New Issue: Orbital Catastrophe Ahead? Read Now

Menu Featured Mammoth but Diners Were Mocked

A genetic analysis of leftovers from an exotic dinner in 1951 reveals that the diners got less than they were promised.

 

MACMILLAN AUSTRALIA Primary Library (MARS)

Illustration of a Bohr atom model spinning around the words Science Quickly with various science and medicine related icons around the text

The Explorers Club in New York City—whose members have included Neil Armstrong, Teddy Roosevelt, and the first men to reach both the North and South poles—has a reputation for serving exotic entrees, like fried tarantula and goats’ eyeballs. In 1951 the dinner menu featured Pacific spider crabs, turtle soup, bison steak and—allegedly scavenged from glacial ice off the coast of Alaska—a mound of mammoth meat.  

One club member who couldn’t make the dinner asked to be sent a doggie bag, which he promptly donated to the Bruce Museum in Greenwich, Connecticut. What was particularly odd—odder than displaying leftovers in a museum—was that the mammoth meat was labeled Megatherium, a giant extinct ground sloth native to South America.

So which was it: mammoth or monster sloth? To find out 64 years later, researchers sequenced some mitochondrial DNA they extracted from the preserved prehistoric takeaway. What they found is that the source of the sample was neither mammoth nor sloth. It was actually sea turtle—meat that likely contributed to both the main course and that turtle soup appetizer.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


That’s the forensic finding served up in the journal PLoS ONE. [Jessica R. Glass et al., Was Frozen Mammoth or Giant Ground Sloth Served for Dinner at The Explorers Club?]

Of course, a double order of sea turtle might not be as exciting as a mouthful of mammoth or a soupçon of sloth. But it may be easier to swallow.

—Karen Hopkin

[The above text is a transcript of this podcast.]

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe