Talk:Blue poison dart frog

Venom

what insects does it derive its venom from? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.225.26.210 (talk • contribs) 21:40, 26 October 2005

- arent there any frog experts on the web anymore? this is an amazing creature people. enrich this page doctors —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.229.64.193 (talk • contribs) 00:42, 15 December 2005

It gets its poison from a special small ant. Cant remember its name though. It takes it up by eating the ant.. --David Munch (talk) 21:07, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

The poisonous one

One of the ants in its nautral enviroment makes the pdf's toxins. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.144.217.99 (talk • contribs) 04:43, 4 July 2006

Strictly speaking, this is still a matter of study. It appears that there are a limited number of ant species that produce the poison. See the entries on Batrachotoxin for details. --Leperflesh 00:38, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

Images

The image gallery was recently removed. [1]. I think that image galleries for species articles are actually really useful, as the appearance of a species cannot be expressed by a single image of one individual from a single angle. I'd like to restore the gallery, but I'll wait a few days for comments. Enuja 01:02, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Does the "gallery remover" really expect a casual or inexperienced reader (maybe a child doing homework) to go to another site (Commons) to find the extra pictures. I know that a link to Commons can be made in the article (which is a good idea) but even then the reader should find in WP a self contained article with (usually) no need to go elsewhere. We are not trying to make a 2-part encyclopedia (read the article then go to Commons). The argument that "Commons is for galleries" is therefore false. Commons is a picture repository for use in all WPs so here we've made use of it. I've restored the Gallery because, given the removers misunderstanding of what Commons is, a concensus is not needed. Note also that Galleries are a feature of very many WP articles so remove this one and they all have to go (imagine the anger!!) - Adrian Pingstone 06:23, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Poison "taken" and "deposited in" skin?

This statement is unclear:

"The paralytic neurotoxins are not produced by the frog itself, but taken from many of its insect prey in the wild and deposited in the skin."

Is the poison being rubbed on its skin by the frog, or digested and excreted from the skin?

If the latter, rephrase as:

"The paralytic neurotoxins are not produced by the frog itself, but obtained by ingesting insect prey containing the toxins, and storing the poisonous chemicals in its skin."

OR "... excreting the poisonous chemicals from its skin." -- depending on whether the chemicals mainly exist in the skin or as an ooze on it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.201.168.122 (talk) 08:04, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

Incorrect naming

The species Dendrobates azureus was described by Hoogmoed in 1969, not by Girard in 1855. However, it now seems that D. azureus is only a subspecies or a variety of Dendrobates tinctorius, which wàs desribed by Girard in 1855. I am however not sure if this has already been discussed in an official publication. In any case, the name "Dendrobates azureus Girard, 1855", as it is now given in the taxonbox, is wrong. Scarabaeoid (talk) 02:37, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

Corrected now. Thanks for bringing it up and remember you can be bold! :-) mgiganteus1 (talk) 03:22, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

File:Dendrobates azureus qtl1.jpg to appear as POTD

Hello! This is a note to let the editors of this article know that File:Dendrobates azureus qtl1.jpg will be appearing as picture of the day on December 19, 2013. You can view and edit the POTD blurb at Template:POTD/2013-12-19. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. Thanks! — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:27, 29 November 2013 (UTC)

Picture of the day

Dendrobates azureus, commonly known as the blue poison dart frog or okopipi, is a poison dart frog found in the forests surrounded by the Sipaliwini Savanna in southern Suriname. Authorities have recently treated it as a variant of Dendrobates tinctorius rather than a distinct species as before.Photo: Quartl

Whats poisonous about it?

No mention of the toxin. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.115.175.170 (talk) 02:56, 19 December 2013 (UTC)

The toxin comes from the frog feeding on insects such as ants that have toxins in them. The frog itself does not produce toxins. Javenemani (talk) 03:35, 13 September 2020 (UTC)

Possible Incongruity in the Description and Reproduction Sections

Hello,

I just wanted to let the community know of a possible incongruity in this article. In the Description section, it says that the " D. tinctorius 'azureus' [...] has a typical lifespan of five to seven years in the wild.", whereas in the Reproduction section, it says that "The expected lifespan of D. tinctorius azureus is between 40 and 60 years in the wild [...]". Which one of these statements is the correct one?

Cheers! — Preceding unsigned comment added by ThuliumSelenium (talk • contribs) 02:48, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

Unusual Convention in Subspecies Name

Most places the trinomial name is listed, azureus is in quotes, and it is often capitalized. This is not common for subspecies names, and I don't know what meaning this styling is trying to convey. Is it meant to indicate that the name is not an official subspecies name? If so, it should not be in italics, and a sentence should be added explaining what is going on. In addition, the species page lists two subspecies including this one. Whatever the correct answer is, these two pages should be consistent. Raran75 (talk) 23:43, 10 September 2022 (UTC)