Talk:Termite

physogastric queens

The text states that "In physogastric species, the queen adds an extra set of ovaries with each moult". My understanding was that insects do not molt after reaching maturity (as defined by by sexual reproduction and wings; Ephemeroptera are a partial exceptino). Reference???? — Preceding unsigned comment added by MrDarwin (talk • contribs) 02:51, 10 January 2006

Mounds

I think the section on Mounds should be categorized as a stub in its current state. I'm puzzled that the subject of the Termite Mounds, which I find amazing - but unfortunately does not have enough expertise to write about myself - is not explored in more depth, but only mentioned in very broad terms. I urge people to extend that section - or perhaps "Termite Mounds" should be a topic on its own? Robbiedsl 27 Jun 2006

Termites as a foodstuff

I kinda browsed through the article, though I didnt see anywhere that termites are used as a foodstuff. I know that in many parts of africa the "flying ants" are used as a common food, when in season. Also the queen is sometimes dug up and eaten. These are still common practices. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fitz05 (talk • contribs) 20:07, 26 July 2007

Adapation

I would like to know about Desert Termites DESERT TERMITES — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.59.15.4 (talk • contribs) 13:30, 11 April 2013

Suggestion

To accurately reflect phylogenetic relationships, I propose changing the “infraorder Isoptera” entry in the taxobox to “epifamily Termitoidae” and treating the subordinate groupings currently given ranks such as parvorder as unranked clades. The underlying phylogenetic relationships have been well established for roughly two decades and are no longer seriously disputed. Moreover, only one classification has been proposed that both preserves the monophyly of these groups and retains the currently recognized termite families. The continued use of the name Isoptera at the rank of infraorder appears to be largely a matter of taxonomic convention rather than a reflection of phylogeny. I therefore think that adopting the Termitoidae-based classification would be preferable. コロネン (talk) 13:45, 22 August 2026 (UTC)

The problem is that the works on taxonomy of termites use Infraorder Isoptera (see note at {{Taxonomy/Isoptera}}. If we move to epifamily Termitoidae, its subdivision become difficult to source. We could change to unranked/clade but that isn't really following the sources. I note that the Cockroach Species File and Isoptera Species File are in the process of merging into a Blattodea Species File. Currently they use Infraorder Termitoidea out of place with the rest of their taxonomy, which is consistent with the cladogram in Blattodea. I assume (hope?) they will try and rectify this discrepancy and provide a unified taxonomy we can use. It's also worth mentioning that while it is easy to change the taxonomy template, there are hundreds of articles that would need revision or checking for consistency. I suggest waiting to see what happens with the Blattodea Species File.  —  Jts1882 | talk  16:12, 22 August 2026 (UTC)

Teletisoptera, Artisoptera and Icoisoptera

The classification, supposedly following the Treatise (Krishna et al, 2013) includes the following:

• Minorder Teletisoptera Barden & Engel, 2021
• Minorder Artisoptera Engel, 2021
• Microrder Icoisoptera Engel, 2013

All three were added without a source in this edit.

Teletisoptera and Icoisoptera were mentioned in passing in Barden & Engel (2021; doi:10.1007/978-3-030-28102-1, p390) and Engel et al (2013; doi:10.4202/app.2011.0198) but without a formal description or ranks. I cannot trace the Engel 2021 authorship of Artisoptera, although the clade was labelled in Wang et al (2022; doi:10.1111/syen.12548). There is a mention of "Microrder Icoisoptera Engel in Engel et al., 2013" in the systematics section of Jouault & Nel (2022; doi:10.1080/00379271.2022.2081606 but that is citing the unranked name from Engel et al (2013), not a ranked taxonomy. The Blattodea Species File uses "Nanorder Teletisoptera Barden & Engel, 2021", but doesn't use Atisoptera or Isoisoptera.

As there is no consistent support for the ranks, I suggest using clade for all three.

However that taxonomy section needs a newer source. The Blattodea Species File is one possibility but has some issues, e.g. using both Neoisoptera and Geoisoptera as nanorders, which makes Neoisoptera paraphyletic. All other sources have Geoisoptera within Neoisoptera.  —  Jts1882 | talk  14:02, 25 August 2026 (UTC)

Engel 2021 authorship seems to come from Jiang et al (2021; doi:10.11646/palaeoentomology.4.4.13. It establishes Artisoptera Engel, minord. nov. along with a number of other taxa. I can't access the full article, although there is a plazi treatment, which has entries for most of the new taxa. I'd like to know if they present a taxonomy listing (e.g. how they rank Teletisoptera and Icoisoptera) or only deal with the new taxa.  —  Jts1882 | talk  09:00, 26 August 2026 (UTC)