Talk:Ungulate

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents 1 Cetaceans and Hyracoids and Xenarthrans, oh my! 2 Pandas are bears. 3 List of common names of ungulates 4 Elephants are or aren't ungulates? 5 Taxon 6 Template and Project 7 Merger proposal 8 Ungulates are no longer a taxonomic group

[edit] Cetaceans and Hyracoids and Xenarthrans, oh my!

I am confused by the following statement, and am unsure exactly what it means:

Suggestions that Cetaceans and Hyracoids are not closest to at least some other ungulates are out of favour, and so is the suggestion that the aardvark is related to South American Xenarthrans.

The author seems to be trying to cram too many bits of information into the same sentence, resulting in double-negatives and other confusing constructions. I'm unclear as to whether this is saying that it's currently favored (believed) that cetaceans/hyracoids are related to other ungulates, or that it's currently favored that they're not. I'm also unclear as to whether it's implying that the aardvark's standing is in some way related to the cetacean/hyracoid question. Also, in what way does the aardvark/xenarthrans question specifically apply to ungulates (is it being implied that if aardvarks are related to xenarthrans then they are ungulates? or is it that if they are related then they're not ungulates? or is this just a tangential issue?). Could somebody clarify a bit, as I'm lost here?

The whole "Relationships" section seems to be really confusing and could use some rework, in my opinion. I'd tackle this myself but I'm not sure what it's actually supposed to be saying in some bits, so... -- Foogod 22:39, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

Everything in that sentence is stated somewhere else in the realtionships section more clearly, so I'm deleting it. It means that whales(Cetacea) are considered related to the even toed ungulates(Artiodactyla), and hyraxes(Hyracoidea) are considered related to the elephants(Proboscidea) and sea cows(Sirenia). Aardvarks(Tubulidentata) are no longer considered to be closely related to the anteaters, armadillos, and sloths(Xenarthra). anonymous 17:30, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Pandas are bears.

I can only assume from the definition of ungulate here, and the definition of bear and panda, that the entry of pandas as a type of ungulate is vandalism that has been ignored for ages. Bears are not ungulates. There have been a few questions as to the exact genetics of the panda, but nobody suggests any relation between pandas and ungulates. Thank you. 131.212.62.99 00:16, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

Agreed that pandas are not ungulates, but what is this list doing at the start of the article in the first place? It seems to have been added just today, and looks misplaced.

Cephal-odd 01:48, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

Actually not even horses are ungulates, as it seems after all. Due to most other articles related to mammal orders Perittodactyla (horses, rhinos, tapirs) are more closely related to Carnivora (cats, dogs, bears, badgers, seals etc), Chiroptera (bats) and Pholidota (pangolins)... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.118.191.48 (talk) 14:52, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Wrong: The term "ungulate" refers to any mammal with hooves. As such, all perissodactyls are ungulates. The only problem is that the taxon "Ungulata" is a polyphyletic taxon.--Mr Fink (talk) 15:31, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] List of common names of ungulates

I think this article would be much more useful if it gave the common names of animals that are considered ungulates, instead of just the Latin names. For example, deer, camel, antelope, rhino (?), etc. The vast majority of people are not going to have any idea what the Latin names mean, and would appreciate a more accessible layperson's explanation.

Amber Kerr 21:32, 15 January 2007 (UTC)Amber Kerr

[edit] Elephants are or aren't ungulates?

This is aways confusing me, why some say an elephant an ungulate while others say it's not. ERRRRRRRRRRGHH! Why cant they just make there minds UP!!!!!!!!!!!!! From 4444hhhh

Some experts regard only Perissodactyla and Artiodactyla as the only "true" ungulates, other experts regard Perissodactyla, Artiodactyla, Dinocerata, Embrithopoda, the South American "ungulates," elephants, and hyraxes as being ungulates.--Mr Fink 03:42, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Oh, well, thank you! From 4444hhhh

[edit] Taxon

When I read this article I have no trust that is isn't a confused mess of several different views of ungulates (evidence and taxonomy). I find it difficult to have confidence in any of it. The "Orders & Clades" box has orders within orders within orders. Someone who knows about these matters should base the article on some specific modern classification (named and sourced) and discuss evidence and older classifications on that basis. 88888 15:02, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Template and Project

Hi, if everyone sees my template that I made, well, I want some of you guys to suggest ideas about the template either on my page, or on this talk page, along with putting this on every page. Second, I think we should need a Wikiproject Ungulate as well, so we could make all the hoof mammal pages right. But, like I said, give me ideas. While thinking about it, I'm putting the template on each family page. From User:4444hhhh

I'm sorry, but the template is too large and it just has too many unnecessary links. We should make it into a portal, instead.--Mr Fink 03:30, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

It also was not a template. If you want to build a template it needs to actually be a template page. If somebody wanted to update this template, it would have taken dozens of edits -- one to each page including the template. Second (I left these comments at Talk:Even-toed ungulate as well), it's just not accurate to call cetaceans ungulates. Ungulate actually means "hoofed animal" which whales/dolphins simply are not. They share that common ancestry, yes, but ungulate is not a purely (or even principally) taxonomic term. But, moving forward, I'd be happy to help out with an ungulate wikiproject, as long as it wouldn't conflict with an existing wikiproject? --JayHenry 19:22, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, it was my first time making one, so, I'm sorry about that, but I would love to make a wikiproject on ungulates! So, when do we start, now or later? From User:4444hhhh

Should we make a wikiPortal or a wikiProject? [1]--Mr Fink 02:50, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

I think we should make a portal. From User:4444hhhh

You know what, I may start the portal. From User:4444hhhh

[edit] Merger proposal

I think we should merge unguligrade into this article. It is a stub that basically compares how ungulates walk with how other animals walk. George D. Watson (Dendodge).Talk^Help 11:18, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

I'm not really sure whether it'd be best to merge here or to Terrestrial locomotion. It seems that different people researching the term might be looking for two very different topics. Perhaps it's best to leave as a stub that serves as a mini-disambiguation page? I don't feel very strongly about it though... --JayHenry (talk) 03:42, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Maybe a 'see also' at the bottom of that page? ...... Dendodge.Talk^Help 11:47, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Ungulates are no longer a taxonomic group

First of all, I am no expert in biology, so pardon me if I get some details wrong. However, it is definitely correct that "ungulate" carries no taxonomic significance.

This page, and thus other taxonomy pages, are woefully out of date. "Ungulate" is now considered a polyphyletic term, as it's been realized that the true ungulates (Perissodactyla and Artiodactyla) are not from the same order as paenungulates (Hyracoidea, Sirenia, and Proboscidea).

The original meaning of the word "ungulate" was a "hooved animal," but then it was realized that some of these hooved orders were closely related to some non-hooved orders, and so these were all placed under the infraorder "ungulata," stretching the definition of ungulate beyond hooved species. However, when it was discovered that Ungulata is not a true infraorder, the term has reverted back to its simple descriptive meaning.--129.2.165.42 (talk) 13:24, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Well, phenetics actually are a type of taxonomy, but I think everything you're saying is correct. Aside from the presence of ungulata in the box at the top of the page, is there any information in this article to which you object? It looks to me like the article already says all the things you just said. I looked at a number of other articles and don't see any instances where they cite Ungulata as part of their taxonomy. If there are articles that do claim Ungulata as a superorder, we should fix this, so please point such examples out! --JayHenry (talk) 04:01, 25 April 2008 (UTC)