Talk:Strawberry poison-dart frog

What?

There's definitely something wrong with this sentence: "Most morphs of O. pumilio average between 18-20mm as adults though as babies they can grow to hundreds of kilometers long." --Dulotic 4:45, 21 December 2007 (PST)

Oophaga pumilio in Captivity

Hyperbole? "vast quantities", "huge increase"... without a reference, these sounds exaggerative.--Leperflesh 22:05, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Oophaga vs. Dendrobates

Is it right to be changing the name? As far as I'm aware, Oophaga has yet to become accepted by the scientific community outside of a single paper proposing the massive reclassification you're undoubtledly familiar with, and I believe it's still in the review process. Correct me if I'm wrong here.--OneTwentySix 22:27, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

I agree with you completely, and have been leaving comments to this effect on other dart frog pages. However, it seems there are at least three or four wiki folks eagerly implementing the new systematics.

the real problem is, there is no "taxonomic authority" which decides when a proposed ordering should or should not be adopted. Thus, it is not really "incorrect" to start using even a controversial and problematic study such as this one. I personally think Wikipedia should reflect "the consensus view" as an encyclopedic source, while acknowledging the proposed changes, but I lack the authority to enforce my own opinion.--Leperflesh 22:33, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

"recently"

Throughout the article are statements like "recently, x has happened". This is poor form, because an article's text can remain for years, and there is no specific date attached to a given article. Instead, we should be indicating dates or date-ranges in which things changed. I lack the reference sources to indicate such dates, but I thought I'd give others a chance to insert them before I go ahead and remove most or all such statements in the article. --Leperflesh 22:36, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Photograph

The frog photograph listed as the "Basti" morph looks more like a Man Creek to me. Any thoughts? --OneTwentySix 22:55, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Spider-Man

The frog is colored just like Spider-Man's costume! That's so awesome! -- AvatarMN 06:25, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

U know wat it don't look like spider-man ok so don't say that ok
                            peace  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 137.87.66.5 (talk) 16:56, 6 March 2008 (UTC) 

strawberry

it looks like a strawberry. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 137.87.66.5 (talk) 16:50, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

FOOD!!!

What do they eat!!?? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikimichael22 (talk • contribs) 02:38, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

I do not need the answer anymore. But it would still be nice if somone added this info. Thanx.Wikimichael22 (talk) 01:12, 17 April 2008 (UTC)Wikimichael22

Name issue

So, is the strawberry poison-dart frog a Dendrobates or an Oophaga specie? I'm confused. The article itself calls it Oophaga, but the scientific classification is Dendrobates - I am confused. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.225.84.73 (talk) 19:44, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

Oophaga is not widely used; it should be Dendrobates. (BTW, I just made the edit to correct authorship, but had forgotten to sign in). MayerG (talk) 16:24, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

missing info

basic stuff - size, weight, lifespan? GraemeLeggett (talk) 20:41, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

Three ways to improve this article

This is a fairly short article that has general information on Straweberry poison-dart frog. It briefly talks about the color morphs; however, it doesn't mention anything about their evolutionary relationship of color variation and toxicity. More information about their evolution of colors would be helpful. Also, this article mentions the difference of males and females on their behavior and parental care but could focus on sexual dimorphism on their phenotypic level and explain further evolutionary reasons. Lastly, a few sentences and even an entire paragraph don't have citations. It is important to cite sources.

Weard

Frogs are not to be eaten or destroyed 75.106.173.112 (talk) 01:41, 9 February 2022 (UTC)

Review

I think the strength of this article is its attention to detail– specifically in the diet section. Personally, I found this to be the most fascinating and relatable to the class. During tadpole rearing, mother frogs feed unfertilized eggs to their young. These unfertilized eggs contain pumiliotoxins, which give the tadpoles a chemical defense against predators. I connected this idea to The Selfish Gene. Tadpoles that hatch first can consume as many eggs as possible, and by prioritizing the survival of their own genes, they gain a distinct advantage over their siblings that hatch later. 3 categories that are missing from this entry are description, predators, and ecological distribution. I think the description section can be included to provide a more comprehensive physiological characterization of the species to the reader. A predator section can be included so readers can place the species in the larger context of the food web. A distribution section can be included so that the readers get a better idea of where the species is located and why it prefers a specific habitat. The talk section described the article as “C-Class” on the quality scale and “Mid-importance” on the importance scale. A lot of the talk sections focus on grammar mistakes or missing sections; however, many of the wording has been fixed and new sections have been added that address these concerns.--Jsun2148 (talk) 20:25, 21 September 2022 (UTC)

Student Review

Strengths of this entry include the use of an audio file so the reader can better understand the information on vocalization, thorough information on reproduction and parental care, and adding links to unfamiliar words/terms. Some facts from the article that I found interesting are that this frog has 15-30 color morphs and that their toxins can induce such strong effects including paralysis and death in predators. One general category that could be included is “conservation.” In the “captivity” section, the mentions of the consequences of smuggling dart frogs allude to information about conservation status or efforts. Additionally, most developed frog entries have an explicit section on conservation. Another general category that could be included is a “description” category. The frog’s number of color morphs and typical size is mentioned, and I think centralizing that information and providing examples of known color morphs would be beneficial to the presentation of the information and clarifying the diversity in morphs which can be inferred from the article’s images. A third category that could be included is “protective coloration and behavior.” Knowing that these frogs are so colorful, I think the entry would feel more complete with information about how their coloration impacts their behavior or the characteristics of other species of frogs living in the same vicinity. I agree with the classification of the article as C-Class quality and mid-importance. This article is not as complete as other ones, but a lot of research seems to have been done on this frog, so it is at least of mild importance. Other Wikipedia users have mentioned the incompleteness of this article and the importance of using specific dates and citations, and I think an additional concern is the lack of conversation about this frog since 2009. NineAilrulus (talk) 00:12, 11 October 2022 (UTC)

Behavior

I had recently watched a documentary on resource competition and the strawberry poison dart frog was mentioned as an example, which drew me to this page. While the behavior section did include interesting information, I was surprised it did not reflect the territorial behavior exemplified in the documentary. Strawberry dart frogs would fight using croaks without entering into physical contact, one frog being the territory owner and the other an intruder. If the croaking continues for long, they eventually wrestle with an inevitable victory for the territory owner. It is an important addition to an overall strong article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Luiscville (talk • contribs) 04:50, 23 September 2022 (UTC)