Talk:Hippidion

Equine Low‑importance

	Horses portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Equine, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of articles relating to horses, asses, zebras, hybrids, equine health, equine sports, etc. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at the barn.EquineWikipedia:WikiProject EquineTemplate:WikiProject Equineequine articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Mammals Low‑importance

	Mammals portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Mammals, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of mammal-related subjects 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.MammalsWikipedia:WikiProject MammalsTemplate:WikiProject Mammalsmammal articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Palaeontology Low‑importance

	Paleontology portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Palaeontology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of palaeontology-related topics and create a standardized, informative, comprehensive and easy-to-use resource 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.PalaeontologyWikipedia:WikiProject PalaeontologyTemplate:WikiProject PalaeontologyPalaeontology articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Onohippidium

There seems to be some uncertainty over its validity.[1] What's the latest? FunkMonk (talk) 04:43, 11 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

DNA

It appears this article misinterprets the scientific papers. The latest one from 2008 appears to say the "Hippidion" bones examined actually belonged to another taxon.[2] FunkMonk (talk) 04:30, 2 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No, that paper still had Hippidion close to E. caballus; "Equus neogeus" appeared within the caballine clade. Ucucha (talk) 07:14, 2 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

But just how close? Within Equus? The abstract at least says " This result indicated either that the currently accepted phylogenetic tree of equids was incorrect regarding the timing of the evolutionary split between Hippidion and Equus or that the taxonomic identification of the hippidion fossils used for DNA analysis needed to be reexamined (and attributed to another extinct South American member of the equid lineage). The most likely candidate for the latter explanation is Equus (Amerhippus) neogeus. Here, we show by retrieving new ancient mtDNA sequences that hippidions and Equus (Amerhippus) neogeus were members of two distinct lineages." FunkMonk (talk) 14:39, 2 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Their E. neogeus sequence was within the E. caballus clade, which had a "stilt-legged horse" clade, and a Hippidion clade as successive sisters, followed by other extant Equus in an unresolved polytomy. Ucucha (talk) 18:35, 2 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

DNA SEQUENCES?

Should this page be merged with equus? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Samweithe4 (talk • contribs) 04:07, 27 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Not until more research has been done to conclusively prove that Hippidion is within Equus--Mr Fink (talk) 04:09, 27 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

And who knows, perhaps Equus is overlumped... FunkMonk (talk) 03:53, 29 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]