Talk:Theria

message: Hi! Dont all the animals within Monotremata actually lay eggs? If so, then why are they classified as Theria if all Theria "...give birth to live young without using a shelled egg?" Email me at ksuttles@email.unc.edu with the answer...I am studying this for a paleontology class.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 152.23.209.219 (talk) 19:47, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: that seems like over-categorization to me. --Philo  17:35, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

text: Please see my point below if you are still confused. Shanoman (talk) 17:32, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: An accuracy tag was placed on the page.  What is the disputed content?  --Aranae 08:20, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Apparently the dispute was as to the use of the classification "Theria".  This is now cited, but it's a book so I can't verify.  We probably need additional refs or a verification to remove the tag. 128.227.68.119 13:23, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

text: I have added that reference to the article and removed the tag.  If people still have issues with the page, they'll have to come here to the talk page and be more specific about what the problem is. Kingdon 21:30, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Accuracy tag

message: Theria are indeed the eutheria; theria are also the metatheria; thus theria include both [all of] the eutheria in addition to [all of] the metatheria.
OR, if you prefer:
All eutherians (placentals) are therians;
All metatherians (marsupials) are also therians;
Therefore, Therians = all eutherians + all metatherians
The designation or grouping "Theria" describes what placentals and marsupials have in common with each other (namely, giving live birth to their young), and what distinguishes them both from the more primitive, egg-laying protherians. This may seem like "overclassification" to some of my fellow laypeople, but it seems to me like it is quite standard procedure among those professionals and other experts dealing with taxonomy (classification). Shanoman (talk) 17:32, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Classification and logic

message: Kingdom: Animalia
Phylum: Chordata
Class: Mammalia
So far so good.  But then:
Subclass: Theriiformes
Superorder: Theria
and then it lists "infraclasses".  Surely infraclass is a higher taxonomic rank than superorder?
Eutheria gives Theria as being a subclass, which makes more sense, but then what is Theriiformes? -- Smjg (talk) 20:50, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Someone just had to put it as superorder since the infobox doesn't support supercohort (and  works poorly with authority) Narayanese (talk) 21:23, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I had a go at fixing this conflict and explaining a bit in the text.  The confusion seems to be from two different mammal classification systems, one that has a subclass named Theria, and another that has a subclass named Theriiformes and in which Theria appears lower down in the hierarchy.  The whole idea of these rankings is kind of problematic in phylogenetics anyway, since new taxa keep being interpolated between the old ranked ones.  --Gblandst (talk) 20:29, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Taxonomic rank - what's going on? 

message: In the taxobox, the links from infraclasses and below don't work.
Dab14763 (talk) 21:16, 1 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Taxobox 

message: I removed this claim as the term is poorly defined and not to my knowledge really favoured in modern ecology. While the Cenozoic is often called the age of mammals, number of mammal species is vastly outnumbered by bird species, and estimates on absolute global numbers of wild mammals vs. wild birds could go either way. Either way, it didn't seem a particularly useful addition as it stood nor was it sourced or defined. Hedge89 (talk) 13:53, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: Dominant terrestrial amniotes