Talk:Venomous mammal

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 30 August 2021 and 10 December 2021. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): OscarCanaboi.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 12:18, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Regarding Big Cats

Should there be an entry in "Chemical defense" for documented learned behaviors such as Lions and other Big Cats in some zoos using their anal scent glands to spray visitors.
Youtube is a great source to verify this from Tiger Spray
Neo Piper (talk) 16:39, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

Poison tree frogs

The introduction included the statment that poison tree frogs are venomous; they are not. They contain poison to deter predators : they are poisonous. They do not inject or bite with that poison to catch prey - that is what venomous means. I removed the statement as it was unessarcary and innaccurate. If any one knows of an actually venomous amphibian by all means reference that instead. Captain Crush (talk) 22:28, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

(addendum to this, the article also states that the hooded pithoui(?) is venomous, it is infact poisonous. Venom must be injected and the birds in question, like these frogs, only contain poison in their feathers and body parts with no injection possible or needed. The link in this article confirms this. This statement should be removed. 2001:569:772D:EE00:8C89:D691:EDC9:581B (talk) 17:35, 7 January 2018 (UTC)

Non-mammals

Why is this info here? These aren't mammals. "There are no species of venomous bird; however some birds are poisonous to eat or touch, such as the pitohui, the ifrita, and the Rufous or Little Shrike-thrush. There are only a few species of venomous amphibian - certain salamandrid salamanders can extrude venom-tipped sharp ribs" 76.103.40.18 (talk) 01:23, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

I am not sure i understood u? could u please be more clear? Docku: What up? 02:32, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

I see what she means. We should add a page about Venemous Amphibians, because the poisinous characteristic makes them unique in a significant way. 76.125.18.96 (talk) 05:29, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

Vampire bats?

The article lists vampire bats as venomous, stating that "vampire bats secrete a powerful anticoagulant in their saliva." I question whether they are really considered venomous. For comparison, mosquitos also possess saliva with anticoagulant properties, but they are not normally considered venomous insects. Augurar (talk) 01:39, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

I also question this. In the Vampire bat article the word "venomous" does not appear once, and in the Anticoagulant article, "venom" only appears once with no apparent claim that anticoagulants are venoms. I propose the vampire bat is deleted from this article.__DrChrissy (talk) 17:37, 15 August 2013 (UTC)

I forgot to save my edit a few days ago, but I've posted about this on the Wikiproject: Rodents page asking for comment. I don't see any good citation that these anticoagulants are considered venom in general, but I'd like to hear from some people in the zoological community as to whether vampire bats are considered venomous. 0x0077BE (talk) 14:48, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

As no one has come to the defense of the vampire bats and DrChrissy seems to agree, I've culled Vampire Bats from the article. 0x0077BE (talk) 18:22, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

I have just been editing the article and I have re-introduced the vampire bat. Whether they are truly venomous is debatable, but some definitions would consider them to be. We seem to have a robust source that they can be included.__DrChrissy (talk) 21:30, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

I came to the Talk page with the same question: Is an anticoagulant a venom? Here is how American Heritage dictionary defines "venom": "A substance that causes injury, illness, or death, especially by chemical means."

It seems very doubtful that the bite of a vampire bat causes "injury" beyond the punctures caused by its teeth. And of course the bat has no incentive to injure its living food sources.

Therefore the article ought to point out that this is at best a borderline case depending on one's definition of the word "venom". There is nothing wrong with pointing out borderline cases. Wikipedia editors don't need to decide all questions one way or the other. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:200:C082:2EA0:11B5:26D8:F265:40B (talk) 18:28, 10 September 2023 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of sections

I propose to delete the last 2 sections on the article, i.e "poisonous" and "chemical defense". These are not really relevant to the article and could be confusing.__DrChrissy (talk) 21:33, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: Mammalogy

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 23 August 2023 and 8 December 2023. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Eahorinek (article contribs).

— Assignment last updated by Eahorinek (talk) 18:07, 1 October 2023 (UTC)

Primates toxicity is known

The wording of source 1 says:

> It has been proposed that some members of a fourth order, Primates, are venomous.

This makes it sound unsure.

The Pygmy slow loris is known to be venomous: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pygmy_slow_loris

The sentence should be rephrased to indicate that there is at least one known venomous Primate.

Skunks are not mustelids

In the "Chemical Defence" section of this article, it states that "Skunks (Mustelidae) can secrete...". Skunks are in the family Mephitidae, not Mustelidae. 2600:8800:1AC0:600:888B:60F4:8562:C1AB (talk) 18:46, 6 May 2024 (UTC)