Submitted by Buck NacreWay back when, someone whose identity is lost to pearling history declared that a natural pearl forms when foreign matter invades a shelled mollusk’s soft tissue, and the mollusk progressively coats the invader with shell material to sooth the irritation it causes. That explanation has been repeated so often, it’s taken as true. But both common sense and close analysis demonstrate it’s false.
First, common sense: If soothing irritation were the mollusk’s purpose in coating the foreign matter with shell material, why would it continue coating once enough layers were applied to give the irritant a smooth surface?
Second, close analysis: Foreign matter gets inside the mollusk and either lodges in the mantle tissue where the epithelial cells that produce shell material are, or it picks up epithelial cells on its way to settling somewhere else in the mollusk’s soft body. Whether in the mantle or elsewhere, the epithelial cells continue doing what they’re genetically programmed to do -- produce shell material. But rather than continuing to build a shell, the cells form a pearl sac and create a pearl that encapsulates the invader. A cultured pearl with a bead as its core is produced by adapting this process.
For more detail, see “Pearl Production” by Joseph Taylor and Elisabeth Strack in The Pearl Oyster, edited by Paul Southgate and John Lucas, and published by Elsevier.
First, common sense: If soothing irritation were the mollusk’s purpose in coating the foreign matter with shell material, why would it continue coating once enough layers were applied to give the irritant a smooth surface?
Second, close analysis: Foreign matter gets inside the mollusk and either lodges in the mantle tissue where the epithelial cells that produce shell material are, or it picks up epithelial cells on its way to settling somewhere else in the mollusk’s soft body. Whether in the mantle or elsewhere, the epithelial cells continue doing what they’re genetically programmed to do -- produce shell material. But rather than continuing to build a shell, the cells form a pearl sac and create a pearl that encapsulates the invader. A cultured pearl with a bead as its core is produced by adapting this process.
For more detail, see “Pearl Production” by Joseph Taylor and Elisabeth Strack in The Pearl Oyster, edited by Paul Southgate and John Lucas, and published by Elsevier.
Posts
85 comments:
pearl business must be very slow..
Right you are Buck , but I liked the old story better !
You can't convince me I still think the grain of sand bit is true.
Bollocks, everywhere on the net and in books it says its a grain of sand so who should we believe, not you.
People also once believed the earth was flat. The grain of sand myth is quite pervasive yet untrue.
says who, the anon Pearl Profesor? Go to any high end pearl seller and they too will confirm it is a grain of sand.
Sadly you are likely correct. The myth is quite pervasive. But it would be quite easy for one to turn to a text of expert analysis such as written by Elisabeth Strack, Hubert Bar or Southgate and Lucas. Each text dispells this myth, one which experts have knows is a myth for more than 100 years.
In the previously cited chapter and book, Taylor and Strack do not exclude a grain of sand from the list of intruders that might induce natural pearl formation. See page 274, section 8.3.
I did not mention a grain of sand in the 12/20/10 submission that the eminent Pearl Professor graciously posted on his internationally renowned blog.
There we go its not the grain of sand that is in question its the process so like I said Prof the grain of sand stands.
Not excluding but determining it is highly unlikely and showing how natural pearls do actually form should be enough to dispell the theory from an educated mind.
Taylor 8.3, while not completely excluding the potential transfer of cells from broken shells and other fragments, goes on to explain the most likely parasitic cestode larvae and parasitic copepods causing the transfer of epithelium cells. This is repeated in Strack's The Formation Process on page 115.
Dr Hubert Bari describes the sand theory on page 18 of Pearls as follows:
"But the mythology of the pearl reached its height when the idea that it was formed around a grain of sand took hold in the Arabian Gulf. This idea is now so deeply rooted in people's minds that it may never be possible to get rid of it. It is the most widespread of myths, even though a grain of sand has never been observed at the heart of a free pearl."
From the above comments, Dr Bari is certainly correct.
The grain of sand myth as you say is still believed by the people of the Arabian Gulf in addition to pearl sites on the internet, books, jewellers and gemmologists. Who is Bari and why are you plugging his book. So everyone els is wrong and this one guy is right. I don't think so.
The short answer is yes, they are wrong. Pearl experts know this.
Dr Hubert Bari has a doctorate in mineralogy and has been researching pearls for the last decade. He was tasked with organising an exhibition on pearls at the Museum of Islamic Art in Doha for the year 2010. He is also the author the book Pearls.
Why wouldn't I plug his book? It is and he is one of the foremost authorities on pearls.
Another expert, Kenneth Scarratt of the Gemological Institute of America in Bangkok in his examination of several million X-ray reports by GIA has found only twenty in which the presence of a foreign body had been identified at the centre of a natural pearl. The very few intrusions identifiable are in a tiny gastropod and a similarly tiny scallop.
It is not just "the one guy" as anonymous so aptly put it. It is common knowledge amongst pearl experts.
The grain of sand theory is a long-disproved myth, which unfortunately seems to make sense to the common observer, further entrenching this false assumption.
Hey prof!
You've probably already read this article written by Douglas McClaurin from Sea of Cortez pearls. But if not you should. He debunked the sand myth by attempting culture with sand.
http://www.perlas.com.mx/blog/?tag=panamic-black-lipped-pearl-oyster
Oh yeah, and if that other guy still thinks you are wrong, he's a moron.
Hubert Bari and David Lam produced Pearls, a gorgeous, well-researched book written in a popular, easy-to-understand style. On pages 18 through 33, they offer an explanation of how natural blister and free pearls form. Part of their explanation is a very reasonable hypothesis, but most of it is drawn from observation and scientific discovery. The authors deny a grain of sand as the core around which a natural pearl forms because no natural pearl has ever been found with sand within it. Further, Bari and Lam say it’s unlikely a bivalve mollusk would retain sand because its natural processes expel such invaders.
Who is this anonymous nutcase who insists on sand grains being in natural pearls, and uses the Internet and pearl dealers as his authorities? Doesn't he know the Internet specializes in wrong, unfounded information and that pearl dealers are, well, pearl dealers? Very few of them know pearls to any depth. Most dealers get just enough right to convince customers with no knowledge whatsoever that the dealers know what they're talking about. That's how they sell. Otherwise, they don't know and aren't interested enough to find out. They skate on hearsay.
"Anonymous said... The grain of sand myth as you say is still believed by the people of the Arabian Gulf in addition to pearl sites on the internet, books, jewellers and gemmologists. Who is Bari and why are you plugging his book. So everyone els is wrong and this one guy is right. I don't think so."
Are you for real? if so, you sound like a stupid idiot.
Grain of sand, lmao! So many people still believe that crock of s***.
Just imagine if pearls really did come from grains of sand. The ocean floor would be covered with them!
Anonymous does have a point about a lot of people believing it still though. One somewhat well-known wholesale company based out of New York made a pearl video earlier this year for YouTube and talked about the grain of sand. THAT is how far the myth goes. Then again, they also mispronounced the word nacre in the same video, so it might just be a general lack of pearl knowledge on their part.
Is anon really such a moron for his reluctance to believe who we deem authorities? What about the keshi pearl fiasco? The GIA has now certified some royal wannabe's nautilus pearl collection for God's sake. WTF.
Uh, yeah! He has no argument, gave no evidence, was proven wrong by an expert and still can't come to grips with all too obvious reality.
Fake nautilus pearls fit the fake royal title. There is no Sultan of Sulu or Saba to give away titles. Those lands belong to Malaysia. Same league as fake royalty Zeide Erskine and her Lop Nur pearls.
" Anonymous said...
What about the keshi pearl fiasco?"
To add, what about the GIA diamnd fiasco? Nothing to do with the grain of sand in a pearl myth but agree on the questionability of "authority."
Pearl is made from dew and not in oyster body. One sand went into the shell, just like between our toes had something went there when we walk on a beach. Then the oyster must find way to take the irritation out from it bodies but it keep fail to do that. One day it have bright idea, it open up, and let the sea water spank the sand out and at the same time prevent other irritation to go inside. While it open his mouth,it saw one round, big and shiny pearl and gulp it. I read this from book in Bahrein.
E. Strack and H. Bari are not employed by the GIA.
why doesn't the prof do an article about the nautilus pearl at least that story is cut and dry fabricated.
Sabah and Sulu are Muslim states that were historically ruled by Muslim Sultans but no more, so how come a Jewish man can have datukship title now from nonexistant Sultan? Ridiculous. This is not old colonial days. In 1963 Sabahan voted to join Malaysian federation, we don't have Sultan since then.
is datuk title recognised by Malaysia or World? or Malaysia recognise Sabah and Sulu sultan? you kidding. These fake sultans cannot go to Brunei because they will be arrested. Even in Sabah and Sulu nobody believe these fakers anymore, only in westen country people can go around with fairy princess and her datuk title given by ghost sultan. stupid westerners.
“The GIA has now certified some royal wannabe's nautilus pearl collection…”
Trying to scientifically confirm or refute the world’s short handful of Nautilus pearl certificates—all dated within the past two years or so by GIA Bangkok—has been entertaining to say the least.
“Fake nautilus pearls fit the fake royal title. There is no Sultan of Sulu…”
Sulu Archipelago is the source of much Nautilus lore, but Indonesia has shown itself to be the true capital of Nautilus pearl mysticism.
“…why doesn't the prof do an article about the nautilus pearl at least that story is cut and dry fabricated.”
Nautilus a very good story, but editorial may want to consider the plot in progress, as who knows when or where it is going to end!
Bari's Nautilus chapter was certainly premature, the pearls (at least one certified) dubious at best and some basic Nautilus biology wrong. But I can understand the overwhelming temptation.
Nowhere in Nautilus mythology is there a mention of a single grain of sand. But at this point I must admit we remain open to all hypotheses!
Mr. Steve, 'overwhelming temptation' in case of fake sultan giving fake datukship and princess title who sells fake pearl is to take peoples money. Sabahan don't need these people we have at least one dozen sultans and hundred and hundred of datuks and princess, if westerner want them OKAY.
Speaking of myths, I'd like to know what that mythomaniac, Zeide Erskine, has to fabricate about the nautilus pearl. I shall weigh both her verdict and Bangkok GIA's with equal seriousness. Meh.
The Russians have a technology that includes some pearls where the pearl sac has been grown in a culture medium for the entire process. This method may also yield pearls from molluscs that do not produce pearls in nature (at least not in any mentionable quantities) like the nautilus. That should tell you something.
Z
Oh, and, as I mentioned on another comment section the nautilus is nacreous with very strong iridescence. When thinking of the pearl, think ammonite.
Hope that helps.
Z
I spent a whole two hours staring at my nautilus pearl today. I own and have seen the few almost nonexistant nautilus pearls so far but this one is truly a stunner because it looks like an opal reflecting an auroral borealis show. If you have ever read his Dark Materials by Philip Pullman (in particular Northern Lights/The Golden Compass) you cannot fail to be utterly enthralled by this pearl. It is also the perfect size and shape to add to my rare organic micro mineral display.
" Anonymous said...
Uh, yeah! He has no argument, gave no evidence, was proven wrong by an expert and still can't come to grips with all too obvious reality."
Anonymous, do you mean the moron, or do you mean the dude that sells GIA certified nautilus pearls? Or do you mean both?
40 Thieves: The mystique of Nautilus and apparent assurance that centuries of myth had at long last been substantiated caused M. Bari to be unable to resist including the Nautilus chapter in Pearls—not to mention inclusion of the published pearls in Qatar Museum Authority's priceless collection.
Z.E.: Your pearl clearly merits exposure. If it is anything like those I have had the pleasure of handling, the photographic process in and of itself is very gratifying. Looking forward to your images at some point.
Opalescence of a sort is indeed a type marker, although the pearls in question are not nacreous. Therefore you would be confusing iridescence with other, equally fascinating, optical phenomena.
Regarding the Russian experiment, a pearl sac composed of epithelial cells from the apertural Nautilus mantle will produce a nacreous pearl analogous to the shell. That does not help us to account for the exclusively non-nacreous composition of pearls claiming Nautilus provenance during all of recorded history.
Nautilus trumps us all…
Dear Steve,
From all accounts your pearl does not sound like a nautilus'. In my second post I said (okay wrote) that the nautilus is highly nacreous with very strong iridescence comparable to an ammonite. Although my pearl does not display the saturated colors resulting from fossilization it clearly displays very strong iridescence of the aurora borealis type which leads me to conclude that I am the only person in possession of one. It has not trumped me.
Z
ZE, your nautilus pearl is as real as your Lop Nurs. If you really have one, I'll eat my hat. That last email you sent me described how you got it from the other sultan of Sulu, the real one, whom you described as a member of the Dayak tribe. You told me that the real sultan gave it to you 13 years ago when you made a grand progress to the Sulu peninsula and Palawan following the trail of one W.Cobb, the purloiner of another famous pearl.
Now Zeide, tell me about the pearl you have that has a grain of sand embedded in it....
You also take the worst photos of pearls in the world because all your pictures look like fresh water pearls. Though it might be interesting to see how you get a freshwater pearl to look anything like a nautilus pearl.
Steve from Seattle, do not let your innate politeness allow you to believe anything ZE says. Do not, I repeat, do not buy from her!
I think something has lodged inside Zeide's brain is what.
Zeide: double certified or not?
Hi
you were posting comments every day until the 16th. I wrote one on the 17th or so and I still don't see it.
Was something wrong with it? Is there some little club who get to post with no one else allowed?
"Z.E.: Your pearl clearly merits exposure. If it is anything like those I have had the pleasure of handling, the photographic process in and of itself is very gratifying. Looking forward to your images…"
Posting again to comment that Z.E.'s use of aurora borealis is actually quite apt to describe the singular optical effects of the purported Nautilus pearls I have experienced and/or acquired. It is an arching effect as the pearl moves, caused by a more or less vortical and tilted arrangement of the aragonite crystals within a low-protein, highly translucent medium.
However, iridescence is not a native quality, as the pearls in question are not nacreous. Show us your photos, Z.E.!
Gastropod target: what do you mean by "double certified"? Do you mean Zeide or her nautilus pearl? a lot of these comments are so ambiguous....
pearl scholar said...
That last email you sent me described how you got it from the other sultan of Sulu, the real one, whom you described as a member of the Dayak tribe. You told me that the real sultan gave it to you 13 years ago when you made a grand progress to the Sulu peninsula and Palawan following the trail of one W.Cobb, the purloiner of another famous pearl.
Wha? A Dayak sultan? At least some Iban are actually Muslim. More believable than a Jewish datuk, at least.
Anonymous said...
Is there some little club who get to post with no one else allowed?
Speaking of clubs, I just saw the prof dancing, or at least flailing his arms, at a questionable club in South Beach. He was decked out in that absurd pink jacket again. Looked like he was wearing a piece too! So sad what is happening to him. The comment moderation must be on auto pilote.
Dearest Steve,
I think you are rather confused. Why are you referring to your non nacreous pearls as coming from the nautilus when you admit they should be nacreous and highly iridescent? Mine are as I have said twice in these comments if you care to reread them. Also, how do you purport I show any photos here.
Z.
the professor was carrying a gun? didn't know clubbing in SoBe was so dangerous.
Z.
You might want to reread my comments with more care to detail.
Your images may be posted on any number of internet album sites. No reasonable comment can be made until this is done and a link is provided.
Whoever is willing to pay astronomical prices for naturals is asking to be screwed over. Of course people will try to sell fakes. Who the hell cares for naturals anyways? In my opinion, round pearls with high luster are art and whoever knows how to produce them and get oysters to create perfection deserves to get paid.
Steve M / Seattle said...Z. You might want to reread my comments with more care to detail.Your images may be posted on any number of internet album sites. No reasonable comment can be made until this is done and a link is provided.
You tell her Steve. She'll never show it unless she can find a freshwater pearl with chatoyance. All her pearls are freshwaters; even the famous Mikimoto is really one of the first freshadamas.
And steve bloom believed her....
When TPP sobers up, send him back here to tell us some thing new.
" Anonymous said...
the professor was carrying a gun? didn't know clubbing in SoBe was so dangerous."
No, not a gun. I wrote "wearing" a piece, not "carrying" one. I mean on his head.
Who ever is willing to pay astronomical prices for naturals is asking to be screwed over indeed. I would modify that into whoever pays astronomical prices for something only one lab is willing to certify or on a seller's guarantee because the seller is such an upstanding example of human virtue, is not only 100% screwed but a major fool as well.
Will you get your investment back on expensive natural pearls if the economy further tanks? Not likely if you are not a dealer(retail helps). On astronomically priced exotic naturals? Very not likely. On dubiously certified exotic naturals? Here you are screwed.
I'll stick with cold hard gold.
"Pearl Wonk said...
And steve bloom believed her...."
Some moron he is, if we are discussing morons, and we are in these comments, it seems. He didn't even interview the people she negatively interacted with who knew her best. Some journalist! He should write a book on the nautilus pearl next. Might be better than what has been written by others to date. He could do another interview with Zeide Erskine and view the one and only true nautilus pearl which is in her collection, obviously.
Dearest Steve,
Although I no longer frequent the pearl forum I can still read your posts there. Your research on the nautilus pearl is highly commendable yet at the same time a thinly veiled attempt at the premature authentication of your non-nacreous pearls as such. Anybody betting on your nautilus pearls being the real deal must have a pearl half-education or be out of their minds. They are clam concretions and are about as rare as blister half concretions in conchs which are about as rare as Pusteblume. Do not worry about me missing any details.
Z.
Thank you! I am LMAO. Phew! TPP's blog comments and conversations are just priceless.
Z.E. said...
...because it looks like an opal reflecting an auroral borealis show. If you have ever read his Dark Materials by Philip Pullman (in particular Northern Lights/The Golden Compass) you cannot fail to be utterly enthralled by this pearl. ...
You get all your descriptions from books including the one of an aurora (not auroral, you moron) borealis show. Where would you have otherwise seen one to describe? Fresno? Aptos? Hamburg? Indonesia where you spent your childhood? Oh wait, you told me you are half Inuit so that must explain it. Let's just forget about the part where you are over six feet tall, blond and look like a quarterback Viking.
"effisk said...
Thank you! I am LMAO. Phew! TPP's blog comments and conversations are just priceless."
You're welcome! :-)
Sorry, made an error ... I mean six feet, blond and she looks like a Viking defensive lineman...think William Perry as a white dude.
In response to the comment on the prose, no I didn't allow the comment because yes, he is a friend of mine.
"The Pearl Professor said...
In response to the comment on the prose, no I didn't allow the comment because yes, he is a friend of mine."
thanks for that bit of info....I think i know who you are.
You're welcome.
"Do not worry about me missing any details.
Z."
Appreciate your lurking over at Pearl-Guide, and you did miss a huge detail. I am claiming M. Abominabilis origin for my pearls as their aragonite microstructure is a complete mystery to the scientists, and discovering its true mollusk origin will be of first-order importance. If it happens to be Nautilus (there is no other current explanation from a phylogenetic point of view), even better.
And as a reminder, throughout history, all reported Nautilus pearls have mentioned porcelaneous appearance. They just aren't, in all likelihood, crossed-lamellar.
Can this get any more queer? How hard would it be to go down to Miami and pick out the old guy doing the monkey dance in a pink suit and wearing a toupet. Okay so you'd get your butt grabbed a few times making the club rounds looking but knowing who the professor is would be worth it in the end. One does have to wonder a little about the relationship between Professor and whoever Steve in Seattle is.
Dearest dearest Steve,
Rest assured I have missed nothing huge. You claim M. Abominabilis yet you hint at Nautilus in almost every post(if not every post). Apparently because of me, you now know better when writing here. I will concede that throughout history the Nautilus pearl has been described in literature as porcelaneous in appearance although it makes little sense to me for the reasons I made clear in my previous posts. Also I do not really care that much about calcareous concretions, something the Nautilus pearl is not. A pearl without orient/iridescence is not a pearl to me except for calcareous concretions like conch pearls that by their very nature do not have orient. Such pearls can be attractive and very costly, they are only something I would accept as a gift but not buy for myself.
Z.
Hi,
To the person or persons who think pearls are formed around a grain of sand, it does not work that way. Sand has nothing to do with pearl formation. Your approach would be as helpful in growing pearls as trying to catch lightening in bottles to make light bulbs.
Z.
Round pearls with high luster are art ! What a load of crap! Round pearls with luster are a mass produced common item of the sea. Nothing more or less.
Can we get back to what this blog is supposedly about - PEARLS. When's the next article coming out? I'm getting bored with all this crap about old guys with rugs who can't dance properly.
This blog is barely alive except for comments.
Time to move on . Has anyone got anything constructive to say about the japanese Tsunami and ramifications if any for pearls and the general pearl market
Anonymous said...
Can we get back to what this blog is supposedly about - PEARLS.
Who the fuck are you exactly the comment nazi?
can't the yakuza kill those TEPCO executives. what are they waiting for.
If this blog were purely about pearls then it would have been dead long ago and if the comments were purely about pearls you'd get only 1 or 2 posts on average per article.I would have stopped reading long ago but for the laughs and that pork cake recipe intrigued my wife to no end.
hey just saw someone that looked to be the professor begging Jeffery Donovan for an autograph. not that many pink suited guys around even in south beach. his rug was lopsided, needs some better glue.
That's Jeffrey, not Jeffery. Just sayin'.
Odd. How many pearl people can there be spotting the Prof besides me? I thought I was the only one here in Miami. The guy has lost it big time, man. His third wife, the wealthy old one that had to wear prescription orthopaedic shoes, dumped his cheating ass after finding out about his beautiful Russian girlfriend. Then the Russian one got bored and dumped his old ass for some hot ex-KGB guy in Russia who still works for the government. So now the Prof is single and loose here in South Beach seemingly looking for some bromance? You can't just make something like this up.
There is something irritating about this article
whoops- there goes arafura pearls- into liquidation.
bye!
Just on a different note . Arafura pearls has collapsed . Receivers appointed . West Australian newpaper finacial news section 24.4.2011. Another one bites the dust!
There's something irritating about Zeide Erskine too.
i have to ask,who the fuck is this zeide erskine commenter peppered all over this blog. am i missing something. do you all know each other?
No we don't know each other but I suspect we all know z.e. as the former poster on the pearl forum who has infected this near dead blog. She's a pathological liar par excellence, poo-poo pearl afficionado and an all round full of shit person. Does that answer it for you?
Read the comments in the old "Decadence Takes The Cake" article and thou shall know the Zeedster then. Mucho entertaining, gotta say. The thing about her husband's sigmoidoscopy was just grand.
idiots, stop buying worthless pearls and start buying gold and silver
Isn't she a vampire? I remember her hinting at being sensitive to light back in the good ol' days on P-F and it was quite amusing.
fleas. thats what shellfish has when it makes pearls.little known fact.
Post a Comment