This article is about the smaller group of anglerfish including shallow water forms. For deep-sea anglerfish with a luminescent lure, seedeep-sea anglerfish.
Theanglerfish areray-finned fish in the orderLophiiformes (/ˌlɒfiɪˈfɔːrmiːz/).[2] Both the order'scommon andscientific name comes from the characteristic mode ofpredation, in which a modified dorsalfin ray acts as alure for prey (akin to a humanangler, and likened to a crest or "lophos"). The modified fin ray, with the very tip being theesca and the length of the structure theillicium, is adapted to attract specific prey items across the families of anglerfish by using different luring methods.
Anglerfish are notable for theirsexual dimorphism, which is sometimes extremely pronounced; the females may be severalorders of magnitude larger inmass than males. This dimorphism has enabled a unique reproductive method in the deep-sea anglerfish;sexual parasitism is the attachment of male to the much larger female, sometimes fusing together as an example ofnatural parabiosis.
Anglerfish were first grouped in the family ofAcanthopterygians with "pediculate pectoral [fin]s" (pectorales pédiculėes) byCuvier in the 1829 edition ofLe Règne Animal;[3] being characterized by possessing "a sort of arm supporting their pectorals, formed by an elongated carpal bone". Cuvier placed the generaLophius (incl.Lophius piscatorius),Chironectes/Antennarius (incl. various subspecies ofLophius histrio),Malthe (incl.Lophius vespertilio), andBatrachus within this family.[3] Translations of this work into English and Latin renderred the family name as "Pectorales Pediculati";[4][5] which was eventually truncated intoPediculati orPediculata (pediculate fish),[b] these names being used to classify anglerfish through 1926.[c] Though this term saw use in publications as late as the1970s,[11] Pediculati has fallen out of use.[19]
Alternatively, Lophiiformes may be treated asclade withinAcanthuriformes; a 2025 paper defines Lophioidei as equivalent to the prior conception of Lophiiformes (the one depicted above) and converts the suborders into infraorders (as seen below).[23] Below are twophylogenetic trees; the left phylogeny elaborates on the relationships of the suborders within Lophiiformes as set out in Pietsch and Grobecker's 1987Frogfishes of the World: Systematics, Zoogeography, and Behavioral Ecology,[24] while the right phylogeny is based on the 2025 study, where Maileet al combines the analysis ofUltra-Conserved Elements (UCE)s,mitochondrial DNA, andmorphological evidence;[23]
Phylogenetic studies have consistently recovered theLophiiformes as sister-group to theTetraodontiformes,[23] with both within the larger clade Acanthuriformes as of 2025.[25] The Lophiiformes and Tetraodontiformes are united by severalderived morphological features separating them from other Acanthuriformes, including restrictedgill openings, along with the absence of multiple skeletal elements, such as spines supporting the anal fin,ribs,nasals, andbasisphenoid.[23]
The earliest fossils of anglerfish are from theEocene, excavated from theMonte Bolcaformation ofItaly, and these already show evidence of diversification into the modern families that make up the order.[26] Given this, and their close relationship to the Tetraodontiformes which are known fromCretaceous fossils, they likely originated during the Cretaceous.[27][28]
A 2010mitochondrial genome phylogenetic study suggested the anglerfishesdiversified in a short period during the early to mid-Cretaceous, between 130 and 100 million years ago.[24] A 2023preprint reduces this time to theLate Cretaceous, between 92 and 61 million years ago.[28] Other studies indicate that anglerfish only originated shortly after theCretaceous-Paleogene extinction event as part of a massive adaptive radiation ofpercomorphs, although this clashes with the extensive diversity already known from the group by the Eocene.[28][29] A 2024 study found that all anglerfish suborders most likely diverged from one another during theLate Cretaceous andPaleocene, but the multiple families of deep-sea anglerfishes (Ceratioidei), as well as their trademarksexual parasitism, originated during the Eocene in a rapid radiation following thePaleocene-Eocene thermal maximum.[30] Adaptations to different ranges ofdepths may have driven the evolution of anglerfish species and families in prehistory.[23]
The sargassumfish (Histrio histrio, up to 20 cm (7.9 in)TL) is a frogfish well-adapted to live amongsargassum
Anglerfish aredefined by gills that open behind the pectoral fins (as opposed to other fish whose pectorals lay behind the gill opening), depressible teeth that can hinge back, joints of the epiotic bone, the form of the pectoral fin radials, and the luring apparatus (see subsection).[35][23]
Anglerfish lengths can vary from 2–18 cm (1–7 in), with a few larger species than 100 cm (39 in).[36] The largest members are the European monkfishLophius piscatorius (200 cm (6.6 ft)SL, 57.7 kilograms (127 lb)), the deep-sea warty anglerfishCeratias holboelli (120 cm (3.9 ft)TL), the giant frogfishAntennarius commerson (45 cm (1.48 ft) TL), and the giant triangular batfishMalthopsis gigas (13.6 cm (0.45 ft)).[37][38][39][40]
Many suborders aresexually dimorphic, with the deep-sea anglerfish being the most extreme example; maleC. holboelli can reach up to 16 centimetres (6.3 in) long (SL), while females are commonly around 77 centimetres (2.53 ft) TL,[38] potentially weighing anorder of magnitude more than her mate.[41][42] MalePhotocorynus spiniceps were measured to be 6.2–7.3 mm (0.24–0.29 in) at maturity, and were at one time claimed to be thesmallest vertebrate known. However, due to not being free-living (being parasitic males) and the females being 50.5 mm (1.99 in), they are now often excluded from the records.[43][44][45][46] Sexual dimorphism is not as pronounced in other suborders; the Lophiid monkfish genusLophiodes are quite similar in size between the genders (Mean for Males 113–133 millimetres (4.4–5.2 in) SL; Females 131–171 millimetres (5.2–6.7 in) SL),[47] and the same is true forLophius itself (Males 68.50–129.50 centimetres (2.247–4.249 ft); Females 93.50–166.60 centimetres (3.068–5.466 ft)).[48]
Anglerfish are generallyambush predators, with shallow-water species such as frogfish oftencamouflaging as rocks,sponges orseaweed.[49] To blend in with the featureless dark depths they inhabit, deep-sea anglerfish are dark colored, with tints ranging from grey to brown.[36][better source needed]
In most species, a wide mouth extends all around the anterior (front) circumference of the head, and bands of inwardly inclined teeth line both jaws. The teeth can be depressed (swept back) so as to offer no impediment to prey gliding towards the stomach, but to still prevent its escape.[50][better source needed] Anglerfish are able to distend both their jaw and stomach to enormous size, since their bones are thin and flexible, which allows them to swallow prey up to twice as large as their entire bodies.[36][better source needed]
Striated frogfish (Antennarius striatus), displaying the worm-like esca at the top left
All anglerfish arecarnivorous and are thus adapted for the capture of prey.[36] A character shared by all anglerfish suborders is the presence of a"lure" or "bait", unambiguously referred to as theesca. The esca is the tip of afin ray, modified from theanterior (foremost)dorsal fin; this fin-ray is often referred to as the "fishing rod" or "fishing line", and is scientifically termed theillicium. The entire illicial apparatus consists of the illicialpterygiophore (the "base" of the structure), followed by a second short dorsal spine, and tipped with the bone of the illicium which ends with the esca proper; this appendage may slot into a groove that accommodates part or all of the illicial apparatus.[51]: 33–40 Both the esca and illicium are usedin tandem to lure prey.[d] The illicium's length is highly variable across species, from not being visible at all in some species, to around 4.9 times SL (over 4 times the length of the rest of the body) inGigantactis macronema (body length 354 mm (13.9 in)).[51]: 469 [56]
The illicial apparatus is most notable in the deep-sea anglerfish (Ceratioidei) as their esca containbioluminescent bacteria, making them glow in the dark waters of the deeper pelagic zones.[57][58][59][55] In other species the esca possesses different luring mechanisms, such as emittingodoriferous chemicals that attract olfactory-driven prey (batfish, Ogcocephaloidei; possibly sea toads, Chaunacioidei), or by resembling prey attractive to small fish such asshrimp orworms (frogfish, Antennarioidei). When the prey is close enough, the anglerfish catches it usingsuction feeding, elongated sharp teeth, or both.[35][60][51]: 263 While sometimes reported to possess a bioluminescent esca, sea toads lack bioluminescent bacteria and do not actually possess this feature.[60][61]
In at least thetriplewart seadevil, the illicium is moved back and forth by five distinct pairs of muscles: namely the shorter erector and depressor muscles that dictate movement of the illicial bone, along with inclinator, protractor, and retractor muscles that aid motion of thepterygiophore.[62]
This sectionneeds expansion with: Merging may be preferrable, but let's see if anyone can save it. You can help byadding missing information.(May 2025)
Skeleton of the anglerfishLophius piscatorius: The first spine of the dorsal fin of the anglerfish acts like a fishing rod with a lure.
The name "anglerfish" derives from the species' characteristic method of predation. Anglerfish typically have at least one long filament sprouting from the middle of their heads, termed the illicium. The illicium is the detached and modified first three spines of the anterior dorsal fin. In most anglerfish species, the longest filament is the first. This first spine protrudes above the fish's eyes and terminates in an irregular growth of flesh (the esca), and can move in all directions. Anglerfish can wiggle the esca to make itresemble a prey animal, which lures the anglerfish's prey close enough for the anglerfish to devour them whole.[63] Some deep-sea anglerfish of thebathypelagic zone also emit light from theiresca to attract prey.[64]
Because anglerfish are opportunistic foragers, they show a range of preferred prey with fish at the extremes of the size spectrum, whilst showing increased selectivity for certain prey. One study examining the stomach contents of threadfin anglerfish (Lophiodes spilurus) off the Pacific coast of Central America found these fish primarily ate two categories ofbenthic prey:crustaceans andteleost fish. The most frequent prey werepandalid shrimp. 52% of the stomachs examined were empty, supporting the observations that anglerfish are low energy consumers.[65][66]
All anglerfish are weak swimmers, including the pelagic deep-sea anglerfish. Demersal species often "walk" on the bottom upon their pectoral and pelvic fins. The pelvic fins were lost in the deep-sea anglers.[23][55]
The deep-sea anglers often drift without actively swimming;In situ observation of femaleOneirodes andwhipnose anglerfish (fromROVs) recorded that they often passively float in place or in acurrent, but they were sometimes observed to attempt to flee from the ROV, beating its pectoral fins in-phase while undulating its tail fin. The lethargic behavior of these ambush predators is suited to the energy-poor environment of the deep sea.[67][68]
The jaw and stomach of the anglerfish can extend to allow it to consume prey up to twice its size. Because of the limited amount of food available in the anglerfish's environment, this adaptation allows the anglerfish to store food when there is an abundance.[citation needed]
The sea toadChaunax endeavouri has been observed to retain water in its gills for at least around 26 seconds and up to 4 minutes in some cases. This behavior is thought to be an energy-saving measure asrespiration requires energy, thus the fish "holding its breath" may conserve enough energy for such a behavior to be beneficial.[69]
Thedeep-sea anglerfish employ an unusual mating method: because individuals are locally rare, encounters between two of the same species are also very rare, and finding a mate can be problematic; this has led to the development ofsexual parasitism in anglerfish, where the males latch onto their mates using their mouths, which may not be suitable or effective for prey capture.[71][42] When scientists first started capturing ceratioid anglerfish, they noticed that all of the specimens were female, and on some of these they had what appeared to beparasites attached to them, which turned out to be highly dimorphic male ceratioids. This is one of the few instances ofnaturally occurring parabiosis.[41] In some species of anglerfish, fusion between male and female when reproducing is possible due to the lack of immune system keys that allow antibodies to mature and create receptors for T-cells.[72]
The spawn of all anglerfish are enveloped by agelatinous sheath, which has multiple terms referring to it.[23] The spawn of theLophius anglerfish consists of a thin sheet of transparent gelatinous material 25 cm (10 in) wide and may be longer than 10 m (33 ft); this "egg mass" may contain over a million eggs.[73][48] The eggs in this sheet are in a single layer, each in its own cavity. Thelarvae are pelagic and have the pelvic fins elongated into filaments. It is thought that these egg masses effectively disperse their young over great distances and a large area.[48][50] A 77 millimetres (3.0 in) femaleLinophryne arborifera, with a 15 millimetres (0.59 in) parasitic male, was observed to have numerous eggs embedded in a gelatinous mass (the "egg raft" or "veil") protruding from the genital opening; the eggs, 0.6–0.8mm in diameter, are among the largest known for any ceratioid.[74][41]
In theHistory of Animals,Aristotle described the "Fishing-Frog" (one of the localLophius species, likeL. piscatorius orL. budegassa) as an example of a marine species well adapted to their environment, those equipped with "ingenious devices" that it uses to capture prey, alongside theTorpedo. He noted that fishing-frogs that have lost their lure appeared to be thinner than those still intact.[75][76][23]
Lophiidae, marketed as monkfish or goosefish, are of commercial interest with fisheries found in western Europe, eastern North America, Africa, and East Asia. In Europe and North America, the tail meat of fish of the genusLophius, known as monkfish or goosefish (North America), is widely used in cooking, and is often compared tolobster tail in taste and texture.
In Africa, the countries of Namibia and the Republic of South Africa record the highest catches.[48] In Asia, especially Japan, monkfish liver, known asankimo, is considered a delicacy.[77] Anglerfish is especially heavily consumed in South Korea, where it is featured as the main ingredient in dishes such asAgujjim.
Northwest EuropeanLophius species are heavily fished and are listed by theICES as "outside safe biological limits".[78] In 2010,Greenpeace International added the American angler (Lophius americanus), the angler (Lophius piscatorius), and the black-bellied angler (Lophius budegassa) to its seafood red list—a list of fish commonly sold worldwide with a high likelihood of being sourced from unsustainable fisheries.[79][51] Additionally, anglerfish are known to occasionally rise to the surface duringEl Niño, leaving large groups of dead anglerfish floating on the surface.[78][relevant?]
Various species of anglerfish are kept in captivity, such as frogfish and batfish,[80][70] though these are all species that inhabit shallow waters; deep-sea anglerfish have not been kept in captivity due to the challenges of keeping them alive through capture, transport, and a display that canrepressurize them.[81][82][83]
Antennarius biocellatus is known by the common names brackish-water frogfish or freshwater frogfish; beingeuryhaline, it can live in freshwater for some time,[84][85] sometimes claimed to be the sole representative of the anglerfish to live in freshwater.[86] Like many frogfish, it has been displayed inpublic aquaria,[87][88] though unlike the other speciesA. biocellatus are sometimes kept in home aquaria by privateaquarists.[89]
^abSedgwick, Adam; Lister, Joseph Jackson; Shipley, Arthur Everett (1898–1909).A student's text-book of zoology. Vol. II. London: Swan Sonnenschein and co. p. 245. Retrieved22 March 2025.
^Cuvier, Georges; Griffith, Edward; Smith, Charles Hamilton (1827–1835).The CLASS PISCES: arranged by the Baron Cuvier, with supplementary additions. The animal kingdom : arranged in conformity with its organization / Alternative: Classified index and synopsis of the animal kingdom Uniform: Règne animal (Translation, with additions, of: Le règne animal.)) (the First ed.). London: for G.B. Whittaker. pp. 245–250. Retrieved22 March 2025.
^Gill, Theodore (1863). "Descriptions of Some New Species of Pediculati, and on the Classification of the Group".Proceedings of the Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia.15:88–92.JSTOR4059748.
^Ghezelayagh, Ava; Harrington, Richard C.; Burress, Edward D.; Campbell, Matthew A.; Buckner, Janet C.; Chakrabarty, Prosanta; Glass, Jessica R.; McCraney, W. Tyler; Unmack, Peter J.; Thacker, Christine E.; Alfaro, Michael E.; Friedman, Sarah T.; Ludt, William B.; Cowman, Peter F.; Friedman, Matt; Price, Samantha A.; Dornburg, Alex; Faircloth, Brant C.; Wainwright, Peter C.; Near, Thomas J. (14 July 2022). "Prolonged morphological expansion of spiny-rayed fishes following the end-Cretaceous".Nature Ecology & Evolution.6 (8). Nature:1211–1220.Bibcode:2022NatEE...6.1211G.doi:10.1038/s41559-022-01801-3.PMID35835827.
^abcMiller, Elizabeth Christina; Faucher, Rose; Hart, Pamela B.; Rincon-Sandoval, Melissa; Santaquiteria, Aintzane; White, William T.; Baldwin, Carole C.; Miya, Masaki; Betancur-R, Ricardo (30 October 2023). "Phylogenomics reveals the deep ocean as an accelerator for evolutionary diversification in anglerfishes".bioRxiv10.1101/2023.10.26.564281.
^abcdePietsch, Theodore W. (2009).Oceanic anglerfishes: extraordinary diversity in the deep sea. Berkeley: University of California Press.ISBN978-0-520-94255-4.OCLC1298208235.
^Smith, William John (2009).The Behavior of Communicating: an ethological approach. Harvard University Press. p. 381.ISBN978-0-674-04379-4.Others rely on the technique adopted by a wolf in sheep's clothing—they mimic a harmless species. ... Other predators even mimic their prey's prey: anglerfish (Lophiiformes) and alligator snapping turtlesMacroclemys temminckii can wriggle fleshy outgrowths of their fins or tongues and attract small predatory fish close to their mouths.
^Luck, Daniel Garcia; Pietsch, Theodore W. (4 June 2008). "Observations of a Deep-sea Ceratioid Anglerfish of the Genus Oneirodes (Lophiiformes: Oneirodidae)".Copeia.2008 (2):446–451.doi:10.1643/CE-07-075.S2CID55297852.
^abChristie, Barrett L.; Montoya, P. Zelda; Torres, Lyssa A.; Foster IV, John W. (2016). "THE NATURAL HISTORY AND HUSBANDRY OF THE WALKING BATFISHES (LOPHIIFORMES: OGCOCEPHALIDAE)".Drum and Croaker. Vol. 47. pp. 7–40. Retrieved15 May 2025.
^Pietsch, Theodore W. (8 March 1972). "A Review of the Monotypic Deep-Sea Anglerfish Family Centrophrynidae: Taxonomy, Distribution and Osteology".Copeia.1972 (1):17–47.doi:10.2307/1442779.JSTOR1442779.
^Prince, E. E. 1891. Notes on the development of the angler-fish (Lophius piscatorius). Ninth Annual Report of the Fishery Board for Scotland (1890), Part III: 343–348.
![[icon]](/mt/?noimg=&dark=on&url=https%3a%2f%2fen.wikipedia.org%2fwiki%2fFile%3aWiki_letter_w_cropped.svg)
_(16059517767).jpg)
.gif)
.jpg)
