 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
.svg){kind=small}
 | It is requested that a photograph be included in this article to improve its quality.
The external tool WordPress Openverse may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites. |
Alternate name?
editIs this also called "conger eel"? Badagnani 08:11, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
- No that is a completely different species found in India and the Pacific ocean. Irisbishins (talk) 22:15, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
First spawning ground ever discovered ?
editThe article stated that the spawning ground discovered by Japanese researchers in 2006 was the first ever discovered for an anguillid species - this seems incorrect, since the Sargasso Sea is such a spawning ground and has been know for almost a century. Is there a difference ? Or did the author mean that in this case the location was pinpointed more precisely ? In the meantime I removed the statement Nberger (talk)
- The Sargasso Sea is a very general location and it has not been confirmed as the spawning ground for the Atlantic species of eel. The placement is based on speculation given small specimens that have been found in areas around it. The location found in the Pacific was far more precise and was confirmed by the discovery of 4 day old specimens, the youngest found of any species as far as I have ever heard. I look for a reference to that effect. Djlayton4 | talk | contribs 05:20, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
year of description
editwhere does the year of the first description comes from? i found the year 1842. I think the first description was in "fauna japonica" (http://edb.kulib.kyoto-u.ac.jp/exhibit-e/b02/image/01/b02s0265.html). other sources said 1846 (http://eol.org/pages/206835/names/synonyms or http://www.marinespecies.org/aphia.php?p=taxdetails&id=271705). what is correct? --217.76.99.221 (talk) 10:45, 27 February 2012 (UTC)
- It must be 1846, see: FishBase. --Ykvach (talk) 12:59, 27 February 2012 (UTC)
- Thanks for your quick answer. I know this page. But what is with the other references i gave? Espacially with Fauna Japonica where these authors (Temminck and Schlegel) have described Anguilla japonica 5 years earlier. In my opinion, there is maybe a citation error because the Fauna Japonica consists of some more issues. Maybe Fishbase took the wrong one. My problem is, that the section about A. japonica in Fauna Japonica is not in my language so I can't check if that is a correct description of the species or only some thoughts about a new fish they find an described later. --217.76.99.221 (talk) 15:28, 27 February 2012 (UTC)
- Probably, it was described as nomen nudum in 1842. It must be studied. At this time, official year of the species description is 1846. --Ykvach (talk) 17:25, 27 February 2012 (UTC)
- Thanks for your quick answer. I know this page. But what is with the other references i gave? Espacially with Fauna Japonica where these authors (Temminck and Schlegel) have described Anguilla japonica 5 years earlier. In my opinion, there is maybe a citation error because the Fauna Japonica consists of some more issues. Maybe Fishbase took the wrong one. My problem is, that the section about A. japonica in Fauna Japonica is not in my language so I can't check if that is a correct description of the species or only some thoughts about a new fish they find an described later. --217.76.99.221 (talk) 15:28, 27 February 2012 (UTC)
Wiki Education assignment: Biology Inquiry and Observation
edit
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 23 August 2022 and 5 December 2022. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Irisbishins (article contribs). Peer reviewers: Ird003, Oaj002, Netasha8.
— Assignment last updated by Netasha8 (talk) 20:40, 5 October 2022 (UTC)