Talk:Archaeamphora longicervia

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	Archaeamphora longicervia has been listed as one of the Natural sciences good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can delist it, or ask for a reassessment.
	An entry from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know? column on February 2, 2007.
February 25, 2007 Good article nominee Listed

	Archaeamphora longicervia is within the scope of WikiProject Carnivorous plants, an attempt to better organise information in articles related to carnivorous plants. For more information, visit the project page.
GA	This article has been rated as GA-class on the quality scale.
Mid	This article has been rated as mid-importance on the importance scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance for WikiProject Plants assessment.

[edit] GA

Awarded GA status. Article is comprehensive and well-cited. --NoahElhardt 01:46, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Given the current distribution of Sarraceniaceae exclusively in the Americas and their comparatively young phylogenetic age it seems unlikely that the plants seen in these fossils are close relatives of Sarraceniaceae. There are several plants with tubular (ascidiate) leaves and it seems more likely in this case that the leaves are similar due to convergence of form rather than due to close relationship. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.225.179.229 (talk) 21:15, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

You may be right; the article doesn't disagree with you. The article states, correctly, that the descriptive paper noted similarities to the family. The taxobox suggests the family as a possible parent to the species, but indicates that this placement is tentative.--NoahElhardt (talk) 04:30, 27 November 2007 (UTC)