This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Hagfish article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 7 February 2022 and 20 May 2022. Further details are available
on the course page. Student editor(s):
CJManalo25 (
article contribs).
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 17 February 2021 and 28 May 2021. Further details are available
on the course page. Student editor(s):
Balakay29,
Whitefke,
JDinauer. Peer reviewers:
Knowl8dge,
Ashleypress0511,
Taylorstokes21.
Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT ( talk) 22:58, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
What are the dimensions of a hagfish? It is difficult to know from the image.
Also, what does it mean that they 'use a knot' to get out of their feeding places?
I remember reading they tie their bodies into a knot then slide the knot towards the mouth. It then presses on whatever the mouth is attached to, disengaging. I'll add a description.-- 24.16.72.226 01:22, 17 May 2005 (UTC)
This article indicates that they are vertebrates whereas the Chordate article indicates that they are not. There's a clue at the Vertebrate article which seems to imply that whether they are vertebrates or not is a matter of dispute. I wonder whether someone who knows the subject could clarify things so that we could have the most correct information and have it given consistantly. Jimp 06:19, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
It seems that recent results have shifted the consensus on Hagfish classification, with prior proponents of the "hagfish diverged before the evolution of vertebrates" view now reversing their positions. See reference at [3]. Cesiumfrog ( talk) 13:52, 23 November 2011 (UTC)
Vertebrata is synonymous to Craniota. Some people picked the term as synonym for Myopterygii. And there are indications that ancestors of hagfish had vertebrae. You can argue that hagfish has no vertebrae but then you have to consider that hagfish as no real cranium eihter. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.70.2.94 ( talk) 18:07, 11 July 2013 (UTC)
Ota, K. G., Fujimoto, S., Oisi, Y. & Kuratani, S. Identification of vertebra-like elements and their possible differentiation from sclerotomes in the hagfish. Nature Commun. 2, 373 (2011). Hagfish seem to possess vertebra, but these are reduced. April 2015 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.96.155.212 ( talk) 09:25, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
Does anyone know the Japanese name for hagfish? How is it fished? How it is prepared? What is the 'eel leather' used for? Are there potential commercial uses for the slime? It'd be nice if someone could expand the information to include a specific section on this.
Does anyone know how hagfish reproduce? Or if it is not well known, should someone point that out? It would be nice. PhoenixSeraph 20:57, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
This section could use some more information. Some additions I'm thinking of are:
Also, there is a lot of information in the section that is not cited, and these sources could be used for that as well.
References
JDinauer ( talk) 00:36, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
I have heard that hagfish can take chunks out of large prey by fastening on with the teeth and then passing a knot from the tail towards the head. This would be worth mentioning if anyone has evidence for it. Myopic Bookworm 11:41, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
I don't have the time or the expertise to fix this, but the second line of this article refers to the creature's "ass hole". That doens't seem right. -Holshy —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 206.195.193.254 ( talk) 16:37, 27 March 2007 (UTC).
It's not clear to me why a section of this article is entitled "Venom." Apparently hagfish are not venomous, and the contents of the section don't seem to have anything to do with venom. - 75.90.166.235 ( talk) 07:16, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
This article currently includes a drawing of Eptatretus minor, which appears to be a hagfish. However the list at Hagfish#Species, which appears to attempt to be comprehensive, does not include Eptatretus minor. Nor does the article on Eptatretus. Is "minor" another name for one of the listed species? I do see E. minor listed on FishBase, but don't know what to do from there. — Epastore ( talk) 22:55, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
In this section it is noted that Hagfish slime is unique in that it contains threadlike fibres and yet slug slime also contains threadlike fibres. Is there a significant difference between these two slime fibres? —Preceding unsigned comment added by ElJayDee ( talk • contribs) 19:05, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
The sentence "with a heart system that is more up to date than that of vertebrates..." is completely puzzling and deserves some explication. No, don't look at me to do it - I'm puzzled. Hue White ( talk) 15:59, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
Apparently hagfish is popularly eaten in Korea. This may have to do with the fact that Koreans consider hagfish as a type of "eel" but it's pretty crazy. Found some vids on youtube. Anyone have any ideas on how we can incorporate this into the article?
Hagfish in tank: http://kr.youtube.com/watch?v=xZ-ED2-09as Cutup hagfish being grilled: http://kr.youtube.com/watch?v=aoTiFlD6S4Y http://kr.youtube.com/watch?v=VC0NiF37Jk8 Melonbarmonster2 ( talk) 05:17, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
This is true, but the current description makes it sound like the slime is the only part that is consumed. ("The hagfish is kept alive and irritated by rattling its container with a stick, prompting it to produce slime in large quantities. This slime is used in a similar manner as egg whites in various forms of cookery in the region.") This is problematic because A. Korean cuisine in fact consumes the flesh of hagfish, and B. there is almost no evidence of the slime being consumed in Korea. Clarification regarding where "in the region" refers to is necessary, as this may be true in other East Asian cuisines, but it is not a known feature in Korea. 50.251.209.2 ( talk) 00:15, 22 July 2016 (UTC)
Darn it. I am sorry, but I lost a bunch of my recent edits; they were substantive and included cites. I suspect I had an old version of the whole page up for one of the edits and it overrode the other content I added. Would someone please contact me and help me figure out how to retrieve those, if possible? mmbutler@gmail.com, edits were on 25 Jan 2008. Thanks, sorry I'm such a klutz and process-ignorant. And I apologize for not having an account. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.18.167.24 ( talk) 11:27, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
The article currently claims hagfish have two brains. I'm by no means a biology expert, but I'm unaware of any animals with two brains, though some have multiple ganglion. A brief google search turned up no other mentions of hagfish possessing this attribute, while the German version of the article seems to discuss a singular brain. I put a citation needed tag next to the sentence in question, as I'm not certain if brain is just a mistranslation of ganglion, vandalism, or what. 129.10.116.80 ( talk) 18:18, 26 March 2009 (UTC)--
I am currently taking a comparative vertebrate anatomy course, and we are referring to the Hagfish as Myxinoidea, a class, with superclass Agnatha. Anyone know what the current "actual" classification is? In any case, I feel Myxinoidea should be mentioned somewhere, even if it isn't the current "correct" name, as people are still being taught this, and older sources do use it. Dewert ( talk) 22:02, 25 October 2009 (UTC)
I wanted to add this, but it seems to conflict with what is already there. Thoughts?
The mouth of the hagfish has two pairs of horny, comb-shaped teeth on a cartilaginous plate that protracts and retracts. These teeth are used to grasp food and draw it toward the pharynx. [7] Anna Frodesiak ( talk) 23:24, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
A higher-resolution of hagfish feeding is coming soon. Anna Frodesiak ( talk) 06:18, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
This article is deeply confused concerning the principles of systematics and the current state of understanding of vertebrate phylogeny. As well, it contains a number of odd assertions about hagfish (e.g., the lack of an operculum causes them to rely on cutaneous respiration). Someone with actual knowledge of the relevant literature needs to redo much of the articlChore. MayerG ( talk) 06:41, 22 November 2011 (UTC)
It seems that this article, and its sister "Chordate" treat the membership or exclusion of Hagfish in/from Vertebrata as settled. Are the artifacts we observe in extant hagfish something that may evolve into vertebra? Or are these the footprints of what used to be vertebrae? Much of the confusion in the article could be resolved by acknowledging the shape and boundaries of the uncertainty. Maybe ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny but iirc that meme has given us some spectacular failures. Cybersharque ( talk) 16:37, 8 November 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to 2 external links on
Hagfish. Please take a moment to review
my edit. You may add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 08:12, 28 March 2016 (UTC)
The phylogenetic tree is a bit confusing and could use more information. The symbol next to Myxinikela siroka, for example, is not explained in the description. It could be an improvement if a less focused tree was used to better show the Hagfish's place in the Chordata phylum and in the evolution of vertebrates. JDinauer ( talk) 01:04, 27 February 2021 (UTC)
Regarding possible additional images that could be added, an image of a hagfish using its slime could be helpful. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Whitefke ( talk • contribs) 23:51, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
There are some sections in the article regarding hagfish anatomy that could use more information in general.
An example of edits that could be made is adding some more sentences to provide more information, such as:
{{
cite journal}}
: CS1 maint: unflagged free DOI (
link)
Whitefke ( talk) 22:01, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
@ Takraphael: added the following material to the article:
I reverted the edit as off-topic and irrelevant to the subject of this article. Takraphael then re-added that material, with additional verbiage, to the article:
I still hold that the material added by Takraphael is inappropriate for inclusion in the article, but I will not edit war over it. I request comments from other editors. - Donald Albury 17:02, 22 April 2022 (UTC)
I appreciate your opinion. but I don’t really think that that accident is not that “inappopriate” for Wikipedia. it is a real accident that occured in US, and its cause is hagfish’s slime. Then What can I do to contribute this info to wikipedia? Should I make another article? Takraphael ( talk) 17:58, 22 April 2022 (UTC)
edit: I don’t really think -> I think Takraphael ( talk) 18:00, 22 April 2022 (UTC)
I should mention that that accident is not just random, it has been written and broadcasted by multiple medias.. and I still have no idea that this information is no worth to be contributed. Well, also some articles in Wikipedia mentions big incident that was happened by some creatures. Why not hagfish? Takraphael ( talk) 03:22, 23 April 2022 (UTC)
Then would you mind if I just mention it in paragraph “Slime”? I’ll just add it shortly, please point out if it is still inappropriate Takraphael ( talk) 10:49, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Hagfish article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 7 February 2022 and 20 May 2022. Further details are available
on the course page. Student editor(s):
CJManalo25 (
article contribs).
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 17 February 2021 and 28 May 2021. Further details are available
on the course page. Student editor(s):
Balakay29,
Whitefke,
JDinauer. Peer reviewers:
Knowl8dge,
Ashleypress0511,
Taylorstokes21.
Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT ( talk) 22:58, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
What are the dimensions of a hagfish? It is difficult to know from the image.
Also, what does it mean that they 'use a knot' to get out of their feeding places?
I remember reading they tie their bodies into a knot then slide the knot towards the mouth. It then presses on whatever the mouth is attached to, disengaging. I'll add a description.-- 24.16.72.226 01:22, 17 May 2005 (UTC)
This article indicates that they are vertebrates whereas the Chordate article indicates that they are not. There's a clue at the Vertebrate article which seems to imply that whether they are vertebrates or not is a matter of dispute. I wonder whether someone who knows the subject could clarify things so that we could have the most correct information and have it given consistantly. Jimp 06:19, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
It seems that recent results have shifted the consensus on Hagfish classification, with prior proponents of the "hagfish diverged before the evolution of vertebrates" view now reversing their positions. See reference at [3]. Cesiumfrog ( talk) 13:52, 23 November 2011 (UTC)
Vertebrata is synonymous to Craniota. Some people picked the term as synonym for Myopterygii. And there are indications that ancestors of hagfish had vertebrae. You can argue that hagfish has no vertebrae but then you have to consider that hagfish as no real cranium eihter. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.70.2.94 ( talk) 18:07, 11 July 2013 (UTC)
Ota, K. G., Fujimoto, S., Oisi, Y. & Kuratani, S. Identification of vertebra-like elements and their possible differentiation from sclerotomes in the hagfish. Nature Commun. 2, 373 (2011). Hagfish seem to possess vertebra, but these are reduced. April 2015 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.96.155.212 ( talk) 09:25, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
Does anyone know the Japanese name for hagfish? How is it fished? How it is prepared? What is the 'eel leather' used for? Are there potential commercial uses for the slime? It'd be nice if someone could expand the information to include a specific section on this.
Does anyone know how hagfish reproduce? Or if it is not well known, should someone point that out? It would be nice. PhoenixSeraph 20:57, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
This section could use some more information. Some additions I'm thinking of are:
Also, there is a lot of information in the section that is not cited, and these sources could be used for that as well.
References
JDinauer ( talk) 00:36, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
I have heard that hagfish can take chunks out of large prey by fastening on with the teeth and then passing a knot from the tail towards the head. This would be worth mentioning if anyone has evidence for it. Myopic Bookworm 11:41, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
I don't have the time or the expertise to fix this, but the second line of this article refers to the creature's "ass hole". That doens't seem right. -Holshy —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 206.195.193.254 ( talk) 16:37, 27 March 2007 (UTC).
It's not clear to me why a section of this article is entitled "Venom." Apparently hagfish are not venomous, and the contents of the section don't seem to have anything to do with venom. - 75.90.166.235 ( talk) 07:16, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
This article currently includes a drawing of Eptatretus minor, which appears to be a hagfish. However the list at Hagfish#Species, which appears to attempt to be comprehensive, does not include Eptatretus minor. Nor does the article on Eptatretus. Is "minor" another name for one of the listed species? I do see E. minor listed on FishBase, but don't know what to do from there. — Epastore ( talk) 22:55, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
In this section it is noted that Hagfish slime is unique in that it contains threadlike fibres and yet slug slime also contains threadlike fibres. Is there a significant difference between these two slime fibres? —Preceding unsigned comment added by ElJayDee ( talk • contribs) 19:05, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
The sentence "with a heart system that is more up to date than that of vertebrates..." is completely puzzling and deserves some explication. No, don't look at me to do it - I'm puzzled. Hue White ( talk) 15:59, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
Apparently hagfish is popularly eaten in Korea. This may have to do with the fact that Koreans consider hagfish as a type of "eel" but it's pretty crazy. Found some vids on youtube. Anyone have any ideas on how we can incorporate this into the article?
Hagfish in tank: http://kr.youtube.com/watch?v=xZ-ED2-09as Cutup hagfish being grilled: http://kr.youtube.com/watch?v=aoTiFlD6S4Y http://kr.youtube.com/watch?v=VC0NiF37Jk8 Melonbarmonster2 ( talk) 05:17, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
This is true, but the current description makes it sound like the slime is the only part that is consumed. ("The hagfish is kept alive and irritated by rattling its container with a stick, prompting it to produce slime in large quantities. This slime is used in a similar manner as egg whites in various forms of cookery in the region.") This is problematic because A. Korean cuisine in fact consumes the flesh of hagfish, and B. there is almost no evidence of the slime being consumed in Korea. Clarification regarding where "in the region" refers to is necessary, as this may be true in other East Asian cuisines, but it is not a known feature in Korea. 50.251.209.2 ( talk) 00:15, 22 July 2016 (UTC)
Darn it. I am sorry, but I lost a bunch of my recent edits; they were substantive and included cites. I suspect I had an old version of the whole page up for one of the edits and it overrode the other content I added. Would someone please contact me and help me figure out how to retrieve those, if possible? mmbutler@gmail.com, edits were on 25 Jan 2008. Thanks, sorry I'm such a klutz and process-ignorant. And I apologize for not having an account. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.18.167.24 ( talk) 11:27, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
The article currently claims hagfish have two brains. I'm by no means a biology expert, but I'm unaware of any animals with two brains, though some have multiple ganglion. A brief google search turned up no other mentions of hagfish possessing this attribute, while the German version of the article seems to discuss a singular brain. I put a citation needed tag next to the sentence in question, as I'm not certain if brain is just a mistranslation of ganglion, vandalism, or what. 129.10.116.80 ( talk) 18:18, 26 March 2009 (UTC)--
I am currently taking a comparative vertebrate anatomy course, and we are referring to the Hagfish as Myxinoidea, a class, with superclass Agnatha. Anyone know what the current "actual" classification is? In any case, I feel Myxinoidea should be mentioned somewhere, even if it isn't the current "correct" name, as people are still being taught this, and older sources do use it. Dewert ( talk) 22:02, 25 October 2009 (UTC)
I wanted to add this, but it seems to conflict with what is already there. Thoughts?
The mouth of the hagfish has two pairs of horny, comb-shaped teeth on a cartilaginous plate that protracts and retracts. These teeth are used to grasp food and draw it toward the pharynx. [7] Anna Frodesiak ( talk) 23:24, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
A higher-resolution of hagfish feeding is coming soon. Anna Frodesiak ( talk) 06:18, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
This article is deeply confused concerning the principles of systematics and the current state of understanding of vertebrate phylogeny. As well, it contains a number of odd assertions about hagfish (e.g., the lack of an operculum causes them to rely on cutaneous respiration). Someone with actual knowledge of the relevant literature needs to redo much of the articlChore. MayerG ( talk) 06:41, 22 November 2011 (UTC)
It seems that this article, and its sister "Chordate" treat the membership or exclusion of Hagfish in/from Vertebrata as settled. Are the artifacts we observe in extant hagfish something that may evolve into vertebra? Or are these the footprints of what used to be vertebrae? Much of the confusion in the article could be resolved by acknowledging the shape and boundaries of the uncertainty. Maybe ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny but iirc that meme has given us some spectacular failures. Cybersharque ( talk) 16:37, 8 November 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to 2 external links on
Hagfish. Please take a moment to review
my edit. You may add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 08:12, 28 March 2016 (UTC)
The phylogenetic tree is a bit confusing and could use more information. The symbol next to Myxinikela siroka, for example, is not explained in the description. It could be an improvement if a less focused tree was used to better show the Hagfish's place in the Chordata phylum and in the evolution of vertebrates. JDinauer ( talk) 01:04, 27 February 2021 (UTC)
Regarding possible additional images that could be added, an image of a hagfish using its slime could be helpful. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Whitefke ( talk • contribs) 23:51, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
There are some sections in the article regarding hagfish anatomy that could use more information in general.
An example of edits that could be made is adding some more sentences to provide more information, such as:
{{
cite journal}}
: CS1 maint: unflagged free DOI (
link)
Whitefke ( talk) 22:01, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
@ Takraphael: added the following material to the article:
I reverted the edit as off-topic and irrelevant to the subject of this article. Takraphael then re-added that material, with additional verbiage, to the article:
I still hold that the material added by Takraphael is inappropriate for inclusion in the article, but I will not edit war over it. I request comments from other editors. - Donald Albury 17:02, 22 April 2022 (UTC)
I appreciate your opinion. but I don’t really think that that accident is not that “inappopriate” for Wikipedia. it is a real accident that occured in US, and its cause is hagfish’s slime. Then What can I do to contribute this info to wikipedia? Should I make another article? Takraphael ( talk) 17:58, 22 April 2022 (UTC)
edit: I don’t really think -> I think Takraphael ( talk) 18:00, 22 April 2022 (UTC)
I should mention that that accident is not just random, it has been written and broadcasted by multiple medias.. and I still have no idea that this information is no worth to be contributed. Well, also some articles in Wikipedia mentions big incident that was happened by some creatures. Why not hagfish? Takraphael ( talk) 03:22, 23 April 2022 (UTC)
Then would you mind if I just mention it in paragraph “Slime”? I’ll just add it shortly, please point out if it is still inappropriate Takraphael ( talk) 10:49, 28 April 2022 (UTC)