Need better identification!

[MichaelAngelo]

(05-26-2013 06:13 PM)OldTimer Wrote:  

(05-26-2013 05:34 PM)MichaelAngelo Wrote:  I don't expect anyone to learn latin names.

How bout Enrique Iglesias................smile

Isn't that a Spanish name?

[MuskieBait]

Michael, you have my lifelist Excel file...that should be an interesting read, huh? It reveals surprising things like Salmon and Northern Pike are very distant relatives under the same Superorder Protacanthopterygii...and Trout-Perch, Atlantic Cod and Frogfish are also distant relative under the same Superorder Paracanthopterygii.

This will blow your mind.

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

I'll work on an ID article this week when time allows.

[MichaelAngelo]

(05-26-2013 09:22 PM)MuskieBait Wrote:  Michael, you have my lifelist Excel file...that should be an interesting read, huh?

I'll work on an ID article this week when time allows.

It was a sweet read, that's for sure.

We have the "rules" space above the thread listings in this forum. Let me know what you'd like put in there... I slipped a link to OT's ID guide up there. Let me know what you want put in that space.

[MuskieBait]

For the rules:

Species must be identified and stated with the correct full common name of the species (ie, Bluegill Sunfish instead of "sunfish", or Silver Redhorse instead of "redhorse sucker"). The Latin name (binomial nomenclature) is highly encouraged to be added as well.

OT's guide is good, but some species characteristics are not complete (eg. White Crappie has 6 dorsal spine vs. Black Crappie has 7-8 dorsal spine, Bluegill Sunfish has a black spot at the base of the soft dorsal fin and the soft anal fin...etc.)

The MNR's ID chart is actually very good. Make sure to also add links to the Baitfish Primer as well as the MNR's ID chart...

http://www.mnr.gov.on.ca/stdprodconsume/...198234.pdf

[OldTimer]

(05-26-2013 09:10 PM)MichaelAngelo Wrote:  

(05-26-2013 06:13 PM)OldTimer Wrote:  

(05-26-2013 05:34 PM)MichaelAngelo Wrote:  I don't expect anyone to learn latin names.

How bout Enrique Iglesias................smile

Isn't that a Spanish name?

SEE!.........smile...........

[smcs28]

Not sure why people want to use Wikipedia. It is not an accredited source and ANYONE can change the information on it. (it is not recognized in schools, colleges or universities. Apparently if it is used as a "source" for a paper you fail) Not the best source for information. I would suggest finding a site that is an accredited resource.

[MuskieBait]

(07-21-2013 05:50 PM)smcs28 Wrote:  Not sure why people want to use Wikipedia. It is not an accredited source and ANYONE can change the information on it. (it is not recognized in schools, colleges or universities. Apparently if it is used as a "source" for a paper you fail) Not the best source for information. I would suggest finding a site that is an accredited resource.

Because not everyone is willing to read a research article on species ID, or not everyone has the scientific background to do so.

If you like, feel free to sort through this document to identify an unknown saltwater fish from the Central Eastern Pacific using this guide. It won't be too helpful if you don't even have an idea which family the fish belong to.

http://content.cdlib.org/ark:/13030/kt896nb2qd/

You can also try FishBase if you like...again, without knowing the family of fish to narrow certain choices down, you would be terribly lost.

http://www.fishbase.org/

At least with the Wiki page, a less experienced person can click though the links to check and narrow down their choices.

Here's a test.

What family of fish does this species belong to? Is it freshwater or saltwater? Local or exotic? Northern or southern? Which body of water can you find it in?



Or you can spend money of physical copies of fish guides. But most will not come cheap. I was just using this guide online today to ID the species of these fish based the the dentition shown in a fried fish head (shown below). Not all the pages are available on the online version, but luckily the pages that I needed were there.

Fishes of the Gulf of Mexico, Vol. 2

http://books.google.com.au/books?id=-e3g...&q&f=false

Of if it is so easy, maybe you can help me ID these fish heads and tell me at least which family of fish they belong to. You will definitely encounter these fish in December while fishing in the Caribbean (there, I at least gave you a hint of their probable location). Please support your ID with a reputable, published reference and the specific morphological structures you used to ID these fish.



** Yes, I do know the answer before quizzing you. It's not that hard at all actually.

Have fun.

[smcs28]

I think you misunderstood what I was saying. I work in education so I really dislike Wiki stuff, since they are not the most accurate sources of information and any yahoo can change it.

I actually got a free fish guide from the LCBO this year. It is put out by the ministry of natural resources in Ontario and is very useful. So no, fishing guides do not have to be expensive. You can also look at the ministry's guide as well online. http://www.mnr.gov.on.ca/en/Business/Let...98012.html which is free as well.

As a newbee angler, no I cannot off the top of my head identify a fish (I know some from the few years I have put in).

I was not trying to be "smart" with my answer, I just worry that people will end up with the WRONG information from a site that is not reputable.

[MuskieBait]

I am working on my PhD in Cancer Biology in the Faculty of Medicine, Department of Medical Biophysics at the University of Toronto. While I fully understand the flaws of quoting Wikipedia, I also understand that most of the general population do not know how to search for credible references in the scientific literature. For some, even a simple government published guide is too complicated. Some government guides can contain mistakes, as reputable as they might appear. I've seen sites where pictures of the wrong species were placed under incorrect entries and causes confusion.

Wiki is not perfect, but it is a decent start. Those who are more interested can continue to search various sources to confirm a species ID.

BTW, before I post a Wiki link for a species here, I had already sort through the info to make sure it is credible.

Also, not all Wiki pages are not credible. Friends of mine had contributed and edited Wiki pages relevant to their specific training in an attempt to put credible information onto Wiki, including references from the latest publication in scientific journals. Believe it or not, many Wiki pages regarding proteins, enzymes and biological pathways are written by leading researcher in their respected fields.

[smcs28]

(07-21-2013 07:15 PM)MuskieBait Wrote:  I am working on my PhD in Cancer Biology in the Faculty of Medicine, Department of Medical Biophysics at the University of Toronto. While I fully understand the flaws of quoting Wikipedia, most of the general population do not know how to search for credible references. Even some government guides can contain a mistakes, as reputable as they might appear. I've seen sites where pictures of the wrong species were placed under incorrect entries and causes confusion.

Wiki is not perfect, but it is a decent start. Those who are more interested can continue to search various sources to confirm a species ID.

I think the issue I have is that as a "newbie" I am concerned that I would end up with misinformation due to a bad site. (ie wiki)

Very nice with the phd. You may end up working along side my husband. He creates and maintains computer programs for cancer research.

Where are you thinking of working when you are done school?