Talk:Archaeplastida
 | This  level-5 vital article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
EEF2 analysis challenges the monophyly of Archaeplastidia and Chromalveolata
edithttp://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0002621
Most of the analyses contradict convincingly Archeoplastida monophyly, and it has weak support. The article is biased in favour of Archeoplastida monophyly. Archeoplastida and Rhizaria are gradist concepts. --Capt. Ciel (talk) 14:55, 31 December 2018 (UTC)
- The article you post in support of your position was ten-years-old at the time of your posting. When you posted, a year ago, there were references in the introduction that were 6.5 years more recent. Now your reference is 11.5 years old. I have no idea if it has been refuted, or confirmed. But there certainly should be more recent publications supporting your position. Nick Beeson (talk) 03:14, 7 January 2020 (UTC)
Simple text error?
editThe chloroplasts of the glaucophytes are surrounded by two membranes, suggesting they developed directly from endosymbiotic cyanobacteria. In all other groups, the chloroplasts are surrounded by three or four membranes, suggesting they were acquired secondarily from red or green algae.
Shouldn't that rather read
The chloroplasts of the archaeplastida are surrounded by two membranes...
? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.179.204.72 (talk) 08:59, 19 January 2014 (UTC)
Needs Updating Jan. 2020
editThe introduction states that "the Archaeplastida form a monophyletic group" but that "based on the evidence to date, it is not possible to confirm or refute" and cites a five-year-old article. Thus "to date" is getting to be pretty far in the past. Five years is forever for a dispute such as this. There must be more recent publications that elucidate this question. This is not my field, and I am incompetent to update this. If you know the current status of the monophyleticity of the Archaeplastida, please post it with references. Thanks,Nick Beeson (talk) 03:08, 7 January 2020 (UTC)
Actually, Archaeplastida may still be a monophyletic group, although Rhodelphydia, Picozoa may be sister to Rhodophyta. Furthermore, Cryptista for now appears to be sister to Archaeplastida, but this is not certain. Otherwise Rhodophyta (and not Glaucophyta) appear to be basalmost. [1] Jmv2009 (talk) 20:17, 26 June 2020 (UTC)
References
- ^ Sibbald, Shannon J; Archibald, John M (2020-05-13). McFadden, Geoff (ed.). "Genomic insights into plastid evolution". Genome Biology and Evolution: evaa096. doi:10.1093/gbe/evaa096. ISSN 1759-6653.