/lit/ - Literature

>>16530517
>Obviously they should be subdivided at actual branching points, keep tetrapods, but distinguish between ray fins, lobe fins, elasmobranchs, lampreys and hagfish, this keeps to monophyletic groups that actually reflect evolutionary history, it isn’t difficult to reorganise things in terms of actually real biology instead of human projections.
Good.
>Taxonomists already do this.
Golly gee, and all this time I thought my goldfish was a weird looking an eagle ray! Is it really so hard to grasp the concept that there are many subgroups of fish? Think of the spatial proximity of these animals to one another and their respective role in the food web. Think of discovering 250 unclassified new species per year or describing something you can't yet identify. Think of managing a specific habitat and how many different fishes will be affected. The broad term 'fish' has many practical uses... And nevermind 'fish,' we haven't even kicked the door off the hinges yet with the concept of a fishery.