Talk:Rufous rat-kangaroo

Distinction between Rat-Kangaroo and Bettong

The information that was placed last night on this page was completely accurate. It was referenced and clearly distinguished the differences between Rat-kangaroos and Bettongs. As such, I was lenient on the Rufous Rat-kangaroo title, as there is no such animal. To call it so is incorrect. The only member of the Rat-kangaroo species is The Musky Rat-kangaroo, clearly recognised by its' brown, rat-like appearance and the previously specified four toed foot with a dominant big toe. Alternatively, the Rufous Bettong, like all other Bettongs, has three toes, with a single dominant large toe.

As a Rufous Bettong breeder, I feel it is important to point out this inaccuracy and wish for my former addition to be reinstated.

Additionally, I have a wish to add photos to accentuate this point. How would this be achieved?Clay0059 03:50, 14 March 2007 (UTC)Clay0059

Your reference is from 1995. Mine is from 2005. Mine says Rufous Rat-kangaroo. Mine says only Bettongia contains bettongs. Mine was written (in part) by Colin Groves. Mine follows on Walker as the authoritative source for mammal common names. - UtherSRG (talk) 04:41, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Regardless of the publication date, you haven't verified whether my information on the structure of the foot is accurate or not. In searching for other verification material, I noticed that Australia Zoo, the most well-known zoo of Australia that is universally recognised, has no record of the Rufous Rat-kangaroo, but 9 articles on the Rufous Bettong. It appears that they breed them too, and by the correct name. The Australia Zoo Website is: http://www.australiazoo.com.au/search/search.php?zoom_query=rufous+bettong&zoom_per_page=10&zoom_and=0&zoom_sort=0

Alternatively, doing an image search on google (australian sites only), will indicate a number of pictures of Rufous Bettongs, some of which clearly indicate the foot structure. This can then be compared with the foot of the Musky Rat-Kangaroo, or any other Rat-kangaroo you happen to find...

To be fair, the Rufous Bettong does not share the name of the Bettongia, however, it does not share its' name with the musky rat-kangaroo either. So neither argument can be verified that way.

Not to be rude, but which country do you come from. I myself reside in Adelaide, SA, Australia, so I am constantly confronted with native animals in my yard, besides from the 20 or so we have bred.Clay0059 03:00, 21 March 2007 (UTC)Clay0059

My country is irrelevant. I'm citing an Australian scientist Colin Groves in the official source for mammals. I have no quarrel with your information about the structure of the foot. Add any accurate, verifiable information you can. Leave the name alone, since my source trumps yours, unless you can find a source that says my source is wrong. - UtherSRG (talk) 11:11, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Now the issue I have with this page is that the Rufous Bettong is classified ubder that name when looking at the external links to the page you added. I feel that Rufous Bettong should be refered to as its common Australian name, being an Australian animal I feel this should be recognised. Cootiesami 05:02, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

"Rufous Rat-kangaroo" is quite as common in Australia as "Rufous Bettong" - I do live in Australia. It also seems to make sense as the other member of the general bettong group that is not referred to as a bettong is the Desert Rat-kangaroo {Caloprymnus campestris). I don't see anyone trying to say that this should be called the Desert Bettong. Frickeg 06:55, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Also, I would certainly dispute that the Australia Zoo is the "most well-known zoo of Australia that is internationally recognised". The Australia Zoo is a private zoo that is much smaller in size than the major government zoos such as Taronga Zoo, Western Plains Zoo, Melbourne Zoo, or Healesville Sanctuary, the last of which also keeps Rufous Rat-kangaroos. Frickeg 00:59, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

Okay, after a brief hiatus, I found a source which specifies that the term rat-kangaroo actually refers to mammals of the potoroo family. Additionally, Desert rat-kangaroos are extinct, so there is no way to verify if such an animal is really a rat-kangaroo or a bettong, as there are only artist illustrations of such a species. In this way, the Desert "rat-kangaroo" is irrelevant. My previously specified source can be found at: http://www.publish.csiro.au/samples/Bettongs%20sample.pdfClay0059 04:51, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

There are museum specimens of Desert Rat-kangaroos which have confirmed its current classification. I don't see how the fact that it is extinct makes it irrelevant. Also, if you look at the taxobox in the article, you will see that all bettongs (and the Rufous Rat-kangaroo) are members of the Potoroidae (rat-kangaroo) family which also includes potoroos. Thus, bettongs are actually a type of rat-kangaroo, and at the moment the name would appear to be most usefully restricted to the genus Bettongia. Frickeg 08:35, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Surely Australian marsupial names should follow the standard Census of Australian Vertebrate Species (CAVS) name? It is the national standard in Australia, after all. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dregsy (talk • contribs) 06:07, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

Where did my picture of the joey climbing into the mother's pouch go? That was an authentic picture which I photographed from my backyard! Clay0059 —Preceding comment was added at 04:46, 28 October 2007 (UTC)