Talk:Alphaproteobacteria

Phylogenetic tree switch
The phylogenetic tree is unutterably inaccurate as it is based off automated data. Can I switch it for the template Rickettsialesphylogeny ? It has less data and isn't really aimed at Alphaproteobacteria, but it's accurate and clear. I am asking as I know how much of a pain cladograms are to make in wikipedia, so I thought I'd ask. --Squidonius (talk) 01:57, 9 April 2015 (UTC) Added the new tree. Please let ne know if the old one may be omitted (or feel free to remove it). Any comments welcome! :-) --Ernsts (talk) 16:08, 28 April 2019 (UTC)
 * I'm assuming it's the one at Rickettsiales? I would go ahead and make the switch, it's certainly clearer and I recently used the Ferla, et al. reference that it's based on in my thesis so accuracy should be fine too - good spot! Thanks, Amkilpatrick (talk) 03:38, 9 April 2015 (UTC)
 * That is right. However, there are several species mentioned in the current cladogramm that are missing in the proposed one. So either they could be added to the proposed one according to some references to be found, or both cladograms could be presented as result of different analysis? --Ernsts (talk) 04:42, 26 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Did some preparations for cladogram replacement as proposed: copied (and classified, if possible) all unclassified taxa from the current legacy cladogram to the taxobox. There are several sample genera speciefied in the current cladogram. However it looks like their taxonomic classification might no longer be valid in many cases. My proposal: These may 'not be moved/copied to the taxobox this way. I. e. cladogram replacement may result in a loss of these.

Vibrio sp. should go to gamma-proteobacteria
It's quite possible that these species were originally described as Vibrio, but technically they have to go to the gammaproteobacteria or the genus has to be renamed, just to avoid any paraphyly. Peteruetz (talk) 16:26, 17 May 2015 (UTC)
 * See Vibrio adaptatus - these two species seem to be wrongly classified as Vobrio as they appear to be alphaproteobacteria, but still have not been renamed. --Ernsts (talk) 04:37, 26 April 2019 (UTC)

Introduction
Introduction says *most* of alphaproteobacteria's members are Gram-negative, but alphaproteobacteria is a subset of the proteobacteria phylum that has *only* Gram-negative bacteria. PublishMe (talk) 06:21, 16 September 2016 (UTC)

I changed it. PublishMe (talk) 15:22, 2 October 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Alphaproteobacteria. 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:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130127030659/http://www.bacterio.cict.fr/classifphyla.html to http://www.bacterio.cict.fr/classifphyla.html

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 19:49, 2 July 2017 (UTC)

Describe Caulobacteridae
With the mention of each subclass under the alphaproteobacteria class needs a brief descriptor that highlights characteristics that's unique to them.

Caulobacteridae and the genus Caulobacter have a dimorphic life cycle with a stalked parent cell and a flagellated daughter cell. Mrj0037 (talk) 22:01, 10 October 2023 (UTC)