Brilliant brittlestars:
Entire skeleton forms one big compound eye
by Jonathan Sarfati and David Catchpoole
Published: 22 August 2007 (GMT+10)
This is the pre-publication version which was subsequently revised to appear in
Creation 30(3):54–55.
Photo Wikipedia.org, Creative Commons Attribution 2.5.

Micro brittle starfish
The brittlestar or serpent star is similar to a starfish, but has five waving arms
attached to a disc. Although it doesn’t seem to have any eyes, it has a puzzling
ability to flee from predators and catch prey. And it even changes colour from dark
brown in daytime to grey at night.
Dr Joanna Aizenberg, an expert in material science, especially biological mineral
structures, at Lucent Technologies’ Bell Laboratories, led a team that solved
this mystery.1
According to one report, its ‘entire skeleton forms a big eye … brittlestars
were one big compound eye’.2
They found that the brittlestar species Ophiocoma wendtii secretes tiny
crystals of calcite (calcium carbonate, CaCO3 ) which formed ‘spherical
microstructures that have a characteristic double-lens design’, and ‘form
nearly perfect microlenses’. The array of microlenses focuses light a small
distance into the tissues (4–7 μm) where nerve bundles detect the light.
Brittlestar species that were indifferent to light lacked these lenses.
The abstract of their paper states:
‘The lens array is designed to minimize spherical aberration and birefringence
and to detect light from a particular direction. The optical performance is further
optimized by phototropic chromatophores that regulate the dose of illumination reaching
the receptors. These structures represent an example of a multifunctional biomaterial
that fulfills both mechanical and optical functions.’
Dr Aizenberg used much easier-to-understand language when explaining to reporters
the nuts-and-bolts significance of what the team’s findings actually mean.
For example, she said that the visual system of lenses in the brittlestar is far
superior to any manufactured lenses.
‘This study shows how great materials can be formed by nature, far beyond
current technology,’ said Dr Aizenberg. She went on to point out: ‘In
general, arrays of microlenses are something that technology tried a couple of years
ago. Nobody knew something like that already existed in nature.’
‘This study shows how great materials can be formed by nature, far beyond
current technology. In general, arrays of microlenses are something that technology
tried a couple of years ago. Nobody knew something like that already existed in
nature.’—lead researcher Dr Joanna Aizenberg
Commenting on the brittlestar discovery in the same issue of Nature, Roy
Sambles, of the University of Exeter’s Dept of Physics, explained that:
- There has to be ‘exquisite control’ of the calcite growth to form the
lens structures
- The calcite must grow as single crystals with the optical axis parallel to the axis
of the double lens (to avoid birefringence effects)
- ‘each microlens should ideally have minimal optical aberration, and that seems
to be the case.’3
And how did such intricate and efficiently coordinated microlenses come to exist
‘in nature’? Aizenberg’s colleague and co-author of the study,
Gordon Hendler, made his views clear to the dogmatically pro-evolution
National Geographic:
‘Thanks to evolution, they [brittlestars] have beautifully designed crystal
lenses that are an integral part of their calcite skeleton. Those lenses appear
to be acting in concert with chromatophores and photoreceptor tissues.’4
Aizenberg J. et al., Science 299, 1205 (2003)

Scanning electron micrograph (SEM) of a part of the skeleton of a brittlestar Ophiocoma
wendtii (Ophioroidea, Echinodermata). The lenses appear opaque because
calcite reflects the electrons used in the SEM microscopy, whereas calcite is transparent
to light.
Huh? ‘Thanks to evolution’ these creatures have ‘beautifully designed’
microlenses acting ‘in concert’ with other (incredibly specialised)
parts of the body? This evolutionary ‘explanation’ is totally vacuous—where
is even a proposed sequence of small changes guided by natural selection
at every step, let alone one demonstrated in the fossil record?
Surely such evidence of design is evidence for a Designer. And
on the basis of what has been made, we can see that the Designer is evidently ‘streets
ahead’ of anything that humans have so far come up with—as the evolutionists
themselves concede, using the brittlestar as an example:
‘Once again we find that nature foreshadowed our technical developments.’
Of course, it was the Designer—the God of the Bible—through his handiwork
in ‘nature’ (not ‘nature’ itself) that ‘foreshadowed
our technical developments.’ But surely the Scriptures aptly describe those
who deny a Creator:
- You turn things upside down, as if the potter were thought
to be like the clay! Shall what is formed say to him who formed it, ‘He did
not make me’? Can the pot say of the potter, ‘He knows nothing’?
(Isaiah 29:16)
- … Does your work say, ‘He has no hands’?
(Isaiah 45:9)
References
- Aizenberg, J., Tkachenko, A., Weiner, S., Addadi, L. and Hendler,
G.,
Calcitic microlenses as part of the photoreceptor system in brittlestars,
Nature 412(6849):819–822, 2001. Return
to Text.
- Abraham, J.,
Eyeless Creature Turns Out to Be All Eyes, Access Research Network,
12 September 2001. Return to Text.
- Sambles, R.,
Armed for light sensing, Nature 412(6849):783, 23
August 2001 (commentary on Ref. 1). Return to Text.
- Roach, J.,
Brittle Star found covered with optically advanced eyes, National Geographic
News, 22 August 2001. Return to Text.
| Expand this site. Besides the 7,000 fully searchable articles on this site, we want to add many more ways to reach a media-soaked culture. But it requires expertise to do it. Help us expand our methods of outreach.  | | |
|