Talk:Agnatha

message: My apologies for rewriting the page. There was nothing wrong with it, but it was difficult to fit in all the material I wanted to add without some reorganization. Feel free to hack up whatever I did if it is unsatisfactory - DJK 22:53, 18 May 2003 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rewrite 

message: Agnatha are not fishes. They have completely different skeleton, and their notochord lasts unchanged for their whole life. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.199.221.98 (talk) 14:41, 21 October 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  I'm sorry, but 

message: Hagfishes aren't really agnathans. All agnathans are jawless vertebrates who's mouths are fixed open. A hagfish's mouth is not fixed open, they have horizontally articulating "jaws", while agnathans just have a mouth fixed open. Giant Blue Anteater 05:17, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hagfish 

message: Hagfishes are considered agnathans because they are cyclostomes.  Hagfishes belong in the Myxinidae family under the class Agnatha.   Information cited from http://www.gma.org/fogm/Hagfish_Lamprey.htm  Qwertyloo —Preceding undated comment added 02:44, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cyclostomes 

message: Agnatha is a dated term; it is being used less and less because the group is paraphyletic. This should be mentioned somewhere in the article. Fuzzform 21:42, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Where does this one belong then? Bob the Wikipedian (talk) 23:12, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: We could describe it simply as an early craniate or chordate.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cephal-odd (talk • contribs) 05:50, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Old terminology 

message: The statement that Agnatha are limited in their ability to evolve seems POV.  There are numerous sucessful species and as another contributer accidentally pointed out, lack of jaw has not prevented the development of an opening and closing mouth. JDN  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.6.149.17 (talk) 14:06, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  POV 

message: The statement that fertilization is external in lampreys and hagfishes needs to be corrected. Fertilization in lampreys is just barely external-- males and females release sperm and egg into a cavity formed between their bellies as the press against each other during mating. Fertilization in hagfishes never has been observed, but given the kind of egg they produce (large, yolky and 'shark-like') internal fertilization seems most likely. I'll make the change as soon as I dig up the references. Struvite (talk) 05:16, 29 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fertilization 

message: You are sadly mistaken if you think a word like 'Agnatha' has a Latin origin. It is of course Greek in origin, as are most of the taxonomic names in biology. It is derived from the Greek negative prefix a + gnathos = having no jaws. If you doubt this, use a dictionary with etymological derivations. Macdonald-ross (talk) 08:46, 8 October 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Name is Greek 

message: Hi, I saw a sentence in this article briefly mentioning a fungus that enters the cloaca of lampreys once they have reproduced. Does anyone have a source behind this? I haven't been able to find anything, though I find it possible. MrKathooloo (talk) 01:49, 5 October 2021  (talk) 01:49, 5 October 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: The only source I could find on the fungus claim was this excerpt of a 1948 Northwestern Atlantic fish guide, and here it is presented as a theory rather than actual fact. 142.134.219.78 (talk) 14:09, 13 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Question about fungus killing these