• lugal
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    3 months ago

    Either that or fish aren’t a phylogenetic group. You decide

    • sem@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      3 months ago

      You can’t evolve out of a clade, or so they say.

      Of course it’s not helpful to call humans and whales fishes in common parlance. But in phylogenetics, why not?

      • lugal
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        Because that would make fish and vertebrates synonyms so why not drop the former altogether?

        • sem@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          3 months ago

          Words can mean more than one thing thought, and depending on the context it can be useful to convey the fact that the vertebrates all evolved from fish-like ancestors, or that whales are more closely related to some fish than those fish are related to other fish.

          • lugal
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            3 months ago

            And it’s totally valid to use it that way even though I wouldn’t. That’s the “You decide” part of my first comment