my 11 year old son has a project in science that requires him to find out what the first fish was.
2007-01-31 11:47:13 · 7 answers · asked by angie w 1 in Pets ➔ Fish
That's a really broad and open-ended question. Traditionally, the term fish refers to any craniate (swimmer with a skull). This would suggest that the Haikouichthys, which had a skull made of cartilage, and were fossilized around the Cambrian, 530 million years ago. The oldest surviving craniate is class Myxini, the hagfish, but they lack jaws and vertebrae, so vertebrate systematists do not regard the hagfish as a "fish." Ostracoderms, which first appeared 500 million years ago, are sometimes noted as being the first fish, because they (as far as we know now) were the first animals with a backbone. And the aforementioned vertebrate systematists use the term "fish" to refer to a specific 'group' of vertebrates, the actinopterygii, which appeared around 444 million years ago. These "fish" are also called ray-finned, and include examples like bass, trout, and tuna. I don't know if this is useful, or just more frustrating, but if it were my child's project, I believe the safest bet would be the Ostracoderm from 500 million years ago.
2007-01-31 12:31:19 · answer #1 · answered by jonriggs2001 2 · 3⤊ 0⤋
Nobody really knows the answer to that one. There were many similar fish that evolved at the same time. One type of "prehistoric fish" is the Coelacanth, which is a living fossil, as some have been discovered in recent years.
2007-02-04 10:12:44 · answer #2 · answered by ispooky2 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No, nobody knows that. There is a theory, but nobody knows anything. Science is like that... nothing is ever certain. If your son learns that lesson it will probably get him through college.
Anyway, here's the link:
http://hoopermuseum.earthsci.carleton.ca/coelacanth/F4.HTM
This depends highly on what you consider to be a 'fish'... our modern definition means it's a water-dwelling thing with a backbone, gills, fins, etc... but there were pre-historic fish that don't meet that definition, like they didn't have teeth or bones and so on. The link I sent you is about the emergence of the first backboned, jawless, water-dwelling animals. Call that a fish if you want.
BTW, sharks are vastly different from most fish... sharks are Chondrichthyes... water-dwelling Vertebrates with cartilaginous endoskeletons. Related to skates and stingrays... no bones.
2007-01-31 12:10:23 · answer #3 · answered by polly_peptide 5 · 2⤊ 2⤋
in the journey that your searching for algae eaters-you may look into plecos, plecos are what people call "sucker fish" it ought to take some months before your tank can produce any algae for those fish to munch on--this can be finished via leaving the light fixtures on day and evening---yet that cant be finished with fish contained in the tank as this can rigidity them out---different algae ingesting critter should be snails---snails munch on algae and leftover nutrition contained in the substrate----maximum community fish will coexist with both the snails and pleco--can check out guppies for novices--solid success on your undertaking!!
2016-12-03 07:22:58 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
the first domestic fish was the common carp, the first tropical fish kept as a pet was the paradise fish. probably not what you were looking for but hope its a neat piece of info...
2007-01-31 14:49:33 · answer #5 · answered by drezdogge 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
That's... Well nobody really knows. There are theories, but in my opinion, finding bones and putting them together doesn't mean that was an actually animal. Sorry, but this is hard to answer.
2007-02-02 17:22:56 · answer #6 · answered by KS 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Sorry I cant be too much help, though maybe triops if they are a fish? Good Luck!!!!!
2007-01-31 11:52:43 · answer #7 · answered by Dani K 2 · 1⤊ 1⤋