Talk:Pelycosaur

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject Palaeontology (Rated Start-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Palaeontology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of palaeontology-related topics and create a standardized, informative, comprehensive and easy-to-use resource on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Amphibians and Reptiles (Rated Start-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon Pelycosaur is part of WikiProject Amphibians and Reptiles, an attempt at creating a standardized, informative, comprehensive and easy-to-use amphibians and reptiles resource. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit this article, or visit the project page for more information.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
Wikipedia CD Selection
WikiProject icon Pelycosaur is included in the Wikipedia CD Selection, see Pelycosaur at Schools Wikipedia. Please maintain high quality standards; if you are an established editor your last version in the article history may be used so please don't leave the article with unresolved issues, and make an extra effort to include free images, because non-free images cannot be used on the DVDs.
 


Untitled[edit]

Shouldn't the entry mention that pelycosaurs were mammal like reptiles?

No, because they weren't what is usually meant by the term. More properly, they were the line that led to the mammal-like reptiles, or Theraspids. CFLeon 07:47, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
At Synapsid Pelycosaurs and Theraspids are co-orders of the same class, so I've changed the article to say they are cousins. --Michael C. Price talk 10:32, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Pelycosauria redefined[edit]

A new definition for Pelycosauria is here provided:

Pelycosauria Cope, 1878 New defintion - All synapsids closer to Eupelycosauria and Caseasauria than to basal Synapsida.

yes but Pelycosaurs are basal Synapsids; it's a paraphyletic group M Alan Kazlev 04:28, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

O.k. they're paraphyletic, No biggie. Keeps the taxon within sensible limits. Also its better to define a taxon (genus, family, order, etc) on observable characters rather than, more closely related to this than to that. J.H.McDonnell (talk) 00:57, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

Text contradicts illustration?[edit]

According to the text, the clade Eupelycosauria includes the Theraspids. Acoording to the taxonomy list, they are a sub-order of order Pelycosaur beside order Theraspida.

I get that there are competing systems out there, but someone should clean that up, at least a note or a comment. --Sukkoth 20:55, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

Unnecessary bother[edit]

It seems a lot of bother is made over clades which are based on a concept not all that difficult to understand. Clades of best used when evolutionary relationships are the issue, especially those which follow. When the concern is over a particular and well defined group, such as Pelycosaurs, the cladistic approach isn't particularly useful, if at all. In this case its better to think of them in the traditional sense as an ordinary taxon.

When it says "At least two pelycosaur clades independently evolved a tall sail, ..etc" it could have just as well have said: at least two pelycosauran families independently evolved a tall sail. For practical purposed in this case the two terms are interchangeable, except that clade is more ambiguous.

Just one man's perspective. Cheers J.H.McDonnell (talk) 00:51, 17 September 2010 (UTC)


comparison to Late Devonian extinction ??[edit]

The late Devonian extinction c.370Ma can be construed, as resulting from the fishes' evolution of jaws, and teeth, c.400Ma; fish then went on a global feeding frenzy, and gradually drove many other species extinct; so explaining the higher background-rate of (marine) extinction after 400Ma. A hundred million years later, the evolution of warm-blood, by basal Therapsids, may have been a similar "quantum leap" in evolution, causing a burst of Therapsid expansion across Pangea, which came at the expense, of more primitive species, who suffered Olson's Extinction c.270Ma. The article's reference to "late surviving forms" of Pelycosaurs, echoes similar statements for (even more primitive) Varanopidae, who also eked out survival, in then-arctic South Africa, until c.260Ma. Plausibly, warm-blooded Therapsids evolved an advanced(-for-earth) feature c.270Ma, which was then a "quantum leap" over contemporary species, even as eons earlier, jawed fish evolved an advanced feature. Perhaps such biogenic mass extinctions become less frequent, over evolutionary time, as more advanced features become more common? If so, then modern anthropogenic extinctions may be part of a persistent pattern, spanning nearly a half billion years, of "quantum advances" bringing about biogenic mass extinctions (not caused by geologic, or cosmologic, pheonomena). Contact with advanced species may have caused the late Devonian, and mid Permian, mass extinctions.66.235.38.214 (talk) 12:26, 22 October 2012 (UTC)