So they discovered a new rodent species in SE Asia. Great. Another one in the biggest group of mammals :rolleyes:
I heard that new species are discovered every day*; are most of these microscopic organisms, or something not so newsworthy? I know this one is important b/c it branched off of other rodent wildlife families mill. of years ago. Where can I find an updated list of these new species (if one exists online)?
*(I got this information from the movie The Faculty; please, please forgive me
From my reading of the article it was not only a new species but a new family - which is two steps up from the species (OTTOMH - species - genus - family - order - etc.).
So a new species - ho hum.
A new family - cool.
That’s what I thought, too.
turned out be a previously unknown species that actually represents an entire new family of wildlife…
On that subject- how often are categories of the old Kings Play Cards On Friday, Gin Saturday 
discovered? But of course I know new kingdoms are never discovered, there are only- four? Animals, plants fungi protists?
Link?
I think there are a lot of insect species yet to be discovered. Maybe even families.
;j Click on the rabbi to go to it
Well, actually…
It wasn’t that long ago that there were two kingdoms: Animalia and Plantae. Now there are… well, more than that, depending who you talk to. I think the generally accepted scheme is now Monera (or is it Eubacteria?), Archae(bacteria), Protista, Fungi, Plantae, and Animalia, although Monera and Archae are often lumped together even though they don’t seem to be that closely related.
Then, of course, there are the domains or empires (Archaea, Eubacteria, and Eukaryota, or sometimes Prokaryota and Eukaryota, or sometimes other names), which are a relatively recent (1990, according to the fairly sparse Wikipedia article) addition to the scheme.
It’s unlikely that we’ll add another kingdom or domain soon… but I’m sure someone said that just before we realized how different the Archaea were from more “traditional” bacteria. I know someone I knew at UT Austin was working in a lab that was looking for evidence of things between viruses and bacteria as far as size and complexity (the name they used escapes me, probably some take on microorganisms like “picoorganisms” or something). Maybe a sixth or seventh kingdom is on the way.
I apologize for the lack of cites and certainty in this; I was trying to give enough to give someone with a better handle on modern phylogeny something to correct 
You’re probably thinking of the nanobacteria, Jon. As I understand it, their existence has not been demonstrated to most biologists’ satisfaction.
Yup, nanobacteria are what I was thinking of. I heard the information pretty much third-hand from an undergraduate assistant who was working in my lab and theirs, and never looked into it more (since even from the story I heard they were basically seeking to prove that they weren’t seeing what some people thought they were seeing). I’m not saying nanobacteria exist, I’m just saying if they’re shown to exist, they could be another kingdom.
Back to the side topic that I started with… WikiSpecies uses 3 “superregna” (domains, empires, whatever), Archae, Bacteria, and Eukarya, and then divides Eukarya into 4 regna (kingdoms): Protista, Plantae, Fungi, and Animalia. The problem is, I’m not sure there’s really a completely accepted phylogenetic system across all branches of biology these days (I know I’d never seen a system exactly like the one on WikiSpecies, and they were getting some flack for that in the discussions).
So, back to the question I was trying to answer…
If we’re wondering “how often does a newly discovered species require a new [kingdom, phylum, class, order, family, genus, or species],” I’d guess the first Archaea to be identified was the last organism to require a new kingdom, and the discoverers didn’t realize it at the time. Phyla are slightly more common, but I couldn’t give you an example of the last time an organism was the only member of its phylum that we’ve seen. Orders and families are also relatively rare additions, but not as rare as phyla and kingdoms. Then we get down to genus and species, which we probably add to daily. Discovering a new family is big, but not likely-to-change-the-overall-classification-system big.
Anyone want to clean that up with some cites?
Outside the bacteria/cyanophytes realm (kingdom, domain, group of domains, whatever), the last phylum to be discovered was Pogonophora, the beardworms. Monera and Archaea are usually defined with a wide range of phyla, some of which are extremely restricted in membership and may well be newer. (You’d have to have a good microbiologist discuss this.)
OTTOMH? Please decipher.
Off The Top Of My Head?
Sounds like that’s it. Thanks!
Why can’t scientists find a new species of non-extinct dinosaurs, or giant ape? Rodents are boring.
Well, you aren’t going to get new giant apes very frequently. The most recently discovered ape, the Bonobo (Pan paniscus) was discovered around 1929. But non-extinct dinosaurs are being discovered from time to time: there are nearly 10,000 species in about 200 families.
HA! Quick, let’s get a group of Lao people to the Piggly Wiggly and “discover” the “cow,” as local people call it …
Er… creationist Christians claim real dinosaurs live all around the world to be discovered, that survived 4400 years of earth history since the Flood to…:smack: never mind, click on the rabbi to see the link.;j
What counts as a non-extinct dino? Gila monsters and lizard types and maybe birds, right? Can you link to a list?
And how 'bout a list of newly discovered species that I can see?
Birds. Gila monsters and lizards aren’t dinos.
According to this news item, two teams have just discovered a new species of monkey in Tanzania.