Talk:Genus/Archive 1

Archive 1

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Genus. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121126194823/http://uio.mbl.edu/NomenclatorZoologicus/ to http://uio.mbl.edu/NomenclatorZoologicus/

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

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• 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.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:03, 12 October 2017 (UTC)

Platypus

this explains why the platypus is called Ornithorhynchus.

As somebody reasonably well-educated on the subject of biology and taxonomy, this statement is false. I have no idea what the preceding paragraph has to do with the platypus. Can anybody either use a different example or explain why--I can't see a logical connection at all. User:Tokerboy — Preceding undated comment added 20:00, 2 October 2002 (UTC)

This annoyed me for a couple days because it seemed nonsensical. Then I got the bright idea to check the platypus article, and sure enough it was explained there. I added the info to this page. Tokerboy 19:43 Oct 3, 2002 (UTC)

Structure/Technical

I think this article is widely different from the other taxonomy articles, and may be a bit too technical. I don't feel qualified to rewrite it myself, but I felt it was worth noting. Mister.Manticore 18:56, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Can species in a Genus Mate?

I remember from my Biology class in grade 12 that certain species could mate in a genus. For example, this is why it was theorized that human and neanderthalers may have mated in Europe -- a theory which has since been disproven. But I do know that in Toronto...a Lioness and a Leopard naturally mated together [[1]]. So can a two species of the same genus actually breed together? Or does it depend upon what particular genus and species we are talking about? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.138.139.155 (talk) 05:15, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

It depends on which genus and which subspecies. Most members of genus Canis (canines: dogs, wolves, coyotes, jackals, dingos) can interbreed with fertile offspring (I know of no exceptions personally). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 205.201.141.146 (talk) 16:30, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

A Re-write

I made a first attempt this morning to substantially rework and re-order this article, especially the first few paragraphs. I thought that the first sections in particular were poorly put-together, opaque, and hard to follow. Invertzoo 13:45, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

How is it classified?

What are they classififed within? The Kingdom classification is classifed by general apperance and behavioral atributes. What about genus? How is it classified? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.70.43.48 (talk) 01:23, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

What does "genus" really mean?

This article does not really explain what makes a genus a genus; it just circulates around a definition. What differences make a genus distinct from another? MrBenzpyrene 15:11, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

Nothing can make any group a genus. It is just a convention established by experts in a particular field of taxonomy. The mechanisms involved in establishing a particular convention are too tricky to be explained in a nutshell but some rational framework for the discussions was provided by cladistics in the 1970s. Of course, the principles of cladistics are more, actually, guidelines :) Seriously, there is no imaginable justification for ascribing any rank in taxonomic hierarchy (except for species, which is a bit less arbitrary). It has a lot to do with nomenclature (the rules of naming) and nothing to do with some real natural entities of a generic quality. Alexei Kouprianov 09:58, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

The article could at least include that information. If a genus cannot be easily defined in a short space, at least some indication of what it is and isn't would be helpful, or something to narrow the definition more than no definition at all. Rintrah 11:27, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

The only solution is to extend a historical section, which is virtually absent now. I'll see what I can do about that. Alexei Kouprianov 16:27, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

The terms "generic" and "specific" are derived from the same cognates as "genus" and "species". This gives us a vital etymological clue as to the original distinction. The sciences of genetics and skeletal measurement have blurred any rigid categorization. --205.201.141.146 16:30, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

I think the article, and this question in particular would benefit from including some examples of genera, such as that of Canis, which was mentioned in another question. Downstrike (talk) 01:30, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

I have added a new section on the size of genera and how their content is defined. It's actually somewhat arbitrary. Otherwise it really depends on the taxonomic group, but I did give some examples. Peteruetz (talk) 03:24, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

How many genera?

The article doesn't say how many recognised genera there are among living creatures. Tsinfandel (talk) 16:00, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

I have added some numbers for reptiles. Otherwise no one has ever counted all genera. No one even knows the total number of species, although the Catalogue of Life has produced a list of some 1.5 million species. However, there are certainly many more, even in the scientific literature. Peteruetz (talk) 03:25, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

I added a new section "Numbers" which attempts to deal with this question in a preliminary manner, including a broad breakdown of "accepted, extant" names by major taxonomic group. Tony Rees Tony 1212 (talk) 07:04, 1 June 2018 (UTC)

I have updated this section (now "Numbers of accepted genera") according to a recently published summary (Rees et al., 2020). Tony 1212 (talk) 22:51, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Hayatiyat

What is the meant by three types of genus 111.119.183.47 (talk) 08:43, 7 September 2022 (UTC)

Examples Please!

In the section Categories of generic name, I have barely any idea of what they're talking about. These are abstractions of abstractions, maybe even again of abstractions. An example or two would clear things up quite a bit with a minimal amount of text. For instance, something like:

   For instance, the taxonomic name sativa is used in many plant names, such as Allium sativum, (garlic), 
   Hordeum sativum (barley), and Oryza sativa, (rice).  The name was registered in the ICZN in 1897 
   by Horatio Groovy, who was studying lettuce at the time and needed a term to distinguish arugula from iceberg.

Or something like that. Most of us have not been reading taxonomic literature for years; not only are the terms unfamiliar, but the concepts needed to make taxonomy work, are unfamiliar. Examples have miraculous powers of explanation, supplying details that the author wasn't even aware needed to be supplied. — Preceding unsigned comment added by OsamaBinLogin (talk • contribs) 23:47, 12 October 2024 (UTC)