Talk:Tilapia

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is part of WikiProject Fishes, an attempt to organise a detailed guide to all Fish taxa and related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the Portal, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. This project is an offshoot of the WikiProject Tree of Life

Contents 1 This article is a mess 2 Tilapia or tilapia? 3 Denny's Restaurants 4 Pilapia? 5 Links - Notice to advertisers 6 pla pla? 7 Disagreement about taste 8 Extreme Tilapia 9 It Blends 10 Time for some reconstruction 11 Merge proposal 12 Removed reference

[edit] This article is a mess

Given how important tilapia are, this article needs substantial work. Specifically, my issues with the article are:

1. It is discussing both the genus Tilapia and the common name "tilapia" as applied to a number of genera of large cichlid. Confusingly, tilapia the common name is used here often with a captital "t", where it looks like the Latin name Tilapia.

2. Latin names are used inconsistently; for example Sarotherodon galilaea is used (correctly) in the text while the (incorrect) name Tilapia galilaea is used in the taxonomy box.

3. Why is Taiwan Tilapia a major heading? I'm also not sure they went into "outer space" -- surely flying in the space shuttle isn't a trip to outer space?

4. Stuff about recipies and aquarium husbandry are nice, but surely the big issues with tilapia (with a small "t") are (a) it's economic importance and (b) its damage as an invasive species when released into non-native waters.

Comments?

User:Neale Monks

Agreed, though I'm not an expert on the subject, its a mess to read. Also could someone put the proper pronunciation at the top? Uniuniunium 02:15, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

Well, I've done a bit of a rewrite over the weekend. Tried to keep the best of what was there before, added some references, and generally clarified the language. Neale Monks 10:29, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

Regarding going to space. It is true that Taiwan Tilapia "went" to space. By your definition, taking a trip in a space shuttle doesn't mean going to space, but humans have only taken trips to space in space shuttles too, does that humans have not gone into space? Surely it is impossible for any life form to go into space without an artificial environment and means. But anyway, the important theme here is that Tilapia is being considered a potential food source for space travel in the future because they are easy to keep and can feed on human waste material. I think Tilapia's role in space travel, should therefore be at least mentioned--and especially the hybrids found in Taiwan, since they contain the traits that NASA is looking for.

Outer Space, which is what I objected to, is beyond the limits of Earth's (or any other planet's) atmosphere. The space shuttle flies well within the Earth's atmosphere, in low earth orbit. So while the tilapias may have gone into space, they didn't go into outer space. If the tilapia went to the Moon, that would be a trip to outer space. A semantic difference perhaps, but an important one.

I'd be happy to see something in the article about tilapias and their role in "astronaut cuisine". Sounds fascinating. It shouldn't be dumped in the bit about Taiwan tilapia though; it deserves a section all its own. Why are those Taiwan tilapia so special though? Neale Monks 14:49, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

• I've just done a fairly substantial rewrite. I dumped the recipe and some of the material re: the Taiwan tilapia. I think we should avoid using "tilapia" as opposed to Tilapia - it's certainly a very confusing common name. I've gone with a more scientific style eg: Some Tilapia species... as opposed to "tilapia are...". Hope this suits everyone. MidgleyDJ 05:24, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

I agree with most of your edits, but I am worried that now the article makes the false assumption that all discussion of tilapia (lower case) in aquaculture or conservation biology is about Tilapia spp. It isn't. In fact, Sarotherodon and Oreochromis are at least equally important. So, we need to tease out the parts of the article refering to tilapiines (i.e., tilapias in the coloquial sense) as opposed to those dealing with the genus itself.

Thus, discussions of reproductive biology might well concentrate on Tilapia spp., whereas discussions of aquaculture are actually about Tilapia + Sarotherodon + Oreochromis spp.

Basically, this article is about tilapiine cichlids, not Tilapia the genus. So we need to go back and revert those changes where tilapia -> Tilapia is actually not correct. Cheers, Neale Monks 17:25, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

• Hi Neale - Would it be better therefore to use "tilapiine cichlids"? Declare at the very beginning of the article the confusion ie: that tilpia = food species of Tilapia, Sarotherodon and Oreochromis? Pheraps use "tilapiine cichlids" where we are talking about the three genera more broadly? Or better still identify those species involved. I think the tilapia vs Tilapia convention is a very confusing one for readers. Are tilapia just those species involved in the food trade? Given the ambiguity of the common name I guess what I would prefer would be an article called "tilapiines" or "tilapiine cichlids" and separate (shorter) genera pages for Tilapia, Oreochromis and Sarotherodon.

Tilapia has 40 odd species, Sarotherodon has ~20 and Oreochromis has 50 - Do we know how many species are involved in the food/invasive group? Maybe 5? MidgleyDJ 20:33, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Neale - I've sought some advice from the Project Fish people: Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Fishes#Tilapia_advice MidgleyDJ 21:50, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Be sure and let us know what the Fish Project people think!

Among the tilapiines generally, species from all three genera are important from an economic perspective: Oreochromis niloticus, Oreochromis mossambicus, and Tilapia rendalli are important in aquaculture, while Sarotherodon galilaeus is important in Near Eastern fresh- and brackish water fisheries. As far as invasive species go, for example in Florida, USA, O. mossambicus, Tilapia mariae, and Tilapia zilli are known to be established [1].

It seems to me that a prime goal of the article must be to clarify the point that the colloquial use of "tilapia" is not synonymous with its meaning among fish scientists (at least not as a taxonomic unit). On the other hand, it would be daft to separate discussion of the three general into their own articles because fundamentally, tilapias (i.e., tilapiines) generally include various species (in different genera) that have importance in fisheries, aquaculture, behavioural science, and conservation.

So yes, perhaps the introduction can be worded to explain the meaning of tilapia (colloquial name) and Tilapia (genus name), define what tilapiines are, and then explain the few differences between the three general. Perhaps referring to tilapiines or tilapiine cichlids instead of tilapias make sense, and then we can simply make the point that while tilapiine is a new word to some, it is more precise, and avoids nomenclature problems.

Cheers, Neale Neale Monks 19:33, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

Hi Neale - That sounds good to me, I'll give it a go asap. MidgleyDJ 22:18, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

Neale - did you see Stan's suggestion at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Fishes#Tilapia_advice thoughts? MidgleyDJ 21:40, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

No, but I've read it now. Seems reasonable, but there should be some discussion of the systematics here. We need a balance between discussing them in a general sense, and making it clear that were discussing not ONE fish but A GROUP of fish. Cheers, Neale Neale Monks 22:17, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

PS. I'd already created a Tilapia (Genus) entry as well. It's empty now, but at least it's there. Neale Monks 22:18, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Calling it a "mess" is an understatement. What an embarrassment. Moncrief 16:43, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

It's noteworthy that the Tilapia (genus) page now exists if it helps with the cleaning. MidgleyDJ 21:17, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Tilapia or tilapia?

(The following was deleted from the article, but I think it's worth putting here at least, since there's a lot of confusion about how and when to use tilapia or Tilapia.)

In the English vernacular, tilapia is used to describe any large, edible fish from the genera Oreochromis, Sarotherodon, and Tilapia. When used this way, the name should be written in lower case and without italicisation. When used to refer specifically to the genus Tilapia as opposed to Oreochromis or Sarotherodon, then the word should begin with a capital letter and be written in italics (see article on Binary nomenclature).

Tilapia can be used both as a singular and a plural (compare: sheep). It is therefore correct to say "Tilapia grow quickly" when referring to tilapia generally, or "I bought a tilapia for dinner", when referring to only a single fish. The pluralised form "tilapias" is also widely used

Neale Monks 11:08, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Denny's Restaurants

Who cares what they say? It's a US chain (of no importance to anyone outside the US) and even within the US isn't exactly a trendsetter or leader of the culinary arts. Besides, the only reason they're using tilapia is its cheap.

I would say that the presence of tilapia on the Denny's menu is a fairly good indicator of its rapid US assimilation, and for exactly the reasons you mention. If a low-brow, all-American chain restaurant with an unadventurous bill of fare would put it on the menu, that seems noteworthy to me.

[edit] Pilapia?

Recently I was at a Mexican restaurant and saw "pilapia" on the menu. I thought "huh, that's funny... they must mean tilapia." But now I see that the Web is full of instances of the word pilapia, and it seems that it is a fish. So, what is the relation? Are they the same fish? How are the words related (if at all - could it be coincidence?)? 24.159.255.29 03:51, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Seems to be a typo; should be "tilapia". Neale Monks 13:41, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

That's what I thought, but why is it so common? 24.159.255.29 04:21, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Is it that common? I did a Google and found 171 counts, as opposed to over 3.5 million for tilapia. Neale Monks 10:36, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

It certainly is a tiny fraction of the total hits for "tilapia," but it seems like there are more than I would expect from just chance typoes. Ok, I just checked a few other strings -- ailapia, bilapia, cilapia, dilapia, eilapia, filapia, gilapia, hilapia -- and found a few hits for each one, and at least a few of those seemed to be in reference to the fish. So perhaps there is some weird sort of misspelling phenomenon going on that I'm not aware of (I had been assuming that misspellings or typoes generally involve substitutions of letters that are either close to the correct letter on the keyboard or represent a sound close to the correct sound).

24.159.255.29 03:59, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Links - Notice to advertisers

Don't advertise here.

WikiPedia isn't a place to advertise your products or services. Such links will be quickly removed. This is an article for people who want to know about tilapia, not where to buy one.

Thanks! Neale Neale Monks 13:40, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] pla pla?

Wasnt sure what to do with this:

In the Philippines and other asian countries, big species of tilapia are called PLA-PLA ( .5 kgs. up )

It doesnt belong in the systematics section. Perhaps simply listing "pla-pla" as an alternate common name is all that should be done. Do we know how widespread the use of this name is? MidgleyDJ 01:18, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

IMHO, various morphs of common names shouldn't even be in the article if they're too specific. As this fish is an invasive species in the Philippines and is called 'tilapia' there, that's about it. Pla-pla refers to many compressiform fish in filipino, including dorys, carangids and the like. Shrumster 11:05, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Disagreement about taste

The top of the article says this fish has "good flavour" yet lower down it is referred to as "bland". They can't both be true, can they? Steve (non-Tilapia eater so I can't answer this one myself) 69.158.186.98 14:44, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

I've edited out the taste aspect to the article. It's a subjective quantity. I've eaten tilapia from time to time. Compared with the better sea fish, like cod or seabass, they're pretty mild tasting, even bland. But if compared with catfish or carp, they're a bit less muddy and have a firmer texture. Subjectively, I'd say tilapia is about the same as plaice or flounder. A lot depends on how tilapia is cooked, and many of the recipes used in Asia particularly lean on things like deep frying in flavoured oil, or steaming with garlic and herbs, and so on. Cheers, Neale Neale Monks 16:12, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Extreme Tilapia

Lake Natron, the world's most caustic body of water, has a population of Alkaline Tilapia. I wonder how these fishes have adapted so that they resist the corrosive effects of this water. Anyway, this is pretty impressive. See the Nasa article on lake Natron. -- Hugo Dufort 11:03, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Tilapia might be the only fish to be able to survive in the Salton Sea if its salinity goes up to 0.44% (it is currently at 0.40% or 40 parts per thousand).Hugo Dufort 02:04, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] It Blends

It should be noted, I think, that it blends. Sycophant 04:15, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Amusing, in a sophomoric sort of way, but hardly noteworthy. Cheers, Neale Neale Monks 09:58, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Time for some reconstruction

I think this artice has reached the point where it needs to be split up completely. Simply hiving pieces off to the genus entries (such as Tilapia (genus)) doesn't work for me, because there'd be duplication between that, Sarotherodon and Oreochromis. What I suggest is something along the following:

• Tilapia -- basically a brief summary, explain the confusion between the colloquial usage for farmed/edible tilapiines, scientifically as a shorthand name for tilapiines in the strict/historical senses, and as the genus name Tilapia. There's also be the etymology section. It would then direct to each of the following:
• Tilapiine -- taxonomic unit as coined by Ethylwynn Trewavas and used by fish biologists. Limit this to discussion of morphology, phylogeny, behavioural ecology, etc.
• Tilapia in aquaculture -- summary of native use in Africa/Middle East and modern use in Asia/Americas.
• Tilapia as exotic species -- summary of tilapia introductions around the world and benefits/problems resulting.
• Tilapia in world cuisine -- if we have to have recipes and comments about appearances in American fast food restaurants, put them here.
• Tilapia (genus) -- unchanged from what this entry is already.
• Sarotherodon -- as Tilapia (genus) , a standard genus discription.
• Sarotherodon -- as Tilapia (genus) , a standard genus discription.

Cheers, Neale —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Neale Monks (talk • contribs) 22:41, 27 January 2007 (UTC).

Sounds good to me Neale. I'd recommend we combine "Tilapia in world cuisine" into Tilapia in aquaculture - I dont think it needs its own section."In the aquarium" sections could be added to the genus pages as for other cichlid species. Thoughts? Molecular evidence seems to suggest that tribe Tilapiini is polyphyletic - I guess the article could express that view (we have a few references for it after all). MidgleyDJ 10:39, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

I agree re: tilapiines. Hence my comment about its usage per Trewavas. It is pretty common to talk about tilapiines in fish biology, aquaculture, etc. even if the grouping itself is not a clade. The parallel would be "reptile" -- not a clade biologically, but instantly explicable and very meaningful outside of discussions of systematics. Also agree re: cuisine, and frankly don't think we need to list recipes on Wikipedia! Cheers, Neale Neale Monks 12:32, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

I think splitting up is a great idea. Like Neale said, Tilapia should be a short description with links to all the related articles, maybe something similar to Angelfish. I'll help with creating Sarotherodon and Oreochromis as genus articles. For the cuisine stuff, I think that can probably be included in the aquaculture article, at least for now. Cheers, --Melanochromis 17:13, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Done with Sarotherodon and Oreochromis. These two are now their own genus articles and no longer redirect to Tilapia. --Melanochromis 18:23, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

DONE! There may be bits missing. Please feel free to check/edit as required. I removed the linkspam about the Salton Sea DVD. Cheers, Neale Neale Monks 21:58, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Merge proposal

User Swbp has decided he/she wants to re-merge all those tilapia articles into one big tilapia article. In my opinion, this is a bad idea. Please be sure and visit his/her talk pages and read why I think that's a bad idea, here. Cheers, Neale Neale Monks 10:04, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

I'm not supporting the merge either. My reason is that both Tilapia as exotic species and Tilapia in aquaculture have the potential to be much longer articles. This fish is one of the most significant invasive fishes around the world. It has created both positive and negative effects in different countries/regions, each of which can easily have its own section in the Tilapia as exotic species article. The aquaculture article can be expanded a lot too, after all this is the fish that suppose to end the world hunger (or something like that). Anyway, as a compromise, I propose that instead of merging Tilapia as exotic species and Tilapia in aquaculture into Tilapia (or Tilapiine cichlid ), why don't we just include in the Tilapia article a short paragragh for each "Tilapia as exotic species" and "Tilapia in aquaculture", and leave the links to the Tilapia as exotic species and Tilapia in aquaculture main articles. --Melanochromis 21:58, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Sounds good. Shrumster 04:32, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Is anyone then opposed my removal of the "mergeto" links? MidgleyDJ 04:39, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Not me. Shrumster 09:48, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Done! MidgleyDJ 08:10, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Removed reference

I have removed this from the article as a cleanup, but the link seems kind of interesting so I'm posting it here just in case people want to read and/or put it back in the article somehow. Note that the report said Tilapia is the 6th largest "seafood species" by consumption in the US.

• Fastest Growing Seafood! [2]

--Melanochromis 14:20, 9 March 2007 (UTC)