Jump to content

Talk:Opossum

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Magicmat (talk | contribs) at 11:38, 6 April 2024 (→Who is “Siebert”?: Fixed book status). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Genus

Why is Gracilinanus listed twice, once as an already existing genus, and once as a separate genus? john k 15:56, 3 Apr 2005 (UTC)

"Gracilinanus" refers to a group of taxa that has been referred to Gracilinanus, however, unpublished research by Robert S. Voss and others (submitted) suggests that the five taxa belong to a separate genus. Another name might indeed be better to avoid confusion. I'll name it the agricolai-unduaviensis group. Ucucha 16:36, 3 Apr 2005 (UTC)

It's described now, as Cryptonanus. A PDF is available here. I'm going to write an article on nl:Cryptonanus. Ucucha|... 19:15, 14 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

"Proto-Algonquin" spelling

The Proto-Algonquin spelling provided has two non-Latin characters in it. One is a theta (appears as ϑ in my browser, but as θ when I copy the text into an editor); the other looks like a question mark and I wonder if it's a character that doesn't appear in my computer's font, or simply a mistake that doesn't belong there. The Proto-Algonquin page linked to shows theta as one of a couple non-Latin characters used to transcribe the language, but otherwise it's not using anything exotic. The Proto-Algonquin page also offers no insight into the leading asterisk (*) in the spelling. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.202.166.103 (talk) 18:08, 7 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Picture

I think this picture is horrible. Ucucha 18:08, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I agree completely. It looks like something out of a bad horror movie. There are some public domain images [here]. I think "opossum_in_tree_closeup.jpg" is the best image. I'd put it in myself, but I can't upload anything to the Commons. StradivariusTV 05:34, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Opossums are ugly no matter how the picture is taken. Sandy June 02:08, 27 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]


THAT is a POV thank you163.21.216.253 06:43, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Opossums have been in Ontario, Canada for over 30 years

My dad and I found a dead one around 1975 near the source of the Humber River.

The only report reference I could find in a quick search was dating from 1982,[1] but thats good enough for me to do a reword of the line to remove the date of 1990. -Dawson 06:56, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I think they're getting more common, though. I live near a ravine in northern Toronto and there's been one prowling around my backyard. My dad has lived in this house for more than 35 years and never saw one before. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.226.89.244 (talk) 14:32, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed merge

Bugger this. I'm going to speedy close this as just plain wrong. They're not even in the same order. Snottygobble 03:45, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Possum/Opossum

Aren't they even more commonly called possums than opossums in North America? It's sort of slang, but has become entrenched enough to appear in dictionaries. Maybe this should be mentioned here. And on the Possum page (which describes Oceanic marspials), it would probably be helpful to note that the word is also used to decribe American marsupials. Tenfour 15:46, 2 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Technically speaking, the North American "'possum" is eqvuivalent to "opossum", while "possum" refers only to the Oceanic species. If you'll note the first paragraph of this article, this is already pointed out to some degree. Any more would be too much, IMO. - UtherSRG (talk) 16:30, 2 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Scientifically, opossum = North American, while possum = Australian. Dora Nichov 03:53, 20 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Just ask Dame Edna. --jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 00:40, 7 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Apparently another editor did not understand this comment, so deleted it. I'm surprised her article doesn't mention it; my fault for assuming it would -- she refers to her fans as "possums", and it was only upon reading this article that I learned that she was talking about the cute-looking Australian possums, not the kinda weird and creepy looking American opossum. A distinction she would understand -- and a confusion she probably takes advantage of. --jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 16:11, 7 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Opossum---A mammal that is flat that lives in the middle of the road Merooster (talk) 11:13, 1 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Lifespan

I came to this page to confirm or deny another page's claim that opossums live to be only 1-2 years old. Is estimated lifespan not encyclopediac? 66.57.225.77 20:25, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Which species? And yes it is encyclopedic, but that doesn't mean those who have editted the article know that information. - UtherSRG (talk) 20:57, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Infant mortality is rather high, but the normal lifespan of a Virginia Opossum that reaches maturity is 2-3 years in the wild. In captivity the normal is 3 years, but I know of a few rare instances when individual animals have lived as long as 5.69.134.14.112 (talk) 19:06, 29 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"Opossum?"

I live in the US. I wanted to know what an 'opossum' was (technically speaking, I've seen more than one in my house!), came to this 'opossum' redirect....This is sooooo NOT what I was hoping to see. Redirect to 'Virginia Opossum' would seem much more appropriate, from an admittedly biased American perspective. Middlenamefrank 05:39, 14 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A redirect to Virginia Opossum, the only opossum in North America, would be incorrect, as there are many species of opossum living south of our border. You know that now. Did you learn that from having the redirect as it is? If so, then there is no problem. If not, then we need to work on the intro to *this* article, not change the redirect. (Or perhaps move this page to "opossum"....) - UtherSRG (talk) 12:49, 14 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Right. Although there's only one species of opossum in North America, there are lots more in South America. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Dora Nichov (talk • contribs).

Thats only true if you do not consider Mexico part of North America. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.217.60.7 (talk) 00:37, 8 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Opposums and Pets

I would like to see some information on how opposums get along with outdoor pets. I have a large opposum sheltering under a deck where my cat also shelters. I have observed this opposum eating my cat's food when it is left outside. I am particularly interested to know if opposums pose any threat to cats. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 67.117.31.69 (talk • contribs).


Unlike cats, opossums lack the instinct to bury their dung, but they tend to go to the bathroom in the same place, with some regularity. Your observation is correct: opossums can eat catfood, but tend to prefer fresh bread, as the scent of fresh bread will pique their interest more than the scent of catfood will. This may only be anecdotal, but we had a loaf of bread that was left out, and they went to it, ripping the plastic bag open in the middle, to get at the bread. Apparently they found the scent of fresh bread much more appealing than the scent of fresh catfood. As you already know, they have long skinny snouts, and have a very keen sense of smell, probably shaped through eons of evolution, to favor the scent of rotten meat, or carrion overwhelmingly appetizing. Even though that may be the case, they nevertheless chose our loaf of white bread over our sack of catfood. 198.177.25.10 (talk) 23:43, 25 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Article talk pages are for discussing the improvement of the article, nothing else. - UtherSRG (talk) 13:05, 8 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

We rehabilitate opossums. I've released 14 and have two currently that are almost ready for release. We also have two cats. They generally ignore each other. Opossums are not aggressive animals. Vnarfhuhwef (talk) 18:52, 15 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A young opossum hanging around my home is paticular fond of cruncy cheetos. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Reandrews (talk • contribs) 17:52, 11 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

teets

I heard that opossums have their teets arranged in a circle with one in the middle. I haven't been able to find anything on teet arrangement. Can someone answer this question for me? I'm just curious. Thank you —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 65.241.19.3 (talk • contribs).

Your answer is on the Virginia Opossum article. - UtherSRG (talk) 09:49, 30 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Date of reference is wrong

The following text:

The opossum was described as early as 1565 in the published letter entitled "Carigueya, Seu Marsupiale Americanum Masculum. Or, The Anatomy of a Male Opossum: In a Letter to Dr Edward Tyson, from Mr William Cowper, Chirurgeon, and Fellow of the Royal Society, London. To Which are Premised Some Further Observations on the Opossum; And a New Division of Terrestrial Brute Animals, Particularly of Those That Have Their Feet Formed Like Hands. Where an Account is Given of Some Animals Not Yet Described", by Edward Tyson, M. D. Fellow of the College of Physicians and of the Royal Society. The letter suggests even earlier descriptions.[6]

is wrong, or at least irretrievably confused. The date of the letter is asserted to be 1565, but the Royal Society was established in 1666, more than a century later. This text was added by an anon in march 2007. I just added the links to the society and to Cowper, but then noticed that the dates don't match. Of the three possible "William Cowper"s that are FRS, the only surgeon, William Cowper (anatomist), was born in 1666 and died on 1709, and was a contemporary of Dr Edward Tyson. Furthermore, there was almost not english presence in Virginia before 1607. Can someone with access to JSTOR please check the source? - Arch dude (talk

  • Aha! The anon contributor was merely confused, not a vandal. The letter was published in 1698, but is was published on Page 1565: Philosophical Transactions (1683-1775), Volume 24, pp. 1565-1575

see [2] I will repair the article. -Arch dude

Common not scientific name

This article should be under the common not the scientific name. I propose moving it to "Opossum" rather than having Opossum redirect here as it does now.--Doug.(talk • contribs) 11:43, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Why? what would this accomplish? Anyone who searches for "Opossum" will find the article anyway. Furthermore, the REAL common name is possum, or perhaps 'possum. "Opossum" is never use in common speech that I have ever heard, at least in Virginia, Tennessee, South Carolina, or Georgia. -Arch dude 04:38, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Opossum was the vernacular in Tennessee, Georgia, Virginia and North Carolina. If someone from the Appalachian South fought in WWII they almost certainly said opossum. That changed radically with the first generation of people born after the war. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:151:8200:8EAC:3476:ABFC:AABC:5A01 (talk) 06:19, 21 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Because that's the naming convention for fauna. See, Wikipedia:WikiProject_Tree_of_Life#Article_titles.--Doug.(talk • contribs) 20:02, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

I cannot speak informedly on usage outside of the one species indigenous to America (the Virginia Opossum), but the name almost exclusively used is "opossum", for both common and scientific purposes (although, to my knowledge, no variant of "opossum" appears in any taxonomic nomenclature).

Alexis Brooke M 04:01, 9 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

University of Florida reports opossums with rabies are rare

The Wikipedia article about opossums states that "...rabies is almost unknown in opossums." This statement may not be accurate or may not be accurate in all cases. The University of Florida IFAS Extension office reports "Opossums, like most other animals, are susceptible to infection by the rabies virus; however, very few rabid wild opossums have been documented." This information can be found here (look under the information section): http://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/UW026

PLohr (talk) 10:27, 21 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

to the best of my knowledge (and the editors of wikipedia's Rabies entry, only mammals are vulnerable to the rabies virus. and it seems that opossums are indeed known to vulnerable, though showing some resistance to it with certain modes of transmission (i.e., intramuscular). - Metanoid (talk, email) 06:34, 5 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am not an expert on opossum but i think it would be good addition to article when some one can add rabies risk and talk about other diseases that affect opossum. Also I think it was rude to send away the user above that asked about opossums and pets, what is so bad to say more about opossums if they can be pets, if they get along with others. Some readers want to know that more than what kind of dental the opossums have. Thanks RetroS1mone talk 12:37, 9 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I am an expert in opossums and the above person who was "sent away" was not asking about keeping opossums as pets. They were asking about their behaviour around pets. (specifically their cat) Opossums should not be kept as pets. They are wild animals with a very complex diet. We rehabilitate them and I can tell you from personal experience that they are very high maintenance animals. The only opossums you see in captivity are either pre-release rescues or adults deemed non-releaseable because of health issues. In either case, it is illegal to have a captive opossum without a state license. If you have more questions, feel free to contact me. Vnarfhuhwef (talk) 18:59, 15 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
State laws vary considerable regarding keeping native species as pets. For example: In North Carolina a permit must be obtained to keep almost any native species while in South Carolina I understand permits are only required for Federally protected and rabies vector species. As a licensed wildlife rehabilitator in North Carolina I have rehabilitated several hundred Virginia Opossums over the years. (I had several dozen this year alone and I currently have 5 which are pending being healthy or old enough to release.) A very small handful have stayed permanently due to physical disabilities which prevented release (with appropriate NC permit.) Regarding rabies: The article cited on rabies statistics is highly questionable. It cites a report which is unpublished, apparently not peer reviewed, and not available for confirmation as the data source. Rabies is a reportable disease and according to the data published on the CDC web site there have been a total of 14 Opossums which were positive for rabies in the US in the past 10 years (as compared to 22 humans, 2,326 cats, 12,106 bats and 21,054 raccoons.) Per the CDC data, there have been no documented cases of opossums ever transmitting rabies to a human. CDC's Rabies Advisory Committee classes the Virginia Opossum, along with small rodents, moles and lagomorphs (rabbits) as "extremely low risk." Their guidelines indicate post exposure rabies vaccination is not medically justified or appropriate for humans bitten by opossums (and does not even recommend testing the animal) unless very specific, and unlikely, circumstances are present.
CDC's rabies page: http://www.cdc.gov/rabies/index.html
NC Dept of Public Health Rabies Page: http://www.epi.state.nc.us/epi/rabies/state.html
CharmsDad (talk) 04:27, 29 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Did anyone ever really address the rabies information presented here? We have a large population of opossums in California, with almost none of those tested being found positive. One in 800 is certainly an overstatement, at least in this area. [[[User:Stmelangell|Stmelangell]] (talk) 23:22, 23 September 2012 (UTC)][reply]

As Food

While I respect the desire for documentation, it can get a little silly. Recipes in old books are pretty strong evidence of food use. Another: Best Yet Life and Lore of the Smokies By Bonnie Trentham Myers, 160, 178 et passim. One can also search "possums for food" and get lots. Same thing was at issue in the raccoonarticle. DavidOaks (talk) 03:27, 12 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Added a note, with a memoir source, on possum pie, which I have actually tasted. It is every bit as revolting as you think. DavidOaks (talk) 03:36, 12 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Foodways?

The opossum can not have "foodways" as described by the wikipedia article foodways because these are uniquely human. Possums can not have social, cultural, or economic activities. Pygmypony (talk) 15:29, 22 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, they can't have "historical references," either. Nor hunting (or at least, we'd only be able to talk about what they hunt, rather than what hunts them). For precision's sake, what about "In Hunting and Foodways"?DavidOaks (talk) 18:43, 22 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps we can compromise by changing the heading to "human predation" or "consumption by humans".Pygmypony (talk) 02:53, 17 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Naming/Spelling?

What about the spelling standard of possum. Being there is apparently a difference between Opossum and possum, but I had been tought that for a possum it was spelled with a leading apostrophe ( ' ) as in 'possum. Bdelisle (talk) 03:35, 3 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That's what I learned also. (BTW, note that "being that" is not grammatical standard English.) Zaslav (talk) 18:04, 9 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This is incorrect^

Reproduction and lifestyle

  • There are several incorrect or inconsistent items in this section. I'm going to spend the next couple of days cleaning up what I can find good citations for. (I don't have much extra time each day to dedicate to this.) A lot of the information in this article is specific to the Virginia Opossum and not the order or family. I think the article is confusing. Vnarfhuhwef (talk) 01:05, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Marsupials do NOT have a placenta, which is specifically what separates them from the other live bearing mammals and is why the young are born so early. Fetal development occurs in the pouch. The actual number born in the new world opossums is quite debated but surprisingly not well documented. All Marsupials have a divided uterus as do the most primitive members of the placental mammals (Edentates: sloths, anteaters, armadillos) They also have twin lateral vaginal canals and a birth canal which is central and separate. Most male marsupials have a two-lobed penis.CharmsDad (talk) 04:50, 29 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I've added a couple of references to support the claim that opossums do, indeed, have a placenta of sorts. However, the previous version of the article implied that they have a fully functional, invasive, placenta (albeit only by omitting to say that they don't), which was somewhat misleading, since its really quite a simple structure, and not at all like the one found in placental mammals. Anaxial (talk) 07:26, 23 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The common opossums of the Americas are the only modern marsupials which are not endemic to the Australian Realm

This claim contradicts two other wikipedia pages. The Monito del Monte and the Shrew opossum are South American marsupials not in the order Didelphimorphia. The source for the disputed claim is a youtube video, whereas the contradicting pages refer to scholarly sources. Therefore I propose to delete the claim. Qemist (talk) 21:31, 30 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Done Qemist (talk) 01:33, 1 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, it's out-of-date. Shrew-opposums and the Monito del Monte used to be considered didelphimorphs, but that hasn't been true for a long time. Anaxial (talk) 08:55, 1 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Could someone explain how this marsupial ended up in the Americas when the other marsupials we know of are in Australia? Carlm0404 (talk) 00:25, 4 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Marsupials had a much wider distribution in earlier geological periods. They could have gotten to Australia from Asia, or from Antarctica. 2601:441:4900:A6E0:C858:16CC:5C63:E59A (talk) 14:41, 15 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Old history

Some old page history that used to be at the title "opossum" can now be found at Talk:Opossum/Old history. Graham87 16:00, 20 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Why? Ucucha 16:01, 20 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Possums in Australia

Possums are not eaten in pies here. They are a protected species and not allowed to be hunted and eaten. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 150.101.211.188 (talk) 02:50, 27 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

True enough, but you're thinking of possums, not opossums - different animal. Anaxial (talk) 07:29, 23 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

possum

The forms "possum" and "'possum" are common in North America. I added a mention of this, as I could find no discussion on why not to. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mkehrt (talk • contribs) 01:50, 9 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • The problem is that this article is on the Order of Opossum, not the species often thought of when you mention Opossum. That species being the Virginia Opossum. The order includes species found in South America and Australia. I've thought that this article needs cleaned up in this respect for a while, but I haven't done anything about it personally. I'm sure everyone appreciates the good faith edits. Vnarfhuhwef (talk) 11:16, 9 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

possums

I can't speak factually other than my personal experiences and the comments from my vets. Hubby says we have the Holts Summit City Zoo because we have dogs, cats, horses, deer, possums, coons, kois, fish of all kinds, cardinals, eagles, hawks, and a green wing macaw which he hates.

Granted most of these are wild animals - hence the 'zoo', lol!

Now, back to topic. We have coons and possums who think they are pets. Come on the deck to get in the trash cans, but will tease the dogs through the french doors in the early am. If it was a cartoon, they would have their thumbs in the ears going 'nah, nah, nah!'.

The possums are not welcome. Because of the horses - their feces can be fatal to a horse. However, like I said, ours think they are pets. I let the cat out one night and went to call it back. Didn't turn the deck light on but saw the cat on the steps but she didn't come. Went out in the dark and sat on step and petted the cat. As I ran my hand down her tail, I said 'what happened to your tail'? Ok, I'm a ditz - I talk to animals, computers, myself - ok, don't put me away yet!

At that point he turned to look at me and we both took off running - opposite directions - it was the possum!

I do take exception to the not aggressive statement. They haven't been to me, but I have seen them tear other animals, including dogs, to pieces.

If I can attach a pic I will. Here goes.

Ok, inserting pics didn't work. Anyone have any suggestions on how to insert pics? THanks.


Reference to Non-Releasable

I'm not really liking the recent edits added to the behavior section. They are a copy/paste verbatim of the website used in the reference. I'm not assuming anything, but I will say it looks like the owner of the website may have contributed the edits. They are, of course, welcome to edit the article. And I'm also not saying that the behavior mentioned doesn't happen. I've personally rehabbed many opossums. But I would like to see those edits rewritten and a stronger reference found for them. Vnarfhuhwef (talk) 01:48, 25 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Doesn't really matter who added the edits; they are clear copyvio. I've deleted them, and warned the editor. Anaxial (talk) 20:23, 25 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Opossum or Virginia Opossum?

I moved some material that was clearly about the Virginia Opossum, but how much of what remains is? The Reproduction, Diet, and Behavior sections look very suspicious. —JerryFriedman (Talk) 04:51, 24 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Cuba and Dominica?

The "Hunting and foodways" section talks about Cuba and Dominica, but there are no marsupials mentioned at List of mammals of Cuba and List of mammals of Dominica. A search for references to opossums on Cuba didn't turn up anything plausible. I suspect the part about Cuba, if genuine, refers to hutias, as these rodents have been miscalled opossums [3] [4]. —JerryFriedman (Talk) 14:37, 24 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I'm not aware of any opposums in the Caribbean, either, nor can I find any reference to such.Anaxial (talk) 14:47, 24 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Didelphis marsupialis occurs north to Dominica in the Lesser Antilles, though it may have been introduced; see Mammals of the Caribbean#Opossums. There are indeed no marsupials on Cuba. Ucucha 20:12, 24 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. I've deleted the reference to Cuba. The material on the Common Opossum probably needs to be moved to that article, especially if there's a source. —JerryFriedman (Talk) 01:52, 25 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Taxobox

Since the scientific name redirects to this page, this page requires a taxobox. Craig Pemberton 18:37, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

Quite right. The taxobox was deleted by a vandal on 4th May, but for some reason, was not reverted properly. I have now restored it. Anaxial (talk) 20:02, 7 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Anal glands?

I believe marsupial morphology indicates that an opossum would have a cloaca, and the "anal" scent gland(s) (typically 2) would actually be "paracloacal glands" (close to, but not part of the cloaca). "Anal gland" might be common name, but is not the correct name. This assumes that an opossum is anatomically similar to Petauridae in that area -- but that is not certain. ~E 74.60.29.141 (talk) 05:13, 9 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
A quick check didn't reveal anything specific to the opossum, but this relates to the Bushtail possum: [5] ~E 74.60.29.141 (talk) 05:25, 9 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Diverse habitats?

I note that an IP has twice removed the request for a citation for this line of the article: 

Their unspecialized biology, flexible diet and reproductive strategy make them successful colonizers and survivors in diverse locations and conditions.

The claim being made is that the statement is so "obvious" that it should be exempt from needing to be demonstrated in reliable sources. Now, that might be fair enough if the statement were obvious (per the second paragarph of WP:NOR), but I don't see that it is. I'm not saying it's untrue, mind you, just that it's not so obvious as to be exempt from the need for a citation if it is challenged - as it has been. Specifically, I don't see that it's "obvious" that an opossum has an unspecialised biology (though it probably does), nor do I see that it's obvious it's reproductive strategy would make it adaptable to diverse conditions (how does it make it adaptable?), nor do I even see that it's obvious that opposums are, in fact, "successful colonisers and survivors in diverse... conditions" (relative to what?) The claim seems plausible enough not to be deleted as unsourced, but not so obvious that it doesn't need a citation. In fact, if it is that widely known, presumably a citation can't be hard to find? Anaxial (talk) 00:34, 26 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Possums in Florida

Based on that "map", one would assume there is not a single chance of possums in Florida or the SE US. This is certainly not the case. These guys inhabit my garbage cans and routinely lock horns with my dogs.

I think you're misreading the map. The grey colour represents the area that opossums inhabit, and that certainly includes Florida and the SE US. Anaxial (talk) 21:59, 5 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I think that map is based on a certain variety of possum not found in the SE US. This should be expanded to encompass all varieties of this species, esp. in an article simply entitled "opossum".

That would certainly be useful, if someone is willing to produce one? Anaxial (talk) 21:59, 5 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The present map probably shouldn't be in the article at all, as the map shows only one species of opossum, the Virginia opossum. Also, it's confusing, as it shows that this species occurs in the southern U.S., including Florida, but at first glance I too though the gray area showed where it wasn't found, not where it was. —JerryFriedman (Talk) 15:56, 8 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Silent letters

We're all finished here. A new thread can start when new information arises. The Mysterious El Willstro (talk) 21:38, 9 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The O in "opossum" is spelled but not pronounced. It is a silent letter, just like the H in the word "honest." The articles "a" and "an" are correctly based on the first pronounced letter, not simply the first letter.

So, you have the phrase "an honest man" not "a honest man," even though H is a consonant. Likewise, the phrase should be "a opossum" not "an opossum," again based on the first pronounced letter.

Therefore, I will go through the Article changing "an opossum" to "a opossum." The O in "opossum" is no different from the H in "honest." The Mysterious El Willstro (talk) 02:28, 1 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This is not necessarily true: the OED says the pronunciation is "Brit. /əˈpɒsəm/ , U.S. /(ə)ˈpɑs(ə)m/". I've always heard it pronounced with the o in America. Note also that the word possum is used for a different group of marsupials. Ucucha (talk) 06:26, 1 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
There may be places in the U.S. where the "o" is pronounced, but I've never been there. In Tennessee and Virginia, the "o" is silent. -Arch dude (talk) 07:57, 1 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The O is silent in my home state of Pennsylvania as well. The Mysterious El Willstro (talk) 14:49, 1 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
My impression (supported by the Concise OED, although I'm not suggesting that that's the final word on the matter) is that the 'o' is always pronounced, but that "possum" is a common slang expression for the animal formally known as an "opossum". So I'd suggest that what we need is written sources using either "a" or "an" when the word is spelled in full, or dictionaries that give the pronunciation, and follow whichever is the most common. A preliminary online search seems to suggest that both pronunciations are equally common in the US, which doesn't help much... (The 'o' is always pronounced in Britain, but, per WP:ENGVAR, that's not relevant here). Anaxial (talk) 18:36, 1 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Has anyone who reads this ever heard a long-term U.S. resident pronounce the "o" in ordinary conversation? I never have, and I'm 63 years old. If you have heard this, please describe where and in what context. I have encountered 'possums in most of the states of the U.S. southeastern states, and discussed them with neighbors and acquaintances there. -Arch dude (talk) 19:35, 1 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I'd have to say that that sounds like original research, and, in any event, since we're writing here, and WP isn't casual conversation, I'd argue that it's more important how its used in other written sources. More easily verified that way, too. Anaxial (talk) 19:54, 1 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Absolutely. Also, in northern Ohio, where I'm from, and in Illinois, where I went to grad school, everyone I heard pronounced the "o" (and we did have them in both places).
The Merriam-Webster Dictionary on line gives the schwa in parentheses. The American Heritage Dictionary gives the pronunciation with an initial vowel first. It also send you to a note at "tater", which reads, "Since English is a language that stresses some syllables and not others, weakly stressed syllables, especially those preceding strong stresses, are dropped at times. This process, called aphesis when it occurs at the beginning of a word, is more common in regional American dialects than in the more conservative Standard English, which tends to retain in pronunciation anything reflected in spelling. Although many American dialects feature aphesis, it is most famous in the dialects of the South, where it yields pronunciations such as count of for (on) account of, possum for opossum, tater for potato, and skeeter for mosquito." —JerryFriedman (Talk) 13:59, 3 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I've reverted the change to "a opossum". —JerryFriedman (Talk) 14:09, 3 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The Oxford American Edition puts the vowel in parentheses, indicating it can be unpronounced while still spelling the word with the O. That said, it is hard for a Pennsylvania boy like me to take seriously the comparison of spelling "opossum" with a silent O (and not pronouncing it) to "count of," "skeeter," and even to a lesser extent "tater." I come from a Northern state where those other examples ("count of" and "skeeter") are rare, but basically everyone here spells "opossum" with a silent O just like the H in "honest." The Mysterious El Willstro (talk) 18:10, 3 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
My mother's from Pittsburgh, and she says "opossum" in three syllables. I'm not sure I've heard any of her Pittsburgh relatives talk about these beasts, but I can't imagine most of them saying "possum".
There are hits at Google Books for "a opossum", but "an opossum" is far more common, and if you search GB, you'll find that many of the hits are in non-standard English. I think we can safely call "an opossum" the only encyclopedic spelling, regardless of the pronunciation. —JerryFriedman (Talk) 23:37, 3 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Also, the AHD note said aphesis in the South yields "possum", but it didn't say anything about whether that happens in other parts of the country too. —JerryFriedman (Talk) 23:38, 3 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I'm actually somewhat closer to Philadelphia than to Pittsburgh (about an hour and a half north of Harrisburg the Capital). My peers and I would differ from your mother in being totally the opposite end of the state. Anyway, it's kind of like saying "an historic" instead of "a historic" even though in American English that H is pronounced (unlike the H in "honest"). It's annoying when a Header Template allegedly says the Article is written in American (not British) English, but one deals with it. I'll back off if someone at least sticks a FAQ to the Talk Page Header. The Mysterious El Willstro (talk) 06:47, 4 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
What do you have in mind? It's not a frequently asked question. —JerryFriedman (Talk) 22:19, 4 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
It's not a question, but it is an issue that I'm sure will cross a lot of people's minds. The Mysterious El Willstro (talk) 22:23, 6 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Really? I don't think any problem with the spelling "an opossum" will cross anybody's mind but yours and maybe those of people you suggest it to. If it happens to the extent that this discussion isn't enough, I think that will be time to think about a note on this page. —JerryFriedman (Talk) 03:36, 7 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
That will be a new thread at that time. For now, I think we all have bigger fish to fry. The Mysterious El Willstro (talk) 21:36, 9 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

"Possum" needed only once

The current first paragraph says twice that people often say "possum". I think it's needed only once. Would anyone like to fix this, or should I? —JerryFriedman (Talk) 13:22, 10 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

By all means, Jerry. That's pretty straightforward. PAGauden (talk) 18:33, 7 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Possum vs. Opossum

I've only seen "O"possum used in very liberal N. American public school textbooks -- Probably something you'd see in New England, even though this creature exists only in Southern States (ie. -- virgins writing about sex). Are there any other (balanced) references to reinforce this nomenclature? This naming convention seems to be something designed to be purposely contrarian or obscure for the sake of being so. Nobody I know that inhabits the same space as this creature says "O"possum, but a Northerner (without access) will be lighting quick to correct them on their spelling/pronounciation?? Political correctness (or something else)? Agenda? American English does not have a silent "O". This seems to be something from British English (ie. "phOetus") -- but again, this creature does not inhabit the same space from where this seemingly nonsensical pronunciation is derived, which makes one question the motivation for the spelling of "Opossum". 24.51.222.35 (talk) 11:57, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Dictionaries are our references. Wikipedia uses the dictionary spellings of words, and for English names of organisms, uses the the ones that are used in science. Dictionaries give "opossum" as the main form, and all scientific writing about this species uses "opossum", no matter where the scientists are from or what political beliefs they have.
That settles the question of what to write in the article, but I'll answer your comments about who uses the pronunciation and spelling. As I said in the discussion above, I grew up in an area where opossums are found, and spent some years in another such area—both in the North—and I normally heard "opossum" with three syllables and always say it that way. If you search Google Books for "opossum" or "Didelphis virginianus", you'll find many, many books that use "opossum" other than liberal textbooks. —JerryFriedman (Talk) 17:06, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not trying to stir up an argument, but I don't see why "Opossum" cannot be the main entry along with "Possum" as a variant (perhaps in parentheses). Every dictionary I've searched lists both. I'm not sure why scientific dictionaries would necessarily rule here for Wikipedia, which is a common, lay-level online encyclopedia. Merriam-Webster, dictionary.com, free dictionary.com,Oxforddictionaries.com, Macmillandictionaries.com PAGauden (talk) 18:23, 7 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Right now "possum" is mentioned parenthetically as a colloquial use which is how the OED has it listed. That said, that's clearly and objectively wrong. This is the English Wikipedia and not the Standard American English Wikipedia or the Science Wikipedia. In southern US dialects the word is always "possum". Having spent my entire life in various places in the southern US (Texas, Georgia, TN, etc.) I had never heard anyone call that animal "opossum" until I met someone from Boston who did. Unfortunately this is a difficult point to prove (using ghits or examining various corpora) as there is another animal named "possum" different from the American possum. Unless we can come up with a reliable source that discusses this point I think the current manner in which the article handles the situation will have to suffice. SQGibbon (talk) 21:04, 7 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
growing up in western illinois/ eastern iowa (both northern states, which both have a healthy population of opossum), all the people i have ever heard refer to these animals as 'possum, with the understanding that it is really opossum, like a nick name... 'possum is not the true name for the creature, similar to the idea that even though EVERYONE calls them buffalo, that is not really what inhabits the western united states, in actuality they are bison... also similar, that things have real names and what they are called, like we don't say, "canis familiarius," instead we say, "dog." 'possum, possum or opossum, google it and you will get a picture of the animal you are looking for, and if you didn't know that it was actually opossum, you will learn. isn't the main reason for looking something up on the internet, to learn something about it? pardon my grammar, i did not major in language arts. Carebearskinrug (talk) 08:53, 16 August 2017 (UTC) carebearskinrug[reply]
This is a fascinating comment. Possums are found in _most_ US states, including every state in New England. And in New England it’s not even like “technically there are a few...” — they’re really pretty common. They’re also one of the few wild animals larger than a house cat that you’ll come across living in more “natureless” parts of big northern cities (usually seen eating trash at 3 AM). The pronunciation and spelling I grew up with (on Long Island) was “possum”, just like it was for you in Virginia. “Opossum” really is used by people in many parts of the US, though. I know there are folks who get pedantic about reserving “possum” for the Australian animals. Given “possum” was already in use in North America before a single English-speaking person had set foot on Australia and the Australian animal is literally _named after_ the North American animal, that’s certainly very silly. But this doesn’t mean that everyone who says “opossum” is being fussy or overcorrecting; it really is just the more common word in some places. Ironically, some of those places are in the south. This was a very creative idea for a culture war for sure, but I’m afraid the opossum/possum tribes don’t align with the red/blue tribes closely enough for it to work out. 2601:182:C67F:9E50:7C78:53F9:9EF8:65E3 (talk) 06:45, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I live in rural Missouri (we have lots of possums) and I had no idea anybody called them Opossums. If we have a scientific name, and a common name, shouldn’t the common name be what real people actually call the creature? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.35.46.38 (talk) 21:50, 18 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Among other things, please be aware that many animal species will have several different common names, all of them being "the correct name" depending on whom you ask, especially when a species has a large range like Didelphis virginiana, which spans dozens of countries across two continents.--Mr Fink (talk) 22:08, 18 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Google Ngram suggests possum is the more commonly used form of this word. [1] 73.54.161.248 (talk) 19:06, 14 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=possum%2C+opossum&year_start=1800&year_end=2000&corpus=15&smoothing=3&share=&direct_url=t1%3B%2Cpossum%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2Copossum%3B%2Cc0

Throwing in my two cents...In the West, too, they are exclusively called 'possums.' The only place one EVER hears or sees 'opposum' is in grade school science textbooks, and the teacher may make some one-liner comment about 'opossum' being the official name for possums. Now, I have no idea what they say in Nee England, but re: the OP's remarks, it is nothing to do with liberalism. it is annoying, though, that an official name declared some 400 yards ago should be etched in stone for all eternity - and which had not been the commonly used term in, maybe, 390 years? Firejuggler86 (talk) 03:44, 23 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

We only have vague anecdotes claiming that nobody anywhere uses "opossum", apparently based entirely on some political ideology, and specific anecdotes saying that "opossum" is common usage where they actually live today. Either way anecdotes are not valid sources for Wikipedia. The only citable source on pronunciation is the dictionary which lists "opossum" as one that people still use. Please cite non-anecdotal sources. And don't edit just to promote some political goal. 2601:441:4900:A6E0:C858:16CC:5C63:E59A (talk) 14:52, 15 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Behavior Section

The entire article is shaping up nicely with excellent documentation and citations. But the "Behavior" section is lacking in that area. I would prefer to leave the material currently there, but if anyone can provide proper documentation and sourcing, that would really help shore this up. Thank you. Looking excellent. PAGauden (talk) 18:08, 7 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Misleading indents

I'd rather leave this to someone with an existing login and some "cred" on this page...

Two, unnamed, tribe-level subgroups of subfamily "Didelphinae" (according to the classification for the genera therein) are presently indented beneath species "Chironectes minimus"

Yes, it's obviously a simple editing goof--just a bit nettlesome to see.

However, dealing with something like this--however trivial--beats arguing about colloquial pronunciations in a context of scholarship!

173.226.163.42 (talk) 08:27, 17 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know if I have "cred", but I've fixed it to the meaning that appears intended. (Can't check the source citation, though, so if I've misinterpreted, somebody else will have to fix it). Anaxial (talk) 20:14, 19 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Missing Genera

I noticed that this article's list of genera is missing the Alphadon, which states that it belongs to the oppossums. Anyone know enough to add this in? -- Somarinoa (talk) 01:32, 15 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

"Biochemistry" and "Hunting and foodways"

The "Biochemistry" sub-section is very small, this information could possibly be combined with the information about their survival and self-defense mechanisms.

The "Hunting and foodways" section is a little choppy and not as easy to read as the rest of the article, I recommend a reordering/grouping of the information in this section to give it a better flow.

There is also little information on habitat, and more citations are needed (or need to be updated). Brittabarre (talk) 02:24, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Opossum. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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) 06:11, 27 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Opossum. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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) 17:44, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Different page image?

Either the lead image on this page or the one on the Virginia opossum page should probably be changed so they don't both use the exact same image. It's a featured image so I don't know if it'd go better on this broader page or the page for the exact species it's about (though this page seems way too focused on the Virginia opossum as it is). --Jessietail (talk) 22:17, 16 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

diseases affecting opossums

If you want to know what diseases affect opossums and do a Google search what you get is a list of what diseases they carry, which is not the same thing. It would be nice if experts could add a section describing these and the symptoms that might be observed in opossums.Ealtram (talk) 23:38, 30 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Litter size

Under the 'Reproduction and life cycle' section it states they can give birth to "very large numbers" of young, and 13 is the max number that can feed from the mother. I think it could be helpful to include more information about the maximum litter size (so it's made aware how many may pass away due to the mother not having space) as well as including the average litter size. HeyImAl (talk) 18:49, 5 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Why is it not mentioned anywhere that opossums' hind feet sorta have opposable thumbs?

The hallux in the hind feet of the opossum is opposable.— Preceding unsigned comment added by SaltySemanticSchmuck (talk • contribs)

Do you have a WP:SOURCE that we can use to state and confirm this?--Mr Fink (talk) 14:14, 18 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nicknames of people

Do not use word possum for nickname on someone I care about. She is family. 174.29.93.157 (talk) 10:50, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Problematic with Philander andersoni and Philander nigratus

Tagging @Jameel the Saluki and @PresN

I do not know why in the species listing, Philander nigratus - Black four-eyed opossum redirects to Philander andersoni - Anderson's four-eyed opossum. The IUCN apparently recognized only 7 species (instead of 10 by the MDD or 13 in the wiki genus page Philander). P. nigratus is not recognized by the IUCN (yet). The MDD recognize P. nigratus using the common name "Black four-eyed opossum" and using Anderson's four-eyed opossum for P. andersoni. The MDD do mention, however, in their taxonomy notes, that Philander nigratus is a split from P. andersoni. However, if wikipedia used the common name Black four-eyed opossum for this species, i think it should not redirect to P. andersoni ?

What's your thoughts on this ? Or perhaps, the page P. nigratus if done, should have just like some other unclear taxa (for example Dingo) multiple latin names positions, i.e Philander nigratus or Philander andersoni nigratus

P-S : P. quica is the genus page of Philander and not in this page.Gimly24 (talk) 13:42, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Gimly24: While it's not being universally applied, the rule for species on Wikipedia is supposed to be (per WP:MAMMALS): Whatever is in Mammal Species of the World 3rd ed. (2005), plus changes that are supported by both the IUCN and the ASM. P. nigratus is not in MSW (andersoni is), and nigratus is not in IUCN either (andersoni is). So, it should not have an article, be listed in this page, or be listed in List of didelphimorphs. ASM has P. nigratus ([6]), noting that it was split from andersoni based on a 2020 Voss et al. paper. So, since it doesn't meet the criteria to have its own article, and is a proposed split from andersoni, it is redirecting there. As to common names, they should match- if Black four-eyed opossum is the common name for nigratus, then it should redirect, like nigratus, to andersoni (aka Anderson's four-eyed opossum).
The article on andersoni should mention that there is a proposal to split out nigratus, of course, along with whatever other splits Voss et al. are proposing, but given that the article is all of a single paragraph, there's a lot more besides that it should mention. --PresN 23:13, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
That make senses. Thanks you for taking the time to explain this. :) Gimly24 (talk) 01:36, 23 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Range map

The article itself notes that opossums have been extending their range northwards. This is certainly true in Southern Ontario. I have seen some in Bolton, northwest of Toronto. The map should really be updated. Kelisi (talk) 07:37, 8 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Lifespan

Am I missing something or is there no mention of their rough lifespan in the article? 109.241.61.214 (talk) 03:55, 23 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There are 93 different species; such things are better covered (where known) in the relevant species articles as they may vary quite a bit. See, for example Virginia opossum, which does include this info for the US species. Anaxial (talk) 06:51, 23 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

No longer recognized species

Under the classification section there are 16 different species that are no longer recognized as valid, and 14 of those have their own separate pages. Just wondering what we should do about them? Most of them have been reclassified as synonyms of other species that are valid, and idk what to do about their pages. For now I marked the invalid ones and listed the species they are synonyms for, but it would be better to clean it up. DirtWhiskey (talk) 07:22, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Probably they should be merged with the article the species are now synonymous with. - UtherSRG (talk) 12:29, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Also, we usually wait until the IUCN and MDD are in agreement before making taxonomic changes. I haven't checked the IUCN on these changes yet, though I spot checked the MDD and those seem right. - UtherSRG (talk) 12:30, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki Education assignment: Principles of Biology 2

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 23 January 2024 and 3 May 2024. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Wildfern.27 (article contribs).

— Assignment last updated by Wildfern.27 (talk) 17:28, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Who is “Siebert”?

In the etymology section, it states: 


 Siebert reconstructs the word phonemically as /a·passem/.


Who is “Siebert” here? The name doesn’t seem to be referenced before this sentence.

The citation for the sentence is “Crawford, James Mack; Crawford, James D. (1975). Studies in Southeastern Indian Languages. University of Georgia Press. ISBN 978-0-8203-0334-5.” However, the editor there is “Crawford”, not “Siebert.” It’s possible that “Siebert” is the author of the relevant passage, but the name doesn’t appear in the small linked excerpt on Google Books. I don’t have the cited book, and there’s no ebook available, so I can’t check it for more detail.

Does anybody have a good justification for the name “Siebwet”, or a better phrasing for that sentence without the name? Magicmat (talk) 11:35, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Opossum&oldid=1217536254"