Talk:Protostome/Archives/2023/December

Simplify
Just a sugestion but could you, perphaps change this page so that the rest of the world can understand it? Now I'm a reasonablly bright person, but this article is like reading a foreign language. I'm all for having accurate and informative pages, but the only person that could read this would be people with degrees in Biology, and people with degrees in Biology do not need to look this stuff up on Wikipedia. It's just a suggesstion but consider it. Antarticstargate 04:56, 18 March 2007 (UTC)AntarticstargateAntarticstargate 04:56, 18 March 2007 (UTC)


 * I agree with this suggestion as I will soon be graduating with a biology degree and am still overwhelmed with the abundance of complex information. If the writer could break down the verbiage or provide definitions, I feel as though that would be beneficial.--KarolinaKaczmarski (talk) 16:20, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

What about cnidarians?
I've looked under both protostome and deuterostome, and there is no mention of the cnidarians. Do they fit under either, or neither? They have a mouth, but some don't have an anus, so they can't be deuterostomes. Even so, what is it called when the blastopore becomes both the mouth and the anus? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Special:Contributions/ (talk)

Cnidarians are Acoelomates, they do not possess a coelom and thus are neither protostomes nor deuterostomes. Platyhelminthes are also Acoelomates so I am not sure they can be categorized as protostomes. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.141.2.167 (talk) 21:01, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Removed section
I removed this section, it is not right:

subphylum of protostomes
 * spincula
 * echiura
 * pogonophora
 * pentastomida
 * onychophora
 * tardigrada

--Dj Capricorn (talk) 17:00, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

Common to protostomes and deuterostomes

 * See Kimberella and Cambrian explosion for some refs.
 * See Evolving a Deuterostome for more.
 * Detlev Arendt, Ulrich Technau & Joachim Wittbrodt (Jan 2001) Evolution of the bilaterian larval foregut; Nature 409, 81-85; doi:10.1038/35051075
 * University of Leeds Evolutionary Developmental Biology Lecture 10
 * Richard A. Kerr (Feb 1998) Pushing Back the Origins of Animals; Science Volume 279, Number 5352, pp. 803 - 804
 * Francisco José Ayala, Andrey Rzhetsky, and Francisco J. Ayala Origin of the metazoan phyla: Molecular clocks confirm paleontological estimates; PNAS  January 20, 1998   vol. 95  no. 2  606-611 - caution: mol phylo estimates vary widely
 * Andrew H. Knoll & Sean B. Carroll Early Animal Evolution: Emerging Views from Comparative Biology and Geology; Science 25 June 1999, Vol. 284. no. 5423, pp. 2129 - 2137 DOI: 10.1126/science.284.5423.2129
 * Aguinaldo, Anna Marie A, Lake, James A Evolution of the multicellular animals American Zoologist,  Dec 1998
 * Guillaume Balavoine and André Adoutte One or Three Cambrian Radiations?; Science 17 April 1998: Vol. 280. no. 5362, pp. 397 - 398; DOI: 10.1126/science.280.5362.397

Evolution of protostomes

 * Acoelomorph flatworms and precambrian evolution contains a nice summary and cites the peer-reviewed source.

Modern protostomes
-- Philcha (talk) 15:33, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Terminology
Why does the Protostome article refer to the group as a clade, but the Deuterostome article refers to it's group as a superphylum? --Dante Alighieri | Talk 20:38, 31 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Some sources say deuterostome is the original condition of bilaterians, and thus a paraphyletic group that includes protostome. --Philcha (talk) 02:37, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

Requested move

 * The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section. 

No consensus to move. Vegaswikian (talk) 19:38, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

Protostome → Protostomia — Should be moved to the scientific name, more encyclopedic. --Whoop whoop pull up (talk) 12:59, 3 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Oppose - protostome is a widely used common name for this clade. &mdash; Amakuru (talk) 18:30, 3 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Oppose - How is that name more encyclopedic? You're just taking the current name and making it (the old, non "s" version of its) plural. Protostome and protostomes are the scientific names for it and are definitely more commonly used than protostomia. Also plurals in article titles are generally supposed to be avoided where possible. --WikiDonn (talk) 19:50, 3 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Oppose. "Protostomia" would be intellectual snobbery. "Protosome" and its plural "protosomes" can be more precise than "protostomia", which has no grammatical number. --Philcha (talk) 06:55, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Dent edges?
I'm not sure what this is supposed to mean: "More recent research, however, shows that in protostomes the edges of the dent close up in the middle, leaving openings at the ends which become the mouth and anus." Which dent? The edges of which dent? The middle of what? It's unclear how this is different than what was previously thought to be true. 75.72.7.108 (talk) 04:02, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

Platyhelminthes
"...Acoelomorpha, a group which may be the sister group to the rest of the bilaterian animals, have a single mouth which leads into a blind gut (with no anus)..." Doesn't this apply to members of the phylum of Platyhelminthes also? They also have a blind gut and no anus. And this sentence seems to imply that the character of having a mouth but no anus, in other words, having a blind gut, defines sister groups to the rest of bilaterian animals. This can be intepreted that those with a blind gut and no anus cannot be classified as Protostomes or Deuterostomes. So this sentence should be changed. 117.0.169.145 (talk) 13:17, 13 November 2013 (UTC)

Platyzoa
The following doesn't look right:

Current molecular data suggest that protostome animals can be divided into three major groups:

Ecdysozoa, e.g. arthropods, nematodes

 Platyzoa , e.g. platyhelminths, rotifers

Lophotrochozoa, e.g. molluscs, annelids

as well as a number of minor taxa of basal or ambiguous affinity, namely the Chaetognatha.

Spend some time on Google Scholar looking up Platyzoa and you see things like:
 * There is no clear support for or against Platyzoa
 * Support for Platyzoa May Derive from a Long-Branch Attraction Artifact.
 * “Platyzoa” Is Likely a Systematic Artifact.
 * Platyzoa is a taxon grouping simple-bodied bilaterians such as Platyhelminthes, Gastrotricha, Syndermata and Gnathostomulida together (eg, Cavalier-Smith, 1998), but has recently been shown to be a paraphyletic assemblage (Struck et al., 2014).
 * the modern debate on the significance of “flatworm-like” traits and the possibility of homologies among the phyla comprising “Platyzoa”.
 * the proposed clade Platyzoa
 * another controversial assemblage, the Platyzoa
 * or “platyzoa,” which are likely not monophyletic

All that from just searching on "Platyzoa," filtering for the current year (2015), and looking at all 29 hits on 3 pages of results. There's nothing wrong with mentioning it and linking to the article, but we should not be promoting this in the voice of the Wikipedia. Zyxwv99 (talk) 00:38, 10 November 2015 (UTC)

Evolution
"anthropods" in this section should probably be "arthropods"? The earlier part of the sentence refers to "over a million species", which should perhaps should say "over a million species (drawn from phyla such as ....)" to remove the suggestion that (e.g.) "insects" are a species. Terrycojones (talk) 13:19, 25 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Yes, good catch. As at least "anthropods" is in conflict with the Nephrozoa article linked in the infobox, I took that bit out for now to see if someone with more expertise will come along and review it. As for the wording, I see what you mean, but I think it's clear that the sentence is referring species from such groups/classes as the ones listed. Eric talk 21:21, 25 December 2017 (UTC)

Protostomy
This section needs a thorough rewrite, as it currently contradicts itself. The first paragraph states (without citation) that "protostomes were so named because it was once believed that in all cases the embryological dent formed the mouth while the anus was formed later, at the opening made by the other end of the gut. It is now known that the fate of the blastopore in protostomes is extremely variable." Meanwhile, the second paragraph states that "in protostomes the first opening of the embryonic gut develops into the mouth, and the anus forms secondarily. In deuterostomes, the anus forms first while the mouth develops secondarily." Note that the first paragraph more accurately describes the current understanding of the variable nature of reality while the second presents the older (now discarded) view of an absolute difference. --Khajidha (talk) 02:04, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

Revised the lead
I asked my Amazon Echo "Alexa, what's a protostome?" and she told me, "According to Wikipedia, Protostomia is a clade of animals containing phyla including the arthropods, annelids, and molluscs. Together with the deuterostomes and xenacoelomorpha, its members make up the Bilateria, mostly compris——"

Alexa stop! JFC that was cringy. Nothing about this lead would satisfy the layperson wanting to know what this subject is. Even User:Antarticstargate commented on the article's complexity back in March 2007!

I made an edit focused on answering the question "What is a protostome?" in the first sentence.

——JavaRogers (talk) 07:27, 5 April 2021 (UTC)