696
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] Drusas@fedia.io 52 points 5 days ago

Flounders are not bilaterally symmetrical.

[-] kryptonianCodeMonkey@lemmy.world 92 points 5 days ago
[-] hydroptic@sopuli.xyz 42 points 5 days ago

YOU'RE NOT BILATERALLY SYMMETRICAL

He can't understand you, dude.

Hey,

Flounder!

You'

re no

t bila

terall

y sym

metri

cal!

[-] SaharaMaleikuhm@feddit.org 6 points 4 days ago

It's a little hard to pick up, but it's all about one rule: Everything has to be on one side of the page.

[-] hydroptic@sopuli.xyz 5 points 4 days ago

Ah, thanks, I really don't speak flounder too well. Really should learn considering how close to Norway I live

[-] NeatNit@discuss.tchncs.de 35 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago)

In the tree of life, flounders are a sub-sub-...-sub-species of bilaterally symmetrical animals: https://www.onezoom.org/life/@Holozoa=5246131?otthome=%40_ozid%3D1&highlight=path%3A%40Apionichthys_finis%3D3640785&highlight=path%3A%40Bilateria%3D117569#x2913,y-2310,w8.2796

Edit: let me preemptively be a pedant to myself and say that "sub-...-species" is wrong because "bilaterally symmetrical animals" is not a species. Flounder is itself a species AFAIK, not a sub-species of anything. It is a descendant of the common ancestor of all bilaterally symmetrical animals. There, now surely no one will find anything to be pedantic about :D

[-] Drusas@fedia.io 9 points 5 days ago

I appreciate that information. However, flounders themselves are not bilaterally symmetrical. I have caught many dozens of them and it's pretty easy to tell that they are not.

[-] austinfloyd@ttrpg.network 7 points 4 days ago

Flounders are born symmetrical; eye migration happens as they transition to the juvenile stage of growth.

[-] Drusas@fedia.io 1 points 2 days ago

Oh, I know. It's very interesting. But when people imagine a flounder, they generally don't imagine a juvenile unless juvenile has been specified.

[-] BreadOven@lemmy.world 2 points 4 days ago

Isn't it referring to during development? Like as they're forming, they are bilateral? I haven't taken developmental biology in many years, so I'm maybe wrong.

[-] Drusas@fedia.io 1 points 2 days ago

They're only bilateral when they're very young. And even then, everyone is just focusing on the eyes. The body of the fish is also not exactly bilateral. Just fillet a flounder of any age (or watch a video on it) and you'll see.

[-] Crashumbc@lemmy.world 2 points 4 days ago

They are born (or hatch too lazy to look up) and their eyes move later once they get larger.

[-] BreadOven@lemmy.world 1 points 3 days ago

Yeah. I just wasn't sure at what point things are considered to be bilateral or otherwise.

I thought it may have been during the development process, but can't remember.

[-] azi@mander.xyz 8 points 5 days ago

Just like starfish!

[-] barsoap@lemm.ee 2 points 5 days ago

Forego the illusion of species and families. It's taxa all the way down.

[-] Morphit@feddit.uk 18 points 5 days ago

It depends on whether it was a larvae or not.

[-] blackbrook@mander.xyz 5 points 5 days ago

They're "differently symmetrical."

this post was submitted on 30 Oct 2024
696 points (98.7% liked)

Science Memes

10853 readers
3153 users here now

Welcome to c/science_memes @ Mander.xyz!

A place for majestic STEMLORD peacocking, as well as memes about the realities of working in a lab.



Rules

  1. Don't throw mud. Behave like an intellectual and remember the human.
  2. Keep it rooted (on topic).
  3. No spam.
  4. Infographics welcome, get schooled.

This is a science community. We use the Dawkins definition of meme.



Research Committee

Other Mander Communities

Science and Research

Biology and Life Sciences

Physical Sciences

Humanities and Social Sciences

Practical and Applied Sciences

Memes

Miscellaneous

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS