Talk:Aphelops

Subfamily
This one is belong to tribe Aceratheriini in subfamily Rhinocerotinae or subfamily Aceratheriinae? Newone (talk) 09:28, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

Aphelops
The article says "Aphelops is an extinct genus of rhinoceros endemic to North America during the Miocene through the Pliocene, living from 20.43—5.330 mya, existing for approximately 15.1 million years." The reference is the Paeobiology Database (PBDB). The dates shown in the PBDB are merely the beginning and end of each age (e.g., Miocene 23.03–5.332), and do not necessarily imply that the animal lived for the entire time. The PBDB simply tells us that remains of the animal have been found at some depth in the sedimentary rock that's been dated to the Miocene but not necessarily throughout the entire horizon. Thus, it cannot necessarily be inferred that Aphelops lived for 15.1 million years. John Alroy can explain the limitations of the PBDB further.

24.254.238.231 (talk) 18:12, 3 September 2013 (UTC) Mike Sarles
 * Feel free to fix it if you know the correct age. The problem with these fossil mammal articles is that many of them were almost autogenerated based on PBDB pages. FunkMonk (talk) 01:15, 4 September 2013 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 16:26, 8 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Aphelops restoration.jpg

How do we know that Aphelops lived until the Pleistocene?
Sarsath3 (talk) 19:48, 27 February 2020 (UTC)
 * The sourcing is exceptionally bad in this article, so hard to tell. But if you mean in general, then well, that would be because it has been found in geological layers dated to that time. FunkMonk (talk) 21:54, 27 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Fossilworks is wrong as usual: North American rhinoceroses are agreed to have gone extinct by the end of the Hemphillian NALMA. Lythronaxargestes (talk &#124; contribs) 23:49, 28 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Nice expansion! I wonder whether this restoration actually shows Aphelops, and whether the semi-aquatic life style depicted is up to date? FunkMonk (talk) 15:37, 29 February 2020 (UTC)
 * I would not be surprised if those are Teleoceras, which are short-legged unlike Aphelops. A semiaquatic ecology has, to my knowledge, not been proposed for Aphelops. Lythronaxargestes (talk &#124; contribs) 17:36, 29 February 2020 (UTC)
 * The 2020 paper discounted the semi-aquatic hypothesis for Teleoceras on isotopic evidence. Hemiauchenia (talk) 17:37, 29 February 2020 (UTC)
 * It was a popular hypothesis around the 1930s, though. MacFadden 1987 seems to have already rejected a semi-aquatic lifestyle so I'm not sure what the 2020 paper's contribution is (perhaps the palaeoclimactic aspect?) Lythronaxargestes (talk &#124; contribs) 17:43, 29 February 2020 (UTC)
 * It's the delta 18O measurement, the same measurement is used as evidence for the semi-aquatic habits of spinosaurs. Hemiauchenia (talk) 18:00, 29 February 2020 (UTC)