Talk:Chlorophyta

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 Chlorophyta is within the scope of WikiProject Plants, an attempt to better organize information in articles related to plants and botany. For more information, visit the project page.
Stub This article has been rated as Stub-class on the quality scale.
High This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale.

Contents

[edit] Taxonomy

Shouldn't Chlorophyta belong either to Kingdom Protista or the new Kingdom Viridiplantae?

Read the referenced article and Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Tree_of_Life/Archive11#Algae. Basically we decided that it is not Protista, and yes maybe should be Viridiplantae, but there is no consensus amongst scientists yet. So rather that change every single plant taxbox, we have stuck with Plantae. Onco_p53 3 July 2005 01:38 (UTC)
But if the text says "Chlorophyta are today classified under the Kingdom Protocista, Under the Phylum Viridiplantae, often called Phylum Algae.", I think it's best to change plantae to protisa. Now it's really hard to try understand which one this is. — linnea (<3) 18:51, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

I didn't notice that text, which is simply wrong - Viridiplantae is not the same as the algae, and is never treated as a protist phylum. Nor are the Chlorophyceae a family, nor are they the only subdivision used today. Josh

So this also is wrong? http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Chlamydomonas&diff=19308236&oldid=16049359 — linnea (talk) 09:09, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

That's not wrong per se, but it's following a different standard then the one we agreed on. Josh


Where can I find the standard you agree on? According to the NCBI Taxonomy server at [1] the division Chlorophyta belongs - together with the Streptophyta - to the phylum Viridiplantae. Is this wrong? --Tom 15:29, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Copyright?

A lot of the text on this page can be found on www.bartleby.com/65/ch/Chloroph.html, which states: The Columbia Encyclopedia, Sixth Edition. Copyright © 2001-05 Columbia University Press.
lycaon 13:10, 10 November 2005 (UTC)

This material was added at the same time as the incorrect classification, so I'm reverting the previous version. Josh

Dit stukje hierboven klopt dus niet zo goed he. Eigenlijk niets. Ik wil meeeeeer info!! Ik weet er ook geen drol over. Ik weet wel dat de fochels HEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEL lief zijn :)

[edit] Stubs and Viridiplantae

OK I added protist and plant stubs to this category, as well as a link to my barebones article on Viridiplantae. Hopefully more people would add things in about the taxonomical debate.

The above comment was unsigned by User:68.163.203.253. Onco_p53 00:32, 9 March 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Merge

This information and page needs merged into the Green algae page. It looks complex. Is there someone comfortable doing it? I'll do it later on in the week if no one else jumps to it. KP Botany 17:46, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Damn - Possibly I should not have added to the Chlorophyta! I added the classification to be found in Hoek,Mann & Jahns 1995.

Perhaps they should be merged, However under "Chlorophyta" rather than "Green algae" - it could be redirected! Too big a job for me! I don't know how to copy & paste an image for a start. Osborne 11:24, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

Ah Ah!! The article "Green algae" is concerned with MICROSCOPIC green algae - or so the first line says! Can I move it to an article entitled "Microscipic green algae"? and move the Chlorophyta to "Green Algae"? There are "Brown Algae" and "Red Algae" articles, so this (i.e.Chlorophyta) should be moved to "Green Algae" - I think! Please advise, I am not confident to make such a move. Osborne 13:21, 10 May 2007 (UTC) {{help me}}

[edit] References

Suggest a full reference be entered under "References" Osborne 08:40, 18 June 2007 (UTC)