Talk:Ventastega

Untitled

I corrected the formatting, plus added template notes and these references: Scientists, led by Per Ahlberg found in Latvia the 365 million-year-old fossil skull, shoulders and part of the pelvis of the Ventastega curonica, which is more tetrapod than fish and looked similar to a small alligator. The discovery contributes to the evolutionary transition from fish to tetrapods (animals with 4 limbs and include such descendants as amphibians, birds and mammals).yahoo.com, Fossil of most primitive 4-legged creature foundnews.bbc.co.uk, Fossil fills out water-land leap--Florentino floro (talk) 09:16, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

Ventastega: fish or tetrapod?

Hello i'm brisio

Please sorry if i sound disrespectful, but the page seems contradictin itself: it says "Ventastega was a tiktaalik-like tetrapodomorph" and then "Ventastega is one of the earliest Devonian tetrapods yet discovered" Ok, i know all tetrapod r tetrapodomorphs by descendence, but the page seems say ventastega is a non-tetrapod tetrapodomorph, a fish still To me it would be better sayin simply "it's a basal tetrapod" or so I found this 2009 paper sayin ventastega is a tetrapod and showin it's really 4-legged and MORE derived than elginerpeton, dat is a tetrapod Look at page two: there is a cladogram http://www.springerlink.com/content/v16470436056263j/fulltext.pdf

If someone wants, i can modify the page —Preceding unsigned comment added by Brisio (talk • contribs) 05:52, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

I think the issue is there are several definitions of "Tetrapod" currently in use, some more inclusive and supplanting Tetrapodomorph in usage. This issue won't be resolved anytime soon, at least until PhyloCode. If the scientists are contradicting each other, than that's the state of the science and might as well be reflected here ;) Dinoguy2 (talk) 21:31, 15 November 2009 (UTC)