Talk:Taxonomy of lemurs

Split and review
This article has been split off from the featured article Evolutionary history of lemurs due to issues of size. I will be making minor changes to ensure that the article is still comprehensive and properly stands alone. In the meantime, I will be running it through WP:GAN as a precautionary review. –  VisionHolder « talk » 23:42, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

History of taxonomy
The current titel could be interpreted as meaning the history of lemurs told in a taxonomic way. How about changing to History of taxonomy of lemurs? --Ettrig (talk) 10:34, 28 March 2011 (UTC)
 * For me, I don't like the repeated "of". Other titles I considered were "Taxonomy of lemurs" or "Taxonomy and phylogeny of lemurs".  Do you prefer either of those?  Also, I'd want to solicit some more opinions before I change it. –  VisionHolder  « talk » 12:11, 28 March 2011 (UTC)
 * "History of lemur taxonomy"? Or perhaps just "Taxonomy of lemurs"—any account of their taxonomy is going to have historical data. Ucucha 12:35, 28 March 2011 (UTC)
 * "History of lemur taxonomy" is much better and "History of" can be skipped if if this is not limited to history. --Ettrig (talk) 13:11, 28 March 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm trying to stay consistent after a back-and-forth dispute over the name of the article Evolutionary history of lemurs. It used to be "Lemur evolutionary history".  Honestly, it all boils down to opinion.  So unless there are strong objections based on good, solid reasons, I'll probably go with "Taxonomy of lemurs".  –  VisionHolder  « talk » 14:12, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

Misleading notes
The "Notes"section is mildly misleading: the way it is placed implies that it includes notes fro the entire article,but clearly it was only ever intended to accompany the table. How about putting them in a table footer, like so (table simplified for example):

As a sidenote, the formatting of the table could be easily and greatly simplified (which I don't mind doing myself). Circéus (talk) 17:55, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
 * I suppose it could include notes from the entire article; all notes just happen to be from that table. Ucucha 18:05, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Ucucha said it perfectly. Anyway, the table concludes the article and the notes immediately follow, so I don't really see an issue. –  VisionHolder  « talk » 19:40, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

Comments

 * In the sentence "However, relevant genetic studies nearly unanimously place cheirogaleids within the lemuriform clade and Groves himself, who had promoted the cheirogaleid-lorisiform relationship in a 1974 paper, by 2001 regarded the idea as refuted.", is there a reason for the "nearly"? I don't have Groves's book, but the other two sources don't talk about genetic evidence that doesn't place cheirogaleids within lemurs. Also, it may be better to drop the cite to Yoder et al. (1996), since it doesn't discuss this point specifically (as far as I can tell) and is now prehistoric for a molecular study.
 * At the time, it sounded more controversial, since papers that I found about these fossil species seemed relatively new. From my interactions with the experts and from what I've seen of the more recent literature, I think you're right.  I'll remove "nearly" as well as the Yoder ref. –  VisionHolder  « talk » 22:48, 29 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks for fixing both of those. The fossil studies are indeed fairly recent, but of course they are not "genetic studies". Ucucha 07:23, 30 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Yoder (2007) says LoM1 had 33 species (32 in this article) and LoM2 "more than 70" (68 here). Ucucha 21:26, 29 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Yoder was wrong—I just checked both LoM1 & LoM2. I think I have an email to this effect from Yoder.  If I remember correctly, I asked her about this discrepancy, and I think she said that she just did a quick count.  Anyway, I'm not sure why I kept it as a reference.  I've adjusted that reference as well as the others so that they point to specific pages that give the number of species or taxa, instead of a range of pages where all the species are listed. –  VisionHolder  « talk » 22:48, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

Navigation template
Was thinking I would find a lemurs navigation template at the end of the article. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 02:07, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry... I missed this post and replied to your suggestion at the FAC. Please check there. –  VisionHolder  « talk » 03:46, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

Minor question about thumb vs. hallux
In the "Suprageneric classification" section we can read "By emphasizing its primate features, such as its postorbital bar, stereoscopic vision, and opposable hallux,...; opposable hallux link to thumb, but hallux usually it refers to the big toe of the foot. Then, ¿aye-aye have opposable hallux or opposable thumbs? --Furado (talk) 08:54, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Good catch. The source talks about the hallux, so I'm not sure why I linked the pollex (thumb).  Anyway, aye-ayes, like the rest of the lemurs, have pseudo-opposable thumbs—it has to do with its range of movement. –  VisionHolder  « talk » 15:48, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Taxonomy of lemurs. 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/20090205163701/http://primate-sg.org/PDF/PC23.new.microcebus.V3.pdf to http://www.primate-sg.org/PDF/PC23.new.microcebus.V3.pdf
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110723173132/http://www.primate-sg.org/PDF/LN11.pdf to http://www.primate-sg.org/PDF/LN11.pdf

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) 20:04, 19 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Taxonomy of lemurs. 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/20110605141111/http://www.nsrl.ttu.edu/publications/opapers/specpubs/SP49.pdf to http://www.nsrl.ttu.edu/publications/opapers/specpubs/SP49.pdf

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) 01:33, 24 September 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Taxonomy of lemurs. 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/20130922212616/http://www.mwc-info.net/en/services/Journal_PDF%27s/Issue1/Flagshipspecies.pdf to http://www.mwc-info.net/en/services/Journal_PDF%27s/Issue1/Flagshipspecies.pdf

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) 05:40, 30 September 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Taxonomy of lemurs. 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/20120204185943/http://www.bucknell.edu/msw3/browse.asp?s=y&id=12100001 to http://www.bucknell.edu/msw3/browse.asp?s=y&id=12100001

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) 23:46, 6 October 2017 (UTC)

Horvath v Orlando v newer?
I've been working on a whole Order of Primates phylogenic tree in User:UtherSRG/primate_clade. Quite the endeavor, to be sure. When I got to Lemuroidea, I knew I'd have some issues. For now, I'm using a toggle to display both Horvath's and Orlando's phylogenies (though without the extinct taxa). I made an effort to also include the intrageneric phylogenies. Doing some research, I found a number of papers, but most of them are just using Horvath or Orlando to lay things out. Fair enough, those papers help show that both Horvath and Orlando are reasonably equally accepted understandings. Since they were both 14 years ago, I figured to keep digging, and I found a paper from 2016 that supports extinct taxa and also updates the family phylogenies. Here's their layout and reference.

There's some good and some bad here. First, the results seem to be a compromise between Horvath and Orlando. The Lepilemuridae + Cheirogaleidae clade is retained from Horvath, and the Lemuridae + Indriidae clade is retained from Orlando, along with the intermixing of the extinct families in that clade, with the exception of moving Megaladapis out to be a sister to all but Daubentonia. Also, Hapalemur is shown to be monophyletic when Prolemur simus is included, simius being shown to not be sister to Lemur catta, but that L. catta is sister to Hapalemur + Prolemur simus, so simus should not have been removed from Hapalemur.

The bad: When including the extinct taxa, Indriidae is paraphyletic, but Herrera doesn't make any recommendations as to erecting a new family (Avahiidae probably as Propithecidae is taken), leaving us with no resolution but to discuss Indriidae's paraphyleticism. (Paraphyleticness? I like coining new words...or is it paraphyly? I think that's it.) However, this does at least resolve the trichotomy in Orlando.

I've not taken the time, but it looks like this work has been cited nearly 100 times, so perhaps this phylogeny has taken root over the other two? Might it be time to switch things up, or should we just add this to the list of competing phylogenies? I'll place a pointer to this talk on some of the other pages that are relevant.

UtherSRG (talk) 13:42, 23 September 2022 (UTC)