Talk:Warm-blooded

Problems with citations
http://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-the-difference-between-warm-blooded-and-cold-blooded-animals.htm this article seems to to say slightly otherwise than the title above, but is also a citation... I do not know how valid the source is, though, so i havent added it. Im leaving the link here so others could potentialy use it.

85.24.42.113 (talk) 08:34, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

Incorrect terminology
the term 'warm-blooded', is scientifically out of date, and where possible should be removed from the article, i study biology as a HSC subject, and it is strictly stated in the syllabus that the term warm-blooded should not be used as it is incorrect, and does not correctly identify the type of system a nominated animal possesses, any arguments? p(Spicypeanut 11:11, 8 November 2007 (UTC))

Hiya Spicypeanut,

You are of course correct that "warm-blooded" is not a scientific term. It is however the best known and most widely used term in the English language. By placing the article here we make it easy for beginners, youngsters, and persons with no formal background to come and start the process of learning about thermoregulation. If we start out with something obscure like "poikilothermic" only people who already know about the subject will be able to find it. Precision is good, but in this situation accessibility is important too.Ken McE (talk) 02:43, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
 * This "most widely used term" problem can be easily resolved by a disambiguation page ("Warm-blooded could mean:") I recently overhauled cold-blooded in this fashion. I plan to do the same here. StevePrutz (talk) 20:40, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

misplaced info?
i think the "temperature control in cold blooded animals" should be moved to the cold blooded article, and possibly be replaced with temperature control in warm blooded animals" which SHOULD just be a link to homeostasis if not thermoregulation

6pm(in aus atleast) july 24th 2007

Reasons for requesting rewrite
Hopefully someone with more zoological knowledge than I possess can definitively edit this... Thanks! --postglock 15:00, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * 1) The first two sections seem to repeat each other and need to be merged. The 2nd person perspective is probably not encyclopedic, although others may disagree.
 * 2) The third section (In between cold and warm blooded) should probably be moved to a separate page accessible by both this page and the cold-blooded page
 * 3) The title should probably be modified, as should the title of cold-blooded. See Talk:Cold-blooded.
 * 4) Not sure what people think should be done about the warm vs cold-blooded sections in both articles... merge? keep separate???

Rewritten
Hopefully this page and the cold blooded page will better complement one another now. Jura 08:33, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Well, it seems there's always the temptation to throw in the mix the terms "homeotherm" and "endotherm" as equivalents, which they aren't! "Homeotherm" refers to an organism capable of maintaining an internal temperature more or less constant independently from the environmental conditions whereas as "endotherm" organism is simply one that has an internal source of heat production. Although generally an endotherm is simultaneously a homeotherm, the two terms *are not* equivalent and so they should be kept in separate sections. The same is true for "poikilotherm" and "ectotherm".

C. L. Furlong --85.242.200.80 11:47, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

Archaic
Warm blooded may not be the scientifically preferred descriptor but it is the most common term in normal usage. Archaic seems a very odd choice of words. Needs changing I think Alci12


 * It certainly seems odd that the page should be listed under its "archaic" name rather than something more formal with a redirect at warm-blooded. --ToobMug 10:54, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

I took the "Archaic" remark to mean someone disapproved of it but did not quite want to move and redo the entire article. They are of course correct that it is the common or "low" English word and persons with advanced training in the field would avoid it as being quaint and imprecise. Ken McE (talk) 00:19, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

Merge
I was actually coming to recommend the same thing as postglock.

The entries for cold and warm blooded repeat themselves a lot, and i think it would be very helpful to write them together, especially considering, according to the entry on cold blooded, "Most creatures fit more in line with a graded spectrum from one extreme (cold-blooded) to another (warm-blooded)"

Remove redirect
Please please please, can the redirect be removed from Homeothermy to Warm-blooded? As has been noted, these terms are not synonomous. Also, I assume there is a redirect from Heterothermy to Cold-blooded? If so, that will need to be eliminated as well. Thanks. Tomwithanh 05:50, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

Homoiothermy
The term homoiothermy redirects to this article, but there is no mention of the term anywhere in the body of the article. Either the term should be written into the article, or the redirect should be changed or eliminated. This becomes a bit more significant today because Archaeopteryx is today's featured article on the front page, and the article brief uses and links the word homoiothermy. &mdash;Stormraven (talk · contribs) 12:41, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

in winter many small birds lose one third of their body weight overnight.
this is in the article, and I'm looking for a reference or citation. I've never tried finding a citation for a nature article. Is this even true? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.41.151.165 (talk) 18:04, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

I cannot find SCHOLARLY citations for this, although there are many amateur birding sites that repeat this fact without ciation, such as this one: http://www.birding.uk.com/fact-file/gardens/top-ten-winter-garden-birds/ 05:58, 28 June 2009 (UTC) damn tildes!! 05:59, 28 June 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Prophet121 (talk • contribs)

The sited page does not support the claim. Page refers to male emu weight loss while incubating. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anorderofmagnitude (talk • contribs) 07:16, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

Proposed split
The "proposed split" banner has been on the article since 6 Feb 2009, and no-one's responded. I'm removing it. --Philcha (talk) 05:55, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

What about mammals that can't self-regulate?
Should this article include something about mammals like mole-rats that need to stay warm but do not have mechanisms to self-regulate? Musanim (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 19:58, 16 June 2009 (UTC).

Homeothermic VS warm blooded poikilothermic vs cold blooded
Surely warmblooded means burning calories specifically in order to keep the body temperature stable, whilst homeothermic means keeping the body temperature stable, but does not specify how it's kept stable.

Wheras cold-blooded means /not/ burning calories specifically to reglate temperature, but this does not mean the animal is ectothermic - they may produce heat by other means or they could not need to regulate their temperature becuase they are gigantothermic. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.2.150.199 (talk) 18:17, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

Complete restructuring commences
I've noticed that people as early as 2006 have commented on this, but this is a mess. Warm-blooded is colloquial term that incorporates some aspects of homeothermy and some aspects of endothermy. I'm going to begin a process in which endotherm, ectotherm, homeotherm, and poikilotherm all have their own pages and this will probably be deleted. Lepidoptera (talk) 21:49, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

Okay, I think I'm going to leave this pretty much as is. Most of the information in this article has now been moved to homeotherm and endotherm. Lepidoptera (talk) 04:18, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

'three species of fish, the opah, tuna, and mackerel sharks homeotherms ????
Regarding: the only known homeotherms are the mammals, the birds and three species of fish, the opah, tuna, and mackerel sharks; Where is the evidence for this statement?

The Research article states the Opah is endothermic not homeothermic http://www.sciencemag.org/content/348/6236/786

per http://phenomena.nationalgeographic.com/2015/05/14/meet-the-comical-opah-the-only-truly-warm-blooded-fish/ "A small number of them(fish) can warm specific parts of their bodies. Swordfish, marlins, and sailfish, can temporarily heat their eyes and brains, sharpening their vision when pursuing prey. Tuna and some sharks, including the mako and great white, can do the same with their swimming muscles, going into turbo mode when they need to. But none of these animals can heat their entire bodies. Their hearts and other vital organs stay at ambient temperature, so while they can hunt in deep, cold waters, they must regularly return to the surface to warm their innards." Jcardazzi (talk) 00:17, 20 May 2015 (UTC)jcardazzi

Selective advantages?
The article seems very thin on the evolutionary reasons why mammals and birds are warm-blooded, which (as it happens) is what I came to the article to find out. It cites a recent theory that warm-bloodedness protects against fungal infection, but that is speculative, and it doesn't explain why it is worth while for mammals and birds to pay the massive cost (in extra nutritional requirements), but not for reptiles, amphibian, etc. Presumably there *is* some large advantage, as mammals and birds outcompete reptiles and amphibia in most environments, with hot deserts maybe the only exception. Even in the sea, mammals are the top predators, though fish presumably have much greater total biomass. I guess that the ability to be active in a wide range of temperatures must be a large part of the answer, but I was hoping to see some discussion and references on the issue.109.149.2.91 (talk) 21:50, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

"Hot Blooded" leads directly here, there's no way to search for the song
Searching in Wikipedia for "Hot Blooded" brings one directly here via a redirect page.

There is also a song titled "Hot Blooded" by the band Foreigner, but there is no way to search for it directly. The song does have a page, at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hot_Blooded. (I found it by going through the band's page, which has a link.)

There ought to be a way for people to search for and get to the song's page directly, given that this really is the name of the song.

But this kind of navigation and redirect and adding of pages is beyond my editing capabilities. Nor should I make that kind of decision -- I'm not sure how it *should* be.

By the way, the song's page does have the proper "About" links at the top:

I would suggest either (1) the search term takes people directly to the song's page, where users can redirect themselves from the top, or (2) this, the biological term's page, should give users a capability of clicking to the song's page. It's obviously up to the editors which is more in keeping with Wikipedia's rules.

(One last quirk. If one types "Hot blooded" into the search bar, the drop-down list of results includes "Hot blooded" which brings one here, and "Hot Blooded" which brings one to the song.  That's a little subtle.  Maybe the song link should say "Hot Blooded (song)"?

Magnabonzo (talk) 20:34, 12 June 2019 (UTC)