Talk:Cucurbita moschata

Plants Mid‑importance

	Plants portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Plants, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of plants and botany on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PlantsWikipedia:WikiProject PlantsTemplate:WikiProject Plantsplant articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Food and drink Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Food and drink, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of food and drink related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Food and drinkWikipedia:WikiProject Food and drinkTemplate:WikiProject Food and drinkFood and drink articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Food and Drink task list:

To edit this page, select here

Here are some tasks you can do for WikiProject Food and drink:

Help bring these Top Importance articles currently B Status or below up to GA status: Agaricus bisporus (i.e. mushroom), Beef, Bread, Curry, Drink, Food, Ham and eggs, Soy sauce, Sushi, Yogurt
Bring these Top Importance articles currently at GA status up to FA status: Beer, French cuisine, Sugar
Bring these High Importance articles currently at GA status up to FA status: Apple, Burger King, Fish
Participate in project-related deletion discussions.
Delete unrelated trivia sections found in articles. Please review WP:Trivia and WP:Handling trivia to learn how to do this.
Add the {{WikiProject Food and drink}} project banner to food and drink related articles and content to help bring them to the attention of members. For a complete list of banners for WikiProject Food and drink and its child projects, select here.
Provide photographs and images for Category:Wikipedia requested images of food
Consider joining this project's Assessment task force. List any project ideas in this section

Note: These lists are transcluded from the project's tasks pages.

WPFood Assessment

Assessed as a low importance stub covering a small set of cultivars of the gourd family. --Jeremy ( Blah blah...) 03:33, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Calabaza

This species includes calabaza, does it not? Badagnani (talk) 00:55, 11 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Food and drink Tagging

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) 22:19, 3 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Evolutionary History

"Evolutionarily speaking the genus is relatively recent in origin as no species within the genus is genetically isolated from all the other species."

This is not necessarily true - as well as "recent" being unqualified a lack of genetic isolation does not necessarily mean a genus is younger than one in which species are isolated.

"C. moschata acts as the genetic bridge within the genus and is closest to the genus' progenitor."

The idea of extant species being closer to the common ancestor of a genus is not valid - all extant species are equally closely related to their most recent common ancestor. The source only calls C. moschata the "putative ancestor of the group" without giving much evidence for it. Iacobndg (talk) 17:41, 31 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If there were evidence with a date range provided, it could be said that the diversification of species within the genus was relatively recent, which, I agree, is not quite the same as saying that the genus is relatively recent in origin. Peter coxhead (talk) 10:01, 3 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Iacobndg: I've attempted to re-write what the source says in more modern terminology without distorting the original meaning. The source does suggest that C. moschata may be closest to the most recent common ancestor of the genus, but its position in the cladograms given doesn't support this. If you're not happy with my attempted re-write, then just delete this material; it's based on a pre-molecular phylogenetics source and isn't central to the article. Peter coxhead (talk) 10:19, 3 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]