Talk:Portuguese man o' war

spelled right or should it be "Portuguese man-of-war" or what? -phma

There's no consistency from various authorities doing a google check. But- A man o' war is a warship from the age of sail and the jellyfish was named after this so it definitely shouldn't be 'man of war'. I'm never very good with the capitalization business, I tend to do it unnecessarily and I think I've done that here too. So I'll move it.

Actually, "Man Of War" is the standard name of the warship, coming into use in the late 15th century. By the 19th century (and yes, through all those centuries, of warre and warr and war, it seems to have always been 'of'), it was the most common word to call any naval vessel, at least among the English-speaking public. In terms of the critter, "Man Of War", "Man O' War", "Man-O-War" and all such variants are common. "Man Of War" seems to be prefered officially, while "Man O' War" seems to be preferred colloquially (when it comes to the hyphenation, however, it is completely up in the air...). Nitjanirasu

---

I thought the sea wasp was a box jelly? Or are both called sea wasps (in which case the sea wasp page needs an edit)? Edd 23:09, 19 Jul 2004 (UTC)

My thought also: is not a sea wasp the highly poisonous Chironex fleckeri? Wetman 09:37, 8 Aug 2004 (UTC)

I've corrected it; the actual synonym is blue bottle. The erroneous name was introduced here, over a year ago by a user who went on to completely vandalise the page. I'm sorry I didn't catch it earlier, and thanks for bringing it up. -- Hadal 09:54, 8 Aug 2004 (UTC)

The Portuguese man o' war has tentacles which can be as long as 55 m (33 ft).

That can't be right??--Gazebo dude 04:46, Mar 10, 2005 (UTC)

Update: That edit was made by 169.151.1.213 on 12:31, Feb 11, 2005, additionally that address is a school district with an apparent history of vandalism: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:169.151.1.213 . I'm new here; should this be reported and how?--Gazebo dude 04:58, Mar 10, 2005 (UTC)

A current BBC article [1] states "The long tentacles can grow up to 165ft (50m)", Does anyone have access to an authoritative printed textbook covering this colony animal? (I presume nothing has been found on the Web.) 87.81.230.195 (talk) 03:26, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

A Good Source

I don't have the time, but I found a nice source if anyone would like to use it to contribute to this article. It has much information that is missing, e.g. reproduction. http://animaldiversity.ummz.umich.edu/site/accounts/information/Physalia_physalis.html —Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.147.57.6 (talk) 17:46, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

Just curious

What makes the Portugese Man o' War Jellyfish Portuguese? Is it really common in Portugal or something? I keep looking and I can't find the answer. Most books say it lives in "tropical waters"--hence no answer.

When I've been on Bermuda, I've been told that it was named so because its sail looked like the sails of Portugese war ships of the time. I don't have a source for this, however. -- Cchiappa 13:38, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Grrrr. It's NOT a jellyfish.

1. It is NOT a jellyfish :P

2. It isn't even found in Portugal - it simply resembles Portuguese ships from the 18th century :) -- Gui —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.240.145.133 (talk) 19:16, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

It's not 18th cenntury! It's 15th and 16th century! (there are no caravels from the 18th century) And it's not any Portuguese ship from the 15th and 16th century. It referes only to the latin caravel. And in Portugal the Portuguese Man o' War can be found only in Azores (middle of the Atlantic ocean) and it's not even comun. 84.39.99.95 (talk) 15:22, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Actually a few were found in the mainland of Portugal this summer (2012). It was a very unusual situation though. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.28.51.244 (talk) 00:42, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

Filled with Argon?

1% of the athmosphere is Argon, but I find it difficult to believe that the creatures can seperate it from the atmosphere?

Any else know better than I do?

Jackliddle 20:33, 2 August 2005 (UTC)

This is incorrect, siphonophores (the group to which Physalia physalis belongs) secrete gas into their pneumatophore that is approximately the same in composition as the atmosphere. Physalia physalis may have elevated levels of carbon dioxide, up to 90%, but not argon. References for these facts are: 1) Brusca, Richard C. and Gary J. Brusca. 2003. Invertebrates, second edition.

Sinauer Associates, Inc., Sunderland, MA. pp. 936.

and 2) Barnes, Robert D. 1987. Invertebrate Zoology, fifth edition. Saunders College Publishing, Fort Worth, TX. pp. 893.

The "argon" myth is being propulgated on the web because of wiki-like projects where misinformation can spread rapidly and references are not taken seriously.

So, that might explain the "Portuguese" part, but why is it called a "Man o' War"? It isn't a man, it doesn't resemble a man in any way, and it doesn't seem to be waging war...

GBC 06:32, 6 August 2005 (UTC)

I believe the "Man o' War" was a specific type of Portugese sailing ship -- Cchiappa 20:48, 29 September 2005 (UTC)

How can only one of the four kinds of polyps that make up its body be responsible for reproduction of the entire combination-organism? No matter how symbiotic they all are, they still have individual DNA and are basically just four really close friends, right?

a useful article that may clarify things a little - this page suggests that the polyp colonies share identical DNA (excluding mutations) as they all bud off from a single gonozooid. As such, I'm not completely sure if they could be classified as symbiotic as they are all working towards the propagation of the same genetic material (this would need to be confirmed, though).

Man O' War was a type of Galleon that the Portuguese sailed.

Portuguese never used galleons, galleon is a spanish ship. Man O' war refers to a ship invented by the portuguese with the portuguese name of "caravela", "caravel" in english http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caravel —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.39.74.40 (talk) 18:15, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Medical advice section

Wikipedia does not give medical advice. 24ip | lolol 19:07, 6 September 2005 (UTC)

In terms of treatment the research from newcastle holds true in at least one case. My recent painful incounter with a blue bottle in sydney was relieved by applying hot water from the shower, my glands did start to hurt too. All the other myths about treatment should be dispelled in favor of hot water.

Do not apply vinegar

Do not apply vinegar. http://www.aloha.com/~lifeguards/portugue.html Husholdningseddik (talk) 19:25, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Prey

I removed "Prey: All types of fish" from the facts section because it is wrong. See for example [2]. 24ip | lolol 20:48, 6 September 2005 (UTC) k

length

The article previously gave the tentacle length as both "55 m" and "30 m". I've removed the latter figure, but I'm not entirely sure which is correct: Google turns up a variety of figures, but nothing I found seems authoritative. Can someone who knows a bit more about the subject check this? —Charles P. (Mirv) 05:50, 13 September 2005 (UTC)

Incorrect treatment

Okay, this is embarrassing... when I read this article when discussing treatment, I kept thinking of the Friends episode, where Monica Geller gets stung by something at the beach. Joey or Chandler has to pee (a.k.a. urinate) on the sting. So, does this also fall under inappropriate treatment? Again, totally sorry but none-the-less it came to mind. Revmachine21 13:41, 25 January 2006 (UTC)poo

Actually, I think there is some component in urine that does actually help. I'm not sure how/why, and I'm only going from memory. If I figure it out, I'll let you know. It's certainly not a recommended first aid treatment.

I think it was the ammonia

Well pee is pretty warm water. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 75.73.234.111 (talk) 06:59, 4 February 2007 (UTC).

Growing up in Hawaii, I know that urine does help but was it the warmth or the ammonia? I don't know. We also used meat tenderizer and papayas. Just because someone took a hot shower and it worked doesn't mean nothing else will work. Say you are in a location where you can not heat water? You might sill find papayas or meat tenderizer and it would work. —Preceding unsigned comment added by BillyNair (talk • contribs) 21:20, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

reverted vandalism

Several sections in the article apparently vandalized from User:67.10.149.231. Sorry I didn't make that clear in the edit summary. Kineticman 09:30, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

More explanation needed

 I don't get it, why dosn't any website say how long they live?.......

Maybe because nobody knows? 87.81.230.195 (talk) 03:18, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Treatment inconsistency

The article claims that "they stun and kill small sea creatures using poison-filled nematocysts". "Box jellyfish use powerful venom contained in epidermic nematocysts to stun or kill its prey.. " (box jellyfish article).

I found this by clicking on the nematocysts link, read the nematocyst article which mentions box jellyfish, then clicked onto the box jellyfish article.

In this article (Man o' War) its stated that "The use of vinegar to treat stings is controversial. It appears that vinegar can make the sting more painful in some cases, while other victims report relief after applying vinegar. One should __never __apply vinegar while the tentacle is still attached to the body, as this will cause the stinging cells to inject more venom." (never emphasized).

Yet in the box jellyfish article article it states that "Following a sting, vinegar should be applied for a minimum of 30 seconds.[5] Acetic acid, found in vinegar, disables the box jellyfish's nematocysts that have not yet discharged into the bloodstream (though it will not alleviate the pain). Any adherent tentacles should then be removed. Removing the tentacles without first applying vinegar may increase discharge of nematocysts increasing envenoming, however, if no vinegar is available, careful removal of the tentacles by hand is recommended.".

It seems to me that there is a bit of an inconsistancy here-- yes the Man o'war article says that the poison isn't the same as that of the box Jellyfish, however the nematocyst article implies that they [nematocyst's] operate as a delivery device, which seems to presume that vinegar should work?

-- Different organism, different poision, different triggers for the release of that poison. Not all nematocysts are created equal. Chrisbrl88 18:11, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Who did this study?

I notice that the article reads "According to a study done by your mom,and your dad..." I do not recall either of my parents conducting studies of this nature. Does anyone have a source? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.195.193.191 (talk) 06:05, 24 January 2007 (UTC).

Where is it?

I came to this article trying to find out what regions of the world the Man o' War lives in, but apparently this is not a part of the article. Would anyone like to expand on this? Chrisbrl88 18:07, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

It's right behind you, look out! --71.112.4.245 02:17, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Pink?

I seem to remember reading that large colonies of these can get together and when it gets very large it has a pink color... I guess due to the sails? --72.200.73.175 04:03, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Venom

We need to get a few things clear. Portugese man o' war are not poisonous. If you touch them you won't die from poisoning. If they sting you you may die of the venom. It is important to remember that poison is inhaled or ingested. Venom is injected through fangs or stingers. So whoever it is that changed it to poison don't. If the article was made this way I can't believe no-one noticed this. Wiki235 21:04, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

I'd also like to see some sources for how bad and dangerous the stings are. I was stung just today, and fair enough it was only on a small part of my body but to be honest it was no worse than a bunch of bee stings or a cigarette burn and over in less then 45 mins. All of my friends who have been stung by these things on Sydney beaches have reported much the same. Perhaps if the stingers wrapped round you and covered a large part of your body then maybe it could be life threatening. Either way it would be good to have some sources or more of an explanation about the toxins. Esteban (talk) 05:56, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was no consensus to move this page, per the discussion below. Dekimasuよ! 06:06, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

---

• Portuguese Man o' War → Portuguese Man of War — Should the entry in an encyclopedia be fully spelled? —VoltronForce 12:24, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

• The name with the apostrophe is the commoner when referring to the animal (but may not be when referring to ships). It's not massively dominant, but it's enough to make any move unnecessary. I know of no policy that requires such things to be spelt out in their entirety; WP:NCA is more to do with cases like IBM or UNPROFOR. --Stemonitis 12:38, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
• This is ridiculous and without any merit. Why not Do not speak, Cannot Hardly Wait, I Do Not Want to Miss a Thing or Twisted Sister's seminal classics We Are Not Going to Take It and I Want To Rock. The name of the creature in question isn't Portuguese Man of War, it is Portuguese Man o' War, much like Man o' War Boulevard in New Orleans, Man O'War in Ireland and that great racehorse Man O' War. Its the name. WookMuff 13:35, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
• It has both spellings, but I see no reason to move. The racehorse may warrant a small o. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 18:48, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
• With consenseus heading to "no move," I realize that I was not the only one to raise the issue, after reading the top of the page. VoltronForce 23:35, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
• WookMuff, it is not necessary to bite the contributor's head off. That said, I see no reason to move the page. In my experience, Man o'War is the more predominant usage. ●DanMS • Talk 00:16, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

You are correct. It is possible that the editor in question is new, or just being conscientious, but this kind of thing really gets on my nerves. There is no reason to change from "most accurate" to "looks nicer". WookMuff 04:20, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

• Shouldn't the article be moved to Portuguese Person of War per certain national sensitivities? —  AjaxSmack  01:59, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
• Actually its full name is Portuguese Man-of-War with the hyphans, and I would support a move to this spelling, but not the other without hyphans. – Axman (☏) 15:26, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
• Oppose Move. I join the responders above who claim that no move is necessary. The Man o' War spelling is the one that's more familiar to me, though I see from Google that both are used. In any case we will have a redirect from the other one to the one used as the article title. EdJohnston 20:12, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Does anyone have a reference for these claims?

I just removed some claims about use of vinegar or urine in treating Man o' War stings. Here is the former text:

The use of vinegar to treat stings is controversial. It appears that vinegar can make the sting more painful in some cases, while other victims report relief after applying vinegar. One should never apply vinegar while the tentacle is still attached to the body, as this will cause the stinging cells to inject more venom.

Urine is also another widely-used way of treating stings because urine contains ammonia, which even in small quantities helps counter the venom. It is a quick treatment that can be used when no other option is available.

We should allow therapy recommendations to remain in our articles with no references. See Wikipedia:Medical disclaimer. If anyone can provide a reference, these statements can be restored. EdJohnston 02:27, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

I was just stung but a Portugese Man O War in Hawaii a few weeks ago, the best treatment is to rub the sand onto it, I then went back into the water to wash off the sand. I came back onto the beach and was sunbathing for a while. There were welts on my legs but they were gone and the pain non-exhistant by the time we left the beach 2 hours later....I had no other reaction and so far all thats left is like a connect the dots red marks...other than that I'm fine with no other reaction....I would definitely recommend this type of treatment..... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ironkitten80 (talk • contribs) 19:05, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

I live in kailua hawaii my sons and I ,we were boogie boarding and suddenly a man-o-war wrapped around his arm which was attached to his arm, needless to say it was stuck on the leash and his arm.Without any concern for my on safety I did the old indian snakebite on his arm.I sucked the man-o-war off his arm.We washed up on the beach and I could feel the toxins at work on my lips and tongue.I grabbed a hand full of sand chewing and spitting sand,3 mouth fulls and then it was all good!!! Needless to say this is not for everyone but the sensation that developed 1/2 to 1hour later in my mouth all I can say is natural lip gloss.75.95.204.139 (talk) 00:58, 29 July 2009 (UTC)kai tangata taua{eater of man-owar] RJ Tansley jtans@clearwire.net

Different species?

There seems to be some difference between Atlantic and Pacific bluebottles, with the latter known as the Pacific Man O'War [3] or maybe there is no real difference. The article infers they are one and the same. Could someone with more marine knowledge shed some light? IF there is a difference then the 'Newcastle-hot-water' study would have only considered the Pacific version, and treatment may be different or untested? - Tomperc 03:19, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

I only found this when I happened across Physalia while cleaning up this page. The Pacific man o' war has a lonely article at Physalia utriculus, but there's currently no listing at all (even a redirect) for its common name. This strikes me as a significant oversight. It seems to me that the best course of action is to edit the article to make the differences clear, and rename it to Man o' War (organism). Maybe even go so far as to merge with Physalia? I'm also reposting below to reintroduce the discussion (probably best to respond down there). – ClockworkSoul 19:26, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

Four species

This "animal" is not an animal, but four animals. Hence, it does not deserve a taxobox. I'm not sure where someone came up with a genus and species for the colony. I wasn't aware colonies were eligible for their own scientific classification. Bob the Wikipedian, the Tree of Life WikiDragon (talk) 15:27, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

I believe you'd need to take that up with science, not this article. It has a genus, it has a species, it belongs in the article, does it not? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.33.141.36 (talk) 12:46, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

I would like to think that there are scientists who edit Wikipedia, especially articles such as this one. I don't know any other way to communicate with scientists, and was hoping to get a response from one. Bob the Wikipedian, the Tree of Life WikiDragon (talk) 15:43, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

It is one organism, just composed of multiple types of bodies in one... Hyper Zergling (talk) 02:53, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

Bizarre section

I've never seen a WP article with a section titled "About It". In addition this section contains "information" that contradicts information elsewhere in the article (tentacle length), and what appears to be a "broken" attempt at a header called "Etymology". Can someone more familiar with this article's history sort this out? It might be editing error, it might be vandalism, I can't tell. Huw Powell (talk) 01:34, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

Structure

More information on its structure / anatomy is needed. How many organisms in each part of the animal? Can we have a schematic diagram maybe? Shinobu (talk) 07:38, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

...inconsistency?

"Below the main body dangle long tentacles, which occasionally reach 50 meters (165 ft)[4] in length below the surface, although one metre (three feet) is the average." Question: How can 50 meters be equal to 165 feet, yet one meter is three feet? That doesn't quite check out. Also, some spelling consistency would be nice. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.140.145.55 (talk) 23:01, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

1 metre = 3.281 feet —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.88.204.44 (talk) 15:55, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

Bizarre effect of text in Venom section

What I see in the article online in the Venom Section is this:

red welts on the skin that normally last 2 or 3 days after the initial sting, throghtyhgv the pain should subside after about an hour

I thought it was a typo, but when I went to edit it, the page has:

red welts on the skin that normally last 2 or 3 days after the initial sting, though the pain should subside after about an hour

No idea what is wrong or how to fix. Ileanadu (talk) 03:05, 16 July 2010 (UTC) In case others aren't seeing this, I'm using Firefox 3.5.10 w/ Vista as my operating system. Ileanadu (talk) 03:07, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

Reproduction

Could a knowledgeable editor add material about how these things reproduce? If it's really a colony of 4 different types of organisms, then in my mind each of the 4 different types of cells would have to simultaneously, miraculously reproduce and stay together with the other 3 types. Comet Tuttle (talk) 23:52, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

I'm not an editor and my knowledge is questionable. However, I would like to offer my understanding of the reproductive nature of the physalias.

Mature physalias are sexually distinct. Male and female colonies release gametes to the open water when sufficient numbers of 'individual colonies' gather. The resulting fertilized cells then reproduce by mitotic fission and differentiation into what eventually becomes a planula, or more simply, a siphonophora larva. At this point, the planula consists of an oral mouth and aboral (not mouth) end, and resembles a tiny flat worm. An ectoderm and an endoderm layer has formed, which of course, is basically the outer epidermal layer and the stomach lining. They also produce a cilia periphery that allows limited mobility, and an inner conglomeration of cells and excretions from the other layers that becomes the 'jelly' or mesoderm (which is largely non-cellular).

Here's where the physalia larva get really weird. Instead of glomming onto a hard surface to develop into a sessile siphonophore, it remains pelagic (open ocean) and starts to elongate and constrict into a bulbous mouth area, a bulbous arboral area, and a constricted middle. The arboral end develops into a float (pneumatophore), the constricted middle area becomes a hollow stem, and the mouth turns into a gastrozooid (feeding polyp). This is simply the upside down version of their sessile cousins and use a float instead of a bottom surface to develop. The magic from then on happens in the stem. It develops a budding site. This budding site produces asexual cloned buds that then develop into specialized zooids (polyps) that mature into gastrozooids (with attendant tentacles), and gonozooids. The tentacles become differentiated until they are considered dactylozooids in their own right.

These three zooids, along with their pneumatophore, are often claimed to be individual jellyfish, and that their alliance is a colony of individuals. Nothing could be the further from the truth. They are simply dependent buds from a dependent founding polyp (a larval siphonophore), that happen to be asexually budded. None of these zooids are independently viable. (Neither am I, I need fresh horses, women, and rum for my men, aaarggg.) Gseymour (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 01:49, 16 April 2012 (UTC).

A significant oversight

About three years ago Tomperc correctly pointed out that this article doesn't mention that there are actually two species of man-o-war (two members of genus Physalia), but his concern wasn't addressed at the time. Here's a copy/paste of my response so you don't have to jump up to Talk:Portuguese_Man_o'_War#Different_species?:

I only found this when I happened across Physalia while cleaning up this page. The Pacific man o' war has a lonely article at Physalia utriculus, but there's currently no listing at all (even a redirect) for its common name. This strikes me as a significant oversight. It seems to me that the best course of action is to edit the article to make the differences clear, and rename it to Man o' War (organism). Maybe even go so far as to merge with Physalia?

Thoughts? – ClockworkSoul 19:32, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

This whole article is so wrong. Physalia physalia is the Portuguese Man of War, and Physalia utriculus is the Blue Bottle jelly. I admit that there are many tourist sites out there that get this wrong, but come on, this is Wikipedia. P. physalia has a float up to 11" long, while P. utriculus maxes at about 4". P. physalia has many tentacles, while P. utriculus only has one major tentacle. They are not at all hard to tell apart, even for laymen like me. Oh, and the photo is a Blue Bottle.

As for a colony not deserving a species classification, get real. We humans are a colony if you really pay attention... we could not live without an entire plethora of symbiotic bacteria. Imagine an amoeba's view of the human species... Just a colony of single cells, most of which aren't determined by the DNA of any one cell. Yet the polyps of Physalia jellies do determine the form of the adult medusa. Evolution is just as real for colonies as for individuals, and the same laws of speciation apply.Gseymour (talk) 22:36, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

Range description

I've gone through and lumped the description of the Man o' War's range into two bulky paragraphs, one for the Atlantic and the other for the Indian/Pacific, although they still read like basically a list of sightings. Someone more experienced than I should go through and weed through them to see what's worthy of being kept. Dralwik|^{Have a Chat} 01:51, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

Portugal wikiproject?

Should this article actually be in the Portugal wiki-project? This animal / colony lives all over the world and is not even particularly prevalent in Portugal. Just having Portuguese in the name does not mean it should be part of the wiki-project. I would like to recommend that this article be removed from the WikiProject Portugal. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nutster (talk • contribs) 15:20, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

You got that right. I recently changed the "animals" tab to wikiproject animals. It should also be included in the wikiproject that deals with invertibrae.Clammybells (talk) 06:23, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

Change page to Physalia physalis

This page should really be modified to Physalia physalis. The scientific name should be used, not this colloquial name that apparently is so silly it started a debate over "of vs o' ". --108.1.205.40 (talk) 09:05, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

Historical distribution in the Mediterranean

The article states that the species was first recorded in the Mediterranean in the 21st century. this seemed really unlikely, and when I checked the references supplied, they do not in fact make any such claim. The references state that the species was sighted in the Mediterranean in those years, but never at any stage claim that these were the first sightings in human history. SO can somebody clear this up. Is this species a very recent migrant to the Mediterranean, or ha someone badly misinterpreted the references? Mark Marathon (talk) 14:39, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

Pluralization?

A quick survey of the net reveals three different ways of pluralizing this beastie:

1. Portuguese men o' war
2. Portuguese man o' wars
3. Portuguese man o' war (same as the singular)

The article currently uses both 1 and 2, and possibly 3. Wikitionary prefers 1. We should standardize. 38.111.35.2 (talk) 16:59, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

treatment with ammonia

I've removed this section for the following reasons:

1) No credible references. The second reference is written by a travel agent. Nuff said, but it also contradicts the rest of the article, for example claiming that the sting should be irrigated with fresh water. The first is to a medical article where the "pathology seems unique to medical reports concerning the Portuguese man-of-war". Hardly supportive of general treatment guidelines.

2) It's a how-to guide, which Wikipedia is not supposed to include. Mark Marathon (talk) 07:07, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

How many individuals in one Man O'War?

I'm not clear from this article how many individuals (i.e. genetically separate individuals) make up one Man O'War. My reading of 'One of the polyps, a gas-filled bladder' is that the whole bladder is a single individual, which makes me wonder about the other three parts. Or should this be read as 'one of the polyp *species* form a gas-filled bladder'. Currently I'm not clear if this 'colony' consists of four individuals or many thousands. 62.232.250.50 (talk) 13:07, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

Reproduction

"Gonozooids are responsible for reproduction." Really? How do the gonozooids go about creating new individuals of the *other* three parts of the organism? What does 'responsible for' actually mean? Do the parts reproduce by cell division and then grow? If so, how do the new cells/individual parts organize themselves into a new Man O'War? If the three parts don't all reproduce at the same time, are there Men O'War floating around (temporarily, at least) lacking the full 'set of parts'? It would be nice if there was a separate section on reproduction, I'd bet the details are quite interesting, whatever they are. 62.232.250.50 (talk) 13:07, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

UPDATE: Comet Tuttle (above) seems to have answer much of this. One further thing is unclear - who many distinct genomes are involved? From Comet's comments it would seem to be just one; and the whole many individuals/colony issue a red herring (i.e. just as true of any other multicellular animal). 62.232.250.50 (talk) 13:21, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

Loggerhead Turtle as predator

"The loggerhead turtle feeds on the Portuguese man o' war, a common part of the loggerhead's diet. The turtle's skin is too thick for the sting to penetrate." Presumably they don't eat the sting then? 62.232.250.50 (talk) 13:07, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

Evolution

There is nothing here on the evolution of these fascinating organisms. It should probably be mentioned, if only to state that little is known about the details, if that is the case. Or perhaps the Man O'War (or some of its parts, anyway) have know related species?