That is exactly what an AI Bot would say XDXD
There is curiously nothing on his website about this isopod site.
Take in mind that the first page cover different morphs of the same genus. Maybe even the same species. They all look variations generated by computer, because they all are Cubaris sp and have exactly the same cephalon shape.
What would be so worrying about someone using AI to generate images for their site?
AI generated images are not appropriate for source or reference material.
Not that it actually matters but if those images were generated it would feel pointless to me, even if I can't tell the difference.
From the comments, there are apparently supposed to be amazing photos. But I see text, I see black backgrounds, but no photos--none at all. Neither on Firefox, nor on Chrome. Just empty boxes where say "Amber Ducky" should be.
The biggest terrestrial can reach 3cm or so, while the largest marine can reach 30-50cm.
That means that they are made of thousands of small eyes, named ommatidia, each of which detects the light coming from a certain direction, so that all together can provide an image. Each small bump that you see on the surface of their blackberry-like eyes is one of the small eyes, i.e. one of the ommatidia.
Each of the ommatidia is a long tube, having at the interior end one or more photoreceptors. The length of the tube ensures that only the light coming from a direction parallel to the axis of the tube can reach the photoreceptors, instead of being absorbed by the walls of the tube.
In the photographs, it can be seen that even the species that are otherwise mostly transparent have black eyes, or at least eyes of a dark color. This is a requirement for any kind of eye, because in order to detect light it must absorb it. So in many animals where the eyes may not have a more obvious structure they can still be recognized by being black or at least dark spots.
In most compound eyes each of the ommatidia corresponds with 1 pixel of the image that they see, so the number of pixels in an image is only of a few thousands, thus they have poor angular resolution in comparison with vertebrates or cephalopods.
There are compound eyes where several ommatidia correspond to a single pixel, trading off angular resolution for a greater sensitivity in low light, or where each of the ommatidia corresponds to several pixels, because it contains a small lens that can separate the light coming from different directions, projecting it on distinct photoreceptors.
Reptile and amphibian keepers use them, along with live plants, to set up a bioactive tank that is relatively self-cleaning and self-maintaining.
Keepers of very small reptiles sometimes maintain colonies as feeder insects.
And still others skip the scaly middlemen and keep isopods as pets. They can get hilariously expensive. Just a couple of years ago, rubber duckies (featured on this site) used to be $90 a pop due to their rarity and difficulty in keeping them. Since they exploded in popularity, however, they're a much more reasonable^1 $15 a head or so.
[1]: For certain definitions of reasonable.
The kangaroos from the invertebrate world. This group contains one infamous taxonomic troll move, when an English decided to name several different genus with anagrams. So everybody now needs to remember the differences between Nerocila, Cirolana, Conilera, Rocinela, Anilocra and Olencira. All because he wanted to impress a woman called Caroline. To add insult to the crime he created also Livoneca, that everybody was (wrongly) calling Lironeca, just because exceptions are annoying to remember. The joke was expanded by a second taxonomist later with Renocila and in 1990 a third author created Creniola and Norileca. I would wish to strangle all of then with my own hands. Slowly.
That’ll be seriously weird.
100% generated website from the code to the text to the pictures.
