Reports of C. daedalma sightings significantly deeper than 100 meters require what type of evidence for trustworthiness?
Answer
Professional deep-sea photography or video evidence.
Given that the established maximum documented depth for this species is 100 meters, sightings reported below this depth warrant significant caution. Such reports, which fall outside the established parameters of current scientific surveys, should only be accepted or treated as trustworthy if they are substantiated by high-quality, verifiable documentation, specifically professional deep-sea photography or clear video evidence confirming the fish's presence at those extreme depths.
Related Questions
To which family does Chaetodon daedalma, the Wrought-iron Butterflyfish, belong?What is the documented depth range spanned by the Wrought-iron Butterflyfish?Which specific island group is cited as a core area of endemism for C. daedalma?What is another common name used for Chaetodon daedalma besides Wrought-iron Butterflyfish?Is the Wrought-iron Butterflyfish considered widespread or specialized geographically?What zone category often describes the habitat at the 100 meter depth limit for C. daedalma?Which island groups are included in the distribution extending south and west from the Ryukyu nucleus?Why do localized threats pose a disproportionately high risk to the Wrought-iron Butterflyfish population?What directly translates the limited range and deep habitat into scarcity in the marine aquarium trade?Reports of C. daedalma sightings significantly deeper than 100 meters require what type of evidence for trustworthiness?