Talk:Polydesmida

Classification needs revision

Since Polydesmida is the largest and probably most-studied group of millipedes, with a complicated taxonomy full of suborders, superfamilies, and tribes, I'd like to propose a Classification section be added to show all supra-famiial classification at once, rather than having to navigate through the various suborders individually. This would likely require editing the downstream taxon pages and taxoboxes for taxonomic concordance, so I want to put the word out before shaking things up too much. As far as I can tell, the most complete authoritative classification is currently that of Shear 2011, and I propose that be a the template used, unless more recent revisions are available. (The current sources for many families seem to be online checklists or other non-authoritative sources).

Here's a rough draft of the proposed composition- appropriate links would of course be added, and the authroity names& dates could probably be dropped in the interest of reducing clutter:

Suborder Leptodesmidea Brölemann, 1916

Superfamily Chelodesmoidea Cook, 1895
- Family Chelodesmidae Cook, 1895
Superfamily Platyrhacoidea Pocock, 1895
- Family Aphelidesmidae Brölemann, 1916
- Family Platyrhacidae Pocock, 1895
Superfamily Rhachodesmoidea Carl, 1903
- Family Rhachodesmidae Carl, 1903
- Family Tridontomidae Loomis & Hoffman, 1962
Superfamily Sphaeriodesmoidea Humbert & DeSaussure, 1869
- Family Campodesmidae Cook, 1896
- Family Holistophallidae Silvestri, 1909
- Family Sphaeriodesmidae Humbert & DeSaussure, 1869
Superfamily Xystodesmoidea Cook, 1895
- Family Eurymerodesmidae Causey, 1951
- Family Euryuridae Pocock, 1909
- Family Gomphodesmidae Cook, 1896
- Family Oxydesmidae Cook, 1895
- Family Xystodesmidae Cook, 1895

Suborder Dalodesmidea Hoffman, 1980

Family Dalodesmidae Cook, 1896
Family Vaalogonopodidae Verhoeff, 1940

Suborder Strongylosomatidea Brölemann, 1916

Family Paradoxosomatidae Daday, 1889

Suborder Polydesmidea Pocock, 1887

Infraorder Oniscodesmoides Simonsen, 1990
- Superfamily Oniscodesmoidea Simonsen, 1990
  - Family Dorsoporidae Loomis, 1958
  - Family Oniscodesmidae DeSaussure, 1860
- Superfamily Pyrgodesmoidea Silvestri, 1896
  - Family Ammodesmidae Cook, 1896
  - Family Cyrtodesmidae Cook, 1896
  - Family Pyrgodesmidae Silvestri, 1896
Infraorder Polydesmoides Pocock, 1887
- Superfamily Haplodesmoidea Cook, 1895
  - Family Haplodesmidae Cook, 1895
- Superfamily Opisotretoidea Hoffman, 1980
  - Family Opisotretidae Hoffman, 1980
- Superfamily Polydesmoidea Leach, 1815
  - Family Cryptodesmidae Karsch, 1880
  - Family Polydesmidae Leach, 181539
- Superfamily Trichopolydesmoidea Verhoeff 1910
  - Family Fuhrmannodesmidae Brölemann, 1916
  - Family Macrosternodesmidae Brölemann 1916
  - Family Nearctodesmidae Chamberlin & Hoffman, 1958

Animalparty (talk) 05:28, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

In principle, I agree, albeit with a few caveats. The fact that taxa have been proposed at subordinate ranks doesn't mean that we always have to include them all. I would also suggest that a template isn't the best method for doing this. Navbox templates are intended to guide readers around a series of (existing) articles; in this case, almost none of the downstream articles exist, making a template less appropriate. I think here, a straightforward list in the article will be more than enough. I also wonder how "Strongylosomatidea" can be the name for a suborder containing the single family Paradoxosomatidae; surely Paradoxosomatidea Daday, 1899 is the appropriate name in that instance (although the ICZN doesn't really apply above the family-group, of course). I would also resist the temptation to remove the authorities; with decent formatting, they actually improve the layout, and are important information from a taxonomic point of view. --Stemonitis (talk) 05:51, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Leptodesmidea Brölemann, 1916

Chelodesmoidea Cook, 1895
- Chelodesmidae Cook, 1895
Platyrhacoidea Pocock, 1895
- Aphelidesmidae Brölemann, 1916
- Platyrhacidae Pocock, 1895
Rhachodesmoidea Carl, 1903
- Rhachodesmidae Carl, 1903
- Tridontomidae Loomis & Hoffman, 1962
Sphaeriodesmoidea Humbert & de Saussure, 1869
- Campodesmidae Cook, 1896
- Holistophallidae Silvestri, 1909
- Sphaeriodesmidae Humbert & de Saussure, 1869
Xystodesmoidea Cook, 1895
- Eurymerodesmidae Causey, 1951
- Euryuridae Pocock, 1909
- Gomphodesmidae Cook, 1896
- Oxydesmidae Cook, 1895
- Xystodesmidae Cook, 1895

Dalodesmidea Hoffman, 1980

Dalodesmidae Cook, 1896
Vaalogonopodidae Verhoeff, 1940

Strongylosomatidea Brölemann, 1916

Paradoxosomatidae Daday, 1889

Polydesmidea Pocock, 1887

Oniscodesmoidea Simonsen, 1990
- Dorsoporidae Loomis, 1958
- Oniscodesmidae DeSaussure, 1860
Pyrgodesmoidea Silvestri, 1896
- Ammodesmidae Cook, 1896
- Cyrtodesmidae Cook, 1896
- Pyrgodesmidae Silvestri, 1896
Haplodesmoidea Cook, 1895
- Haplodesmidae Cook, 1895
Opisotretoidea Hoffman, 1980
- Opisotretidae Hoffman, 1980
Polydesmoidea Leach, 1815
- Cryptodesmidae Karsch, 1880
- Polydesmidae Leach, 1815
Trichopolydesmoidea Verhoeff, 1910
- Fuhrmannodesmidae Brölemann, 1916
- Macrosternodesmidae Brölemann, 1916
- Nearctodesmidae Chamberlin & Hoffman, 1958

Thanks for your input, I like the look of that. As for the Strongylosomatidea/Paradoxosomatidea I can't offer any clarity right now. It may have been a mistake in Shear 2011, or there may be validity to it. Animalparty (talk) 08:32, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

As an update, regarding the Strongylosomatidea/Paradoxosomatidea usage: From a 2013 global checklist of Paradoxosomatidae: "Suprafamilial names are not governed by the priority rules of the ICZN. Various permutations have been used by various authors, such as: Strongylosomatidea Brölemann 1916, Paradoxosomatidea Hoffman, 1967 or Paradoxosomatidea Daday, 1889. Published catalogs may stabilize the nomenclature". So I guess it's an open issue. From the same source, it's also interesting to note that the nominal genus of the family, Paradoxosoma Daday, 1889, is no longer a valid name (apparently synonymized with Stosatea Gray, 1843), while Strongylosoma Brandt, 1833 is valid. --Animalparty-- (talk) 20:02, 10 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]