The reptiles were from the outset of classification grouped with the amphibians. Linnaeus, working from specie's Sweden, where thecommon adder and grass snake are often found hunting in water, included all reptiles and amphibians in class "III -- Amphibious" in his System's Nature.[1] The terms "reptile" and "amphibian" were largely interchangeable, "reptile" (from Latin rep ere, "to creep") being preferred by the French.[2] Josephus Nickolaus Laurenti was the first to formally use the term "Reptilia" for an expanded selection of reptiles and amphibians basically similar to that of Linnaeus.[3] It is today stil common to treat the two groups under the same heading as herptiles.
Reptiles
JESUS
vertebrates, reptiles etc.
They are all reptiles.
It's a phylum.
No. Birds, fish and reptiles are each a classification of "vertebrates" of their own. They all have quite different characteristics.
Chameleons are like reptiles,because some can camouflage and eat insects.
All turtles are considered reptiles.
No, cobras and other snakes are reptiles, reptiles have backbones and internal skeletons along with central nervous systems which puts them in the classification of vertebrates.
Tylosaurus was not a dinosaur. It was a type of mosasaur, which were large, carnivorous marine reptiles.
They're egg-laying vertebrates with close common ancestors. In cladistic classification systems birds are actually considered a subset of reptiles, as this method of animal classification goes by closest common ancestor.
There is no such classification. However, monotremes are a sub-classification of mammals, and include the platypus and the echidna. They are egg-laying mammals.