Does anyone know how many chambers are in a fish, amphibian, reptile or birds heart or where i could find this info. thanks.
208689
Fish have 2 major chambers (one auricle and one ventricle, plus one sinus venosus - before the auricle - and a conus arteriosus - after the ventricle). However, in the lungfishes there is a partial separation of both the main chambers, linked to the existence of a pulmonary blood circuit. \nAmphibians have two auricles and one ventricle, and the latter has deep "pockets" where oxygenated and deoxygenated blood goes, so that these two blood volumes do not mix much  while each flows through its respective circuit.\nReptiles... well, there is no such thing as a "reptile" really but rather three different groups. Both the turtles and the squamates (lizards and snakes) have two auricles and one ventricle, and the latter is partially separated by a spiral septum so that the pulmonary and body circuit do not usually mix (except in special circumstances). \nCrocodiles are related to birds, and just like them, they have a four chambered heart, with two auricles and two ventricles. However, in crocs the oxygenated and deoxygenated blood can get mixed because they have a hole between the paired main blood vessels that leave the heart. \nBoth birds and mammals have also four-chambered hearts with completely separate pulmonary and body circuits. \nCheck the link, there are good schematic illustrations and explanations for each taxon.
578326
What happened to the small animals in your area birds, fish, frogs, insects. Compare it to historical numbers of your area I believe you will be surprised.
532758
I'm not a herpatologist, but the most logical reason why some snakes are ovoviviporous (giving live birth to embryos that incubated in eggs in utero) and some are oviporous (laying eggs that are incubated outside the body) is evolution.  Some may need to keep their young in their body because their environment may not allow them to lay nests (i.e. predators, geologic conditions, etc.).  This ensures the young have a better chance of survival upon being born.  Being ovoviviporous is more biologically advanced than just laying eggs in a nest.  \n\nAs someone else said, fish do this.  Some cartilaginous fishes such as some shark species, all rays and also some bony fishes such as guppies and mollies are ovoviviporous.
417522
There Sach's organ has a stack of electroplaques, which acts somewhat as a stack of battery plates. There evolutionary history is not know to me.
518913
This webpage may be of some help:\nhttp://www.habitat.org.pg/species.htm <-- animals with scientific and common names\n\ntry searching "flora and fauna Papua New Guinea"
31928
You are WAY OFF there on your description of the animal phylums.  Their are MANY phylums of invertabrates.  And vertebrates are a SUB-phylum of the phulum Chordata.\n\nAs for your plant question, the short answer is NONE.  The plant kingdom is divided into Divisions (not phylums). The VASCULAR plants are (usually) grouped into 16 divisions (11 extant, 5 extinct).  I wont even try at orders and classes - that information changes too often.
519426
here\n\nhttp://search.singingfish.com/sfw/home.jsp
616408
There have been plenty of studies but nobody seems to have a good answer!\n\nI visited a zoo last Sunday (my kids took me, lol) and there were plenty of sparrows there - nesting as well.\n\nhttp://www.birdsofbritain.co.uk/bird-guide/house-sparrow.htm
556181
These are the classes of Chordata : \n\nPhylum Chordata\n\n    * Subphylum Urochordata - Tunicates\n    * Subphylum Cephalochordata - Lancelets\n    * (unranked) Craniata (animals with skulls)\n          o Subphylum Vertebrata (Vertebrates - animals with backbones)\n                + Class Myxini or Hyperotreti (hagfish)\n                + Class Conodonta (Conodonts)\n                + Class Cephalaspidomorphi (Paleozoic jawless fish)\n                      # Hyperoartia (lampreys and kin)\n                + Class Pteraspidomorphi (other Paleozoic jawless fish)\n                + Infraphylum Gnathostomata (jawed vertebrates)\n                      # Class Placodermi (Paleozoic armoured forms)\n                      # Class Chondrichthyes (cartilaginous fish)\n                      # (unranked) Teleostomi (advanced fishes and their descendents)\n                            * Class Acanthodii (Paleozoic "spiny sharks")\n                            * Class Actinopterygii (ray-finned fish - Osteichthyes in part)\n                      # Class Sarcopterygii (lobe-finned fish - Osteichthyes in part))\n                            * Superclass Tetrapoda (four-legged vertebrates)\n                                  o Class Amphibia (amphibians)\n                                  o Series Amniota (amniotic egg)\n                                        + Class Synapsida (mammal-like reptiles)\n                                              # Class Mammalia (mammals)\n                                        + Class Sauropsida - (reptiles)\n                                              # Subclass Anapsida\n                                                    * Order Testudines (turtles)\n                                                    * Subclass Diapsida (most modern reptiles)\n                                                          o Superorder Lepidosauria (lizards, snakes, tuatara)\n                                                          o Division Archosauria ("ruling reptiles")\n                                                                + Order Crocodilia (crocodiles, alligators, caimans, gharials)\n                                                                + Superorder Dinosauria\n                                                                      # Class Aves (birds)
117132
You want to exchange fish stories?You want to hear about the giant crappies that i caught?I have pictures of only their lips tho because i left them in water on a stringer to go make a drink.But they were HUGE.LOL . What is your biggest catch?
84464
That is not a good question. A cladogram expresses the ancestor-descendant relationships by means of _branches_, not by means of an ascending or ordered system. Thus, a goldfish would not come "before" a horse, nor a lamprey before a platypus. All the animals in your list do not even belong to a single nested group of taxa.\nThe sparrow is more related to the crocodile, the horse with the human and they in turn with the platypus, but all them, as well as lampreys, frogs, goldfish,  have their own evolutionary histories and their phylogenetic relationships are more complex than that.\nTell that to your teacher!
175032
Emu \nerr a few more here: http://www.americazoo.com/goto/index/e.htm
352272
I searched the ultimate source of all the stuff on net and here's what came out-\n\nhttp://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=humans%20and%20shark%20dna&hl=en&lr=&oi=scholart\nhttp://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=humans+and+shark+dna\n\nGood luck
356236
There are over two million species alive on earth right now. Which particular path do you want?\n\nFor humans, we know the progression through some crucial stages, but not the whole thing. For example, we have very good fossils for the transition between certain fish and amphibians, between reptiles and mammals, very good evidence for the last couple of million years. The early development of primates is being actively researched with a lot of interesting results.\n\nHere is the basic progression:\nLife started about 3.8 billion years ago\nEucaryotic life (with true nuclei) started about 2 billion years ago.\nMulti-cellular life started about 570 million years ago.\nThe first vertebrates were around 450 million years ago.\nThe developement of sarcopterygian fish was about 400 million years ago.\nDevelopment of labrynthodont amphibians from the sarcopterygian fish was about 360 million years ago. \nFirst reptiles from amphibians was about 320 million years ago.\nA wide variety of mammal-like reptiles developed in the time period between about 300 million years ago and 250 million years ago, with the cynodonts developing later. \nSmall, rodent-like mammsls developed from the cynodonts about 220 million years ago.\nSome very early primates developed around 60 million years ago from smallish rodent-like mammals.\nHomonoidae (apes) developed around 22 million years ago with Proconsul the type species.\nDryopithecus was around 17 million years ago in Africa and was an ancestor to most african apes.\nAustralopithecus developed about 4 million years ago in Eastern africa with Australopithecus afarensis the most likely human ancestor.\nBetween about 2 and 3 million years ago there were several hominid species in eastern and southern africa. The exact human ancestor is controversial since they are so similar.\nHomo habilus appeared about 2 million years ago and was replaced by Homoe erectus about 1.5 million years ago.\nHomo sapiens (modern humans) appeared about 300 thousand years ago in africa. There were other hominid species around at that time and later. For example Homo neanderthalensis was around until about 25 thousand years ago. Whether Neanderthals contributed to modern humans is another controverisal question.\n\nIt should be pointed out that the exact ancestral species may not be known. But it is typical for a variety of closely related species to develop in the fossil record at the same time. Figuring out which one is the actual ancestor for a given later species is not always possible given the fragmentary fossils available and our current knowledge of how structural changes occur in evolution.\nI hope this helps.
247008
http://www.reptileallsorts.com/spcsheet.htm\nthis site is awesome
185275
http://www.flmnh.ufl.edu/natsci/herpetology/brittoncrocs/csp_amis.htm\n\ntypically 1 year
127435
Star fish have five *arms* (or, sometimes, multiples of five or six arms).  Their legs are called "tube feet" and are found in the grooves under the arms.  They have an even number of them!\n\nMost animals have an even number of legs because they are symmetrical along a single axis, so both sides end up looking the same.  The only way to have an odd number would be to not be bilaterally symmetrical (and the only animals who aren't don't have legs!) or to have a leg in the middle, which wouldn't be much use.\n\nThe only "exception" to this would be an insect-like animal called the springtail.  It's not really a leg, but they do have their abdomen bent over and underneath them.  They use it to spring very high into the air, so you could call it a leg of a sort.  Sprintails are neat.  They are very common, but most people never notice them because they are mostly quite small.