This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Added a section on mating and parental care behavior, with an emphasis on the evolution of parental care and relatively high occurrence of male parental care in teleosts. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wenamy ( talk • contribs) 02:51, 18 September 2013 (UTC)
Teleosts are by far the largest group in Actinopterygii and have some unique adaptations that are of particular interest; therefore I was bold and made this redirect into an article. -- Ginkgo100 talk · contribs 00:08, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
The Marshall Illustrated Encyclopedia of Dinosaurs & Prehistoric Animals lists two Triassic teleosts, Pholidophorus and Leptolepis, so I changed 'Jurassic' to 'Triassic'. Jerkov 20:13, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
"On the basis of biomass as well as of species count, teleosts are the typical vertebrates, and all other vertebrates are exceptions to the teleost rule." What does this sentence mean anyway? Can someone clarify it and back it up with more evidence? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 138.16.64.11 ( talk) 03:06, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
I think the biomass part means that if you gathered up all the teleosts alive in the world today and weighed them against all the other vertebrate animal groups alive today, the teleosts would outweigh the next nearest contender. The species count claim means that there are more living species of teleost than there are of mammals, of birds, of reptiles, of amphibians, or of other types of fish. -- arkuat (talk) 11:14, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
According to the Actinopterygii article there are 30,000 species of ray-finned fishes, but this article claims only 20,000 for the Teleostei. Given that there only seem to be about 60 species in the Chondrostei and Holostei, there seems to be a large discrepancy here. -- Graminophile ( talk) 09:31, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
The Actinopterygii consist of Polypteriformes, Acipenseriformes, Lepisosteiformes, Amiiformes and Teleostei. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.102.246.128 ( talk) 21:15, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
Does anyone find this article a bit jargon-laden? What distinguishes telostei from the other two "infraclasses"? Neopterygii are mentioned in the sidebar, but aren't in the text proper
"Nearly all living bony fishes are teleosts." according to the Actinopterygii article -- shouldn't that be here also?
"Systematics" -- is this term defined? Feldercarb ( talk) 20:42, 18 September 2011 (UTC)
is there a particular reason the superorders are not in alphabetical order? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Feldercarb ( talk • contribs) 20:47, 18 September 2011 (UTC)
The lead image shows 4 fishes, of which 3 are in the Perciformes. It is an attractively colourful painting, but it fails to represent the diversity of the teleosts. Perhaps we could have an eel, a catfish, a pike, an opah and an anglerfish to represent the teleosts rather better. Chiswick Chap ( talk) 15:09, 1 January 2016 (UTC)
There is an expansion going on with this article, which is a good idea as it is certainly overdue. However, what is happening so far seems to me a bit confused. I would have thought the teleost article should be focused quite sharply on what it is that makes teleosts stand out compared to other fish groups. Instead it seems heading in the direction of cobbling together all sorts of bobs and tails from other articles that apply quite generally to fish. If that is going to happen for teleosts, then for consistency the same should happen for Percomorphi, Sarcopterygii, Elasmobranchii, and so on. The articles will be endlessly duplicating material and obscuring the key points that distinguish the different taxa. -- Epipelagic ( talk) 09:09, 6 January 2016 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: Dunkleosteus77 ( talk · contribs) 02:58, 4 February 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Teleost. 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:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 07:52, 3 April 2016 (UTC)
This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Added a section on mating and parental care behavior, with an emphasis on the evolution of parental care and relatively high occurrence of male parental care in teleosts. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wenamy ( talk • contribs) 02:51, 18 September 2013 (UTC)
Teleosts are by far the largest group in Actinopterygii and have some unique adaptations that are of particular interest; therefore I was bold and made this redirect into an article. -- Ginkgo100 talk · contribs 00:08, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
The Marshall Illustrated Encyclopedia of Dinosaurs & Prehistoric Animals lists two Triassic teleosts, Pholidophorus and Leptolepis, so I changed 'Jurassic' to 'Triassic'. Jerkov 20:13, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
"On the basis of biomass as well as of species count, teleosts are the typical vertebrates, and all other vertebrates are exceptions to the teleost rule." What does this sentence mean anyway? Can someone clarify it and back it up with more evidence? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 138.16.64.11 ( talk) 03:06, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
I think the biomass part means that if you gathered up all the teleosts alive in the world today and weighed them against all the other vertebrate animal groups alive today, the teleosts would outweigh the next nearest contender. The species count claim means that there are more living species of teleost than there are of mammals, of birds, of reptiles, of amphibians, or of other types of fish. -- arkuat (talk) 11:14, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
According to the Actinopterygii article there are 30,000 species of ray-finned fishes, but this article claims only 20,000 for the Teleostei. Given that there only seem to be about 60 species in the Chondrostei and Holostei, there seems to be a large discrepancy here. -- Graminophile ( talk) 09:31, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
The Actinopterygii consist of Polypteriformes, Acipenseriformes, Lepisosteiformes, Amiiformes and Teleostei. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.102.246.128 ( talk) 21:15, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
Does anyone find this article a bit jargon-laden? What distinguishes telostei from the other two "infraclasses"? Neopterygii are mentioned in the sidebar, but aren't in the text proper
"Nearly all living bony fishes are teleosts." according to the Actinopterygii article -- shouldn't that be here also?
"Systematics" -- is this term defined? Feldercarb ( talk) 20:42, 18 September 2011 (UTC)
is there a particular reason the superorders are not in alphabetical order? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Feldercarb ( talk • contribs) 20:47, 18 September 2011 (UTC)
The lead image shows 4 fishes, of which 3 are in the Perciformes. It is an attractively colourful painting, but it fails to represent the diversity of the teleosts. Perhaps we could have an eel, a catfish, a pike, an opah and an anglerfish to represent the teleosts rather better. Chiswick Chap ( talk) 15:09, 1 January 2016 (UTC)
There is an expansion going on with this article, which is a good idea as it is certainly overdue. However, what is happening so far seems to me a bit confused. I would have thought the teleost article should be focused quite sharply on what it is that makes teleosts stand out compared to other fish groups. Instead it seems heading in the direction of cobbling together all sorts of bobs and tails from other articles that apply quite generally to fish. If that is going to happen for teleosts, then for consistency the same should happen for Percomorphi, Sarcopterygii, Elasmobranchii, and so on. The articles will be endlessly duplicating material and obscuring the key points that distinguish the different taxa. -- Epipelagic ( talk) 09:09, 6 January 2016 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: Dunkleosteus77 ( talk · contribs) 02:58, 4 February 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Teleost. 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:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 07:52, 3 April 2016 (UTC)