Talk:Gigantorhynchus

Potential summary table

Name	Taxonomy	Host(s) and Range	Description
G. echinodiscus (Diesing, 1851)	It is the first species to be described in the genus Gigantorhynchus and is the type species. This species was originally named Echinorhynchus echinodiscus by Karl Moritz Diesing in 1851 but moved to Gigantorhynchus by Hamann in 1892.	The giant anteater (Myrmecophaga tridactyla), the southern tamandua (Tamandua tetradactyla) and the silky anteater (Cyclopes didactylus). It has been found in Brazil, Venezuela, Panama, and Trinidad Island. Intermediate hosts include two species of termites from Brazil (Labiotermes emersoni and Orthognathotermes heberi).	Morphological traits used to distinguish the species include a cylindrical proboscis with a crown having eighteen large hooks followed by 21 to 23 small rootless spines arranged in two longitudinal rows. The first row has six hooks measuring between 0.16 and 0.23 mm from the tip of the hook to the root. The second row has twelve hooks in pairs which are smaller than first row measuring between 0.18 and 0.19 mm from the tip of the hook to the root. The crown is separated from numerous small, rootless spines by a short space without hooks. Twenty-one to twenty-three small, rootless spines are arranged in longitudinal rows 0.05 to 0.08 mm long. The lemnisci reach the middle of the trunk and are sometimes bent back on themselves. Other traits include a lateral papilla at the base of the proboscis, a small region (2.24 to 3.21 mm long) after the proboscis with no segmentation, a ringed with no complete segmentation, large testes, eight cement glands in pairs occupying a region measuring between 0.98 and 2.13 mm long and between 0.45 and 0.76  mm wide, and a non-segmented region in the posterior end of the body. The male has two ellipsoid testes that are narrow and in tandem. The posterior end after the anterior testes without a segmented region measures between 5.45 and 8.53 mm. In the female, the gonopore is subterminal and the vagina has a sinuous lateral region shaped like a guitar. The genital pore including the vagina, uterus, and uterine bell (a funnel like opening continuous with the uterus) is between 0.69 and 0.97 mm long. The eggs contain three membranes.
G. lopezneyrai Diaz-ungria, 1958	Amato (2014) raised doubts about the validity of this species suggesting that the hook number and arrangement is an incorrect observation that needs to be revisited as no drawings of the proboscis showing the hook formation was published. This species is named in honour of Carlos Rodríguez López-Neyra de Gorgot, a Spanish parasitologist.	The Southern tamandua (Tamandua tetradactyla) in Venezuela.	The trunk is slightly segmented and no female measurements were taken in its original description. There are twelve hooks on the proboscis (4 in the first circle each around 0.235 mm long, and 8 in the second circle each around 0.106 mm long). The eight cement glands are organized in pairs.
G. lutzi Machado, 1941
G. ortizi Sarmiento, 1954
G. pasteri Tadros, 1966
G. ungriai Antonio, 1958

Translation of German source material

Moved from [[:Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Germany#Short translation requested Eric ^talk 19:50, 13 June 2020 (UTC)]]

Hi! I'm working on the featured article Gigantorhynchus and the only record of the origins of this name is from a 150 year old German text that says: "Wie der Name besagt, sind es große Formen, die hierher gehören." I assumed the "giganto" refers to the large size, but I'm wondering if anyone could translate that for me so I can add the translated phrase to the article? Thank you! Danke! Mattximus (talk) 16:55, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

Hi- I'll take a stab beginning with a mostly literal translation, with my presumptions of context in brackets: As the name indicates/implies, these are large forms [as in versions/varieties?] [of acanthocephalan] that belong here [i.e. to this classificiation/type]. Can you provide a bit more of the wording that precedes and follows this bit? Eric ^talk 17:21, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

Sure! The direct quote was found in the final paragraph here [1]. I believe I linked to the correct page. Thank you already! In the featured article review, they wanted the etymology of the name, this link I gave you was the original description so should contain the etymology. This quote was what I assumed was that.Mattximus (talk) 17:37, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

Ok, found it on the preceding page. It seems he's distinguishing his suggested family name Gigantorhynchidae from the Echinorhynchidae by their size, initially anyway. So a good approach might be to this family belong the large(er) forms/varieties/species/genera or the larger varieties belong to this group/classification. Note: I keep wanting to change große to größere (large to larger), if I dare edit a guy from a time when people could talk way gooder than us. Have you seen this article, by the way? I haven't read it yet, but thought it might be of use. And maybe this ITIS report. Do you want me to move this discussion over to the article's talkpage? Eric ^talk 18:38, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

Sure this would be great to move the the Gigantorhynchus. The article you linked is excellent, and I will use it on the Mediorhynchus since it contains 2 species not even on the ITIS site. Thank you! As for the translation, I'll incorporate your translation into the body of the text now. Thanks again! Mattximus (talk) 19:27, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

Glad to help! Eric ^talk 19:40, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

Ok so I wrote this, does it match with your German translation? Danke!

The name Gigantorhynchus is derived from two Ancient Greek words: gígantas which Hamann used in 1892 as a descriptor when grouping the the larger varieties of these worms and rhúnkhos, meaning snout, nose, or beak, which describes the characteristic proboscis in this genus of Acanthocephala.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Mattximus (talk • contribs) 19:43, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

Looks good to me. I made a couple tweaks. Do you think it should go into its own etymology section, or is that typically included in the taxonomy section of such articles? Omnipaedista might be good to ping for guidance; see this: User_talk:Omnipaedista#Etymology_section_name. Eric ^talk 20:14, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

In this case I think it should be in the taxonomy section because so little is known about this genus that there is not enough information to warrant two separate sections. Normally though I agree with you. Thanks once again for your help, hopefully this will help it pass featured article nomination! Mattximus (talk) 14:12, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

Sounds good! Eric ^talk 15:32, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

Notes