5 ms·
What's fascinating is that finding new animal phyla is apparently something that has happened a few times in the last century, and they aren't able to place thi
by ghshephard 12y ago
What's fascinating is that finding new animal phyla is apparently something that has happened a few times in the last century, and they aren't able to place this creature into a phyla yet - it's close to a jellyfish and comb jellies, but not close enough to be included in the Cnidaria or Ctenophora phylum.
- MrArtichaut 12y agoI don't deny the importance of the finding. Bilateria and non-bilateria are huge groups in the animal kingdom and if this animal doesn't fit in one of them is really something. But (for now, without ADN analysis) it's just a new structure plan. I just find the title about "a new branch of life" a little sensationalist :)
- lmm 12y agoI think the article was using "branch" colloquially, rather than in some technical sense. And it's saying "may be" rather than "is".
- gus_massa 12y agoThe problem is that it's an exaggeration like: "New article title may be a new branch of linkbait art" A better title is "Deep sea 'mushroom' may be new branch of animals" or "Deep sea 'mushroom' may be new branch of animal kingdom". I'm still not 100% happy with the proposed title, but it's more realistic. One of the problems is that it's not a mushroom nor mushroom related. It's only a weird animal with a strange shape that looks like a mushroom.