Template talk:Taxonomy/ParaHoxozoa
Latest comment: 11 months ago by Jts1882 in topic Edit request 18 May 2023
 | Template:Taxonomy/ParaHoxozoa is permanently protected from editing because it is a heavily used or highly visible template. Substantial changes should first be proposed and discussed here on this page. If the proposal is uncontroversial or has been discussed and is supported by consensus, editors may use {{edit template-protected}} to notify an administrator or template editor to make the requested edit. Any contributor may edit the template's sandbox. This template does not have a testcases subpage. You can create the testcases subpage here.
|
Edit request 18 May 2023 edit
 | This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Looks like the actual parent is -->Myriazoa<--. Ref is Schultz, Darrin T.; Haddock, Steven H. D.; Bredeson, Jessen V.; Green, Richard E.; Simakov, Oleg; Rokhsar, Daniel S. (2023-05-17). "Ancient gene linkages support ctenophores as sister to other animals". Nature: 1–8. doi:10.1038/s41586-023-05936-6. ISSN 1476-4687. Jmv2009 (talk) 17:45, 18 May 2023 (UTC)
- The Porifera-sister or Ctenophora-sister hypotheses are subject to an ongoing debate. Both have had papers claiming to be definitive for their hypothesis, but soon another paper claims definitive evidence for the alternative hypothesis, both with strong support using their hypothesis based on their assumptions and methodology. Myriazoa assumes the Ctenophora-sister hypothesis, while Parahoxazoa is agnostic. Any change needs a good secondary reference establishing the preference for one hypothesis, not yet another primary reference. This new one is interesting because it takes a new approach, but will it convince neutrals or those from the opposite camp? If it does a supporting secondary reference will appear soon. — Jts1882 | talk 20:06, 18 May 2023 (UTC)