Talk:Xenacoelomorpha

Clade or phylum?

Is this a clade or a phylum??? (See the articles for the two respective "subphyla"). 160.111.254.17 (talk) 15:27, 31 January 2017 (UTC)

It would be a clade wither way. Modern biologists are vastly more concerned with determining which clades have molecular support than how they fit into Linnaean taxonomic ranks. The article currently presents it as a phylum, but I think it might be better simply to follow the lead of the paper that introduced this taxon and consider it an "unranked clade" that contains a subphylum and a genus not in that subphylum. —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 07:30, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

I don't think that the rank name is really that relevant, because, as Metaknowledge said, biologists are more concerned with phylogenetic support than the rank. Linnean ranks in taxonomy are becoming obsolete. But if we consider all animals as belonging to a phylum, Xenacoelomorpha would be one of them. What else could be the modern phylum of those creatures? Piter Keo 15:22, 1 February 2017 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Piterkeo (talk • contribs)

The point is that phylum is a taxonomic rank, named and described following precise rules of taxonomic nomenclature rules. A clade and a phylum (or any other taxomomic rank) may have the same circumscription, but they mean different things. Clades are not taxonomic ranks (and many taxonomists would disagree that rank names are irrelevant or obsolete). 160.111.254.17 (talk) 14:24, 6 February 2017 (UTC)

Protostomes

This article contains the now-discredited idea that protostomes develop mouths before anuses. This information is in the opening section of the linked Protostome page. 2600:6C40:53F0:7D00:5077:AA06:776C:391A (talk) 02:04, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

The deuterostomes do develop anus-first, so that part is still accurate 2600:6C40:53F0:7D00:5077:AA06:776C:391A (talk) 02:06, 29 January 2024 (UTC)