Contents

Talk:Fish scale

This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Fishes Mid‑importance This article is part of WikiProject Fishes, an attempt to organise a detailed guide to all topics related to Fish taxa. To participate, you can edit the attached article, or contribute further at WikiProject Fishes. This project is an offshoot of the WikiProject Tree of Life.FishesWikipedia:WikiProject FishesTemplate:WikiProject FishesFishes articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Animal anatomy Mid‑importance This article is part of WikiProject Animal anatomy, an attempt to organise a detailed guide to all topics related to animal anatomy apart from human anatomy. To participate, you can edit the attached article, or contribute further at WikiProject Animal anatomy. This project is an offshoot of WikiProject AnimalsAnimal anatomyWikipedia:WikiProject Animal anatomyTemplate:WikiProject Animal anatomyAnimal anatomy articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Commercial use[edit]

Fish scales are used to produce fish silver (sorry, I dont know the correct english term, if there ever is one), in German its called Fischsilber (http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fischsilber), a pigment, in Makedonia they also produce the so called 'Ohrid pearls'. -- 178.113.231.207 (talk) 22:35, 29 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The English term may be "guanine" Crinoline (talk)

??? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 110.92.106.46 (talk) 08:43, 10 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Article says, "Unlike bony fish, sharks have a complicated dermal corset made of flexible collagenous fibers arranged as a helical network surrounding their body. The corset works as an outer skeleton, providing attachment for their swimming muscles and thus saving energy.[3]"

Why is this in an article on scales? It makes sense in an article on shark anatomy/physiology in general. IAmNitpicking (talk) 15:01, 27 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This page claims that the Bowfin features Ganoid scales, however this is incorrect. The bowfin wikipedia has this correct in claiming that the body is in fact covered with cycloid scales. This example should be moved from the Ganoid section to the Cycloid section. Here is a link to the University of Florida's Florida Museum page that corroborates my claim: Florida Museum- Amia Calva. I plan to edit this change in adding the aforementioned source. Another possible edit includings adding a high resolution photograph of a Bowfin scale obtained with a dissecting microscope. – Preceding unsigned comment added by Tyler Johnson32 (talk) 18:15, 10 March 2017‎ (UTC)[reply]

The ctenoid scales section is rather brief. There are a number of topics that could be elaborated on in more detail. I have found an article that has good information regarding the development of the ctenoid scales which can be found below: http://scholarworks.umass.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1452&context=masters_theses_2 (particularly the development section) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cksmith8 (talk • contribs) 00:13, 11 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The other types of scale state what they are made of. I have found this article, but am not sure if I need to actually know what I'm talking about before editing the article! https://micro.magnet.fsu.edu/primer/techniques/dic/dicgallery/cycloidscalesmall.html Crinoline (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 20:03, 6 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I moved the image of the gudgeon scale to the ctenoid gallery, because it looks to me like a perfect example of a ctenoid as described in the article. Even if the gudgeons are buriied deep in a cycloid clade, this still seems to me to be a ctenoid scale. BUT... I am not an icthyologist, and if they call the gudgeon scale cycloid, than please move it back.Nick Beeson (talk) 13:15, 26 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I made minor edit to the section "Leviticus". It should be named "Kashrut" since that is what the section is about; also I reworded "celebrated passage" to "verse", since "celebrated" is not neutral.TAPwiki (talk) 18:40, 23 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No, the section is about Leviticus. It just happens that the Kashrut takes Leviticus to be literally true. But so do other people. – Epipelagic (talk) 06:40, 10 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]