| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Endeiolepis article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
 | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Plagiarism edit
About sixty specimens of Endeiolepis have been found in the Escuminac Formation, all extracted from a few sandstone layers within the same small area of the cliffs.
A recently discovered Endeiolepis specimen revealed an abdomen that split open as the fish decayed, making it possible to study the well-preserved details of these scaly ventral structures from the inside. It turns out that this feature was not related to fins after all; instead, it represents a series of small internal gill pouches, like those of today’s lamprey. But unlike the lamprey, which has seven pairs of gill pouches, Endeiolepis had about 30, as is also the case for Euphanerops. The finely preserved details in the recent Endeiolepis specimen also showed the outline of small gill lamellae.
This discovery is the oldest evidence of respiration through gill pouches. Once believed to be a specialization in existing lampreys and hagfishes, it now seems more probable that gill pouches were an ancestral condition of vertebrates, subsequently lost in the gnathostomes.
By discovering the true nature of the scaly ventral structure, however, we have effectively erased the one anatomical trait that distinguished Endeiolepis from Euphanerops. Their apparent dissimilarity could simply be due to differences in the environments in which they were preserved. Indeed, we only find Endeiolepis in turbidite deposits made of sand, which promote three-dimensional preservation, and Euphanerops in thinly layered clay beds, which tend to flatten specimens.
- This text appears to have been copied word for word from the link provided. I was unable to find the code for the plagiarism tag so for the time being I have removed the offending text from the article and placed it here. 75.210.190.247 (talk) 16:01, 9 June 2008 (UTC)