Talk:Deuterostome
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
In the page on Chordata I find
- Kingdom: Animalia
- Subkingdom: Deuterostomia
- Phylum: Chordata
How does that work with the box shown on this page where it's shown as a Superphylum? I don't really know how these things work. Should the boxes link to articles explaining the terms?
KayEss 21:16, 3 Dec 2004 (UTC)
In general, the high level classification of animals is not standard. Subkingdoms and superphyla vary from author to author, so probably shouldn't be used on phylum pages. Josh
Contents |
[edit] Vetulicolia
Vetulicolia was erected by Shu, et.al. in 2001 as a phylum of deuterostomes. Are there any objections to adding it to the list of phylums here? -- Dalbury(Talk) 20:58, 1 December 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Merge proposal
Protostomes and deuterostomes are fundamental divisions of the animals. What would be the advantage of merging the articles into eumetazoa? I would prefer to have an article for each clade, at least at the higher levels for now, and eventually down to lower levels. -- Dalbury(Talk) 01:23, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Deuterostomes and parasites
This site says "[n]one of the deuterostome phyla are truely parasitic". -- Dalbury(Talk) 22:14, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
I was talking about deuterostome species, not phyla. Maybe there arn't any endoparasites, but there are still specialised parasites such as "vampire fish" which sucks blood from other fishes.
- It depends on how you define parasite. For instance, the Wikipedia article Parasite includes the statement, Classically, the distinction between parasites and other symbionts was methodological: parasites were symbionts that could not be kept alive outside the host, unlike bacteria, for example, which could be cultured in a laboratory. Blood sucking fish and vampire bats are specialized feeders. As long as they leave their "hosts" after feeding, I don't consider them parasites. I would also note that some human groups consume blood drawn from living animals, but they are not called parasites.
There are cases of male parasitism on females in the Ceratioidei (anglerfishes), and maybe some other fishes, but that is a rather specialized type of parasitism. Can you cite any other deuterostomes that have become obligate parasites? -- Dalbury(Talk) 18:49, 1 February 2006 (UTC)
[edit] yunnanozoans
i am taking a evolution class now and we have talked about yunnanozoans. they are dificult to fit anywhere it seems. perhaps someone should have a look at nature 430:426 (2004) and nature 402:44 (1999).
- See Yunnanozoon. As many of us don't have access to Nature, listing article titles and authors would help us search for abstracts, comments, etc. -- Donald Albury 10:42, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Bourlat et al. (2006) paper
Should the article be updated with reference to S. J. Bourlat, T. Juliusdottir, C. J. Lowe, R. Freeman, J. Aronowicz, M. Kirschner, E. S. Lander, M. Thorndyke, H. Nakano, A. B. Kohn, A. Heyland, L. L. Moroz, R. R. Copley, M. J. Telford (2006). "Deuterostome phylogeny reveals monophyletic chordates and the new phylum Xenoturbellida". Nature 444: 85-88. ? Bondegezou 10:55, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
- Why not. The abstract for the article is at [1], so that can be included in the citation. -- Donald Albury 20:57, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
