Talk:Limbless vertebrate

	Limbless vertebrate is part of WikiProject Amphibians and Reptiles, an effort to make Wikipedia a standardized, informative, comprehensive and easy-to-use resource for amphibians and reptiles. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit this article, or visit the project page for more information.Amphibians and ReptilesWikipedia:WikiProject Amphibians and ReptilesTemplate:WikiProject Amphibians and Reptilesamphibian and reptile articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

What about cetacean?

Would cetacean classify as limbless vertebrates? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jfbilodeau (talk • contribs) 16:59, 28 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

As far as I know all ceteceans have front fins, which are essentially limbs. Nicolharper (talk) 10:57, 29 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yet the sirenidae are included, and they have front limbs.--Jfbilodeau (talk) 14:06, 29 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It's always a tough call, especially since the reality is that limblessness is just an endpoint on the continuum from snake to giraffe. Do you require strict limblessness, in which not even vestiges of the pelvic or pectoral girdles are present? Internal remants only? Functionless extenal limbs? External limbs that have only non-locomotory function (mechanosensory/chemosensory)? External limbs that only function in some environments but aren't used in others (like skinks)? What of organisms that lack only pelvic limbs, but retain the pectoral limbs in some role (Bipes, cetaceans, sirens, manatees, etc.)? IMHO, and if I had the time, the article should be expanded away from "list of things that are limbless by one or more of the above criteria" and towards a more thorough discussion of why it happens, functional demands and consequences, environments and physiologies conducive to limblessness, and the intersection between limblessness and body elongation. Sadly, I've got little time and a mile-long to-do list. Mokele (talk) 16:06, 29 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. Nicolharper (talk) 14:08, 6 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

There are no known limbless species of mammal or bird. This isn't true, there's that extinct limbless mole from North America. What is it called? Starts with a P, maybe two syllables long? It has an article here on Wikipedia--I just visited it earlier today, but for the life of me I can't find it again! 50.30.49.13 (talk) 01:48, 11 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Google isn't turning anything up. I'd be very surprised if moles evolved limblessness, since their use of the forelimbs to burrow is so key to their locomotion. HCA (talk) 14:17, 11 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It was called Proterix and it was an insectivore. Possibly not a mole. 50.30.49.13 (talk) 03:26, 2 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting. Possibly more interesting is that apparently the "limbless" conclusion isn't well supported outside Dixon's book. There's a review paper from the 60's that mentions odd vertebrae but with no conclusions about limbs (assuming they just haven't been found), and reduced limbs are floated as an idea in a 1975 paper, but not very strongly and, IMHO, purely speculatively (the author himself states that a complete skeleton is needed for confirmation).

Based on this, I don't think it's a good idea to include Proterix here, and I'll edit the species WP article to more accurately reflect the current state of knowledge. HCA (talk) 17:07, 2 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

what about whales?

they do have front flipper/arms but they lost their hind legs? would they be worth noteing? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.235.89.234 (talk) 15:18, 23 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]