Butt-Less? Tail-Less? It's All Pretty Much the Same

Mind you, I have lots of flaws, one of which my wife ascribed unto me shortly after our first meeting. She said then and, for that matter, still says today that I have absolutely no butt, and I reckon, compared to some I see on other people, she's absolutely right. However, I can live with that shortcoming--and evidently, so can some fish, as evidenced by a few photos I stumbled across here recently.

These fish, for all intents and purposes, appear healthy, other than for their tails, of which they have none. They appear to swim, eat and do all the other things fish normally do. (FYI: The photo at left was included in the latest issue of BassBlaster. If you're interested, check out the short video of the last fish shown here at the following link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VeSKt2hJ3hY.)

My online research really didn't turn up a lot of information about this phenomenon, but I'll gladly share what little I did learn.

The first thing I found was a fish camp up in Canada, where anglers one year started finding some big pike (the kind my kayaker buddy, Charlie, likes to catch) with large portions of their tails missing. If you looked closely, it was nearly as though the tail pieces had been surgically removed, so everyone went on high alert for the fiendish devil, or maybe a whole gang of 'em, who might be "playing" with these pike anglers' livelihood. This saga continued into the next year, when a conservation fella accidentally stumbled onto the answer. The big pike simply were losing their tails to a run-of-the-mill fin rot.

Whether something that simple accounts for any of the missing tails in the accompanying photos is anyone's guess. It could be the fish got caught with their tail between a rock and a hard place, zigged when they should have zagged (while being chased by a bigger fish), spent a little too much time on the spawning bed, or maybe they're just like me--born without a hind part, so to speak. Truth be known, the possibilities are endless.

This much I do know, thanks to some Duke Medical Center research I discovered: Most fish have the ability to regenerate lost tissue, as long as they don't have any complications from infections, and optimal environmental conditions exist. As we all know, bass often wear a portion of their tail fin away while fanning the nest during spawning season. Within four to six weeks, though, the tail usually is back to normal.

"And when I say normal," explained a research expert, "I mean an exact replica of the original tail, including bony growth, blood vessels, nerves, and even the exact skin pigmentation. It's a pretty fascinating process," he continued. "Even more interesting is that, regardless if 40 percent or just 20 percent of the tissue is lost, the regeneration time is the same. And furthermore," he said, "fish also regenerate new mouth tissue around hook wounds."

I can't speak for everyone, but that's information I never had heard before. The Duke research dude, however, didn't stop there. He went on to describe some other ongoing studies in which they've learned that animals like salamanders can regenerate entire limbs.

And did you know that humans have limited capacity to regenerate tissue? "This is most evident in a human's ability to regenerate blood or liver tissue," said the expert, "but young children even can regenerate fingertips."

So, where is the the line drawn between our abilities and the abilities of animals like bass? Researchers are in the process of finding out. According to the Duke expert, "There is ongoing research in regenerative medicine that could lead to new therapies for humans who have lost limbs, suffered a heart attack, or for those who have had cancerous tissue removed."

Take it from this but-less expert at nothing, I feel sure there's a reasonable explanation for why all the fish in the accompanying photos have no tails. Don't know about any of the rest of you, but I take great consolation in knowing that at least some of them probably have regrown the missing appendages you see here. In my case, however, what you see (or more aptly, what you don't see) is all you get. If it hasn't improved in more than 73 years, I reckon it ain't gonna happen.