Jump to content

Talk:Animal

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Good articleAnimal has been listed as one of the Natural sciences good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
March 11, 2018Good article nomineeListed
April 2, 2023Peer reviewReviewed
Article Collaboration and Improvement DriveThis article was on the Article Collaboration and Improvement Drive for the week of December 15, 2007.
Current status: Good article


Wiki Education assignment: Introduction to Community Economic and Social Development II

[edit]

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 9 January 2024 and 5 April 2024. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Rajandeep Kaur Dhaliwal (article contribs).

— Assignment last updated by Rajandeep Kaur Dhaliwal (talk) 04:21, 12 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Numbers and habitats of major phyla

[edit]

Under the heading "Numbers and habitats of major phyla" there's a table that presents the phyla in descending order by number described species. I suggest, in the interest of presenting good information, they be ordered phylogenetically.

Also, someone should either, `1) add a column that describes the points of increasing adaptive complexity, or 2) add a table for just this purpose. Krisandtim (talk) 03:32, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've made the table sortable under the name and the number of species columns. To get the number of specie column to work I added a sort key using data-sort-value. Some other columns could be made sortable with appropriate sort keys.
What measure would you need for "adaptive complexity"? This would have to be sourced. —  Jts1882 | talk  07:36, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Surely unworkable. Sounds like "higher" and "lower" by any other name. But it would be nice to have all the other columns sortable in a Boolean (yes/no) way if that can be arranged. Chiswick Chap (talk) 08:27, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't make the other columns sortable as they have a mix of yes, blanks and numbers and give a strange order. The numbers with references are treated as stings, which is why they need sort keys. Are all the blanks noes? Perhaps those columns should all have yes or no with the numbers in parenthesis. To make the column sortable, remove the class="unsortable" from the column headers.
Yes, blanks are noes, so we can begin all with yes or no followed by (details). The free-living column can't be sorted as it's all yeses, so not a lot of use in that instance. Chiswick Chap (talk) 10:53, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Also, can we do better than the 2013 reference? —  Jts1882 | talk  10:42, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The ref is fine. Any replacement must be comprehensive as different sources are never directly comparable, so it's far less misleading to give a set of figures from one source, of whatever date, than to hunt after recency. Chiswick Chap (talk) 10:53, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Choanozoa, super-class between Filozoa and Animalia missing from info box

[edit]

The class Choanozoa, which would fall between Filozoa and Animalia is not mentioned in this article's info box in the classification section, but is mentioned in other parts of the article, as well as being named as a subclass in the Filozoa article. Is there a reason for this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gonb (talk • contribs) 02:28, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The taxobox gives a brief summary at some preset level of detail, naming just a few major clades like nested Russian dolls. There are nearly always more subdolls, as it were, invisible in between the visible ones. Chiswick Chap (talk) 03:12, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I've changed the parent taxon for animals to Choanozoa, but unranked. It's unusual for taxoboxes not to show the immediate parent. I assume the reason is that the Choanozoa introduced by Cavalier-Smith was paraphyletic. Now it has been recircumscribed for the clade containing animals and choanoflagellates, it seems appropriate to include it. The Adl et al (2019) classification uses Choanomonada but this doesn't seem to be used widely[Correction: This is wrong. Choanomonada is their taxon for choanoflagelletes.]. —  Jts1882 | talk  08:10, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Good work! Many thanks. Chiswick Chap (talk) 08:17, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I've corrected my comment on Adl et al (2019).[1] They support the redefinition of Choanozoa as animals + choanoflgellates, attributing it to Brunet & King (2017)[2] It was also used by Tikhonenkov et al (2020)[3], which suggests the new usage has caught on. —  Jts1882 | talk  09:33, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ Adl, Sina M.; Bass, David; Lane, Christopher E.; Lukeš, Julius; Schoch, Conrad L.; Smirnov, Alexey; Agatha, Sabine; Berney, Cedric; Brown, Matthew W. (2018-09-26). "Revisions to the Classification, Nomenclature, and Diversity of Eukaryotes". Journal of Eukaryotic Microbiology. 66 (1): 4–119. doi:10.1111/jeu.12691. PMC 6492006. PMID 30257078.
  2. ^ Brunet, Thibaut; King, Nicole (2017). "The origin of animal multicellularity and cell differentiation" (PDF). Developmental Cell. 43 (2): 124–140. doi:10.1016/j.devcel.2017.09.016.
  3. ^ Tikhonenkov DV, Mikhailov KV, Hehenberger E, Mylnikov AP, Aleoshin VV, Keeling PJ, et al. (2020). "New Lineage of Microbial Predators Adds Complexity to Reconstructing the Evolutionary Origin of Animals". Current Biology. 30 (22): 4500–4509. doi:10.1016/j.cub.2020.08.061. PMID 32976804.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Animal&oldid=1237565740"