From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Wikipedia Version 1.0 Editorial Team / v0.7 (Rated C-class)
WikiProject icon This article has been reviewed by the Version 1.0 Editorial Team.
C-Class article C  Quality: C-Class
Checklist icon
 ???  Importance: not yet rated

Toxic metals in canned smoked oysters?[edit]

I have found a brand of canned smoked oysters on a store shelf that has a warning on the label that the oysters contain lead and cadmium. Three other brands on the same shelf do not have the warning. Is it that they all contain the metals but only one brand has a warning for whatever reason? There is nothing in the article about this so it would be helpful if someone knowledgeable about it could add some information. Troother (talk) 20:35, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

sustainable sources  ?[edit]

i was rather surprised to come across this section. it isn't informative as much as it is not NPOV. the sustainability of oysters isn't something readers need to concern themselves with. wiki serves its constituents well enough without trying to sway opinion. Spellbook (talk) 11:19, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

shelf-life of smoked oysters[edit]

Oysters can be eaten either raw or cooked, but like all shellfish they have an extremely short shelf-life. They MUST be fresh when consumed or they can cause serious illness.

What about smoked oysters? These come in cans and seem like they'd last for years. I've been to places that carry canned smoked oysters and don't restock too often... -- Merphant—Preceding comment was added at 02:12, 17 November 2002

How can the page on oysters NOT mention the Chesapeake Bay?-- (talk) 20:24, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[edit]

Line removed[edit]

I have removed the following line from the article:

Researchers in Oregon have invented a self-shucking oyster.

I believe that this sentence refers to this report: [1]

These aren't oysters that shell themselves. What they invented (AFAICT from a brief skim of the article) was a process to sterilise the meat without cooking it, and this happened to make the meat come away from the shell.

Almost got this spectacularly wrong in a report from reading the article, so thank goodness I checked on Google. --Suitov 14:35, 7 May 2004 (UTC)


Here's an external image of editable oysters, probably of the Ostrea genus. zh-min-nan:Image:Chhinn-o-a.jpg A-giau 06:24, 17 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Oyster farming[edit]

The following needs to be cross-checked and NPOVed:

Most of Europe's supply of oysters comes from France. Oysters are popular among most countries in Europe with the possible exception of the UK. Between the World Wars, a plague ruined most of the oyster farms in the English Channel, infecting them with TB, and so consuming these oysters would cause illness to humans; so French scientists wanted to find a new type of oyster which was resistant to the TB bug, and came up with a type of oyster from China, which is what most of today's oysters are. However, the Brits seem to be still angry about the French poisoning them back in the between-wars period, so import very little amounts of French oysters Oyster farms are well-protected in the north of France, and the French government enforces strict anti-pollutian laws on the shores of Normandy and Brittany, where oyster farming is most prolific. Examples of towns which have oyster farms are Concarneau and St. Malo

I have added necessary information about Sergius Orata, probably the best farmer of oysters in History. --KesheR 00:19, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

I think some of that may be now recognized as apochryphal. I put a citation request on the paragraph, and I'll see what I can find. Tom Harrison Talk 00:29, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
I'm sorry, I quoted that from Rubicon by Tom Holland (a book about Roman Republic). It's an excellent book, so it must be true. --KesheR 01:18, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

"Oysters have been cultured for well over a century." This is neither precise or informative. I know little about the subject but am certain that flourishing oyster industries (i.e. industrial enterprises of some scale) were operating in the tidal flats of the East Anglian coastline in the early 19th century, mainly for consumption in London. I would suggest that someone with knowledge on the subject edit this sentence. Jimjamjak (talk) 15:02, 13 June 2008 (UTC)


Oyster comes from the Latin word Ostrea (as you know) and the oyster-season is from September till April. These are eight months with an "R".

Some people say that therefore the French word for oyster, "huitre", comes from huit "eight" - re "R", so eight months with an R, the oysterseason.

There's a hidden missing "s" in huîtres that makes that "huit" unlikely. I'm generally skeptical of "Some" as a citation, anyway. --Wetman 07:25, 24 July 2005 (UTC)

'Mercans jus' fryin' up them ersters[edit]

"In the United States today, oysters are usually cooked before consumption" Middle America is still not all America. More interestingly, it's a matter of location and social class; not the kind of information Wikipedia permits, however. The only highty-tighty cooked oyster is in oyster stew, a misnomer as the oysters are never quite simmered. Oysters were a workingman's lunch in the 19th century, eaten standing up from barrows in the street or in saloons. Smart Gold Coast and Newport driveways were paved with oystershells that wheeled traffic crushed to a fine gravel. Pearl Street in New York City was similarly "gravelled". Fresh spread, oystershell has an odor that lingers for a few weeks. In winter, barrels of oysters were shipped as far as Chicago on railroads without spoiling, though I don't see how they did it. --Wetman 07:25, 24 July 2005 (UTC)

Months with R[edit]

The article claims that it is based on when the oysters spawn, then denies it regarding the Gulf of Mexico. What about the 'red tide'? "Some red tides produce large quantities of toxins, which kill fish and are accumulated by filter feeders. This bioaccumulation of toxins causes bivalves – like oysters and clams – collected in areas affected by algal blooms to be potentially dangerous for human consumption." (from the page on red tide).

The article states that the oysters filter their food, but makes no mention of the implications of it being a filter-feeder, with respect to accumulating large quantities of toxins. It seems to me there should at least be a link to the red tide.

To quote the article itself: "In the United Kingdom, the native variety is still held to be the finest, taking five years to mature and protected by an Act of Parliament during the May-August spawning season."
The Pacific or Rock oyster can be eaten all year round, due to the difference in spawning. Gretnagod 15:10, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

et all[edit]

touching on diffrent topics

smoked oysters are farily well preserved fist by the smoking process itself and secondly by the fact that they are stored in oil, that said all i can say is check the experation date.

so on

in the US around 70% of oysters grown are from Lousiana, many of which died in the hurrican season of 2005 after they were covered in silt, as of early 2007 the have mostly recovered. Other major oyster producing areas are in the pacific northwest and surrounding san fran on the west coast, on the east coast the carolinas produce a large amount as does the northeast, the chesepeake used to be a major producer of oysters but they have really been hit hard there as of late due to the enviromental conditions within that body of water. Also oysters from certian areas are thought to be supporor to others, ie such as those from Wellfleet, MA, oysters from there are known as Wellfleet oysters and can reatail for quite a bit especially the further from the town you get, these oysters are shiped eveywhere to, and are avaible in new york, las vegas, and paris. additionally the town holds an annual "oysterfest" in the fall during which tens of thousands of people come just to eat these oysters, ha.

oysters have of late (within the last fifty or so years) risen drastically in price in the US largly putting them out of reach as an everyday workmens meal escept for special occiasions this is due to the fact that these days their is both a larger demand for the due to the fact that they can be shipped whereas before it was much to expensive and impractical to do such a thing and were largly eaten in local markets and not the national market. additonally the wild population of oysters has been dramatically overfished and now days the vast majority are farmed, the wild eastern oyster is in fact in danger of being declaired an endanged species. this has dramatically risen the cost to harvest oysters themselves, and it requires a lot of backbreaking work. actually most shellfishers are cutting down on the ammount of oysters that they grow and are replacing them with hardshell clams which are growing in popularity. They say it takes about 4 times the amount of work to grow oysters as opposed to clams.

finally, yes oysters are affected by red tide and accumalate toxins just as other filter feeders do. additionlly those grow in langudid waters such as those from lousiania are effected by high ammounts of toxic bactaria that they accumalate, to counteract this many shellfishing compines in lousinia, and i'm not kidding here use some kind of pressure devise which both kills this bactaria and shuckes the oyster. this is the reason why many of the oysters avaible in middle america are preshucked, these are used by many resturants too i.e. chinese food, places serving fried oysters basically any oyster that isn't served on the halfshell in the south and middle armeica has been preshucked. additoanlly the growing times for oysters varry sometime taking as little as two years to mature to market size and other times taking over twice as long mostly due to local conditions.

one last thing red tide seldom kills fish but can easlly kill marine mammels such as otters and whales which feed on filter feeders where the toxin accumlates, fish kills are often not caused by red tide, i can not say for certian that red tide dosn't kill fish. red tide itself dosn't accumalte within the mussels of annimals which ingest it it instead accumales within the digestive tracts, for example did you know that you can still eat fish and scallops that have injested red tide, just as long as you don't eat the whole kit and kobital and just eat the mussle (the most commonaly eaten part) and that there is more than one type of red tide which have diffrent effects.

"shellfish" vs. "bivalves"[edit]

I removed a statement claiming that oysters are not "shellfish," but "bivalves." I looked this up in several sources and it seems that this is false; "shellfish" is a culinary classification, "bivalve" a scientific one. The two are not mutually exclusive: oysters are both shellfish and bivalves. Please justify if you change it back.


Do oysters have heads? 03:22, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

What is this, Animal Planet? No, no heads. None of the bivalves has a head. This is part of how they were once classified, as Acephela, literally "those without a head". KDS4444Talk 16:59, 9 August 2014 (UTC)

Months with 'R'[edit]

Wasn't the months-with-Rs warning a legacy/vestige of the pre-refrigeration era? June, July, and August are hot summer months, of course, and consumers of oysters far from a coast took their chances with higher rates of spoilage during shipping--or so it was explained to me way back when. 06:26, 2 May 2007 (UTC)RKH

I always heard that it was because they spawned during those months, and this affects the texture. The warmer temperatures promote spawning. (talk) 01:07, 25 March 2011 (UTC)


How much zinc is in the average oyster?

How many oysters should we eat to be good for us?

Can we eat too many oysters?

How many is bad for us?

How do the levels of Zinc differ in different types of oysters?

-- 18:35, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

as known some people like tro eat oysters and some dont. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talkcontribs) 17:10, 7 October 2007

Scientific name[edit]

how come it doesnt give its scientific name? im doing a project on the mangrove swamps and have to include a food chain and food web and i need to use thier fomal name. if anyone knows what it is please add it on here. thanks, *Albeanie* (the x's dont mean kisses!) xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 00:38, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

I think this very problem needs addressing and is much overdue. The problem is that there are several different animals that we call "oysters", and they are not all closely related the way you might expect. But that needs to be made clearer earlier in the article, with some scientific information to take you where you would want to go. By now you have probably finished high school, so it will be too late for you, but there will always be another. KDS4444Talk 17:02, 9 August 2014 (UTC)


hello can any one tell me if this is true or not?? i have heard that the reasons people eat oysters raw and whole is so the oyster eats the bacteria of our stomach lining....thank you (talk) 21:34, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

This is very interesting. I have never heard of such a thing. But, judging by the way oysters are usually eaten, they do not survive down to our stomach, but this thing you heard could be maybe an enzimatic reaction between enzymes in the (dead) oyster and the bacteria lying in our stomach lining. Either way, this is not "the" reason they are eaten raw, but it might be an advantage of not cooking them.-- (talk) 09:06, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Food and drink Tagging[edit]

This article talk page was automatically added with {{WikiProject Food and drink}} banner as it falls under Category:Food or one of its subcategories. If you find this addition an error, Kindly undo the changes and update the inappropriate categories if needed. The bot was instructed to tagg these articles upon consenus from WikiProject Food and drink. You can find the related request for tagging here . Maximum and careful attention was done to avoid any wrongly tagging any categories , but mistakes may happen... If you have concerns , please inform on the project talk page -- TinucherianBot (talk) 03:01, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Vandalism at head of article[edit]

Someone has written, at the head of the article, "oysters are doing bad." This looks like vandalism to me. i was going to remove it, but I couldn't figure out how to edit that portion of the article.--Digthepast (talk) 03:51, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Heart and blood vessels?[edit]

The bivalve page states that bivalves have an open circulatory system and hemolymph. This page states that oysters have veins and a heart and blood. Could someone clear up this apparent contradiction? Craig Pemberton (talk) 06:43, 23 July 2009 (UTC)


What are ostreoliths? Drutt (talk) 15:02, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

The word means literally "oyster-stone" in Ancient Greek. My guess is that any fossilized member of the Ostrioidea is considered an ostreolith. KDS4444Talk 17:04, 9 August 2014 (UTC)

Oysters compared to plants[edit]

Two common ethical objections to the consumption of animals is that they feel pain (and that causing pain is wrong), and that their cultivation is environmentally harmful. On both of these, oysters are significantly closer to plants than animals.

The above bolded sentence is problematic. Logically it doesn't make sense that an aspect of of an animal species is "closer to plants than animals" when, simply by being an animal, that aspect is also an animal one. Since capacity to feel pain and environmental impact have nothing to do with classification in Animalia or Plantae, it doesn't follow that oysters are significantly closer to plants in these particular aspects. If we want to keep this misleading wording, we'll need to cite a reliable source. Currently there is no source there, so I suggest we change it to something more defensible, like "On both of these, oysters are considered less objectionable than other animals." or "On both of these, oysters have been compared to certain plants."

Regarding pain, oysters lack a central nervous system, and are not believed to experience pain in the same way as humans do, with they and other bivalves being closer to mobile plants than to plant perception.

This sentence is sort of confusing. I think what is meant is oysters have a similar sensory experience to mobile plants and plants that have been shown to have plant perception. This comparison probably stems from a misunderstanding that nervous systems that are not centralized (like ours) are all basically the same in their capacity for senses. However, oysters' nervous systems are merely divided into ganglia, and no plants have been shown to have ganglia (or even actual neurons). So it doesn't make sense to claim they're closer to plants than other animals in this regard, nor does it make sense to extrapolate that their sensory experience must be more similar to plants. This, too, needs a reliable source cited if we wish it to stay. -kotra (talk) 19:32, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

Two facts: A. Oysters are an animal, end of story. They belong to the phylum Molluska which is part of the kingdom Animalia. Whether they are ethical to eat or not, (I like them), can be argued until people are blue in the face, but they are an animal. Lets not confuse kids using this site for science class research or something by stating otherwise. B. Vegans don't eat, (or use, for that matter), animal products. As a meat loving carnivore, I personally think they're crazy, but hey, that's there choice. But just b/c I like eating meat doesn't mean we can "redefine" them out of existence. Saying that a vegan can have an oyster is like claiming you're practicing abstinence, except on weekends! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Norbytherobot (talkcontribs) 20:31, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

Can someone confirm that it's reasonable to say they have no central nervous system? That's not exactly what it says in Bivalvia#Nervous system. Vagary (talk) 20:23, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

I will confirm that it is reasonable to say they have no central nervous system. They do, however, have a diffuse nervous system centered around several sets of nerve ganglia which control the limited movement of their musculature, and we have every reason to believe that this nervous system is sensitive to vibrations, heat, and certainly pain. But then maybe your question is really a request to have that put in the article somewhere (?). KDS4444Talk 17:10, 9 August 2014 (UTC)


The use of bricks at Comalcalco was unique among Maya sites, the city's buildings were made from fired-clay bricks held together with mortar made from oyster shells.

I think this should be added in "Human history" — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alex gnpi (talkcontribs) 00:21, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Great! Be BOLD, find a citation for this claim, and enter the information as you like. KDS4444Talk 17:12, 9 August 2014 (UTC)

Cooking safety[edit]

I have recently had reason to research the old canard about not eating oysters or other shellfish which do not open after they have been steamed or otherwise cooked. While it is certainly the most often repeated advice, there seems little clear science to support it (for example: oyster fisheries tell you that you can store oysters in the refrigerator for several days under specific conditions. At that point following their advice, you would eat raw any oysters with tightly closed shells, or shells that close when tapped. However, an oyster with a shell that is still closed after cooking, is now advised to be discarded. Why, when you would have eaten it raw?) Looking into the matter, I found this article from ABC Science in Australia:

A marine biologist who questioned the "conventional wisdom" regarding mussels did his own research, and found that over 10% of mussels didn't open during cooking, but were thoroughly cooked and safe to eat.

I question the objectivity of the link to "I Love the Blue Sea" which is a seafood wholesaler/reseller in San Francisco. They may know a great deal about oysters, but they also have financial incentive to tell customers to discard unopened shellfish, to promote over-buying and waste. At a minimum I would prefer to see the link changed to a more objective one (for example an extension office or food safety board) but I have to wonder whether there is any actual research on the "other side?" In any case, I presented the alternative perspective and tried to objectively summarize the research presented in the source, which I hope is sufficiently objective as it is a mainstream news media outlet. (talk) 05:58, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

Done. Replaced with link to, a project of University of Georgia Marine Extension Service, California Sea Grant Extension Program, Georgia Sea Grant, and University of Georgia Public Service and Outreach. (talk) 02:34, 14 June 2015 (UTC)

Oysters as an aphrodisiac?[edit]

Why does this article contain no section on oysters as an aphrodisiac? It's well known... War Pooter (talk) 20:57, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

Maybe because no one can find a citation to support the claim. Although it should be relatively easy to find citations to prove that the belief exists, and that would be enough for the information to be included in the article. Feel like finding some sources? Welcome to Wikipedia, the encyclopedia that anyone can edit! (Really!). KDS4444Talk 17:14, 9 August 2014 (UTC)

Taxobox request[edit]

Can someone with better taxonomy skills than me create the taxonomy infobox for oysters? Not sure where the cutoff would be to be all-inclusive.--☾Loriendrew☽ (talk) 03:48, 8 December 2014 (UTC)

Anatomy and Allergy[edit]

I think the anatomy section is weak. I'm trying to find out what exactly the beard is and whether it is edible. For example look at the tentacle page and the picture of the abalone. This clearly has a "beard" comprising tentacles which look edible. Perhaps there is a general bivalve anatomy page which could be linked (if there isn't already. Or if there is I can't see it)

I was once very ill on raw oysters, yet I've never had a problem with stewed or smoked oysters. I'd like to know more about whether oyster allergy is only for the raw shellfish, or were the raw oysters I ate off? Vince Calegon 11:26, 15 January 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vince Calegon (talkcontribs)


There is no section detailing how long oysters have been around or how they evolved. In fact, the word 'evolution'doesn't even appear once in the article! Fig (talk) 19:03, 27 November 2016 (UTC)

"Some kinds of oysters are commonly consumed by humans, cooked or raw, the latter being a delicacy."[edit]

Do I detect snobbery here? I'm sure that those who like cooked oysters consider them a delicacy. They wouldn't cook them or have them cooked otherwise. Delicacy is in the palate of the eater. (Incidentally, I like them either way.) What about Oysters Bienville, Kirkpatrick or Rockefeller or Angels on Horseback? Real plebeian stuff, right? Kostaki mou (talk) 22:24, 13 April 2017 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Oyster. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:17, 21 May 2017 (UTC)