Close
Articles Field Notes today i learned (til)

Mind the Tentacles: How Octopuses Outsmart Scientists (and Aquariums)

April 19, 2025

Mind the Tentacles: How Octopuses Outsmart Scientists (and Aquariums)

When you first think of an octopus, you’re probably picturing an animal with 8 tentacles floating around in the ocean. As unseeming these creatures may seem, they are one of the smartest animals in the ocean! Octopuses have a nervous system, which controls their movements, thought processes, memory, and more (Carls-Diamante, 2022). Octopuses are said to have two brains – one in their head and a complex net of massive nerves in each of their tentacles (Carls-Diamante, 2022). About 2/3 of an octopus’ nerves are in their tentacles, and this allows each tentacle to act independently or jointly with the others (Shamilyan et al., 2021). Let’s explore the capabilities and intelligence of an octopus!

 

Flexibility:

Octopuses use their flexibility in the natural environment to escape and hide from predators by squeezing into very tight spaces. For example, scientists have put a small octopus in a jar with a closed screw-lid. The challenge for the octopus was to escape the jar from the inside, which the octopus managed to do using its incredible flexibility (Mather, 2021). Since octopuses are immensely flexible, some octopuses have managed to escape from aquarium tanks by opening the top lid! In addition to their amazing flexibility, they have several other surprising abilities to survive in the wild.

 

Camouflage:

Octopuses are known for their abilities to blend in with their surroundings by changing their color to match that of their surroundings (Young, 2023). This ability to camouflage into their surroundings is a key survival mechanism to prevent predators from spotting them. However, octopuses also use their color-changing abilities to communicate with each other (Young, 2023). An octopus’ color changes based upon its mood and can be used to warn other octopuses of potential danger (Carls-Diamante, 2022). Octopuses often go on hunting trips together, but how do they remember their way back home? That’s where their navigational memory comes in!

 

Spatial and Navigational Memory:

Octopuses make their homes in holes in the seabed or coral reefs. They go on long hunting trips for food, often for days or weeks at a time for long distances before returning back home. They frequently take different paths home each time they go hunting, indicating they have incredible spatial memory on how to return home (Carls-Diamante, 2022). In addition, some octopuses have been seen putting rocks near their home as an identifier, like how people put numbers outside their homes or apartments to identify which residence is theirs (Carls-Diamante, 2022). Octopuses are more like humans than we originally thought!

 

In conclusion, octopuses are amazingly intelligent ocean creatures whose wit should not be underestimated. They are able to escape closed spaces using their flexibility, change colors at will to disguise themselves or communicate with other octopuses, and use spatial memory to identify where their homes are. Next time you go to an aquarium, check out the octopuses and see their tricks in action!

 

Citations:

Carls-Diamante, S. (2022). Where Is It Like to Be an Octopus? Frontiers in Systems Neuroscience, 16. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnsys.2022.840022

Mather, J. (2021). Octopus Consciousness: The Role of Perceptual Richness. NeuroSci, 2(3), 276–290. https://doi.org/10.3390/neurosci2030020

Shamilyan, O., Kabin, I., Dyka, Z., Kuba, M., & Langendoerfer, P. (2021, June 1). Octopuses: biological facts and technical solutions. IEEE Xplore. https://doi.org/10.1109/MECO52532.2021.9459727

Young, N. (2023, December 27). Exploring Problem-Solving Skills through the Octopus Mind – West Coast Centre For Learning. West Coast Centre for Learning. https://www.wccl.ca/problem-solving-skills/

0Likes
About Author

You May Also Like

today i learned (til)
Noses Know: The Fragrant Connection to Our Memories
today i learned (til)
AI & Historical Texts
today i learned (til)
Carbonation and Coca-Cola
today i learned (til)
What if humans weren’t meant to be here… like at all

Your journey starts here! Let’s talk!

ThemeRex © 2026. All rights reserved.
  Timothy Durham was convicted of rape when a test showed his DNA genotype matched the DNA recovered from the crime scene. Eye witnesses testified that Durham was in a different state at the time of the incident, but he wasn’t exonerated from his 3000 year sentence until follow up DNA analysis showed that the preliminary forensic analysis used in the trial was misinterpreted (Thomas et al.). DNA testing serves an invaluable part in our criminal justice system, but it comes with complications and bias that can lead to wrongful convictions and misinformed juries.  

Background:

Forensic genetics aims to identify the origin of a biological sample. It can be traced back to Karl Landsteiner who discovered human ABO blood groups. With blood groups, suspects could be eliminated based on their blood type. For example, if a suspect had type A blood and there was type B blood left at the scene by the perpetrator, the investigators could rule out the suspect. Unfortunately, the reverse didn’t work. If the suspect and perpetrator both had the same blood type, it can’t be concluded that the suspect was guilty. Blood identifiers evolved into 8 distinct categories which improved the ability to eliminate suspects, but could only conclude that (if the system matched) it might be the perpetrator or this person might be related to the perpetrator (Jobling and Gill). The field evolved in the 1980s with the discovery of Minisatellites, lines of repetitive DNA that don’t encode proteins. Minisatellite patterns in DNA create what we know today as the DNA fingerprint, and it has a much higher accuracy rate than previous methods (Augustyn et al.). Around the same time, a breakthrough for victims of sexual assault was discovered. In the case of assault, bodily fluids of both the victim and the assaulter can get mixed. A process called differential lysis was created which could selectively increase the concentration of sperm in a fluid sample thereby allowing for accurate DNA testing (Jobling and Gill). Forensics evolved to use single-locus probe testing after several years because of its ease of interpretation. It looked at specific minisatellites that had high variability between subjects. This was the first DNA-based method to be used in a criminal investigation. Two murder homicides from several years apart were connected using DNA evidence. The evidence was then used to exonerate an innocent man, and the guilty party was found when he tried to evade mandatory DNA testing for all men in the small town. His guilt was then reinforced when the DNA profiles matched, and he gave a confession (Jobling and Gill). Finding DNA at a crime scene doesn’t guarantee that you’ll find a murderer. There are issues with non-pure samples and limited samples that make DNA work difficult, and accreditation of facilities and new techniques and take time (Jobling and Gill).  

Subjectivity of DNA Interpretation:

In a 2009 publication, the National Academy of Science discusses the possibility for subjective influence in lab based forensics. The interpretation bias happens in complex cases where, for example, there could be a mixture of DNA. A study published in 2011 looked specifically at this issue. A gang rape happened in Georgia, and the mixture in DNA from the case was used to prosecute one suspect after another suspect took a plea bargain to testify against him. With DNA mixtures, there are three possible conclusions: suspect excluded, suspect cannot be excluded, and inconclusive. If the suspect is excluded, it means that there’s little to no possibility that his DNA is part of the sample. If the suspect cannot be excluded, it means that there’s a possibility that his DNA is part of the sample. In the trial, the DNA examiners who knew the context of the case concluded that the suspect being prosecuted could not be excluded. The 2011 study gave the DNA evidence from this case and the DNA profiles of the suspects to 17 forensic examiners. These examiners had no context of the case, and they all worked independently. Of the 17, only 1 came to the same conclusion (suspect cannot be excluded) as the examiners who knew the context of the case. Twelve of the 17 concluded that the suspect who was prosecuted and convicted had no relation to the DNA found in the sample. Not only does this show that subjectivity occurs due to the context of the case, but the 17 examiners came up with different findings based on their past experiences meaning that not all DNA analysis is objective. Some organizations like the Scientific Working Group on DNA Analysis Methods say that quantitative statistical evidence should be presented with every categorical conclusion, but the US doesn’t require this (Dror and Hampikian).

False Positives:

There are two categories that cause wrongful identification in a DNA report: coincidental matches and false positives. Coincidental matches are DNA matches between two unrelated people. The probability of these matches is about 1 to 500,000 for white individuals and about 1 to 350,000 for black individuals. This small probability of coincidental matches makes people feel confident in DNA evidence. False positives, on the other hand, are matches between DNA and test DNA that result from issues in the forensics lab. There have been multiple cases of forensics labs accidentally switching victim and suspected rapist DNA which lead to convictions that were later overturned when the lab realized the error. There are also cases of misreading or misunderstanding a sample. In a case from 1993, a man was convicted of rape because someone interpreted a mixed sample of victim and perpetrator DNA as an individual sample. The conviction was again overturned. To prevent false convictions, retesting DNA is allowed, but it’s not an efficient solution. Many people are pushing for statistical information on the probability of false positives, so that the jurors can make accurate judgements based on DNA evidence (Thomas et al.).  

Conclusion:

DNA analysis is a useful tool for the criminal justice system, but subjectivity can be an issue in forensic testing. To combat wrongful convictions, there are organizations like The Innocence Project who use DNA testing to free the innocent, but reformed forensic testing standards should be put in place to prevent subjectivity and to ensure juries are correctly informed during trials. https://www.innocenceproject.org/    

Citation:

Augustyn , Adam, et al. “DNA Finerprinting.” Encyclopedia Britannica , 26 Apr. 2018, www.britannica.com/science/DNA-fingerprinting#ref153186. Dror, Itiel E., and Greg Hampikian. “Subjectivity and Bias in Forensic DNA Mixture Interpretation.” Science & Justice, vol. 51, no. 4, 2011, pp. 204–208., doi:10.1016/j.scijus.2011.08.004. Jobling, Mark A., and Peter Gill. “Encoded Evidence: DNA in Forensic Analysis.” Nature Reviews: Genetics, vol. 5, no. 10, Oct. 2004, pp. 739–751., doi:10.1038/nrg1455. Thompson, William C, et al. “How the Probability of a False Positive Affects the Value of DNA Evidence.” Journal of Forensic Sciences, vol. 48, no. 1, Jan. 2003, pp. 1–8., doi:10.1520/jfs2001171.