|WikiProject Plants||(Rated C-class, High-importance)|
Do cotyledons count as leaves? Because if they did, I think welwitchia would have 4 leaves through all it's life, 2 that split and grow and 2 that wither and die. Lotusduck 20:43, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
- 2 refers to the number of permanent leaves. The plant does not have the cotyledons for its entire life. SCHZMO ✍ 21:56, 19 April 2006 (UTC)
--17:46, 3 July 2006 (UTC)188.8.131.52I'm not a botanist. I came to this site hoping to find out how gnetophyta differed from magnoliophyta. I'm doing a ?lineage on maize and would like to explain what the characteritics are than split each grouping.
I removed the following text:
The possibly paraphyletic nature of the gymnosperms is well-covered in the gymnosperm article (and the cites there seem to point to the living gymnosperms as being monophyletic, although I'm not sure whether this is fully settled yet). If we really want the gnetophyta article to discuss the impact of the placement of the gnetophyta upon the monophyletic/paraphyletic nature of the gymnosperms, we could use some better wording (which better connects the issue to the discussion about morphology and molecular data). But at least for me, we have sufficient text, between the text remaining here, and the gymnosperm and vessel element articles.
The splitting of Gnetophyta into Gnetales (Gnetum), Ephedrales (Ephedra) and Welwitschiales (Welwitschia) is a POV (and according to whose classification, I don't know) and certainly does not represent a consensus view of the classification of this group. Many classifications place all three genera in a single order, Gnetales. As with virtually all articles dealing with plant classification, this article needs to indicate much more clearly whose classification it is presenting. MrDarwin 14:39, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
- Every classification is a POV, but I otherwise agree with MrDarwin that it needs to be referenced.--Curtis Clark 15:17, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
- Personally, I'd just say "the division contains 3 genera" and mostly/completely ignore classes, orders, and families. Granted, there is some scientific basis for separate/combined orders (roughly, how long ago the lines diverged), but I'm not sure that's so important for the general reader. Kingdon 15:41, 12 February 2007 (UTC)