Talk:Tadpole

Untitled

I need to know the scientific name for tadpoles + this isnt very detailed is it? And i thought tadpoles were ambiotic. 60.241.67.65 (talk) 08:58, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

x

Aren't tadpoles larval amphibians, not just frogs and toads?or are they? Steinsky 13:39, 4 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Eastern Newt agrees. — Omegatron 17:28, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

photo problem

The photo of frog embryos is crowding out the text to the left, so there is a big white blank gap. I'm not sure how to fix this--but I note that html coding is being used here. Deirdre 21:09, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I'm no expert, but I tried to fix it. 208.170.67.211 17:53, 8 May 2005 (UTC)

1953?

That pointer to 1953 needs to be either a more direct reference to something specific, or removed. James S. 23:05, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

Tadpole soup

Why was this removed? Have you researched Cherantais cuisine? How to cook a Tadpole?? Please wright it I need it!!

I've eaten tadpole soup in Royan. It DOES exist in France. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.10.36.201 (talk) 19:04, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

It is 'soupe de têtards', soup from Royan, Mornac, and the other villages. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.41.212.2 (talk) 10:47, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

Idem. Ate it last month in St Sulpice de Royan, a bit wierd but it exists. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AlexfromPessac (talk • contribs) 21:14, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

Idem. Sign it this time (new and strange addition to Wikipedia)AlexfromPessac (talk) 21:21, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

Tail absorption

Sounds like it should be phagocytosis, not apoptosis. Zargulon 13:40, 25 December 2006 (U by XANA BANANA

    ARE TADPOLES PRODUCERS?

ARE TADPOLE'S PRODUCERS?

Are tadpole's producers ? comehere and tellm e cause i need this naswer for my home work!±jgkrtes —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.149.203.8 (talk) 14:16, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Some are. Neotheny (spawning while in a larval stage) is known from several groups of salamanders.Petter Bøckman (talk) 19:56, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Homework may be asking about their position in the trophic chain - in which case the answer is "no" - tadpoles are heterotrophs ("consumers") in that they break down complex foodstuffs into less complex wastes (or transform materials from a higher to a lower energy state). To be a "Producer" they'd need to be autotrophs of some kind, making complex compounds from less complex ones, e.g. by photosynthesis. 62.196.17.197 (talk) 16:57, 27 March 2014 (UTC)

"Common Insecticide Can Decimate Tadpole Populations"

For reference. http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/09/080929123939.htm StevePrutz (talk) 16:06, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

"Tadpoles play a key role keeping the algae at the base of the food chain productive"

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/10/081016124252.htm (for reference) StevePrutz (talk) 15:32, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

=="How big does their enviroment have to be?"== lkbarnes5709@yahoo.com

detailed development

This page is almost redundant with how little it contains.

Anyway, I have a question along with my suggestion for more info on the development. I have some common (european) frog tadpoles in front of me. All of them have a flap only on their left hand side. After closer observation i noticed that this is the operculum (or the tadpole equivalent) as i could see the water being pulsed out by the gulping of water. Then i asked why this is the case, and it seems apparent (to me at least) that this consistent (i.e. always right hand side first [for this species only?]) asymmetrical development explains how they develop lungs while not surrendering gill function; they turn half of their gills into lungs and then the other half. These tadpoles come up to breathe air but still gulp water and use a left-hand-side gill. This kind of info on tadpole metamorphosis would make for a kick-ass article, if only i could find academic sources to back up my observations. And then to find further information on other more detailed processes. 80.176.89.230 (talk) 20:14, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

The question was, can anyone confirm my observations? Or find sources? and Should this kind of info be included? 80.176.89.230 (talk) 20:15, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

Does it eat mud or sand

I read today in the newspaper(The Hindu) that Tadpoles consumes mud as its eatable. Does it true. I'm eager to know. That news title was somewhat like this "Mud eating Tadpoles".

—Dev Anand Sadasivam^t@lk 12:47, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

Newt larvae

Hi, HCA, I was quite surprised to see my edit reverted, because the newt article refers to their larvae as tadpoles (as always have I); my 1925 Concise OED derives the word from toad + poll. Interesting. Best wishes, Tony Holkham (Talk) 08:37, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

I fixed the newt article. From a scientific standpoint, "tadpole" only refers to anuran larvae; all other amphibians just have "larvae". The common terminology is often confused and generally worthless, like the utter mess that is the common term for "toad" (which covers 6 different families of anurans with no basis beyond "bumpy skin"). HCA (talk) 12:43, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

Hi HCA, is "tadpole" a scientific term at all? My assumption is that scientists have no need of that concept, their concept "larva" suffices for them doesn't it? Which is not to say "tadpole" shouldn't be included here--on the contrary, Wikipedia is for a general audience and no herpetologist has need to look up what a 'tadpole' is! I suspect the concept of 'tadpole' continues to be something widely used by the public because of the unique status of amphibians as intermediate between fish (gill-breathing) and reptiles (lung-breathing). I propose we treat 'tadpole' as equivalent to the larval stage of any amphibian, with special emphasis on amphibian larvae that are fish-like, i.e. aquatic, gilled, and having a tail--as contrasted with juveniles of lunged vertebrates, which do *not* have any larval stage. Thoughts? Dansksalamander (talk) 21:28, 28 May 2019 (UTC)Doug (dansksalamander)