Talk:Dodo

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Dodo article.
Please sign and date your posts using four tildes (~~~~). New discussion topics go at the bottom of the page; click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Frequently asked questions. This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject.	Talk page guidelines Be polite Assume good faith No personal attacks Don't bite the newcomers!

Dodo (reviewed version) has been listed as a good article under the good-article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can delist it, or ask for a review.

	Dodo is part of WikiProject Birds, an attempt at creating a standardized, informative and easy-to-use ornithological resource. If you would like to participate, visit the project page. Please do not substitute this template.
GA	This article has been rated as GA-Class on the quality scale.
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale.
WikiProject Birds To-do: edit MAJOR taxonomic overhaul (see here) Create Galloanserae
Biology WikiPortal

WikiProject Featured articles in other languages has identified Dodo as a foreign language featured article. You may be able to improve this article with information from the Dutch language Wikipedia.

To-do list for Dodo:

edit · history · watch · refresh

copyedit 2 paragraph lead get to 15 references alice in wonderland, older paintings Use Albatross as model Please consider the notes on phylogeny at Rodrigues Solitaire and compare Johnson & Clayton (2000) (see Pigeon article) - at least cyt b cannot resolve the relationships of the Indoaustralian lineage properly. So the phylogeny proposed in the much-touted "Flight of the Dodo" paper must be taken with so much salt that it nearly becomes unpalatable, unfortunately. See e.g. their placement of "Gallicolumba beccari" (sic), which is almost certainly wrong. At any rate, here to copy'n'paste is the citation: Shapiro, Beth; Sibthorpe, Dean; Rambaut, Andrew; Austin, Jeremy; Wragg, Graham M.; Bininda-Emonds, Olaf R. P.; Lee, Patricia L. M. & Cooper, Alan (2002): Flight of the Dodo. Science 295: 1683. DOI:10.1126/science.295.5560.1683 (HTML abstract) Supplementary information In conclusion, cyt b should be avoided for determining the interrelationships of the Indoaustralian group (for some reason, it gives crystal-clear resolution of the columbine and zenaidine lineages, however) Dysmorodrepanis 18:05, 1 September 2006 (UTC) In his book A Short History of Nearly Everything, Bill Bryson claims that the last surviving Dodo specimen was kept at the Ashmolean Museum in Oxford, until a caretaker mistakenly assumed it was rubbish and put it on a bonfire (it was apparently rescued, but not before it was seriously damaged). Parts of that specimen can still be seen at the Oxford University Museum of Natural History, namely the head and foot [2]. First it was part of the John Tradescant collection and its museum. Later is was passed on to the Ashmole Museum in 1659. In 1755, it was examined and, presumably under Ashmole's statute number 8, ordered for destruction. The instruction was obeyed, but not to the letter as parts still survive. The statute also ordered that it had to substituted, but as the bird was extinct that was not possible anymore. The parts were passed from the Ashmole museum to the Oxford museum (source: Errol Fuller's book "Extinct Birds"). http://www.amnh.org/exhibitions/expeditions/treasure_fossil/Treasures/Dodo/dodo.html?dinos http://animaldiversity.ummz.umich.edu/site/accounts/information/Raphus_cucullatus.html http://www.birds.mu/Extinct/Dodo.htm

This article is part of WikiProject Extinction, an attempt at creating a standardized, informative, comprehensive and easy-to-use resource on extinct animals, extinct plants and extinction in general. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit this article, or visit the project page for more information.

Dodo is either included in the Wikipedia CD Selection or is a candidate for inclusion in the next version (the project page is at WPCD Selection). Please maintain high quality standards, and if possible stick to GFDL and GFDL-compatible images.

I've found a large text on the net which, in some aspects, contains much more exact facts than the current wikipedia article (including exactly quoted diaries of the captains of the ships arriving to Mauritius at the time the Dodo lived). Some "thruths" from the wikipedia article then appear as oversimplifications, at best. I give the link to the English text here, somebody with the knowledge of French can take a look at the rest of the whole site:

http://www.palli.ch/~kapeskreyol/dodo/c32.php

Contents 1 Dodo Tree 2 Used for Food? 3 specimens 4 Extinction date 5 Linnaeus' naming 6 Calvaria Tree 7 speculation 8 HP Reference 9 largest animal 10 Caps? 11 Popular Culture 12 Vandalism 13 Reason of Extinction 14 numbers 15 "Dumb as a dodo" 16 Phylogeny 17 Last surviving specimen 18 Dodo Clones

[edit] Dodo Tree

It was discovered that the dodos ate the seeds of the tree, and only by passing through the digestive tract of the dodo did the seeds become active and start to grow. How was this discovered? I'm not saying I don't believe it, I'm just saying I think it would be interesting trivia.

Perhaps I should have written "deduced" or something like that. The web site where I found the information didn't specify, either. --Pinkunicorn

While dodos may have eaten "dodo tree" fruits, there is no solid evidence they did. Nor is there solid evidence that the dodo was absolutely required for seed germination. You can read more in another discussion here: Talk:Dodo#Calvaria_Tree, or read this: The Widespread Misconception that the Tambalacoque or Calvaria Tree Absolutely Required the Dodo Bird for its Seeds to Germinate. Peter Maas 08:01, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Used for Food?

I just did a quick google and the first site I found mentioned that the dodo was used extensively by the Portuguese for meat. http://www.bagheera.com/inthewild/ext_dodobird.htm

Which is correct. At the same time, I would not be surprised if the article above was the source of information for our own article, so the discrepancy is especially interesting. Danny

I was pretty sure that dodos were eaten... I'm SURE that's what we learnt in school! I'll see what I can find... KJ

I've removed the bit about dodos not being used for food, they obviously were. --Scipius 23:20 Jan 3, 2003 (UTC)

They were not, they tried to at first but found it very horrible, recent reseacrh has shown that they were not. A program on TV a few years ago showed they were not. -fonzy

fonzy, what was the title of the program? It is difficult to trust a source which can't be viewed. I also saw a program on PBS recently and it claimed the birds were often and easily hunted for food. TV isn't always right: the same program also claimed the Calvaria tree was going extinct, which I have since learned is untrue.

Does anyone know how tall the Dodo was known to grow?

It could have been up to three feet. --Bearbear 15:51, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

In the Scottish Standard Grade Exam Paper of English in 2003 had an article on Dodos. They said that the Portuguese didn't eat the dodo as its lack of breast muscles made the meat taste disgusting. There were lots of other opinions, but most are covered in the article. Unfortunately, the exam didn't say which newspaper/journal the artical came from. --Bearbear 15:51, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

I forget where I read it, but I recall reading as a child that, regardless of its horrible taste, sailors coming to Mauritus killed and ate the birds anyway, as many had been confined to their ships for great lengths of time and, well, I guess being gross, uncultured swine, in the source's words (as best I can remember them), "...sailors craved fresh meat, regardless of its taste, so spurred on by long stays of maritime service and availability of only pickled meat, the helpless bird was doomed, and was hunted to extinction less than 100 years after its discovery." I am sure I am not remembering the passage correctly, the parts that I can remember, but it would certainly seem to make sense. If you were cooped up on a slow-moving boat at sea with a bunch of jacked-up, restless sailors, with only "pickled" meat to satisfy your instinctual carnivorous desires for months on end, a turtle would look like a feast, let alone a large, plump, slow-moving(?) and witless bird. --Dingno 16:17, 26 June 2006

[edit] specimens

There are no museum specimens of the dodo still extant today. I presume this is to mean specimens from an original, live dodo, correct? Dysprosia 12:30, 1 Feb 2004 (UTC)

That's right, there are no stuffed birds, so the images of the Dodo are from paintings, not corpses. The last stuffed Dodo was burned because it was getting a bit smelly! jimfbleak 14:15, 1 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Sounds like a good piece of info to add to the article. Where is this museum, and when? --Menchi (Talk)â 20:01, 1 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Ah, you said it was burned because it was smelling. Are you sure about that? My perception is the goddamn museum burned down. The article is neat. I like how it explain the origin of the expression "As dead as dodo". It seem they may also have uncovered more bones. See link [1]

---

I've got a photo of a 19th century model of a dodo at User:Imran/photos if anyone wants to include it. --Imran 02:24, 16 Mar 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Extinction date

The two paragraphs beginning "There is some controversy.." and "The last known dodo..." are mutually contradictory. Can anyone provide references for the second paragraph?

[edit] Linnaeus' naming

When Linnaeus assigned a genus and species to the Dodo, was that the first genus and species given to an an extinct animal? --Wetman 09:38, 5 Dec 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Calvaria Tree

The discussion of the Calvaria tree is pretty isolated in the article -- easy to miss since I couldn't remember the name though it is something that I often hear about in association with the Dodo. Maybe it should go in its own section instead of "Family Raphidae". Actually, now that I say that it doesn't make much sense where it is now since it has little to do with the family of the species. The paragraph which discusses it over uses the verb "discover". It seems likely that many of the uses are suboptimal (maybe "theorized", "proposed", or "deduced" would be good alternatives). In any case, this page:

http://home.conceptsfa.nl/~pmaas/rea/dodobird.htm (old version)
http://www.petermaas.nl/extinct/speciesinfo/dodobird.htm (new version)

(see the section titled "Food") claims that the theory that the birds were needed for the seeds has been disproven, though it doesn't offer a lot of evidence to back up the assertion.

Also, that site has a lot of other Dodo pictures, a picture of the tree, and the burned head of the last stuffed bird.

I've updated the link posted above. The previous one was an old version, the new one the current page. Peter Maas 07:33, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

About the evidence: it is indeed not cited well on that page. I will do that soon. For the evidence that the theory of Stanley Temple has been rebutted, I would suggest you reading:

 http://www.botany.org/PlantScienceBulletin/psb-2004-50-4.php#Dodo

Citation of link/article: Herhey, D.R. 2004. The Widespread Misconception that the Tambalacoque or Calvaria Tree Absolutely Required the Dodo Bird for its Seeds to Germinate. Plant Science Bulletin (a publication of the Botanical Society of America, Inc.) Vol. 50, Nr. 4, pp. 105-109. I hope this helps, if not you will find other sources in the article references, etc. Peter Maas 07:56, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

A page wikipedia article on this tree can be seen at: Tambalacoque. Peter Maas 08:07, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] speculation

I moved the following from the article - IMHO speculation doesn't belong into the article, and I cannot believe it anyway. andy 12:03, 12 August 2005 (UTC)

But is the dodo actually extinct? Although it no longer lives on Mauritius, there are a number of smaller islands around this one and some of these are yet to be explored by humans. Although unlikely as the dodo couldn't fly or (probably) swim, it may be that the dodo or some relatives of it live here. After all, something similar happened to the coelacanth...

[edit] HP Reference

The little blip about the "Diricawl" is amusing and seems to fit nicely in this article, because the original article has an encyclopedic feel to it, someone could almost be fooled into thinking they were reading a wizarding article on here. ;) Morhange 20:11, 21 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] largest animal

I added "It was due to it being the largest animal on the then uninhabited island of Mauritius, thus the master of the territory." to the article but it was reverted. Maybe theres a better way to say it, but its important to say that the dodo was the largest animal, ie top of the food chain on Mauritius (no humans, or any other larger animals) - thats why it could nest on the ground, had no predators etc. Astrokey44 23:27, 24 October 2005 (UTC)

I should have had the courtesy to explain my rollback. The previous version implied cause-and-effect, which is speculative. Some animals, eg the phalaropes are very tame despite contact with humans. Apologies for my lazy rollback, I'm happy with the current version. jimfbleak 06:25, 25 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Caps?

Why does the article refer to this animal as the Dodo? We don't say the Duck, or the Penguin, so why capitalize dodo? 142.217.16.115 20:39, 29 November 2005 (UTC)

Individual species are capped in wikipedia, so duck, but Tufted Duck, penguin but King Penguin - Dodo is a single species jimfbleak 06:33, 30 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Popular Culture

This section is getting to be overshadow the actual information about poor old Raphus cucullatus -- I propose breaking it off as we did with Giant squid / Giant squid in culture. Any objections? Ben-w 01:26, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

None from me... it's been nearly 4 weeks now, split away... Tomer^talk 07:46, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Vandalism

Someone's changed the extinction dates to the 1990s....... CFLeon 04:26, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Reason of Extinction

According to this trustworthy article: http://www.amnh.org/exhibitions/expeditions/treasure_fossil/Treasures/Dodo/dodo.html?dinos 81.165.40.190 21:21, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] numbers

are there sources depicting the number of dodos at differnet dates until it became extinct ? Amoruso 01:05, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Highly unlikely. That quantative data wasn't collected back in those days, particularly by sailors. It was more "there were many greate fowlles on the islands" or "a sailor spoke to me of seeing many score of birds, but we saw none ourselves". Sabine's Sunbird talk 05:44, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] "Dumb as a dodo"

Should it be added that the dodo has been (probably unfairly) stereotyped as being unintelligent? Funnyhat 05:42, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Phylogeny

Please consider the notes on phylogeny at Rodrigues Solitaire and compare Johnson & Clayton (2000) (see Pigeon article) - at least cyt b cannot resolve the relationships of the Indoaustralian lineage properly. So the phylogeny proposed in the much-touted "Flight of the Dodo" paper must be taken with so much salt that it nearly becomes unpalatable, unfortunately. See e.g. their placement of "Gallicolumba beccari" (sic), which is almost certainly wrong. At any rate, here to copy'n'paste is the citation:

• Shapiro, Beth; Sibthorpe, Dean; Rambaut, Andrew; Austin, Jeremy; Wragg, Graham M.; Bininda-Emonds, Olaf R. P.; Lee, Patricia L. M. & Cooper, Alan (2002): Flight of the Dodo. Science 295: 1683. DOI:10.1126/science.295.5560.1683 (HTML abstract) Supplementary information

In conclusion, cyt b should be avoided for determining the interrelationships of the Indoaustralian group (for some reason, it gives crystal-clear resolution of the columbine and zenaidine lineages, however) Dysmorodrepanis 18:05, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Last surviving specimen

In his book A Short History of Nearly Everything, Bill Bryson claims that the last surviving Dodo specimen was kept at the Ashmolean Museum in Oxford, until a caretaker mistakenly assumed it was rubbish and put it on a bonfire (it was apparently rescued, but not before it was seriously damaged). Is anyone able to verify this? If so, should it feature in the article? It would be a fairly pertinent symbol of mankind's regard for the species. Legis 14:02, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Yes that is true! Sadly enough. Parts of that specimen can still be seen at the Oxford University Museum of Natural History, namely the head and foot [2]. First it was part of the John Tradescant collection and its museum. Later is was passed on to the Ashmole Museum in 1659. In 1755, it was examined and, presumably under Ashmole's statute number 8, ordered for destruction. The instruction was obeyed, but not to the letter as parts still survive. The statute also ordered that it had to substituted, but as the bird was extinct that was not possible anymore. The parts were passed from the Ashmole museum to the Oxford museum (source: Errol Fuller's book "Extinct Birds"). Peter Maas 16:03, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

This is a very interesting snippet and could make a good 'Did You Know' item. - Ballista 16:16, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Dodo Clones

Are there any scientists thinking in doing this with the remaining soft tissue? -Pedro 13:24, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

Of course not. Cloning of mammals from living cells happens only by accident (it takes several 100 attempts to produce a viable embryo on average, and nobody knows why; although there are some rather good ideas as to why, if they were correct it would mean that cloning could never become a "mature" technology at all! Disruption of developmental gradients and/or genomic imprinting are the keywords here). Cloning of birds is technically impossible at present and will most likely remain so for quite some time. Cloning of extinct animals of which no cells have been preserved in liquid nitrogen is likewise impossible at present, and as far as any scientist can tell, it will always remain impossible because the genetic information is simply gone, "extinction IS forever". It is as if you try to recreate a book after all people that have ever so much as heard of it are dead, all specimens of the book have been burned, and all forests and whatever one possibly could make paper from has been destroyed. Yes, it is that extreme. Forget cloning of extinct animals or mammals and especially birds in general and play in the lottery or try to get killed by a lightning strike, your odds are far better. Dysmorodrepanis 14:33, 7 November 2006 (UTC)