Edge Rewrite
// HTMLRewriter · presentation

This page was redesigned at the edge.

Cloudflare fetched the original article and streamed it through HTMLRewriter to apply an entirely new visual system without rebuilding the source page.

Jump to content

Talk:Sepiida

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Add topic
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Latest comment: 11 months ago by Monster Iestyn in topic Sepiida vs Sepiina

Sepiida vs Sepiina

[edit]

@UtherSRG: I think there might actually be a good argument to restore this article's title to Sepiida, provided there's a suitable source to back it up. So bear with me a little...

WoRMS' records for both Sepiida and Sepiina are based on Biology and evolution of the Mollusca, which gives Sepiida as having two suborders Sepiina and Sepiolina. But, since WoRMS/MolluscaBase considers Sepiolina a full order Sepiolida, Sepiina is the only suborder left. Unless I'm mistaken, this should mean that Sepiina is now also redundant to Sepiida, suborder not being a major rank, but WoRMS/MolluscaBase for some reason I don't know still retains Sepiina.

To put it another way, I'm pretty sure Sepiina only makes sense to list as a suborder if there are actually other suborders in the order. You don't list a species with only one subspecies, you don't list a genus with only one subgenus (which would have the same name anyway), you don't list a family with only one subfamily and/or tribe, and it seems to me to make sense to say the same for higher ranks like order/suborder, class/subclass, etc.

The only trouble I have here is that I don't have an alternative source for the taxonomy offhand (I haven't checked). As for WoRMS/MolluscaBase, I'm inclined to believe that Sepiina being listed as a valid suborder of Sepiida is an error (unless I'm mistaken and an order can be given with a single suborder intentionally??), maybe whoever maintains the database should be contacted? Monster Iestyn (talk) 03:21, 3 August 2025 (UTC)Reply