Talk:Agnotozoa

Animals Mid‑importance

Agnotozoa is within the scope of WikiProject Animals, an attempt to better organize information in articles related to animals and zoology. For more information, visit the project page.AnimalsWikipedia:WikiProject AnimalsTemplate:WikiProject Animalsanimal articles

Mid

This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject Animals To-do:

Here are some Open Tasks :

Copyedit:
Merge: GLAM/ARKive donated texts into articles about endangered species.
Improve: Photoperiodism, Tool use by non-human animals, Omnivore, Animal suicide, Sphaerium beckmani (a species in family Sphaeriidae),
Requests:
- Mammals:
- Invertebrates: Campocraspedon
- Fishes: Zaniolepis frenata
Merge: GLAM/ARKive donated texts into articles about endangered species.
Expand: Junqueira cow, Atka mackerel
Nominate and vote: Science collaboration of the month, Article Improvement Drive, WikiProject Animals Collaboration

Acceptance of Agnotozoa[edit]

I was looking for more information to add to this article and the only instances of Agnotozoa that I can find all seem to be wikipedia clones. I think this is odd for something as important as a subkingdom. Is this truly a scientifically accepted classification?Remuel 18:49, 6 Jan 2005 (UTC)????

Good question. Agnotozoa doesn't seem to be widely used by biologists today. A search for the name in Biological Abstracts turns up nothing. The term does make a historical appearance, though, in the book Invertebrate Fossils by Moore, Lalicker, & Fisher, 1952. A phylum-level classification on page 17 divides the animals into the subkingdoms Eozoa (protozoans) and Metazoa. The latter is further divided into three "branches": Agnotozoa, Parazoa, and Eumetazoa. Unlike the Wikipedia article, the Agnotozoa of Moore et al. includes only Mesozoa (Orthonectida & Rhombozoa) and makes no mention of Placozoa.

Although there is precedent for the taxon Agnotoza, there seems to be no compelling reason to regard it as a clade, or even a useful grade group. It may make the taxobox more tidy, but that's not reason enough to keep it in an encyclopedia article. I suggest we remove the name from the Animal article, but retain the Agnotozoa article as an example of taxonomic history.

Cephal-odd 23:14, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That's exactly what I was thinking. 98.82.23.93 (talk) 23:50, 21 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Placozoan pictures[edit]

I'm going to add the picture from placozoa to the info box to make it more pretty.Werothegreat 15:44, 23 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]