Do Fish Have To Drink?

[ShoC]

might be a silly question but as a child (even now) I find myself wondering do fish drink!!
I asked friends and they all say yes
As all creatures on this planet that live on land need water to survive!
do animals submerged 100% of the time need to drink water?
what do you lot think?

regards
Carl

 

[idlefingers]

Yes.. as you said, all animals need water to survive. Here's a quote from Great Lakes in the marine forum (Saltwater Fish Stocking) which explains it better than I could ever attempt to..

A freswater fish will ingest small amounts of water with its food and various activities. Its body will also absorb water to aid in its hydration. Excess water is then expelled with the urine. The impact this physiological behavior has on stocking levels is twofold. The minimal ingestion and absorbsion of water limits the health hazards of toxins in the water, and the water in the urine helps dilute it making a minimal impact on its surroundings.

A marine fish, for the most part, is the direct opposite. It ingests large amounts of water continuously. And instead of absorbing water to aid in hydration, the marine fish expells water from the inside out. And since it flushes its cells with water, very little of it is used in the digestive tract, making a marine fishs urine very concentrated. The twofold impact here? The marine ingests so much water during its day that the risk of toxins getting into its system are far greater, and their urine can have a greater effect on its immediate surroundings and the overall parameters in the tank.

 

[ShoC]

there goes the big discussion
nice find btw

 

[raptorrex]

Drink, no. well with freshwater fish anyway. but as stated all living things, we know of, need water. drinking is not however a freshwater fish activity. even though sea fish take on water, they are still not drinking. it would need to be a voluntary act to be considered drinking. as it is an involuntary act, and has no part in hydration, it should not be called drinking.

 

[CAC]

A freswater fish will ingest small amounts of water with its food and various activities. Its body will also absorb water to aid in its hydration. Excess water is then expelled with the urine. The impact this physiological behavior has on stocking levels is twofold. The minimal ingestion and absorbsion of water limits the health hazards of toxins in the water, and the water in the urine helps dilute it making a minimal impact on its surroundings.

A marine fish, for the most part, is the direct opposite. It ingests large amounts of water continuously. And instead of absorbing water to aid in hydration, the marine fish expells water from the inside out. And since it flushes its cells with water, very little of it is used in the digestive tract, making a marine fishs urine very concentrated. The twofold impact here? The marine ingests so much water during its day that the risk of toxins getting into its system are far greater, and their urine can have a greater effect on its immediate surroundings and the overall parameters in the tank.

And I assume thats why stocking levels in FW can be greater than in SW in the same volume of water...Interesting information

 

[The-Wolf]

it would need to be a voluntary act to be considered drinking.

I dispute that.
it is a basic survival need to drink therefore it would not be a voluntary act
it would be an instinct.
Humans have an awareness and can decide not to drink, animals don't have that choice.

 

[juwelfan]

My fish drink Whiskey, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . but only on fridays.

 

[three-fingers]

it would need to be a voluntary act to be considered drinking.

I dispute that.
it is a basic survival need to drink therefore it would not be a voluntary act
it would be an instinct.
Humans have an awareness and can decide not to drink, animals don't have that choice.

How can you possibly know that an animal doesn't have the choice whether to drink or not?

If you are going to make a such a sweeping statement like that, I believe (I think I'm getting it the right way round this time ) that you need to provide some evidence.

 

[The-Wolf]

when have you ever known an animal to make an informed decision not to drink or to eat or to even take its own life,
never that is when. Animals do not have the congnative ability to make those kind of decisions, period!.

 

[three-fingers]

when have you ever known an animal to make an informed decision not to drink or to eat or to even take its own life,
never that is when. Animals do not have the congnative ability to make those kind of decisions, period!.

That's not evidence though. I'm beginning to think your original statement was based more on your personal beliefs on animals rather than science.

You shouldent really make statements such as "animals do not have the congnative ability to make those kind of decisions" on this forum without providing any evidence.

Especially since this humans are classified under the kingdom Animalia.

Personally, I don't believe there is any definitive way to prove that animals do or don't have the ability to decide not to drink any more than you can prove the person next to you does.

 

[idlefingers]

Perhaps I'm missing something but does it matter what the semantics of the word "Drink" are? I don't see how it really relates to original question which perhaps could've been worded more descriptively.. "Consume" or "ingest" probably being more fitting?

 

[madgap]

when have you ever known an animal to make an informed decision not to drink or to eat or to even take its own life,
never that is when. Animals do not have the congnative ability to make those kind of decisions, period!.

Animals don't decide?

My dogs decide which cushion to sit on. Which bush to sniff and urinate up. My guinea pigs choose to eat leaves instead of dry food, as both are offered.
One of my lizard decides he would rather eat crickets than wax worms.
Now... how about this. I have two upsidedown cat fish. One has chosen a place it likes to reside in. And the other is not welcome there.
They don't build or try to better their lives or make profit. They dont live like us. I think, personally that humans are the higher animal (some, anyway). But does that mean that that which is beneath us doesn't think or decide?

 

[three-fingers]

Perhaps I'm missing something but does it matter what the semantics of the word "Drink" are? I don't see how it really relates to original question which perhaps could've been worded more descriptively.. "Consume" or "ingest" probably being more fitting?

Agree 100%, I just took issue at "humans have an awareness and can decide not to drink, animals don't have that choice" being posted as fact in the scientific section. Really it doesn't relate at all to the original question.

Dictionary.com describes 'drink' to mean simply:

to take water or other liquid into the mouth and swallow it; imbibe.

So looking back at the answer you posted it would seem that all fish do drink...but it's not the best word to use, as it's meaning isn't very intuitive when applied to fish.

 

[kat11180]

i belive all animals have the congnative ability to choose to drink if i dont put water in my dogs bowl she will tell me when she needs a drink that ther aint nothing for her to drink so in theory she has choose to drink right or wrong???

 

[madgap]

i belive all animals have the congnative ability to choose to drink if i dont put water in my dogs bowl she will tell me when she needs a drink that ther aint nothing for her to drink so in theory she has choose to drink right or wrong???

I'm with you on that. Just cause hey are not human doesn't mean they cant decide and choose. They might view us as thoughtles?