Debate and discussion of any biological questions not pertaining to a particular topic.
Science has proof without any certainty. Creationists have certainty without
any proof. (Ashley Montague)
- Inland Taipan
- Posts: 3909
- Joined: Thu Feb 03, 2005 2:46 pm
- Location: Canada
Um, i may be wrong kiekyon, but i don't think prokaryotes have a nucleus at ALL. Much less being enclosed by a membrane.
- Posts: 3
- Joined: Fri May 12, 2006 8:55 pm
I agree, the kings for these kingdoms are the general criteria.
After some taxonomy congress the king might be dead, so long live the next king.
- Posts: 23
- Joined: Fri Apr 07, 2006 1:46 pm
kiekyon wrote:Monera small, simple single prokaryotic cell (nucleus is not enclosed by a membrane); some form chains or mats absorb food bacteria, blue-green algae, and spirochetes
Protista large, single eukaryotic cell (nucleus is enclosed by a membrane); some form chains or colonies absorb, ingest, and/or photosynthesize food protozoans and algae of various types
Fungi multicellular filamentous form with specialized eukaryotic cells absorb food funguses, molds, mushrooms, yeasts, mildews, and smuts
Plantae multicellular form with specialized eukaryotic cells; do not have their own means of locomotion photosynthesize food mosses, ferns, woody and non-woody flowering plants
Animalia multicellular form with specialized eukaryotic cells; have their own means of locomotion ingest food sponges, worms, insects, fish, amphibians, reptiles, birds, and mammals
What about the fact that Plantae can produce their own food and other kingdoms have to obtain it?? lol this lost me marks in a test
Quote from my friend.. "parents say that anything worth doing should be done, luckily most things they say to do aren't worth doing.."
- Posts: 1
- Joined: Tue Jun 23, 2009 10:18 am
- Location: Stinkin' Melbourne, australiaaa
Plants are not the only ones that can make their own food. Prokaryotes and archae have species that can say: screw plants and screw sunlight, we make our own food without you! ;)
- King Cobra
- Posts: 776
- Joined: Sun Apr 08, 2007 6:45 pm
asutoshsahu wrote:I dont think there is any need of 6th kingdom as it is easily classified with 5 kingdoms taking eubacteria and archaebacteria in the kindom monera.
Maybe as one domain "Prokarya" to go with the already-existing Eukarya, but as kingdoms I think they're different enough to be separate. Plus, I had thought that Archaebacteria is more closely related to eukaryotes than the eubacteria, that it evolved from eukaryotes after evolving from eubacteria. I could be mistaken though, so don't jump on me if it's wrong.
Science rules! "Nothing says 'oops' like a wall of flame."
-Marion WinikGo Phillies!Go Eagles!
- Posts: 10
- Joined: Mon Sep 14, 2009 9:52 pm
- Location: East Stroudsburg, PA
EASTstroudsburg13 wrote: Plus, I had thought that Archaebacteria is more closely related to eukaryotes than the eubacteria, that it evolved from eukaryotes after evolving from eubacteria. I could be mistaken though, so don't jump on me if it's wrong.
This is one of theories. Actually I saw one article, where they were solving, what is true based on 16S RNA sequences, but I do not remember the conclusion.
Anyway, about the number of kingdoms. You can put all into one kingdom and than have lets say three subkingdoms (eukarya, eubacteria, archea) and than divide them into many more clades or you can divide them immediately into 6 kingdoms (as are presented here) a and some of them group into some superkingdoms etc. or you can have even 50 or 100 kingdoms, which will supplement todays phyla. This system will always be just made by humans and the nature does not care
Cis or trans? That's what matters.
- Inland Taipan
- Posts: 5615
- Joined: Mon Sep 14, 2009 7:12 pm
Return to General Discussion
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: JackBean and 7 guests