Talk:Dickinsonia

message: The  template on the article page is problematic. It is not even clear that Dickinsonia is an animal, and any further classification would be contentious. I don't see any real point in providing a taxobox for this genus. -- Donald Albury 14:36, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: We could place it in Family Dickinsonidae, which currently includes also Yorgia and Marywadea.--Mr Fink 17:01, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Few of the Ediacaran biota have any taxoboxes, and they don't have any agreed form of classification.  Family Dickinsonidae is just one POV.  Another POV I have read is that presumably evolution diverged groups over time, so that close to their point of divergence they were more closely related, so that different Phyla ancestors in the Ediacaran period would be as closely related as animals from different orders (or some smaller subdivision) are today. I was thinking along the lines of animalia and leave it at that! GB 06:05, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Placing it in the Anamalia is a big POV! I think the classification of Dickinsonidae is fair – the PoV is whether that should be a family , genus, or phylum. That's a semantic, not factual, decision. Verisimilus T 00:09, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Taxobox

message: There's also a genus of (extant) tree fern called Dicksonia, which could be confused with this thing. 75.208.187.54 (talk) 01:25, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: That's true, though, do remember that the naming conventions of Taxonomy allow for a generic name to be used more than once, provided that the organisms being named are in different kingdoms, for example, Proteus being used to name a bacterium, and the olm.--Mr Fink (talk) 01:49, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Very similar names 

message: You guys think that these reconstructions I made     are usable for this article?--Mr Fink (talk) 05:37, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Can you edit new pictures with one species and without the other species on them?  Having them half cut off looks like we are missing something! Graeme Bartlett (talk) 08:25, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: In the recon of D. lissa, should I also crop out D. menneri, and should I crop out Archaeaspinus from the big portrait?--Mr Fink (talk) 14:27, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: That is my idea, only leave the relevant ones visible, otherwise we are confused. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 21:48, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I finished cropping up the portrait of D. lissa, but, I decided to leave Archaeaspinus in the big portrait, so we can use it for a comparison between dickinsoniids and yorgiids when we expand on Proarticulata.--Mr Fink (talk) 01:13, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Images 

message: Bad URL
Erik Sperling1 et al. (2008). "A placozoan affinity for Dickinsonia and the evolution of Late Precambrian metazoan feeding modes" in Palaeontological Association Annual Meeting. Cusack, M; Owen, A; Clark, N Programme with Abstracts 52.
Liu, A. et al (2008). "Taphomorphs and taxonomy of the Ediacara Biota in Avalonia" in Palaeontological Association Annual Meeting. Cusack, M; Owen, A; Clark, N Programme with Abstracts 52.
Correct link - http://downloads.palass.org/annual_meeting/2008/Glasgow2008abstracts.pdf
internal anatomy
"Some spectacular fossils which can be attributed to Dickinsonia appear to preserve internal anatomy, believed to represent a tract that both digested food and distributed it throughout the organism.[11] However, this probably represents an artefact of the preservational process; the reported fossils may have been more decayed than usual for Ediacarans, producing a different appearance.[12]"
Please, don’t do of strange and anything ungrounded generalizations! The research of A. Liu et al “Taphomorphs and taxonomy of the Ediacara Biota in Avalonia” about mystery Ivesheadia and Shepshedia from Avalon biota only!
Internal organs in the manner of channels system at Proarticulata were, it is not artifact of the preservation process it is real structures. These organs were confirmed in hundreds of specimens of Proarticulata members, especially in Yorgia, Cyanorus, "Dickinsonia cf. tenuis", Vendia rachiata, Marywadea. The channels system demonstrate strict constancy of the form, the regularity in structure and form, the ontogenic development in process of organism’s growth and development.
Dickinsonia preserved in coarse sandstone
"The organisms are preserved usually in coarse sandstone."
The Australian ediacatan rocks usually are coarse sandstone, but in Russia it usually fine-grained sandstone, aleurolite (siltstone).
Aleksey (Alnagov (talk) 20:11, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Remarks 

message: "Dickinsonia is found in sedimentary beds 8 mm thick; allowing for compaction, this allows these specimens a maximum height of 1 cm." But erosion of the sea-bottom?!
There is regularity - the thin layer contains small Dickinsonia, Kimberella, Yorgia and other fossils of the mobile animals. Big and very big Dickinsonia, Kimberella, Yorgia are discovered only on thick massive not layered sandstone.
"Organisms of all sizes are found on bedding plane assemblages; this shows that they were commonly preserved in life position, as currents would preferentially remove smaller specimens." All agree that a Kimberella is mobile animal and small Kimberella find with Dickinsonia on one surface of fossiliferous beds!
"The organisms displayed isometric growth" - Russian Dickinsonia demonstrate not isometric growth.
"The organisms displayed indeterminate growth" – different species demonstrate different max size.
"Their mode of anchorage may have been oyster-like concretion, lichen-like rooting with rhizines, or fungus-like attachment to an underground network of hyphæ.
The organisms are preserved in such a way that their resistant parts must have been a sturdy biopolymer (such as keratin) rather than a brittle mineral (such as calcite or a pyritised death mask)." This Retallack hypothesis is unproved conjecture, it hypothesis based on assumption that Dickinsonia is fungus/lichens and on assumption that Dickinsonia connected with tubular “Aulozoon” fossil. But "Aulozoon" find only on one bed in Australia. There are no fossils the rhizines, or fungus-like an underground network of hyphae!
The shell of cells of fungus and lichens consists of cellulose (as well as algae) and chitin. In Russia the real algae and fungal preserved on one beds with Dickinsonia as a flat carbonaceous films. Russian specimens displayed elastic deformations and it wrinkled and crumpled. 
Preservation style of a Dickinsonia similar to preservation style of Tribrachidium, Kimberella, Yorgia, Temnoxa, Parvancorina and other not fungal-nature organisms (animals).
"The imprints are almost identical, suggesting they were made by one organism -- but this is not necessarily the case: they could be the bases of lichens or "mushrooms arranged in fairy rings"" All positive imprints (traces) identical in one group. These traces overlap each other. They have a stable body orientation, with the head pointing in the direction of movement.
My Best Regards. Aleksey (Alnagov (talk) 20:29, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  ''Dickinsonia'' it is lichens: a critique of the Retallack idea 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Dickinsonia. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added  tag to http://www.samuseum.sa.gov.au/Journals/TRSSA/TRSSA_V073/trssa_v073_p72p99.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070927022652/http://vend.paleo.ru/pub/Keller_Fedonkin_1976.pdf to http://vend.paleo.ru/pub/Keller_Fedonkin_1976.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070929092905/http://www.samuseum.sa.gov.au/Journals/TRSSA/TRSSA_v071/trssa_v071_p212p224.pdf to http://www.samuseum.sa.gov.au/Journals/TRSSA/TRSSA_V071/trssa_v071_p212p224.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070704183947/http://vend.paleo.ru/pub/Ivantsov_et_Malakhovskaya_2002-e.pdf to http://vend.paleo.ru/pub/Ivantsov_et_Malakhovskaya_2002-e.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:01, 10 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The title explains my complaint, it seems to have a tensing error.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fivework (talk • contribs) 00:49, 3 April 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Shouldn't the first sentence say it WAS, not IS? 

message: A fossil has recently been found in India. Please see:
 
Thanks Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 16:11, 12 February 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Recent find from India  

message: I've found this article regarding that some specimens of Dickinsonia from Russia provide evidence of their growth and biological affinities alongside marginal and terminal areas of wilting deformation being necrotic zones which separate regenerated growth in the specimens. Could this be added to the taxonomy and/or body fossils section? The article in question is https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0269638 Rugoconites Tenuirugosus (talk) 16:56, 16 October 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Damaged Dickinsonia specimens