PlanetCatfish.com

Do you think a separate definition for biofilm would be in order, Racoll? I'm wondering if they are the same thing or if what is believed to be aufwuchs is too generalised(like algae, there are many types of algae). I'm looking at DeVries' German-English Scientific Dictionary (to help me with the Mergus Wels Band 2)(Nice photos, Lee and Shane. I even caught your names in there a few times. )"Growth" is the literal translation of the word "Aufwuchs" from this little old dictionary(1946). Nothing more, nothing less. If any German speakers out there would like to correct this, please feel free.

Here's another go at:
Evolution: A biological change resulting in a new species. This change may be due to natural selection or genetic variation.

What should we add or subtract to the above?

I'll put in: lotic, lentic, symbiotic, gene, phenotype and allele. How far do we want to go with the genetics, Jools?

Catfish definition: How do you define thousands and thousands of species with one or two sentences? Maybe a link to the Cat-eLog would be a good definition.

Are anoxia and hypoxia different? Just curious.
Amanda

Aufwuchs comes from Aufwuchsnahrung which is a created word as it is not in the "Duden" (the thing with word`s in)

Do you think a separate definition for biofilm would be in order, Racoll?

Perhaps. Although, as you say, we will have to wait for a German speaker to tell us exactly what is meant by that word.

How about this for evolution?

A biological process, in which genetic traits can be changed and transfered over generations via natural selection.

Amanda, I think "still" should be added to lentic, to seperate it moe clearly from lotic.

Lentic: Of inland still waters. Examples: swamps, ponds and lakes.


Thanks.

Are anoxia and hypoxia different?

Not really, but hypoxia usually seems to refer to a physiological condition, and anoxia usually refers to environmental conditions.

So, to clarify: A creature that isn't evolved to live in such condtions would suffer from hypoxia in an anoxic environment...

--
Mats

Yes, that's exactly what my understanding is.

I have just clarifed this in a huge penguin dictionary.

Evolution: The historical development of a biological group.

Hi Folks:

a short note on the definition of swim-bladder:

"A sac or container for air and gasses. The fish can compress and enlarge the Swim Bladder
through muscular activity to control buoyancy."

To my knowledge, the swim-bladder is filled through diffusion of gases (usually mostly oxygen, but also nitrogen or CO2) from the blood. A structure called "rete mirabile", a counter current system, helps to concentrate the oxygen in the blood by biochemical processes in order to fill the swim-bladder with oxygen. The other way to fill or empty the swim-bladder ist the "ductus pneumaticus", that leads to the gut.

Has anyone a scientific citation mentioning muscular activity?

cheers

Stefan

Hi Mats,

So, to clarify: A creature that isn't evolved to live in such condtions would suffer from hypoxia in an anoxic environment...

I would also see it vice versa: If a fish can not adapt his respiration to hypoxic conditions (severe hypoxia rather than moderate hypoxia), he would suffer from anoxia (at least at the mitochondrial level).

cheers

Stefan

Stefan, sorry!:oops: (The source was a book from the 1980's)I appreciate the correction. Let's try this:

Swim Bladder: A sac or container for air and gasses which helps adjust buoyancy and sometimes acts as an accessory breathing organ. It is attached to the Weberian Apparatus. The Swim Bladder is filled through the diffusion of gasses (mostly Oxygen, but also Nitrogen and Carbon Dioxide) from the blood.

Durlänger wrote:Aufwuchs comes from Aufwuchsnahrung which is a created word as it is not in the "Duden" (the thing with word`s in)

Like the OED(Old English Dictionary) or Webster's(named after Noah Webster), you have "Duden?"(I'm trying!!) The dictionary I got is from 1946 and it's scientific. Please be patient with me.

Racoll, I'll be happy to add "still water" to the lentic definition. I like the idea of including the history in the evolution definition. I think we should start there and then move into the scientific portion.

Evolution: The historical development of a species in which genetic traits may be transferred over generations via natural selection.

Closer?

Hypoxia and hyperoxia should go in then.
Amanda

Evolution: The historical development of a species in which genetic traits may be transferred over generations via natural selection.

I'm happy with that. I would remove the "a" and add a comma though, to read:


Evolution: The historical development of species, in which genetic traits may be transferred over generations via natural selection.

racoll wrote:

Evolution: The historical development of a species in which genetic traits may be transferred over generations via natural selection.

I'm happy with that. I would remove the "a" and add a comma though, to read:


Evolution: The historical development of species, in which genetic traits may be transferred over generations via natural selection.

If there aren't any objections to Racoll's definition, I'd say let's go with it. How about we let it sit for a day to see if anybody else has some input. Nicely done, Racoll!

Where are we with Aufwuchs and Biofilm?

Here's two more:
Armoured: A fish having a protective outer covering, such as scutes, bony plates and/or scales.

Adaptation: When an organism or population adjusts to accomodate its environment. Example: Blind cave fishes. Also see Evolution.

I read that some blind cave fishes still have the eye sockets, but no eyes. I need to learn more about it!

Stefan, I'll enter the corrected Swim Bladder today. I deleted it yesterday to avoid any confusion.
Amanda

I'll put in Evolution (yippee!) and Armoured today. I want to see if anybody has more input for Adaptation. I'd like to go back to Sid's definition also:

Convergent Evolution: The evolution of species from different taxonomic groups toward a similar form; the development of similar charactaristics by taxonomically different organisms.

I like it when I can refer back to words that are already in the glossary.
Amanda

To me adaption implies more of a deliberate short term change, rather than generational change which sounds more like evolution (as in the example of blind cave fish).

How about adding behaviour in as so?

Adaptation: When an organism or population modifies physical or social behaviour to accomodate environmental changes.

snowball wrote:To me adaption implies more of a deliberate short term change, rather than generational change which sounds more like evolution (as in the example of blind cave fish).

How about adding behaviour in as so?

Adaptation: When an organism or population modifies physical or social behaviour to accomodate environmental changes.

I'll go for that. Any other input for Adaptation?

Here are a few more:
Contaminant: When a different species is caught along with the targeted species. If undetected, a Contaminant species may make it all the way to the LFS.

Neutral: Neither acid nor base. Having a pH of 7.0.

Cephalad: Toward the head.
Amanda

The correct scientific term for contaminant is bycatch.

Perhaps a mention too?

It's not totally accurate as bycatch refers to the act of collection whereas contaminant has a very definite possibility that it's because fish were mixed up at the exporters or importers.

It's another natural vs artificial uses of a term I think and probably should be dealt with in whatever way we decide to treat acclimate / acclimatise.

Jools

bronzefry wrote:


Acclimation: The process where a fish becomes used to a new set of circumstances, such as water parameters.

Conservation: The planned saving of an ecosystem and the species in it.


I think acclimation is an AmericaniZation, the people who invented the language would say Acclimitisation. Twisted Evil Maybe have both? Any Aussies out there reading this? Could you confirm what you guys would say?

It's nit picking but I'd also use "the planned preservation" for the Conservation defn.

Jools

I'm afraid you have that wrong there Jools. Acclimation is different from Acclimatiszation. The Americanism is the substitute of the z for the s.

Acclimation is the organism's physiological response to an artificial environment (laboratory/aquarium/captivity).

Acclimatisation is an organism's physiological response to environmental ("natural") changes.


My take on adaptation is: Any heritable trait which aids survival or reproduction of an organism.

Behaviour to me, is not related to adaptation in it's literal sense.

racoll wrote: I'm afraid you have that wrong there Jools. Acclimation is different from Acclimatiszation. The Americanism is the substitute of the z for the s.

Acclimation is the organism's physiological response to an artificial environment (laboratory/aquarium/captivity).

Acclimatisation is an organism's physiological response to environmental ("natural") changes.

So, as laboratory = aquarium = captivity and all are artificial, would you also agree that could be represented more simply and yet correctly as:

Acclimation is the organism's physiological response to an changes in an artificial environment.

Acclimatisation is an organism's physiological response to changes in a natural environment.

?

I'm uncomfortable about the distinction, but then that's only me and the oxford English dictionary "wrong". While I'm guessing the above is correct from a strict scientific viewpoint (although I'd like to see a source) it's not commonly used as such by most of our visitors. So, at what point does common usage give way to being strictly correct? Walk into any LFS in the UK and you'll get one word, the other in the US LFS.

If we are being strictly correct, and with apologies to Lee Finley for re-raising one of his old hobby horses, all <em>Ancistrus</em> species should be called bushynoses and not bristlenoses, but maybe that's not scientific distinction.

At the very least we should add a "see also" to both entries cross referencing them. It was certainly a distinction I was unaware of.

Jools

bronzefry wrote: Cephalad: Toward the head.

Where does this term occur on PC? I searched but drew a blank.
Seriously, I have not even encountered this term in all the time I have been reading scientific literature (and only once or twice did I encounter its antonym, caudad).

I thought the whole point of having a glossary was to explain words on the website that some readers might have difficulty comprehending. Seems to me like the net is being cast wider (and more indiscriminately)...

Silurus wrote:

bronzefry wrote: Cephalad: Toward the head.

Where does this term occur on PC? I searched but drew a blank.
Seriously, I have not even encountered this term in all the time I have been reading scientific literature (and only once or twice did I encounter its antonym, caudad).

I thought the whole point of having a glossary was to explain words on the website that some readers might have difficulty comprehending. Seems to me like the net is being cast wider (and more indiscriminately)...

I totally agree with HH, I found myself writing a similar reply to this topic a few times but thought better of it as didn't wish to curb the enthusiasm that's obvious in terms of adding words and researching them.

Now that it's been mentioned, I'd like to add my support to it, only words that appear in the site please! You can very easily check this by using the search button.

Cheers,

Jools

Hi Amanda,

Stefan, I'll enter the corrected Swim Bladder today. I deleted it yesterday to avoid any confusion.

thank you. I fully agree with your definition.

cheers

Stefan

Hi Folks,

what about the following definition of "buffer"?

Buffer: A organic or inorganic substance dissolved in water that can bind or release hydrogen ions in order to avoid huge pH changes when adding acidic or alkaline substances.

any suggestions?

cheers

Stefan

Hi Amanda,

Neutral: Neither acid nor base. Having a pH of 7.0.

I agree but to make it more precise: neutral means that the amount of hydrogen ions H^+ and OH^- are equal. A pH of 7.0 is not necessarily neutral. It depends on temperature and concentration of other substances like salts and ions too.

What do you think?

cheers

Stefan

So, as laboratory = aquarium = captivity and all are artificial, would you also agree that could be represented more simply and yet correctly as:

Yes, indeed.

So, at what point does common usage give way to being strictly correct? Walk into any LFS in the UK and you'll get one word, the other in the US LFS.

Yes, I think that it should be mentioned that they're often used as the same thing, and spelt differently.

I'm uncomfortable about the distinction, but then that's only me and the oxford English dictionary "wrong".

While I'm guessing the above is correct from a strict scientific viewpoint (although I'd like to see a source)

I got the definition from...

Mackenzie, A. et al. (1998) Instant Notes In Ecology, Bios, Oxford.

I can dig out a weightier tome if you are still not convinced.

It's also mentioned in Wikipedia....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acclimation

Silurus wrote:

bronzefry wrote: Cephalad: Toward the head.

Where does this term occur on PC? I searched but drew a blank.
Seriously, I have not even encountered this term in all the time I have been reading scientific literature (and only once or twice did I encounter its antonym, caudad).

I thought the whole point of having a glossary was to explain words on the website that some readers might have difficulty comprehending. Seems to me like the net is being cast wider (and more indiscriminately)...

I apologize. No excuses.

Technically, I think it should be Bycatch. In general, it seems many people call them Contaminants. The majority of definitions I found were of Bycatch, not Contaminant. How do we reconcile this?

Thanks, Stefan. I'll work on Neutral again tonight. Are we sure that Buffer agrees with the GH and KH definitions? I want to make sure.

I found an older dictionary which has both Acclimitization and Acclimation. One refers to the other.

I'll print out the rest so that I can read them more easily and rewrite things. Thank you, everybody!!!!
Amanda

I think the difference between bycatch and contaminant is where they are...

Bycatch is when you fish for X, and catch Y as well.

They are a contaminant when they are actually in the exporters tank of X, when the real species is Y.

--
Mats

The correct scientific term for contaminant is bycatch.

Perhaps a mention too?

It's not totally accurate as bycatch refers to the act of collection whereas contaminant has a very definite possibility that it's because fish were mixed up at the exporters or importers.

It's another natural vs artificial uses of a term I think and probably should be dealt with in whatever way we decide to treat acclimate / acclimatise.

Jools

Jools, I think our posts have become merged.

I agree with what you say though.

How about.....

Bycatch: The accidental capture of species X during the targeted capture of species Y.


Contaminant: A fishkeeping term in which species X is found in a shipment of species Y. This could be due to bycatch, or deliberate/accidental mixing by the fishermen/exporters/importers.

Sounds good, Racoll. How about this:
Neutral: A substance that is neither acid nor base.

I think we should keep this definition simple. I could add "a substance with an equal number of Hydrogen ions and Hydroxyl anions" as Stefan has pointed out. Does anybody think this would complicate the issue?
Amanda

bronzefry wrote:How about this:
Neutral: A substance that is neither acid nor base.

What does base mean?

Jools