Talk:Radiolaria

Number of Species

This page should say how species are in the phylum. --Savant13 20:24, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Size?

I'm missing a mention of the size of these creatures - small, yes, but how small? A rough size range (in micrometers) might be useful... --Janke | Talk 16:59, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

I added diameter (diameter 0.1-0.2 mm) from http://radpage.univ-lyon1.fr/rad_en.html. Keturys (talk) 04:50, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

Images

'Haeckel Stephoidea edit.jpg' is in this article twice. Can we remove the one in the gallery? GrahamBould (talk) 13:44, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Embryos

A question from an embryologist: does anyone know whether any preserved examples of Circogonia icosohedra remain, or their existence confirmed by anyone other than Haeckel himself? He made paintings of several radiolarians that supposedly had exact polyhedral shapes, and drawings of these are frequently published, for example on the cover of an abridged edition of D'Arcy Thompson's book "Growth and Form"; but I have been told by people who knew Thompson that he came to doubt whether those creatures ever existed, and that Haeckel made them up. I have asked every biologist I knew who were familiar with radiolarians whether anyone but Haeckel ever reported any of those icosogedral etc. shaped radiolaria have ever been seen. Thank you: Albert K. Harris akharris [at] bio.unc.edu —Preceding unsigned comment added by 152.2.14.111 (talk) 20:02, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Re the comment above under Embryos, one of the geometrical forms predicted was that of Circogonia Icosahedra http://www.rutherfordjournal.org/article010109.html BachAndByte (talk) 07:22, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

Suggested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: page moved. Malcolmxl5 (talk) 02:35, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

---

---

Radiolarian → Radiolaria – Other related taxa at this level are at scientific name. BarbBarbBarb (talk) 03:11, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

Survey

Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with *'''Support''' or *'''Oppose''', then sign your comment with ~~~~. Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's policy on article titles.

• Comment isn't "Radiolarian" singular? -- 70.24.248.246 (talk) 06:19, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
• Yes, and "Radiolarians" is plural. --BarbBarbBarb (talk) 06:42, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

Discussion

Any additional comments:

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Synonymization

The current accepted name is Radiozoa [1]. Should we update and move the page?—67.124.27.226 (talk) 20:27, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

Morphogenesis

The article lacks a reference to the work of Alan Turing http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alan_Turing and Bernard Richards which predicted the structure of several forms of Radiolaria. This should be added.

86.140.224.194 (talk) 14:25, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

Pictures

All the pictures chosen to illustrate this article are pictures of phaeodarians, which Haeckel considered as being radiolarians, but are not considered today to be (and indeed, in the article, they are not included in the group). See Adl et al 2005 or Keeling et al 2005 for instance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.201.100.83 (talk) 13:27, 17 September 2014 (UTC)