OK, a fish that lives in trees for months at a time?! :eek:
True, though.
Also, a unique sex life.
I was under the impression that there were several species of lizards that reproduce via parthenogenesis (asexually). I think Wiki agrees. I wonder why the author of the article doesn’t think that counts.
Um…'cause they’re not fish, maybe? His claim is that they’re one of the oddest “fish” known to man, not the oddest creatures.
Perhaps you didn’t read the article. Wiki also says that some sharks have been found to reproduce asexually. I believe sharks are both vertebrates and fish.
I skimmed it, actually. But that doesn’t address the lizards you brought up.
Frankly, “one of the few [blankety blank]” is pretty meaningless all by itself, isn’t it? Just bad reporting and writing, but fascinating fishies!
They don’t live in trees though. Except for the tree shark. So the killifish still comes out ahead in the oddness department.
The author of the article is British. It’s safe to assume that he knows what he’s talking about in this regard. If there’s one thing the British do best, it’s oddness and eccentricity.
I do, however, have to question the choice of opening line:
Yes, well it seems that penguins were also left out of the loop there, weren’t they?
Parthenogenesis and producing sperm and ova in the same individual is not the same thing, which is what the writer is referring to. The wording is a bit sloppy and makes me think that someone attempted to explain the difference to the reporter, who didn’t have enough of a background in biology to grasp the distinction.
Parthenogenesis is the development of an embryo without fertilization. The killifish practice self-fertilization.
Bah! Still not as impressive as the endangered Pacific Northwest Tree Octopus!