From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Dentistry (Rated B-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is supported by WikiProject Dentistry. If you want to participate and/or join, please visit the project page, or ask questions on the project talk page.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject Animal anatomy (Rated B-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is part of WikiProject Animal anatomy, an attempt to organise a detailed guide to all topics related to animal anatomy apart from human anatomy. To participate, you can edit the attached article, or contribute further at WikiProject Animal anatomy. This project is an offshoot of WikiProject Animals
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Premolars vs Molars[edit]

I believe that there are no molars in "milk" teeth - only premolars. The molars erupt at a later date. Is this the case? — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 26 May 2007

in milk dentition pre molars are absent and molars are present —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 13:55, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

list of dentition patterns of North American mammals[edit]

I found a table on the internet from a good source that seems to have the dentition patterns of all the mammals of North America.

  1. Is this a good place to put such a list?
  2. Can I put something like that from a webpage into wikipedia?
    1. Do I need to reference where I got it?
    2. Do I need to paraphrase the text part that lists the names of the species?

-Crunchy Numbers 03:17, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

1) From what I gather is on the table, yes. (2) Yes, if the webpage is a reliable source. (2a) Yes, reference would be helpful. (2b) Paraphrasing would be better and perhaps mandatory to avoid copyright issues, though prose would be preferred to mere lists. I am interested to see this webpage. - Dozenist talk 03:23, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
I don't think it meets the reliable source criteria. I prefer not to put the link here now that I see the author says no one can use his information anywhere else on the web.

What I could do is start with one species from each dentition configuration and find a reliable source that verifies for each, hopefully for more than one at a time. Then I could start a table here with that. Other species could be added to the table as they are found. He doesn't own the information after all.

We could also have tables for mammals from the rest of the world.

Email me if you would like to see the link. I tried to send it to you but couldn't. -Crunchy Numbers 04:25, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

Cats, horses, rabbits and sheep but no dogs. You do have these in North America I gather? :) Gmackematix (talk) 23:54, 23 September 2011 (UTC)

Dental Formulae[edit]

It is more accurate to say that the primitive, rather than the maximum, dental formula for placental mammals is 3/3 1/1 4/4 3/3. Cetaceans, for example, frequently have many more teeth than the "maximum" referred to in the current verbage. In a similar way, we should be sure to say that the primitive dental formula for marsupials is 5/4 1/1 3/3 4/4. Tomwithanh 05:53, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Bat-eared foxes have 48 teeth. [1] — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 13:57, 18 January 2016 (UTC)

Will Citations adjacent to dental formula create confusions?[edit]

The citations are given adjacent to the dental formula for some animals. But these may create chaos and confusions as it may be thought that the number given to citations are a part of dental formula. This is not much felt in electronic mode, but in printable version, it creates very big problem. Look at the way citations and dental formula combines as if they where a single formula Shouldn't we need additional column or alternative way for keeping citations and formula apart from each other. (Please not that people with little knowledge about dental formula also come to Wikipedia for learning and to them this can definitely create problems.)Valchemishnuʘ 17:32, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

Dental Eruption Sequence[edit]

About the dental formulae listed, I assume that whoever originally gave the info was referring to the eruption sequence on the bottom jaw, correct? Or is something missing?RuneMan3 (talk) 18:10, 17 December 2014 (UTC) RuneMan3 (talk) 18:08, 17 December 2014 (UTC)RuneMan3 — Preceding unsigned comment added by RuneMan3 (talkcontribs) 18:02, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Dentition. 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.

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • 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.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:11, 9 September 2017 (UTC)

  1. ^