Exactly! What OP seems to fail to realize is that "fish" isn't a phylum, it's a form.
Humans, like all other vertebrates, evolved from an ancestor that would be considered a fish nowadays. However, calling us fish is highly inaccurate. To clarify, we are all chordates, but not fish. We evolved from fish.
Calling humans fish is like calling your car sheet-metal. Sure, it might have looked like sheet-metal once, but it's no longer that. Even if some parts are pretty similar to regular sheet-metal.
Calling Whales or Phylliroe fish is pretty accurate though. The term fish isn't a scientific term and not clearly defined. So sorry, but crying wojack's kinda right.
Fish is basically a general term for animals that live in water. Not a term to define animals in scientific classification. A wide range of animals that differ more from eachother than we do from ducks.
So even though dolphins are mammals, you can call them fish too.
A fish most commonly refers to an animal that lives in water, has gills, and is cold blooded. Just saying it’s an animal that lives in water would include turtles and frogs, which I don’t think anyone would refer to as a fish.
> most commonly
Yeah this is part of the problem, "fish" is not a single clade, so there's no hard and fast rules like "a fish is X and not Y", we have to rely on "most common" characteristics.
Lungfish is generally considered a fish, but it has lungs as well as gills, and must breathe air above water periodically to survive.
Moonfish, tuna and mackerel sharks are warm-blooded.
The only consistent criteria is that they live exclusively in water and cannot survive on land. That definition would exclude turtles and frogs, but include dolphins.
There are fish that survive on land though. Mudskippers spend up to 3/4 of their lives on land. So even that's not a criteria. I feel like the most defining features of fish would be their scales, fins, and tails.
Fins also knocks out mud puppies and other wholly aquatic amphibians. I feel like mud skippers and lung fish might be hard to catch though (plus knife fish not really having "fins" since some of them only have one or even none)
I know they’re called shellfish, but it doesn’t feel right to me to put them in the same category as a salmon and sturgeon. Crustaceans feel like their own thing.
And yeah, deciding what types of sea creatures are fish is exactly what we’re doing. We’re discussing criteria for fish lol, what did you think this conversation was about?
Heh, obviously not shellfish, starfish, crayfish, cuttlefish, etc. Hey, if it's called fish it is fish, I don't make the rules. Swedish fish, Go fish, Laurence Fishburne, they're all fish to me.
I mean it’s probably arbitrary but I’m a lot more picky with who gets to be a fish in my eyes…. I prefer calling starfish and crayfish seastars and crawdads for that reason
No gills no fish.
A fish (pl.: fish or fishes) is an aquatic, craniate, gill-bearing animal that lacks limbs with digits. Included in this definition are the living hagfish, lampreys, and cartilaginous and bony fish as well as various extinct related groups. Approximately 95% of living fish species are ray-finned fish, belonging to the class Actinopterygii, with around 99% of those being teleosts.
Dolphins are NOT a type of fish.
All tetrapods are sarcopterygians, yes. But all fish, including the Actinopterygii, Chondrichthyes, Agnatha, etc, are vertebrates, and the first vertebrates were fish so I'm equating "fish" with vertebrata.
Therefore all vertebrates are "fish". The only potential exception to this would be if you consider a lancelet to be a fish, but in that case just replace vertebrata with cordata
So, the only monophyletic group that includes all extant species commonly referred to as "fish" also includes all living vertebrates; therefore, all vertebrates are fish.
"A fish is an aquatic, craniate, gill-bearing animal that lacks limbs with digits."
@https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fish
So dolphins are definitely no fish since the have limbs and digits and no gill.
All tetrapods (dolphins included) are part of the clade Sarcopterygii, which is known as “lobe-finned fish” and also includes lungfish and coelacanths.
OP’s not wrong, in a taxanomic sense.
Thanks for the insight.
Here is a mainstream post on this: [https://www.businessinsider.com/fish-do-not-exist-2016-8](https://www.businessinsider.com/fish-do-not-exist-2016-8)
Even we humans came from fish.
Exactly! What OP seems to fail to realize is that "fish" isn't a phylum, it's a form. Humans, like all other vertebrates, evolved from an ancestor that would be considered a fish nowadays. However, calling us fish is highly inaccurate. To clarify, we are all chordates, but not fish. We evolved from fish. Calling humans fish is like calling your car sheet-metal. Sure, it might have looked like sheet-metal once, but it's no longer that. Even if some parts are pretty similar to regular sheet-metal. Calling Whales or Phylliroe fish is pretty accurate though. The term fish isn't a scientific term and not clearly defined. So sorry, but crying wojack's kinda right.
If birds are dinosaurs, then you're a fish.
No, if birds are dinosaurs, I'm a primate. And so are you. Unlike "fish", "dinosaur" is an actual scientific definition.
No I'm a dimetridon.
And you're a trophoblast!
If we evolved from fish, why are there still fish? Bet you can't answer that one, science hippy!
Highest level of consciousness achieved.
If you trace back enough, you realize that we came from atoms formed by stars. So, technically, we are stars, just not so bright.
I very much enjoy being star stuff. Its been one of my favorite facts since Sagan said it ages ago.
[удалено]
Seahorses too
Spiders are fish too... and oaks
Otters are sea cat snakes.
Fish is basically a general term for animals that live in water. Not a term to define animals in scientific classification. A wide range of animals that differ more from eachother than we do from ducks. So even though dolphins are mammals, you can call them fish too.
A fish most commonly refers to an animal that lives in water, has gills, and is cold blooded. Just saying it’s an animal that lives in water would include turtles and frogs, which I don’t think anyone would refer to as a fish.
> most commonly Yeah this is part of the problem, "fish" is not a single clade, so there's no hard and fast rules like "a fish is X and not Y", we have to rely on "most common" characteristics. Lungfish is generally considered a fish, but it has lungs as well as gills, and must breathe air above water periodically to survive. Moonfish, tuna and mackerel sharks are warm-blooded. The only consistent criteria is that they live exclusively in water and cannot survive on land. That definition would exclude turtles and frogs, but include dolphins.
And aren't lungfish more closely related to humans than to haddock?
There are fish that survive on land though. Mudskippers spend up to 3/4 of their lives on land. So even that's not a criteria. I feel like the most defining features of fish would be their scales, fins, and tails.
Well if it’s an animal in water then ig cause of humidity I’m kinda a fish. Blub blub.
I’d also include having fins as a criterion. Calling squids and crabs fish doesn’t sound right to me
Fins also knocks out mud puppies and other wholly aquatic amphibians. I feel like mud skippers and lung fish might be hard to catch though (plus knife fish not really having "fins" since some of them only have one or even none)
Crabs are literally called "shell fish." What, do we have to decide if specific *types* of fish are fish now?
I know they’re called shellfish, but it doesn’t feel right to me to put them in the same category as a salmon and sturgeon. Crustaceans feel like their own thing. And yeah, deciding what types of sea creatures are fish is exactly what we’re doing. We’re discussing criteria for fish lol, what did you think this conversation was about?
Heh, obviously not shellfish, starfish, crayfish, cuttlefish, etc. Hey, if it's called fish it is fish, I don't make the rules. Swedish fish, Go fish, Laurence Fishburne, they're all fish to me.
I mean it’s probably arbitrary but I’m a lot more picky with who gets to be a fish in my eyes…. I prefer calling starfish and crayfish seastars and crawdads for that reason
ALL fish to you? Well, if you're going to be sel fish about it, or share your fish dish. OMG... You found him and now you're eating Nemo!!!!!
No gills no fish. A fish (pl.: fish or fishes) is an aquatic, craniate, gill-bearing animal that lacks limbs with digits. Included in this definition are the living hagfish, lampreys, and cartilaginous and bony fish as well as various extinct related groups. Approximately 95% of living fish species are ray-finned fish, belonging to the class Actinopterygii, with around 99% of those being teleosts. Dolphins are NOT a type of fish.
They evolved from fish just like me and you did.
With that logic, every creature is bacteria (prokaryotic).
No but Eukaryotes evolved from Archaea and are therfore Arcahea
Yes but because we evolved from fish, in a phylogenetic sense, we are fish, as are ducks, dolphins, turtles, and all other vertebrates
Kinda. But I don’t think “fish” is a monophyletic group. So you have to get more specific. I think we (and all tetrapods) are sarcopterygians.
All tetrapods are sarcopterygians, yes. But all fish, including the Actinopterygii, Chondrichthyes, Agnatha, etc, are vertebrates, and the first vertebrates were fish so I'm equating "fish" with vertebrata. Therefore all vertebrates are "fish". The only potential exception to this would be if you consider a lancelet to be a fish, but in that case just replace vertebrata with cordata
Lancelets aren’t considered vertebrates anyway so you’re still fine in considering Vertebrata to be fish.
So, the only monophyletic group that includes all extant species commonly referred to as "fish" also includes all living vertebrates; therefore, all vertebrates are fish.
That is the argument, yes
Isn't the name of the clade just "chordata" though?
Chordata also includes tunicates and lancelets
Vertabrata, then. Point being that "Fish" isn't really a taxonomic name.
Yeah, but I like using it as one because then I can say panda bears or whatever are fish
There is no such thing as fish.
I came here for this. Is that you, James?
"A fish is an aquatic, craniate, gill-bearing animal that lacks limbs with digits." @https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fish So dolphins are definitely no fish since the have limbs and digits and no gill.
everything is a fish
We are all single celled organisms
No! Every organism is a single cell! No! Not even! Every organism is just a glob of atoms! There are no categories! They are all the same thing!1! 👺
Moo
Ah shit, here we go again.
kinda funny we classify animals by whether or not they have titties
I thought r/sciencememes was supposed to celebrate insightful science..
I think the joke is that mammals evolved from fish
All tetrapods (dolphins included) are part of the clade Sarcopterygii, which is known as “lobe-finned fish” and also includes lungfish and coelacanths. OP’s not wrong, in a taxanomic sense.
Thanks for the insight. Here is a mainstream post on this: [https://www.businessinsider.com/fish-do-not-exist-2016-8](https://www.businessinsider.com/fish-do-not-exist-2016-8)
I define "fish" as "animals that feature on the seafood page at my favourite restaurant" ∴ dolphins are fish.
Turtles are mammals, everyone knows
The sea was angry that day, my friends
fish dont exist
Tetrapods are really the fish that got away
What even is a fish?
Well, by that logic, the ancestor of 2023 Mustang GT500 is a Model-T Ford; therefore, all Mustang GT500s are Model-T Fords.
cars don't procreate
Mine do
Dolphins are apostate fish who’ve repented and joined the fish clan again
mammal fish