Talk:Spiralia

Animals Low‑importance

Spiralia is within the scope of WikiProject Animals, an attempt to better organize information in articles related to animals and zoology. For more information, visit the project page.AnimalsWikipedia:WikiProject AnimalsTemplate:WikiProject Animalsanimal articles

Low

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

WikiProject Animals To-do:

Here are some Open Tasks :

Copyedit:
Merge: GLAM/ARKive donated texts into articles about endangered species.
Improve: Photoperiodism, Tool use by non-human animals, Omnivore, Animal suicide, Sphaerium beckmani (a species in family Sphaeriidae),
Requests:
- Mammals:
- Invertebrates: Campocraspedon
- Fishes: Zaniolepis frenata
Merge: GLAM/ARKive donated texts into articles about endangered species.
Expand: Junqueira cow, Atka mackerel
Nominate and vote: Science collaboration of the month, Article Improvement Drive, WikiProject Animals Collaboration

redlink fix

under the heading "Distribution of Spiralian Development Across Phylogeny", there is a red link for nemerteans. there is, however, a nemertea page. a very good one at that. i have no idea how to fix the link, i'm not sure i'm even doing this right. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.222.152.112 (talk) 03:13, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Kimberella close to Ecdyzoa???

Although I very much like the first diagram, I do not believe there is any reason on the placement near Ecdyzoa, far more often it is considered a stem-group mollusk and if you should choose to show it it should be put somewhere there, but probably better not to show at all until more consensus has been reached. I know of only 1 interpretation of it being a stem-group arthropod (Jenkins 1992) which has gained no support at all since. Codiv (talk) 13:46, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Playtozoa and trochozoa

If im honest how the hell do you think Phoronida is releted to brachipods or molluscs its should be releted to bryozoa, Mesozoa how do hell is it a playtozoa it should be the eirliest spiralia or earliest animals not releted to flatworm how is that possible i know flatworm are small but not with one cell layer pls change it😭 31.201.41.206 (talk) 18:24, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Four recently published mutually incompatible hypotheses for spiralian cladogram are presented in the article (and supported by references to scientific studies). It is not clear nowadays, which hypothesis will win, but all of them should be presented as possible, because theay are well referenced:

Platytrochozoa concurrently with Kryptotrochozoa (the first cladogram)
Platytrochozoa concurrently with Tetraneuralia concurrently with Parenchymia (with Brachiozoa sister to Annelida) (the second cladogram)
Trochozoa (with Brachiozoa sister to Annelida) concurrently with Platyzoa (the third cladogram, referred in the taxobox to Phyla)
Trochozoa (with Brachiozoa sister to Annelida and/or Nemertea) + Platyzoa s.l. (referred in the taxobox, as reference to Platyzoa s.l.)

Phoronida is sister group to Brachiopoda (common clade Brachiozoa) according the hypotheses 1 and 4, Phoronida is sister group to Bryozoa/Ectoprocta according the hypothesis 2; btw. in hypotheses 1 and 2 Brachiopoda, Bryozoa/Ectoprocta and Phoronida form together a common clade.

Mesozoa form a part of Platyzoa s.l. in hypotheses 3 and 4 (where Platyzoa s.l. was introduced as a sister clade to Trochozoa). It is based on phylogenomic studies and the simple body structure could be the result of a secondary simplification. In hypotheses 1 and 2 neither Platyzoa nor Platyzoa s.l. are recovered as a natural clade. (I hope you can distinguish Platyzoa, Platyzoa s.l., Plathelminthes and not spiralian Placozoa.)

Sorry, but it is not important what do YOU believe, but what are the results of the recently published phylogenomic studies presented in references. If you know about another opinion on spirlian phylogeny, supported by a recently published textbook or a new phylogenetic study with different results, it will be wellcome if you put a summary of it with proper reference into the section 'Lophotrochozoa within Spiralia'. Then the change of the taxobox could be discussed.

Thanks for your understanding. Petr Karel (talk) 07:45, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Phylogeny in the infobox

I removed the three phylogenetic hypotheses from the infobox because they duplicate the cladograms in the body of the article. I also removed the following reference because I didn't know where to put it.^[1]

^ Nesnidal MP, Helmkampf M, Meyer A, Witek A, Bruchhaus I, Ebersberger I, Hankeln T, Lieb B, Struck TH, Hausdorf B (November 2013). "New phylogenomic data support the monophyly of Lophophorata and an Ectoproct-Phoronid clade and indicate that Polyzoa and Kryptrochozoa are caused by systematic bias". BMC Evolutionary Biology. 13 (1): 253. doi:10.1186/1471-2148-13-253. PMC 4225663. PMID 24238092.

Lophotrochozoa (talk) 08:36, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I add this reference for identification of the extension made by 31.201.41.206, which could seem to be his original research, as several his previous edits. Now it has no sense to be included.

In the new short view of the listed phyla I corrected the names to be in plural for all phyla and removed tommotiids, maybe an order-level clade but more probably only a paraphyletic group of five families, but not a phylum. Petr Karel (talk) 14:44, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

[1] Nesnidal MP, Helmkampf M, Meyer A, Witek A, Bruchhaus I, Ebersberger I, Hankeln T, Lieb B, Struck TH, Hausdorf B (November 2013). "New phylogenomic data support the monophyly of Lophophorata and an Ectoproct-Phoronid clade and indicate that Polyzoa and Kryptrochozoa are caused by systematic bias". BMC Evolutionary Biology. 13 (1): 253. doi:10.1186/1471-2148-13-253. PMC 4225663. PMID 24238092.

[1]