Zoologist, media consultant, and science writer, Dr Karl Shuker is also one of the best known cryptozoologists in the world. He is the author of such seminal works as Mystery Cats of the World (1989), The Lost Ark: New and Rediscovered Animals of the 20th Century (1993; greatly expanded in 2012 as The Encyclopaedia of New and Rediscovered Animals), Dragons: A Natural History (1995), In Search of Prehistoric Survivors (1995), The Unexplained (1996), From Flying Toads To Snakes With Wings (1997), Mysteries of Planet Earth (1999), The Hidden Powers of Animals (2001), The Beasts That Hide From Man (2003), Extraordinary Animals Revisited (2007), Dr Shuker's Casebook (2008), Karl Shuker's Alien Zoo: From the Pages of Fortean Times (2010), Cats of Magic, Mythology, and Mystery (2012), Mirabilis: A Carnival of Cryptozoology and Unnatural History (2013), Dragons in Zoology, Cryptozoology, and Culture (2013), The Menagerie of Marvels (2014), A Manifestation of Monsters (2015), Here's Nessie! (2016), and what is widely considered to be his cryptozoological magnum opus, Still In Search Of Prehistoric Survivors (2016) - plus, very excitingly, his first two long-awaited, much-requested ShukerNature blog books (2019, 2020).

Dr Karl Shuker's Official Website - http://www.karlshuker.com/index.htm

IMPORTANT: To view a complete, regularly-updated listing of my ShukerNature blog's articles (each one instantly clickable), please click HERE!

IMPORTANT: To view a complete, regularly-updated listing of my published books (each one instantly clickable), please click HERE!

IMPORTANT: To view a complete, regularly-updated listing of my Eclectarium blog's articles (each one instantly clickable), please click HERE!

IMPORTANT: To view a complete, regularly-updated listing of my Starsteeds blog's poetry and other lyrical writings (each one instantly clickable), please click HERE!

IMPORTANT: To view a complete, regularly-updated listing of my Shuker In MovieLand blog's articles (each one instantly clickable), please click HERE!

Search This Blog



Saturday 24 September 2016


Three (un)usual suspects as the identity of the Shatt-al-Arab's venomous mystery fish – the Asian stinging catfish (top); the long-tailed moray eel (centre), and the bull shark (bottom) (public domain)

Yesterday, here on ShukerNature, I offered a blenny for your thoughts (click here). So today, I'm offering another one! You can thank me later.

The Shatt-al-Arab is a 120-mile-long river formed by the confluence of the Tigris and Euphrates rivers in the southern Iraq town of Al-Qurnah. Flowing southwards, it constitutes the physical border of Iraq with Iran, and empties into the Persian Gulf. Many species of fish inhabit its waters, but one of them may be a notable species still unknown to science.

The Shatt-al-Arab river (public domain)

I first learnt of this small but potentially significant unidentified freshwater fish many years ago, when reading Dangerous To Man (1975), Roger Caras's definitive book on creatures hostile to humans, but its mystery remains unsolved to this day. In his book, Caras included the following brief but very intriguing paragraph:

From Tehran comes a report of a diminutive black fish found in the Shatt al Arab River. It reputedly has killed twenty-eight people with a venomous bite. Death is said to be swift. No other information is presently available. (No other fish is known to have a venomous bite, and this report is at least suspect.)

What makes the above snippet so interesting (apart from the fact that except for my own researches into it and documentation of it in various of my books and articles, I have never encountered anything more about this creature anywhere) is Caras's claim that it is its bite that is venomous and that no other fish is known to have a venomous bite. In contrast, a wide range of piscean species possess venomous spines, for instance, or toxin-secreting skin.

My copy of Dangerous To Man by Roger Caras (© Roger Caras; reproduced here on a strictly non-commercial, Fair Use basis only)

But if we assume that such a fish does indeed exist, what could it be, and how can its reputedly venomous nature be explained? Various candidates can be selected from the many thousands of fish species already known to science, but none can offer a comprehensively satisfying solution.

When I originally read Caras's report, the first candidate that came to mind, for several reasons, was the Asian stinging catfish Heteropneustes [formerly Saccobranchus] fossilis. This species does indeed inhabit the Shatt-al-Arab (though it is an imported rather than a native fish here, originating from Indochina). Moreover, it is often only around 4 in long (though it can grow up to 1 ft), it is definitely black in colour, and, of particular significance, it is known to be venomous. So far, so good.

Asian stinging catfish (public domain)

However, unlike the Shatt-al-Arab mystery fish, the Asian stinging catfish is venomous due not to a toxic bite but instead to a poison gland at the base of a spine on each of its two pectoral fins. This can yield an extremely painful but not fatal sting. Consequently, even if victims (or onlookers) were mistaken in assuming that this catfish had bitten them (unless perhaps it had done so in self-defence if they had been molesting it, but this would not have been a source of venom), they would not have died from its fin spines' sting. Exit H. fossilis from further consideration.

A second candidate is the long-tailed or slender giant moray eel Strophidon sathete (aka Thyrsoidea macrura). Although typically marine, and distributed widely in the tropical Indo-Pacific Ocean, it is well known for entering estuaries and travelling considerable distances up rivers, including the Shatt-al-Arab. What is particularly interesting about this species in relation to the latter river's mystery fish is that in a sense it can be said to have a toxic bite, albeit not in the usual convention.

Long-tailed (slender giant) moray eel (public domain)

True, its teeth do not actually secrete a toxin, via poison sacs, like those of venomous reptiles do. However, as a voracious carnivore the long-tailed moray eel will certainly have pieces of rotting flesh left over from previous meals and packed with pathogenic bacteria sticking to its teeth, just like crocodiles and carnivorous mammals like lions and tigers do. Consequently, a bite from this fish might well transfer some of those bacteria into the wound caused by its teeth, which in turn may lead to septicaemia developing, especially in someone with a less than robust immune system, such as a child, an elderly person, or someone recovering from a major illness. Even so, no known human fatalities resulting from a bite by this moray eel species are on record, and there is also the not-inconsiderable problem of size difference to reconcile, because it can attain a maximum length of up to 12 ft when fully grown (even its average length is over 2 ft). So this species can hardly be deemed 'diminutive', like the Shatt-al-Arab mystery fish. Don't call us, S. sathete.

Nor can the bull shark Carcharhinus leucas be termed diminutive, bearing in mind that it averages 7.5 ft long. Unlike most sharks, this notably aggressive species is frequently found in freshwater habitats, including the Shatt-al-Arab River, and like those of moray eels its teeth are brimming with pathogenic bacteria from rotting meat still attached from earlier meals. So again, a bite from this fish, although not intrinsically venomous, might well lead to blood poisoning. And several human deaths caused by this fish attacking them have been confirmed here. But as even a new-born specimen is normally around 2.5 ft long, this species clearly has no bearing upon the identity of the Shatt-al-Arab mystery fish.

Bull shark (public domain)

As I researched further into this ichthyological puzzle, however, I made an unexpected breakthrough, by discovering that one crucial aspect of Caras's account was fundamentally incorrect. Contrary to his statement, some fishes do possess a genuinely venomous bite.

And one of these is the blackline fang blenny Meiacanthus nigrolineatus. Its lower jaw bears sizeable canine teeth that have grooved sides and venom-producing tissue at their base. These teeth enable it to produce a sufficiently unpleasant bite to deter all predatory fishes, large and small. In general appearance, it is relatively nondescript – no more than 3.75 in long, with a blue-grey head and foreparts, and the remainder of its body pale yellow. There is also a thin black stripe running lengthwise just beneath its dorsal fin, which earns it its common name.

Blackline fang blenny (© Akvariumugamyba at http://akvariumugamyba.lt/ - reproduced here on a strictly non-commercial Fair Use basis only)

Over 830 species of true blenny or blennioid are currently known to science, generally small in size and scaleless but many-toothed, and are of worldwide distribution. Most are marine fishes, as indeed is the blackline fang blenny, which is native to the Red Sea and the Gulf of Suez and Aqaba. However, there are freshwater species too (such as the well-known Salaria fluviatilis, which is native to rivers in several European countries as well as in Morocco, Algeria, Israel, and Turkey).

No human fatalities have been recorded with the blackline fang blenny, but what if the Shatt-al-Arab River is harbouring a still-undescribed, darker-coloured, but otherwise comparable freshwater relative that is capable of producing a more potent venom? If such a creature, known locally but attracting little notice from the outside, scientific world, is one day captured and formally identified, then our mystery fish will surely have been unmasked at last - turning up like the bad blenny that it is.

My special thanks to French ichthyologist Dr François de Sarre for very kindly sharing his own thoughts and comments with me regarding this fishy affair.

This ShukerNature blog article is adapted and expanded from my book Karl Shuker's Alien Zoo: From the Pages of Fortean Times.


  1. Brian W Coad has this to say on Heteropneustes fossilis toxicity in an exhaustive treatment in "Review of the Freshwater Catfishes of Iran (Order Siluriformes)" in the Iranian Journal of Ichthyology (December 2014), 1(4): 218-257

    An important food fish in
    India and Sri Lanka, where its flesh is reported to
    have invigorating qualities. Some fish are exported
    from Sri Lanka for the aquarium trade. V. D.
    Vladykov reported (in litt. 22 July 1963) that he had
    seen this species in pet shops in Tehran, on sale at
    about $2.00 each. The pectoral spine can cause a
    serious wound because of the toxin content of the
    epidermal cells covering the spine. The histology of
    the pectoral spines was described by Bhimachar
    (1944) based on Indian material and the toxin was
    found to have both neurotoxic and haemolytic
    effects. The toxin is fatal to frogs (within 15-20
    minutes of subcutaneous injection of glycerinated
    venom) and to other fishes.

    Zakaria (1964) reported severe swelling
    involving the whole arm from a hand sting in Iraq.
    The swelling and pain recede after about a day but
    the puncture wound can take about two weeks to heal
    and some pain can be felt when applying pressure to
    the wound site up to six weeks later. Caras (1964)
    (probably based on a report in Farsi in Game and
    Nature, Tehran, ca. 1961) recorded a diminutive
    black fish found in the Shatt al Arab which reputedly
    killed 28 people with a venomous bite (sic). Death
    was said to be swift. This was presumably a garbled
    report on this species. Verbal and newspaper reports
    from Tehran (V. D. Vladykov, in litt. 26 August
    1961) maintain that this species could cause death to
    cattle and humans although Vladykov (in litt. 30
    September 1963) considered fatal cases "not well
    proved". I was stung in the thumb by this fish in Iran
    with no effect (although I did devote considerable
    time and effort into squeezing and sucking blood
    from the puncture site!). Freshly caught or netted fish
    swing the head from side to side and thus are active
    envenomators (despite knowing this I was still
    stung). Treatment is symptomatic and some relief can
    be obtained by immersing the sting site in water as
    hot as can be withstood and applying a meat
    tenderiser. These treatments serve to coagulate the protein toxin. The wound should be cleaned to avoid secondary infections such as tetanus (Halstead 1967-1970; Coad 1979).

    Dorooshi (2012) reports on two envenomations
    by catfish referred to the poison center of Noor
    Hospital, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences.
    The catfish were aquarium specimens and their
    identity was not specifically stated but it was implied
    that they were Heteropneustes fossilis. The stings
    were on the hands, causing swelling and pain.
    Immersion in hot water (temperature 45°C) led to a
    gradual reduction and elimination of pain in less than
    half an hour.

    I would take from this that:

    The fish has a reputation for being fatal in humans.

    The original report for Caras' information was in Farsi and translated into English. This makes it easy to confuse bite and sting and perhaps other ambiguity.

    The thrashing of the fish to sting its captor may make it easy to mistake the sting with a bite, especially as the pectoral fin is very close to the head.

    The fish is abundant and well-known in the Shatt-Al Arab.

    1. Thanks for this information, Pat, which makes interesting reading, even though I first documented the catfish option a full 15 years before this paper's authors did, lol (in my book Mysteries of Planet Earth, 1999). Yes, this catfish does appear to have a reputation for being fatal in humans, but judging from their paper's wording there is apparently still no actual confirmation of this, so until/unless any such confirmation does arise, the situation concerning its candidature as the Shatt-al-Arab mystery fish cannot be advanced any further than already noted here by me. All of this is anecdotal, hearsay. What is needed to resolve the issue once and for all is the capture of a specimen claimed locally to be the mystery fish, which can then be examined and identified.

    2. If you are concerned with priority, it looks like Coad published on the subject in 1993. My google search teased the Caras quote but because that paper is on Taylor and Francis I can't get full access without going to an academic library. http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/09397140.1993.10637648?needAccess=true

      Due to the tragic events in that region it would now be unlikely to find anyone in the region who could identify the fish on such a flimsy description. Perhaps the problem could be resolved by finding the original report and re-translating it, as Caras' report is undetailed and he is no longer available for elucidation. I assume he gave no reference for his source for this report in his book? Perhaps Brian W Coad could help with narrowing down the original source of this report? He has contact details on his website: http://www.briancoad.com

    3. Coad published info re the catfish but I'm not aware that he did so directly in relation to the mystery fish, as I did. I'll contact him and see if he can shed any light on this mystery.

  2. https://weather.com/science/nature/video/crowds-ogle-rare-white-hummingbird