Talk:Beetle

"40% of described insects" into arthropods

cf. special:diff/1285061591. Adding :

• Groombridge, B., Global biodiversity: status of the Earth's living resources. (1992) : "If we should conclude, reasonably enough in view of what is known of tropical canopy insects, that beetles are typically less than 40% of canopy arthropod species, let us say 25% (see Stork, 1987), the estimate for tropical arthropods rises again to approaching 200 million.", p. 34

I'm not sure where the confusion originated, but it seems to have shaped the general understanding of the topic (cf. 40 percent of the known insect species, It includes 40% of all insects. I bet it's 'Wikipedia shaped'.

I also suggest better annotation of references. For instance, McHugh and Liebherr (2009) state "Beetles comprise 25% of all described animals and plants" (p. 183); therefore, this source cannot support the claim that beetles constitute "40% of described insects," which is incorrect given Stork and citations of Stork. LD (talk) 13:24, 11 April 2025 (UTC)

The Animal Biodiversity estimates for Arthropods has 1242k arthropod species, 1020k insect species and 387k beetle species. The introductory article has 1,659k animal species. So beetles at 40% of insects or 25% of animals couldn be sourced to these articles. According to World Flora Online there are 380k accepted land plant species. However, accepted species and estimate species are different things. There are arguments that Hymenoptera species would outnumber beetles.  —  Jts1882 | talk  13:53, 11 April 2025 (UTC)

Heaviest beetles

Someone should rewrite the text on heaviest beetles, as the provided link (#23) gives very different details than the text (larval weight versus imago weight of Goliathus beetles). The link is also not a primary source but rather cites other, unnamed, sources. ~2025-34712-33 (talk) 20:11, 18 November 2025 (UTC)

Made some adjustments - is that a bit better? Tony Holkham (Talk) 20:34, 18 November 2025 (UTC)