Talk:Zygomycota

C. Moreau

In this article I find this:

Phylum: Zygomycota

Moreau 1954 (informal)

But C. Moreau is currently a redirect to an article about a man who died in 1916. Michael Hardy (talk) 17:17, 25 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

C. Moreau was a red-link until yesterday, when it was redirected to a newly-created article. There are not other articles that link C. Moreau, so I just removed the link in this article. Adrian J. Hunter^{(talk•contribs)} 03:34, 26 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Zygomycota. 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 http://web.archive.org/web/20090404103924/http://www.catalogueoflife.org:80/search_results.php?search_type=browse_by_classification&kingdom=Fungi&phylum=&tax_class=Zygomycetes&order=&superfamily=&family=&genus=&species=&infraspecies=&match_whole_words=on&Submit=Search+%3E%3E to http://www.catalogueoflife.org/search_results.php?search_type=browse_by_classification&kingdom=Fungi&phylum=&tax_class=Zygomycetes&order=&superfamily=&family=&genus=&species=&infraspecies=&match_whole_words=on&Submit=Search+%3E%3E

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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) 19:10, 21 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Proposal to split the page

It's been known for a while that Zygomycota is not monophyletic. In 2016, Spatafora et al. named the Zoopagomycota and the Mucoromycota. These two phyla have been named in a few secondary sources that I list below. I'm proposing this page be split into two pages: one for Mucoromycota and one for Zoopagomycota. (And the downstream taxo-boxes fixed.) Are there enough secondary sources to justify this? Is there consensus to do this? I'm going to ping some participants of the wikiproject and other editors who have edited this page but aren't listed as wikiproject participants. Pings: @Peter G. Werner, Mycota, Alan Rockefeller, Nemetona, Anonymous Dissident, Nastassja Noell, Serols, Look2See1, Plantdrew, Caftaric, Dough34, and FourViolas: (I'll watch this talk page; so, need to ping me back.)

Sources for the use of Zoopagomycota: Uniprot JGI Mycobank Sources for use of Mucoromycota: Uniprot JGI MycoBank Sources for both: Google Book on Fungal phylogeny press release

Such a split will mean most of the information will go to the Mucoromycota page since that is the group most of the information has been derived from. TelosCricket (talk) 12:11, 8 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm. Is Mycobank actually supporting the split? It looks to me like maybe they aren't yet: Zygomycota has current name = Zygomcota, Zoopagomycota has no value for current name. However, Mucoromycota has current name = Mucoromycota, so at the very least, Mycobank is inconsistent. I have no objection in principle to splitting Zygomycota, I just want to be sure Wikipedia follows consensus in secondary sources before doing so. Plantdrew (talk) 19:40, 9 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

And this is why I wanted others' input! I hadn't noticed that inconsistency. TelosCricket (talk) 22:55, 9 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like Mycobank still isn't supporting the split (as mentioned by Plantdrew in April). I've at least edited [1] the Phylogeny section to include *something* about this for readers unfamiliar with zygomycetes. Please improve this to make it more clear as you see fit. Also maybe it should be added in that Mycobank doesn't yet support the split... Neato-nick (talk) 17:58, 3 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Neato-nick: Yes, well, the taxonomy of the group has become very messy with a few research groups putting forth their ideas of what rank the clades should be. I revised the phylogeny section to remove what I felt was extraneous, but I am not sure what I did makes matters clear. TelosCricket (talk) 18:50, 21 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

For what it's worth - I came across this page while referencing a 2015 paper on fungal diversity in rewetted blanket bogs. Zygomycota is the fungal family name used in Elliott et al. 2015, "Bacterial and fungal communities in a degraded ombrotrophic peatland undergoing natural and managed re-vegetation" — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:BB6:18F0:9A00:64AD:BDCB:B5F3:9310 (talk) 22:04, 8 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Question

When the article says that the phylum was split into Mucoromycota and Zoopagomycota does it mean Zoopagomycotina^[1]? Because Zoopagomycota doesn't appear to exist. 50.53.119.205 (talk) 08:20, 5 February 2020 (UTC)Caston[reply]

That statement comes from the first reference Spatafora et al.^[2], and it uses Zoopagomycota. You are correct that Zoopagomycota doesn't exist on Wikipedia but Zoopagomycotina does. TelosCricket (talk)

References

^ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zoopagomycotina
^ Spatafora, Joseph W.; Chang, Ying; Benny, Gerald L.; Lazarus, Katy; Smith, Matthew E.; Berbee, Mary L.; Bonito, Gregory; Corradi, Nicolas; Grigoriev, Igor; Gryganskyi, Andrii; James, Timothy Y.; O’Donnell, Kerry; Roberson, Robert W.; Taylor, Thomas N.; Uehling, Jessie; Vilgalys, Rytas; White, Merlin M.; Stajich, Jason E. (2016). "A phylum-level phylogenetic classification of zygomycete fungi based on genome-scale data". Mycologia. 108 (5): 1028–1046. doi:10.3852/16-042. ISSN 0027-5514. PMC 6078412. PMID 27738200. {{cite journal}}: Invalid |ref=harv (help)

Campbell Biology, 12th Edition splits Zygomycota into Zoopagomycota and Mucoromycota

Firstly, I'm very new to Wikipedia editing (and have only ever made "minor" edits). So I apologize in advance for any issues.

I'm currently studying biology, and am looking at fungal diversity. I have access to both the 11th and 12th editions of Campbell Biology (a very, very widely used introductory biology textbook), and I noticed that while the 11th edition simply referred to Zygomycota, the 12th edition has split it into Zoopagomycota and Mucoromycota. I looked on Wikipedia, and noticed that there has been a lack of the secondary sources needed to progress this issue. So, is that textbook considered as a reliable secondary source? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biology:_The_Unity_and_Diversity_of_Life — Preceding unsigned comment added by Heidi Newton (talk • contribs) 22:58, 18 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Heidi Newton:, welcome to Wikipedia! That textbook is a reliable source, as far as I know.

Above, I proposed splitting this article into two because of the division of Zygomycota into Mucoromycota and Zoopagomycota. However, others courtesy pings @Plantdrew: & @Neato-nick: pointed out, the taxonomy of the group is a bit messy and not every source supports the split. Before the pandemic happened and I had more time, I was going to overhaul the page as a draft in my userspace: User:TelosCricket/Draft_Zygo_changes. I was then going to point others to it to see if they accepted the changes or not. Part of those changes were structuring the article by Mucoromycota and Zoopagomycota. You are welcome to make changes directly to this article or to the draft in my userspace.

TelosCricket (talk) 18:06, 19 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Zygomycota

The hypea are aseptate and coenocytic (aseptate and multinulceate hypae) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 103.255.6.247 (talk) 15:54, 8 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Zygomycota

The hypae are aseptate and coenocytic(aseptate and multinulceate hypae) — Preceding unsigned comment added by SHAHAB KABEER KHAM (talk • contribs) 16:12, 8 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

[1] ttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zoopagomycotina

[Spatafora-2] Spatafora, Joseph W.; Chang, Ying; Benny, Gerald L.; Lazarus, Katy; Smith, Matthew E.; Berbee, Mary L.; Bonito, Gregory; Corradi, Nicolas; Grigoriev, Igor; Gryganskyi, Andrii; James, Timothy Y.; O’Donnell, Kerry; Roberson, Robert W.; Taylor, Thomas N.; Uehling, Jessie; Vilgalys, Rytas; White, Merlin M.; Stajich, Jason E. (2016). "A phylum-level phylogenetic classification of zygomycete fungi based on genome-scale data". Mycologia. 108 (5): 1028–1046. doi:10.3852/16-042. ISSN 0027-5514. PMC 6078412. PMID 27738200. {{cite journal}}: Invalid |ref=harv (help)

[1]

[2]