Talk:Danionin
 | This  level-5 vital article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
ToL-wise and title-wise, this article seems kind of confused - it seems not to be about a genus, or subfamily, or anything. If it's just about "danionins", then it should be titled "Danionin". Stan 14:05, 27 November 2005 (UTC)
- Hi Stan, youv'e opened a can of worms with that:-) - The page was originally called Danio and had about 8 fish. All of these were in the "Danio" genus when the page was written, however circa 2002 the Ichthyologist Fang Fang in a paper erected the "Genus" Devario and discovered that fish in several other genuses were closer to the Danio/Devario Genuses than previously realised. Unfortunately people persist in calling many of the species "Danio" XXX instead of "Devario" XXX including most web site. Hence my decision to change the name. Danioninae is rapidly gaining acceptance as a subfamily within Cyprinidae comprising the Danios, Devarios etc, which were previously in Rasboriniae. Danionins is starting to replace the (now inaccurate in many cases) use of "Danios" as the commonly used expression for this group of fish among ichthyologists but has still to filter through to much of the public. Many devario species still have Danio in their common name [eg Devario Regina is Queen Danio]
- So yes, strictly speaking you are correct and Danionin or Danioninae should be the correct name, but so many people have not yet heard of the phrase that it seemed sensible for the two main genuses to be listed in the title. Danio, Devario and Danionin all redirect to the page.
- OK, thanks! - let's go with just "Danionin" then. In general, when situations are messy like this, we tend to prefer a simpler title and rely on the lead para to explain to people surprised by redirs or whatever. If nothing else, it makes linking from elsewhere easier. Stan 20:19, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
- Ok, Ill do it. All those double redirects to do again sigh ;-() Kerripaul 21:06, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
Danionins should be lower-case throughout
editWithin the rules of biological nomenclature, only formal (scientific) names get capitalised and not colloquial names based on them, thus Reptilia versus reptile, Felidae versus feline. I know some hobbies tend to bend the rules a bit, but speaking as a taxonomist, it should capitalised Danioninae or lower-case danionins throughout. Especially given that the grouping probably doesn't even represent a clade, at least not as it used in the aquarium hobby.
Cheers, Neale Neale Monks 18:28, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
- It's Rasborinae and danionins anyway, it seems. There is no ambiguity here, one of the two appliers and the other is a junior synonym. I'm gonna check it out. Dysmorodrepanis (talk) 04:23, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
New information on Danioninae
editThere's a 2009 paper on Danioninae. (Fang, F., Norén, M., Liao, T. Y., Källersjö, M. & Kullander, S. O. 2009. Molecular phylogenetic interrelationships of the south Asian cyprinid genera Danio, Devario, and Microrasbora (Teleostei, Cyprinidae, Danioninae). Zoologica Scripta 38:237-256.) Here are some of the notes that I'm placing here since I don't feel like editing it now. 1. There is a subfamily Danioninae (member of Danioninae is "danionine") and a tribe within the subfamily Danionini (member of Danionini is "danionin"). 2. Rasborinae is the same as Danioninae and loses on precedence, therefore Danioninae is the subfamily name. A tribe "Rasborini" does exist within the subfamily Danioninae 3. Danionini includes two clades, the Danio clade including Danio, and the Devario clade including Devario, Microdevario, Microrasbora, as well as Chela, Laubuca, and Inlecypris of less certain placement. 4. Danionella and Esomus together are sister to Danionini. 5. Sundadanio and Paedocypris are sister and basal to the rest of the Danionines, including Rasborini, Danionini, and various other genera of cyprinids. 6. Neither Tanichthys nor Parachela are danionins.
Either way, with official nomenclature the article should either be moved to the tribe (Danionini) or the subfamily (Danioninae). If we do tribe, we should cut out Danionella, Sundadanio, Paedocypris, and Esomus, and if we do subfamily, we need to add various genera (ie. Rasbora, Boraras, Trigonostigma, Rasboroides for Rasborini, as well as Malayochela, Nematabramis, Luciosoma which were found to be in Danioninae). If no one has anything to say I will likely do the tribe as this article seems to be closer to that idea.MiltonT (talk) 18:23, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
Difference between Danioninae and Danionidae
editApparently this article is about Danionidae but mentioned are Danionins and the sidebar shows "Subfamiliy Danioninae". Boraras and other Rasborinae are in a sister family to Danioninae, and all are in Danionidae.
Edit: It also clashes with "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Danionin_species".