Wednesday, April 17, 2013

Why the Graboids from "Tremors" Totally Would Not Have Worked, and the One Thing They Got Right, Part II

We resume my review of the “graboids,” giant carnivorous worms from the 1990 cult classic “Tremors.” My previous post ended midway through a lengthy diatribe criticizing the flaws in their supposed fossorial lifestyle. I’m not quite finished with the criticism, but I do have a few good words to say about the monsters, and the movie as well. So, without further ado…


"Miss me?"

Problem #3: Internal rumblings

It is established fairly early in the movie that graboids are blind*, and detect and follow their prey via seismic waves (= vibrations) – entirely logical adaptations for a burrowing organism. While this detection is shown to be quite sensitive and spatially precise, it is not very discriminatory. Through the course of the movie, graboids are attracted to not only to prey, but to a hand shovel, pogo stick, tumbler, chest freezer, unmanned riding mower, running water, and possibly a jackhammer. 

*Strangely, later in the movie, the graboids supposedly learn that motor vehicles keep their prey safe, and manage to locate and disable a pickup truck and SUV, even though neither is running at the time….

But if this style of prey detection is true, graboids have either extremely bad luck or a terrible sense of direction. Nevada, where the movie takes place, is the third most seismically active state in the nation, just behind Alaska and California (you may have heard about earthquakes in those two…). If you look at the geologic map of Nevada to the top left (from here), you may notice that mountain ranges are arranged in parallel bands with an eerie resemblance to the stretch marks on a pregnant woman’s belly (bottom left; from here). This is not a coincidence – in CliffsNotes®-style plate tectonics, the plate being subducted under the west coast (the one ultimately responsible for the San Andreas Fault) is dragging and stretching the western United States along with it, expanding Nevada to several times its original width. Inherent to this is a lot of seismic activity. Graboids trying to pinpoint the footsteps of a puny human amidst all the seismic background noise is akin to trying to find a buzzing housefly in the middle of a dubstep concert.

Incidentally, the co-option of seismic waves by animals is not limited to science fiction. Several modern organisms are suspected of using seismic waves for communication, probably the most notable being the elephant. Elephants, both Asian and African, appear to generate and detect low-frequency waves for long-distance communication. Some paleontologists have also hypothesized that hadrosaurids (duckbilled dinosaurs) may have participated in similar communications, using their elaborate headgear as resonance chambers.


So what’s the good news?

Fortunately, the producers of “Tremors” did manage to include one impressively accurate feature on the graboids (possible unintentionally, but I’m willing to overlook that). In several scenes, graboids display prominent finger-like or fringe-like lateral projections. I assume these to be the gigantic equivalent of setae: miniature hair-like structures found on many organisms, including our invasive friend the earthworm. In earthworms, these structures are very small – even at the microscopic scale in the image below, you may still believe I’m pulling your leg when I say the structures really are there.

asknature.org/strategy/29204f007bb1d29b7c2f63a580fd7d4d

But they are present, and damned effective. Earthworms use them to “grip” the soil and assist with locomotion – an important trait for a cylindrical, slimy invertebrate. They also help the earthworm resist attempts to remove it from the ground - anyone who has ever tried to pull up earthworm probably learned that even if you have the grip of a professional free-climber, the best you will end up with is half an earthworm. Scale this trait up to a whale-sized worm, and very well-anchored organism would result. In fact, in a scene early in the movie, one of a graboid’s “tongues” manages to clamp onto the axle of a pickup. The pickup is able to get away after flooring the gas, but it only succeeds in pulling the “tongue” out by its base, leaving the rest of the graboid likely in exactly the same position it started, albeit in much pain. 

Unfortunately, the graboids in the movie never fully utilize their extreme stubbornness. Towards the end of the movie, the town’s survivors hatch a plan to escape on a bulldozer – reflecting on the graboids’ previous motor vehicle destruction, one of the characters says something along the lines of “[The bulldozer] weighs more than 30 tons. There's no way they could lift that!” Well, it turns out the graboids wouldn’t need to bother. If setae can allow an earthworm to resist something 100,000 times its size, they sure as hell can allow a graboid to immobilize a bulldozer. One graboid would simply need to bite down on the dozer and hold it place, then patiently wait for the trapped prey to “jump ship” (and the graboids are shown early in the film to do just that).

For the record, I don’t mean to sound too critical of the movie – as I said, it is one of my favorites. It effectively blends horror and comedy, portrayed Reba McEntire and the father from “Family Ties” as survivalist gun nuts, and accurately depicted “bromance” decades before Judd Apatow wasted film on nothing but two hours of hairy, pasty-white men waving their dongs at the camera to bad 80’s pop music. But if the producers or writers had consulted with a biologist (or, apparently, a bored paleontologist), they could have created a rare good science/cult classic combination, and saved the bandwidth needed for these last two blog posts.


Although, considering what most of the internet is used for,
perhaps that's not such a great loss after all...

Tuesday, April 16, 2013

Why the Graboids from "Tremors" Totally Would Not Have Worked, and the One Thing They Got Right, Part I


The move to California has made its impact on my life, and consequently this blog. I give my employer credit for keeping me busy, which severely limits blogging time. On the other hand, it has given me ample exposure to Quaternary alluvium (Qal), and much time to ruminate on this type of sediment. One of my most consistent ruminations revolves around the monsters from one of my favorite movies - the 1990 cult classic “Tremors.” Unfortunately, my armchair evaluations have led me to conclude the monsters, dubbed “graboids” in the movie, would never work realistically. For this blog post, I will begin explaining how I arrived at this conclusion…

The monster of concern, in true 90's-era video quality.

NOTE: In my “research,” I tried to exclusively limit myself to data presented in the original movie, and not any of the lame sequels or fan fiction. Apologies if any of the following criticisms are resolved in subsequent movies.

cinemajunkyard.wordpress.com/2011/10/07/tremors-1990/
For those who have not seen the movie, the plot revolves around the denizens of a small, isolated, rural Nevada town trying to escape the wrath of four giant carnivorous subterranean worms. That’s not the best sell on my part, but it works on the screen – I would recommend watching it for those that have not seen it.  

First, some background on the monsters: no specific dimensions are ever given for the graboids, but the picture to the left indicates they are around 2 m wide, and the occasional full-body shot in the movie suggest they push 10 m in length. For comparison, that is slightly larger than an orca (this will be important later). Nearly all the necessary information about the graboids’ behavior is nicely summarized in the following clip from early in the movie, when “Old Fred” meets his demise:


As you can see, graboids live and travel underground (technical term: fossorial burrowers), and not very deeply - their arrival in the above clip disturbs a scarecrow that is anchored into the ground by no more than a couple feet. Additionally, throughout the movie, graboids are frequently shown to be traveling less than 1 m below the surface, especially when stalking or capturing prey. A key plot point in the movie is the graboids can only travel through the Quaternary alluvium – when one runs into a ~50 cm cement wall, it ends up killing itself through blunt force trauma. They also capture their prey by pulling it underground as Kevin Bacon wryly observes (warning: simulated horse mauling). In the movie they are shown (or implied to) pull sheep, humans, horses, and even an entire station wagon underground.

Second, some background on the author: I am currently employed primarily as a “paleontological field monitor,” meaning I watch construction, much of it in Qal, for the disturbance of fossils. This presents the opportunity for long periods of deep thinking, but not much else to envy. Conveniently, much of the groundwork I have observed is comparable to what would be required of a whale-sized fossorial organism, and I have arrived at two major flaws with the graboids.

Problem #1: No, you’re a dense medium!

First off, let’s return to that “fossorial” part. In contrast to the more familiar terrestrial and arboreal (flying) animals that live and travel in air, and aquatic organisms that live and travel in water, fossorial organisms spend at least part of their lives in the soil. For the purposes of this discussion, we will sidestep the strict definition of “soil,” and just keep in mind that the majority of soil is loose rock grains. Forgivably, most of us are only familiar with soil when it is in a unique, heavily disturbed state – after is has been dug up and placed in a pile, or well-tilled and aerated in a garden. Under these conditions, the grains have been separated and the soil is spatially unconfined. But in its natural state, soil is under stress from the weight of the soil above it, and confined by the soil surrounding it in all directions. This causes grains to tightly compact, resulting in a heavy, dense medium.

For comparison: the atmosphere through which we regularly move is .001 g/cm3. According to casual conversations with soil scientists, undisturbed Qal like that in the movie is naturally 75 – 80% grains by volume (rock = 2.7 g/cm3, for our sake). "Back of the envelope" calculations suggest the soil itself would have a density of at least 2.3 g/cm3, i.e. over 2000 times denser than air*.

* For a good “hands-on” example, pick up a bag of vacuum-packed coffee grounds at the grocery. In that state, the contents are about 80% grounds by volume, and the vacuum packaging simulates the confinement from surrounding sediment. Imagine digging through something like that, but harder, and you have a good approximation of a burrowing lifestyle.

ossamenta.dreamwidth.org/24900.html
Needless to say, unless an organism is microscopic, traveling through such a dense medium places extraordinary demands on its body. For a classic example of this, look no further than the image at the left – the bone on the left is a rat humerus, and the bizarre-looking bone on the right is actually the humerus of a similarly-sized common North American mole. Evolution has forced it to extensively remodel itself to accommodate enormous arm muscles for a lifetime of efficient digging. The adaptations of other digging organisms – from the massive teeth and neck muscles of mole-rats to the lethal claw of badgers – are all testaments to the demands of living underground. Consequently, fossorial organisms are relatively quite rare – if I were to spontaneously ask you to name all the burrowing vertebrates you could think of, you would probably list a sizeable percentage without trying too hard.

Part of the reason for this rarity is that the extraordinary demands require extraordinary fuel. A single mole or gopher can wreak a seemingly disproportionate amount of havoc on your victory garden because is needs a lot of nutrition to move through something 2000 times more challenging than a hurricane. And even the best burrowers are comparatively painfully slow at subterranean locomotion – I was unable to find estimates for how quickly various burrowing organisms can move while underground, probably because it’s too slow to really warrant a velocity. In contrast, graboids are shown to burrow at speeds faster than a sprinting young adult male human, and travel dozens of kilometers (at least) over the course of three days. And they are whale-sized.

Again, for comparison: the image to the left (traffic cone for scale) shows auger bits used on a highway expansion project I monitored. The auger excavated a 1.5 m-diameter tunnel, roughly equivalent to the width of the graboids. But it took five 8-hour days, running on two 11,000 watt generators, to excavate a 15 m-long tunnel. Now, 22,000 watts converts to 29.5 horsepower (hp). In an interesting paper in 1993, Stevenson and Wassersug calculated the upper limit of an actual workhorse’s power output to be 14.9 hp, and that it could only last for a few seconds. If an organism could double this theoretical maximum and maintain it for hours, it could potentially burrow at 0.3 km/hr – definitely not enough to catch Kevin Bacon in a dead sprint. To account for the activity exhibited in the movie, a single graboid would have to possess magnitudes of order more power than any known organism on the planet, and have a food source rich enough to fuel it. And there were four of them. The handful of people and livevstock ingested would not have been anywhere near enough fuel to go around.

OK, I’m willing to concede the graboids’ burrowing abilities are merely highly implausible, not impossible. One of reasons I like the movie is because it doesn’t make the mistake common to many science fiction movies of trying to explain too much. The origin of the graboids is never determined, so for all we know, they could be aliens with an unknown, exceptionally efficient fuel source – ultra-brown fat, perhaps. But even if they came from another planet, the laws of physics are universal, which brings us to problem number two…

Problem #2: Aristotle, still relevant after all these years.

One other thing you might notice about the fossorial organisms you named earlier is how small many of them are – squirrel-sized burrowers are the norm. There’s good reason for this for this – for any subterranean space excavated, the disturbed soil has to be moved somewhere, and the less dirt to haul, the better. For permanent or semi-permanent burrows and dens, this is a one-time hassle. But, as discussed above, the graboids are shown to be constantly on the move – while hiding from one, a character comments “Doesn’t he have a home to go to?” But nowhere in the movie are visible castings or spoils from the enormous burrows the graboids must have excavated – note how in the above clip, Fred's remains are surrounded by a small halo only a few centimeters high. Even after pulling the aforementioned station wagon underground, there is no station wagon-sized volume of spoils to be seen – two characters only know a vehicle is underground because of the still-active radio. 

cnn.com/2013/03/01/us/florida-sinkhole-explainer
This is not just an aesthetic quibble – it is related to a notable problem with the graboids’ unique mode of predation. In order the pull, say, Fred underground, a graboid needs to excavate a Fred-sized hole directly underneath him, regardless of how the excavated soil is dispatched. Problem is, this is one of those instances where horror vacui is very much true – an excavated subterranean space is living on borrowed time. The weight of the soil and sediment overlying such a space will cause it to ultimately collapse - we see instances of this every day with sinkholes. As a prime example, the picture to the left shows not only the start of a commuter’s very bad day, but what commonly happens when a graboid-sized tunnel is situated too near the ground surface. The graboids in the movie are consistently shown to be moving even nearer to the surface, yet only rarely is there any detectable disturbance above ground, and never anything noticeable to the doomed prey. 

Personally, I believe this plot hole was intentionally “edited out” – there is at least one scene where the actual ground (not a scaled-down set) is disturbed in a manner consistent with a near-surface graboid. The subsequent disturbed earth is carefully edited out of the movie, but the film crew would have unavoidably seen the physical aftermath in real life. Furthermore, in one ironic, humorous scene, a character experiences a brief moment of terror when his foot sinks into a gopher burrow. Yet in other scenes, burrows hundreds of times larger are actively excavated underneath a person, yet go unnoticed and remain sturdy until the person is pulled under. I’ll sympathize with the producers not wanting to foot the bill for renting a backhoe to simulate collapsed tunnels for every attack scene, but I do fault them for trying to “sweep under the rug” a fundamental flaw with their own monster’s lifestyle. 

But wait, we’re not done yet! And it isn’t all bad! But I’ve written enough for one sitting. Look for "Part II," coming soon!

REFS

Stevenson, R. D., and Wassersug, R. J., 1993, Horsepower from a horse: Nature, v. 364, no. 6434, p. 195, doi:10.1038/364195a0