Talk:Shellfish

Shellfish is a culinary term?

This article opens with the assertion that "Shellfish is a culinary term ..." Is this meant to exclude the use of the word in other contexts? Are there credible citations for this position? --Geronimo20 (talk) 09:58, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

• I think the point is that it's not a monophyletic clade in general, though the narrow "regulatory" meaning appears to be monophyletic. Somewhat more generally, a word that means "crustaceans and bivalves" isn't of much value in biology except in the context of "things that are often eaten by the same predators," e.g. humans. 69.120.105.1 (talk) 14:53, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

What do shellfish eat? I cant seem to find it.

Types of shellfish

i wonna know the types of shellfish and fish —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.65.213.237 (talk) 15:04, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

Well, what exactly do you mean by that? The article clearly mentions lobsters, shrimp, oysters and mussels all being in the category of shellfish. By the way, it would be nice if you could give a more clear name to the section, so that we can see what you are talking about. --User:Crustaceanguy 18 May 2009

Shellstock

In my experience, many restaurants now use this word instead of shellfish, probably because they arent actually fish. I wonder if anyone else in the world has had this experience, and what reliable sources are saying? I may do some research. I came here after reading about lame edit wars, and this word popped into my mind as a potential edit war. I promise i dont do that sort of editing, but i think its an issue worthy of some discussion.Mercurywoodrose (talk) 15:47, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

Allergies

Are people who are allergic to crustaceans also allergic to molluscs? If so, why? They're totally different phyla. Also, technically Leviticus only bans certain fish technically applying that to any non-fish is a matter of interpretation. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.11.36.169 (talk) 14:25, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

Perhaps this is an example of Cunningham's law being a bit slow, but to your point:

> technically Leviticus only bans certain fish technically applying that to any non-fish is a matter of interpretation

This is incorrect, the passages in Leviticus are quite explicit in referring to everything in the water.

102.115.243.92 (talk) 07:17, 15 January 2023 (UTC)

"Heavy metal content"

The "Heavy metal content" section only covered arsenic, which is not a heavy metal. I've changed the section to "Toxic content" - I don't like it much but I can't think of anything better right now, so if anyone can come up with a better answer... -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 13:24, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

Echinoderms?

Echinoderms, and sea urchins in particular, don't have exoskeletons, which the page initially describes as one of the characteristics of all shellfish. The term "shellfish" seems to have a pretty varied usage; is it possible that some sources only apply the term to animals with exoskeletons while others include pretty much any marine invertebrate animal? 69.120.105.1 (talk) 14:53, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

How Do They Breathe?

I visited this article to learn how shellfish breathe -- do they have to surface, or can they breathe underwater? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.83.44.198 (talk) 19:49, 3 November 2015 (UTC)

Toxicity (mishandling)

Can someone who is a better author than I, copy/reword/reference the material seen (at 2 or 3 locations) in the Eutrophication article about shellfish toxicity into this article because the common conception is that if you have been poisoned by shellfish it was probably due to mishandling (ie, could have been left out of the freezer), when in reality, it was the algae environment that the shellfish was raised in which caused the problem. Charlieb000 (talk) 03:20, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Shellfish. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m3190/is_n34_v32/ai_21072930/
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m3089/is_n3_v51/ai_9071424/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061011102911/http://textonly.mde.state.md.us/CitizensInfoCenter/FishandShellfish/harvesting_notices/index.asp to http://textonly.mde.state.md.us/CitizensInfoCenter/FishandShellfish/harvesting_notices/index.asp
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060830083723/http://www.cefas.co.uk/Publications/shellfishnews/default.htm to http://www.cefas.co.uk/Publications/shellfishnews/default.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090212213053/http://shellfish.org/image/tid/104 to http://shellfish.org/image/tid/104

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:01, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

olo

A pinus 77.230.242.199 (talk) 07:38, 10 August 2022 (UTC)