this post was submitted on 29 Oct 2023
1176 points (96.4% liked)

Curated Tumblr

5409 readers
5 users here now

For preserving the least toxic and most culturally relevant Tumblr heritage posts.

Here are some OCR tools to assist you in transcribing posts:

Don't be mean. I promise to do my best to judge that fairly.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Apytele@sh.itjust.works
Csynthare@dataterm.digital
ethaver@kbin.earth
1176
What’s in a name? (i.imgur.com)
submitted 2 years ago by NotSpez@lemm.ee to c/curatedtumblr@sh.itjust.works
142 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] merc@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Because:

There is no sensible phylogenetic definition of “fish” which includes both trout and sharks but not humans.

Gills.

[–] Strawberry@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I'll be just as terse

phylogenetic

[–] merc@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I admit I don't really know much about that. But Wikipedia says:

In biology, phylogenetics (/ˌfaɪloʊdʒəˈnɛtɪks, -lə-/)[1][2][3] is the study of the evolutionary history and relationships among or within groups of organisms. These relationships are determined by phylogenetic inference methods that focus on observed heritable traits, such as DNA sequences, protein amino acid sequences, or morphology.

Where morphology is:

Morphology is a branch of biology dealing with the study of the form and structure of organisms and their specific structural features.[1]

This includes aspects of the outward appearance (shape, structure, colour, pattern, size), i.e. external morphology (or eidonomy), as well as the form and structure of the internal parts like bones and organs

It sure seems to me like that should cover gills.

[–] Strawberry@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Yes, fish would be a morphology that includes gills, fins, streamlined body shape for swimming, etc. But there is no good phylogenetic definition because all the animals we call "fish" do not form a monophyletic group. The monophyletic group encompassing all fish would include also mammals, reptiles including birds, and amphibians because these all have fish ancestors

[–] merc@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

But there is no good phylogenetic definition because all the animals we call “fish”

The challenge was to come up with a group "which includes both trout and sharks but not humans". It seems like "gills" satisfies that pretty well.

[–] Strawberry@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 2 years ago

Animals with gills do not form a monophyletic group.