Talk:Conidae

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Miscellaneous notes[edit]

Cone snails are the only known animals that produce D isomer amino acids.

This sounds extremely interesting, now where's the source ? Taw 00:16, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Cone snails are the only known animals that produce D isomer amino acids.

There are no references for this in the article, and searching google and pubmed doesn't return any relevant results. So unless someone has some reference, I'm removing this sentence. Taw 08:59, 7 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]


If you enter "cone snail containing D isomer amino acids?" into Google, you will find that the issue concerning amino acids comes up..and not only with the Cone Snail. Other land dwelling snails seem to contain useful amino acids. Molliemcguire 19:15, 29 November 2006 (UTC)molliemcguire[reply]

non scientific name for conus geographus?

Geography cone. SeeConus JoJan 18:34, 17 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Having researched cone snails extensively for a report, I think I can be of help here. Conus geographus, like many other cone snails, is simply given the common name "cone snail". As for the amino acids part, the snails produce extremly potent neurological chemicals that "hack" the nervous system to do things like cause instant paralysis. They are being researched for medical purposes because of their extrem speed of effect, and lack of side effects(which would slow down the venom by getting in the way, a bad thing for a slow moving snail.) --Scorpion451 06:03, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This sentence seemed unnecessary in the introduction, so I removed it. "The shell when handled should be held with a large forceps since the harpoon can reach any part of the snail's shell surface. A wound caused by a cone sting should be treated by dipping the affected region in hot water for one hour in order to reduce the pain."CalamusFortis 18:05, 14 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting[edit]

First of all why the redirect. Articles on taxa (e.g. family Conidae) should be under a taxonomic, not vernacular heading .

Overall a collection of interesting facts but mostly regarding their venomous aspect with little on the general biology, ecology, or taxonomy.

Perhaps the Conidae artilce should be retaimed with basic information and taxobox with a link (not redirect) to this article, basically as is.

John McDonnell 14Jume2009 —Preceding undated comment added 20:39, 14 June 2009 (UTC).[reply]

Conus synonyms[edit]

There is a lot of genus that are synonyms of Conus but linking to a non-existing article. Should the links be removed or should a redirect be put in each case ? I'd go for a redirect since they would be picked up by the search engine. zubrowka74 02:54, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Removed this paragraph[edit]

I removed this paragraph because currently it is out-of-date, and I am not sure it needs including now, at least not in its present form. If people want to include it, my option is that it should be edited to be more up-to-date and relevant. Invertzoo (talk) 15:23, 13 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

"The World Register of Marine Species places all species within the family Conidae in the genus Conus and the genera recognized by Tucker & Tenorio 2009 are considered to be "alternate representations".[1] Debate within the scientific community regarding this issue continues, and additional molecular phylogeny studies are being carried out in an attempt to clarify the issue.[2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13]"

References

  1. ^ http://www.marinespecies.org/aphia.php?p=taxdetails&id=14107 Classification: Traditionally, all cone shells have been included in the Linnean genus Conus. Tucker & Tenorio (2009) have recently proposed an alternative shell- and radula-based classification that recognizes 4 families and 80 genera of cones. In WoRMS, we currently still recognize a single family Conidae (following Puillandre et al. 2011), but Tucker & Tenorio's 80 genera classification is presented as "alternative representation". [P. Bouchet, 14 Aug. 2011]
  2. ^ Cite error: The named reference Systematic was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  3. ^ Cite error: The named reference Bouchet 2011 was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  4. ^ Cite error: The named reference C.M.L. Afonso 2011 was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  5. ^ N. Puillandre, E. Strong, P. Bouchet, M. Boisselier, V. Couloux, & S. Samadi (2009), "Identifying gastropod spawn from DNA barcodes: possible but not yet practicable", Molecular Ecology Resources 9:1311-1321.
  6. ^ Tucker J.K. & Tenorio M.J. (2009), Systematic Classification of Recent and Fossil Conoidean Gastropods, ConchBooks, Hankenheim, Germany, 295 pp.
  7. ^ P.K. Bandyopadhyay, B.J. Stevenson, J.P. Ownby, M.T. Cady, M. Watkins, & B. Olivera (2008), The mitochondrial genome of Conus textile, coxI-conII intergenic sequences and conoidean evolution. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 46: 215-223.
  8. ^ S.T. Williams & T.F. Duda, Jr. (2008), Did tectonic activity stimulate Oligo-Miocene speciation in the Indo-West Pacific? Evolution 62:1618-1634.
  9. ^ R.L. Cunha, R. Castilho, L. Ruber, & R. Zardoya (2005), Patterns of cladogenesis in the venomous marine gastropod genus Conus from the Cape Verde Islands Systematic Biology 54(4):634-650.
  10. ^ T.F. Duda, Jr. & A.J. Kohn (2005), Species-level phylogeography and evolutionary history of the hyperdiverse marine gastropod genus Conus, Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 34:257-272.
  11. ^ T.F. Duda, Jr. & E. Rolan (2005), Explosive radiation of Cape Verde Conus, a marine species flock, Molecular Ecology 14:267-272.
  12. ^ B. Vallejo, Jr. (2005), Inferring the mode of speciation in the Indo-West Pacific Conus (Gastropoda: Conidae), Journal of Biogeography 32:1429-1439.
  13. ^ Biggs, J. S., Watkins, M. Showers Corneli, P. and Olivera, B. M. (2010). Defining a clade by morphological, molecular, and toxinological criteria: distinctive forms related to Conus praecellens A. Adams, 1854 (Gastropoda: Conidae). Nautilus 124:1-19 (naming new species and moving species from Kurodaconus to Turriconus).

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Conidae. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:21, 29 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Request to merge Cone snail into this page[edit]

Cone snail is just the common name for Conidae, so I believe that the pages should be merged. InvalidOS (talk) 13:44, 4 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Against merging the article Cone snail into the article Conidae is stupid. I read that scientists are planning to break up the cone shells into more then one family.Catfurball (talk) 19:33, 7 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Conidae&oldid=1201101052"