Talk:Leptosporangiate fern

Proposed move

Leptosporangiate fern → Pteridopsida — Consistency in page naming; anyway, the Osmunda clade is arguable whether it's leptosporangiate or eusporangiate. I think it's better to use the scientific name and to redirect from the English name.— jaknouse (talk) 20:36, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

Oppose. The usage of "leptosporangiate fern" (to include Osmundaceae) reflects the usage of papers such as Smith 2006 and Schuettpelz 2007. Then there's the Pteridopsida versus Polypodiopsida question. Furthermore, we just discussed this a few weeks ago at Talk:Pteridopsida. Kingdon (talk) 02:58, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

Comment. The equivalent articles at WikiSpecies and Commons are atcommons:category:Polypodiopsida and WikiSpecies:Pteridopsida, which is confusing.--Grahame (talk) 06:57, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

Infobox

Can anyone put a better image at the infobox? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Extra999 (talk • contribs)

Go for it! Should be plenty of choices at commons:Category:Polypodiopsida. Kingdon (talk) 11:27, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

Contradiction in species numbers cited

The first sentence of the first paragraph is:

"Leptosporangiate ferns are the largest group of living ferns, including some 11000 species worldwide."

The first sentence of the second paragraph is:

"There are approximately 8465 species of living leptosporangiate ferns, compared with about 2070 for all other ferns..."

11,000 or 8465, which is it?

Mmmeiss (talk) 18:00, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

I came here to write a similar question. The article Fern speaks of “10,560” altogether, which would leave a negative number for the subclasses not covered here. Now, the sentence here has three citations, so it seems very credible. Can anyone look up one of the sources, please? ◀ Sebastian 13:16, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

Adding up the numbers from the other articles doesn't help: Equisetidae: 20 + Ophioglossidae: 129 + Marattiidae (i.e. Marattiaceae): 110 ≪ 2000. ◀ Sebastian 14:42, 4 June 2020 (UTC)