Talk:Trioecy
Appearance
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Trioecy article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Misreports
[edit]Apparently one of the sources claims that trioecious species are misinterpretations of gynodioecious species. I may need to research further into that.
As a matter of fact I have seen sources mention that there are some species misinterpreted to be trioecious. I believe this may be an interesting area to research and the article could mention some examples of misreports.CycoMa (talk) 04:29, 15 July 2021 (UTC)
Categories:
- Start-Class Sexology and sexuality articles
- Mid-importance Sexology and sexuality articles
- WikiProject Sexology and sexuality articles
- Start-Class Animal anatomy articles
- Mid-importance Animal anatomy articles
- WikiProject Animal anatomy articles
- Start-Class Biology articles
- Low-importance Biology articles
- Biology articles needing attention
- Wikipedia requested images of biology
- WikiProject Biology articles
- Start-Class Ecology articles
- Mid-importance Ecology articles
- WikiProject Ecology articles
- Start-Class plant articles
- Mid-importance plant articles
- WikiProject Plants articles