This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
For the record, Kladothrips is not the only genus displaying eusocial behaviors. See:
Might also be worth noting that this is regarded as a genus in transition from a non-social species to a social species, depending on the severity of the habitat. Not all species within this genus meet that third condition of "non-reproducing soldier caste". See the above article and:
That variable phylogenetic transition is one of the things that makes this a useful group for developing theories explaining the evolution of eusocial behavior.
Aderksen, thanks for the review. I actually did realize that this information also applies to certain Oncothrips species. My question would be what to do with the writing I have come up with, given the fact that it applies to to separate genus, both of whom do not have articles of their own. If you have any advice in that regard that would be very useful so I can parse this into the correct spot. JSDavis2 ( talk) 01:23, 5 December 2013 (UTC)
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
For the record, Kladothrips is not the only genus displaying eusocial behaviors. See:
Might also be worth noting that this is regarded as a genus in transition from a non-social species to a social species, depending on the severity of the habitat. Not all species within this genus meet that third condition of "non-reproducing soldier caste". See the above article and:
That variable phylogenetic transition is one of the things that makes this a useful group for developing theories explaining the evolution of eusocial behavior.
Aderksen, thanks for the review. I actually did realize that this information also applies to certain Oncothrips species. My question would be what to do with the writing I have come up with, given the fact that it applies to to separate genus, both of whom do not have articles of their own. If you have any advice in that regard that would be very useful so I can parse this into the correct spot. JSDavis2 ( talk) 01:23, 5 December 2013 (UTC)