Talk:Troglofauna

2007-02-9 Automated pywikipediabot message
--CopyToWiktionaryBot 12:24, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Angelfish
On the series of Planet Earth, they mention a troglobite named Angelfish, which is not described in this article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.49.68.209 (talk) 17:56, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Change page name to Subterranean fauna
Hi, This page includes information on both stygofauna and troglofauna, which are the two broad groups of subterranean fauna/animals. There is a page on stygofauna, although brief. I am thinking of separating this page into subterranean animals and one for troglofauna. Thoughts? michaelomorph (talk) 08:33, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

= Currently, the See Also: Subterranean animals entry redirects back to this same page. Not helpful. User:dabblerx 18:17 29 March 2013 (PST)

I see no reason for the split between stygofauna and troglofauna, nor for having a separate page for Subterannean animals and troglofauna. for the sake of a complete article, all should be combined and discussed as one, with distinction only when necessary, rather than parsing apart of minor details. --Animalparty-- (talk) 18:51, 13 November 2013 (UTC)

Self-contradictory?
This page continues to include information on both stygofauna and troglofauna, though its name is now Troglofauna, which label the article states applies to animals which live above the water table. I interpret above the water table to exclude all creatures that live strictly in water, but of course even standing water can occur above the water table and fish can live there. But the distinction between fish that live in such a situation and those that live below the water table seems specious at best to me. A little more clarity is needed I think. My sense is the fish and others that dwell strictly in the water should not be here anymore. Bob Burkhardt (talk) 14:03, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

I guess I am having trouble understanding stygofauna. Dwelling below the water table does not seem to me so characteristic as dwelling in ground water for these critters, which are apparently microfauna. The troglofauna can't survive in ground water. Perhaps there are pockets of water that troglofauna could survive in if they could get to them, but they can't so the stygofauna thrive there. It's beginning to sound like a vernal pool sort of situation where some species can thrive because other species are excluded by a sort of trick of the habitat. Bob Burkhardt (talk) 19:17, 25 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Have tried to clear this up Bob, I look forward to your review michaelomorph (talk) 04:55, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

I'm new to this article, but are troglofauna and stygofauna really that conceptually differnt? I realize there are difference in microhabitats, but their isolation, adaptations, low food source, conservation implications, etc. are for the most part identical. Rather than having three separate articles on the same subject, I think it would be much simpler and informative to lump both Stygofauna and Troglofauna into Subterranean fauna, and discuss ecology, adaptations, reproduction etc together, with distinction between Stygos and Troglos only where necessary. --Animalparty-- (talk) 18:43, 13 November 2013 (UTC)


 * Although the articles are this stage are similar to a certain extent, they are rather different (when fleshed out) and I figured keeping them separate allows them to be developed. Lumping together will mean having separate sections for each section, making a pretty long article, but it will be centralised. Thoughts? michaelomorph (talk) 01:41, 10 January 2014 (UTC)
 * I really don't see much conceptual distinction, aside from one group lives in the water of caves, and the other does not live in water in caves, and to me the similarities outweigh the differences. Could you elaborate on what would significant differences would be when further fleshed out? The nomenclature distinction between "-xene", "-philes", "-bites" are identical for Stygo- or Troglo- and could be succinctly defined in the introduction, and the words "Stygofauna" and or "Troglofauna" do not even need to be mentioned after the introduction, e.g. rather than something like "troglofauna have poor dispersal and stygofauna also have poor dispersal" a section on dispersal could describe general trends, giving examples of select taxa, and thus eschewing the semantic distinction. Troglomorphic traits such as reduced eyes and pigmentation are certainly seen across the water/air boundary. (and for the record, Troglomorphism should probably be eventually merged and redirected as well as it currently largely a WP:DICDEF, and is intimately related to cave-dwellers. --Animalparty-- (talk) 21:04, 28 March 2014 (UTC)

Albinism - I think not
Fauna have lost the need for colour/pigmentation through the process of adapting/evolving to live underground over thousands of years. I don't think it should be confused with Albinism, which is usually defined as a "congenital disorder characterized by" etc or a recessive genetic trait (from Usage of Albino: "The term is not comparative: one either has albinism (a recessive genetic trait) or does not.") michaelomorph (talk) 03:55, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

External links modified (January 2018)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Troglofauna. 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/20090716032923/http://aquat1.ifas.ufl.edu/guide/caves.html to http://aquat1.ifas.ufl.edu/guide/caves.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) 09:28, 25 January 2018 (UTC)