Talk:Rhizaria
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] Taxobox
Would it hurt to have a taxobox here? Unikont and bikont have one, primoplantae has one, yet when I put one here it gets deleted! This is a technical taxinomical grouping, therefore it should have a taxobox! Something like, domain Eukaryota, subkingdom bikonta, Supergroup Rhizaria. If we must (to please the pagans) you can shove in kingdom protista. Werothegreat 20:50, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
The thing is, Rhizaria is a clade, and it's not clear how it will be used in ranked taxonomic systems. Cavalier-Smith treats it as a protist infrakingdom, in a subkingdom Gymnomyxa; but nobody else seems to recognize Gymnomyxa, which is after all a paraphyletic group. Listing them as bikonts is a possibility, but I'm not sure it makes sense to list that as established; things like Adl et al. still consider their relationships uncertain.
That, by the way, is why I removed the box. All that would be left is saying Rhizaria are an unranked group of eukaryotes, which doesn't add much to the article. So long as we're organizing pages by kingdoms rather than clades, I thought it would make more sense to wait until they find a place in an established ranked system. I'll check with WP:TOL, though, if we should still be using Protista as our main organizational scheme. Josh
It's been a few days and nobody there has expressed opposition to dropping Protista. I'll replace the taxobox. Josh 07:12, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
- For now, I'd like to suggest we remove the reference to Cabozoa from the taxobox. This relationship to Excavates is hypothetical and is contradicted by some studies. For example, the paper Burki et al. 2007. Phylogenomics Reshuffles the Eukaryotic Supergroups. PLoS ONE 2(8): e790.
- concludes that Rhizaria clusters with the alveolates and stramenopiles.
- Cephal-odd (talk) 14:19, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
-
- Agreed. I have done so. I think it is premature to start rewriting a bunch of pages to reflect the SAR hypothesis, but I'm not comfortable with Cabozoa either (after having read that paper and a few others, especially Laura Wegener Parfrey, Erika Barbero, Elyse Lasser, Micah Dunthorn, Debashish Bhattacharya, David J Patterson, and Laura A Katz (2006 December). "Evaluating Support for the Current Classification of Eukaryotic Diversity". PLoS Genet. 2 (12): e220. doi:.). I will let stand the statement about the monophyly of the Rhizaria. It might be a bit early to really be sure about that, but it seems to be reasonably well-supported by many of the studies. Kingdon (talk) 06:16, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Taxobox colour change
Hello,
After much discussion, it has been agreed that colour changes for taxoboxes are necessary; it's currently proposed that amoebozoa taxoboxes should become #FFC8A0 and rhizaria, lavender. These changes would be carried out automatically, determined by regnum/phylum/etc entries in the taxobox. Your comments and opinions would be gratefully received here!
Thanks,
Verisimilus T 20:19, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Kingdom?
The introduction says Rhizaria is "...a species-rich kingdom of protists." How can something be a kingdom of protists when protista is a kingdom, according to the Eukarya page? Maybe Rhizaria should be considered a phylum or subkingdom of protists, or maybe you should call it a kingdom of eukaryotes. Anyways, just taking note of that. 69.15.134.58 (talk) 16:37, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
- I think the usual word is "supergroup" (which is a way of not worrying about exactly how you are arrange things into ranks). If you have to pick a rank, you'd probably pick superkingdom (the kinds of people who talk about Rhizaria are probably not going to recognize protista as a kingdom because protista is paraphyletic). My opinion is that it is a bit premature to worry too much about the rank; maybe it would be better to change "kingdom" to "group" or something. Kingdon (talk) 20:25, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
-
- Sounds like you get to Wikipedia:Be bold. Kingdon (talk) 18:16, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
taxbox needs to be changed too, though i don't no how to change it. --AznShark (talk) 18:42, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
- Someone tried here but that isn't correct; there is no "group" parameter to taxoboxes. There is also no "unranked_regnum" (the unranked feature is for phylum to family; see Wikipedia:WikiProject_Tree_of_Life/taxobox_usage#Unranked taxa). Also, taxobox coloration is based on kingdom, and there's also the question of all the taxoboxes for all the taxa within the Rhizaria. If someone really wants to try to take this on, propose something at WT:TOL, but it is far from clear to me what a solution would look like given the unsettled nature of the research itself. Kingdon (talk) 04:07, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
