<< And my 2 cents on lampreys as fish or not -- the fact that they are
jawless
is a fundamental different between them and the true "fishes". They are
fish-like in many ways, but jaw structure is a major diagnostic character. >>
So you would not use the word "fish" even as a loose umbrella term to cover
non-amphibian, reptile, mammal, ect. vertebrates in the same manner that
invertebrates are used as an umbrella term for worms,mollusks, crustaceans
ect? What would you classify lampreys as? Merely Agnathans, or is there a
broader term that you would use to include other groups along with them?
Chris is calling them "fishes" in a very loose sense which still makes VERY
BIG distinctions between them, sharks,fishes like sturgeons, sunfishes,ect.,
but I'm under the impression that you would not even use the the word "fish"
to describe them even in a loose sense of the word.
/-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
/"Unless stated otherwise, comments made on this list do not necessarily
/ reflect the beliefs or goals of the North American Native Fishes
/ Association"
/ This is the discussion list of the North American Native Fishes Association
/ nanfa_at_aquaria.net. To subscribe, unsubscribe, or get help, send the word
/ subscribe, unsubscribe, or help in the body (not subject) of an email to
/ nanfa-request_at_aquaria.net. For a digest version, send the command to
/ nanfa-digest-request_at_aquaria.net instead.
/ For more information about NANFA, visit our web page, http://www.nanfa.org