http://www.underwatertimes.com/news.php?article_id=73210864950
2007-03-20 04:27:19 · 4 answers · asked by Donald 1 in Science & Mathematics ➔ Zoology
The 'legs' that the shark had feet on the ends of were actually the male claspers, an intromittent organ used in shark mating.
Although the ends of the claspers were unusually formed they were not real 'feet', and wouldn't have had skeletal or muscular support - so the critter couldn't have walked on them.
When the official is talking about where fish with feet could come from, I think he's talking about the coelacanth, Latimeria, which does indeed have skeletal and muscular support in the fleshy lobes that support the base of its fins - muscular lobes that are homologous to the ones that the distant relatives of the coelacanth used to move up on land back in the Carboniferous 380 million years ago.
2007-03-20 05:03:31 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 0⤋
no hon sharks do not walk no matter what the circumstances are. those legs things may be a genetic disorder. a fish is not adapted to walk even if it has the legs it is meant to swim
2007-03-20 11:32:36 · answer #2 · answered by hippiegurl 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No. Just because a body part develops does not mean that the brain has the knowledge of how to work it, or can learn to work it.
2007-03-20 11:48:04 · answer #3 · answered by Brian L 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
well, i dont think so!
it had webbed feet, so it could have swum as well as walk
but to walk(upright) would have been difficult, as sharks have cartilagenous bones, which in my view wouldnt have taken its weight to stand upright.
though, it could still have been a good swimmer!
2007-03-20 11:32:19 · answer #4 · answered by xyz 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋