated by actor Marmaduke Wetherell.
New Hypothesis About the Loch Ness Monster and Its Refutation. In 2018, New Zealand geneticist Neil Gemmell led an international effort to uncover the truth once and for all. Along with his team, he collected numerous water samples from Loch Ness and filtered the environmental DNA. The researchers aimed to create a database of all species residing in the lake. However, as reported by Sciencealert, scientists found no evidence of DNA from sea serpents or plesiosaurs. Instead, they discovered a significant amount of DNA from European eels. This is hardly surprising, as these fish are well-known inhabitants of the lake. Mr. Gemmell and his team concluded that if anyone had spotted something long and serpentine in the lake, it was likely just a very large eel. This idea is what Mr. Foxon decided to explore further.
He analyzed data on eel catches in Loch Ness and other European waters to assess the likelihood of encountering an exceptionally large specimen of this species. Is the Loch Ness Monster an eel or not? For Nessie to match its reported size, an eel would have to be extraordinarily large. The chances of seeing such a fish are virtually nonexistent. In Foxon’s analysis, which included over 20,000 eels, the maximum length of these creatures reached 93 cm. The physiologically possible maximum size for a European eel was estimated at 1.3 m.
The approximate upper size of Nessie in the surgeon’s photograph is 2.4 m, while the total body length of this creature is about 6.1 m. Thus, as Mr. Foxon discovered, if one were to see an eel in Loch Ness, it would hardly create the impression of a gigantic creature. Even the chances of encountering a large eel measuring 1 m in length are about 1 in 50,000. This is reasonable, considering the fish stocks in Loch Ness. Mr. Foxon suggests that some sightings of smaller, yet still unidentified animals in the lake may actually be related to large eels. However, the likelihood of finding a specimen over 6 m is essentially zero. Therefore, eels are unlikely to be contenders for the role of the mysterious Nessie.
