Talk:Gerobatrachus

Maybe reverse the merge?
I think merging a species article into a genus article would be more appropriate than merging a genus article into a species article. Comments? The &#39;&#39;Gorgeous Girl&#39;&#39;!!! (talk) 02:03, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Go for it.--Wloveral (talk) 03:04, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
 * What happened to family in taxobox?--Wloveral (talk) 04:01, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Should we mention the polyphyly of Lissamphibia?
In the May 22, 2008 paper, a new phylogenetic study considering Gerobatrachus places salamanders and frogs in Temnospondyli but places caecilians in Lepospondyli. Thus Lissamphibia is not monophyletic, but rather polyphyletic. Should this be mentioned? Maybe it is more appropriate on the caecilian article.192.52.218.45 (talk) 02:32, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Go for it.--Wloveral (talk) 04:10, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

The image is copyright protected, permission would need to be obtained from the artist to be used here.
Suggest removing it.--70.75.34.237 (talk) 05:38, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

290 mya is technically U. Carb. so perhaps using the range Late Carb to Early Perm. would be more accurate. Also, good skeletal photos are now available. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.37.227.32 (talk) 17:50, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

--290 MA is Early Permian, according to the most recent (2004) International Geologic Time Scale.--136.159.150.31 (talk) 19:40, 11 June 2008 (UTC)