Jump to content

Talk:Banteng

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The banteng should be the third endangered species to be successfully cloned.

[edit]

A guar clone was born in 2000. A healthy mouflon clone was born in 2001. The banteng clone was bron in 2003. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 144.92.122.114 (talk) 17:40, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Weight for it

[edit]

Can somebody include? Radar O'Weighty I heard that 08:25, 17 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Tembadau

[edit]

Tembadau is a subspesies of Benteng. Different subspesies. Banteng is common family name ie. Stork. vs Milky stork.

Benteng = Bos banteng http://nzpnewdelhi.gov.in/benteng_cattle.htm
Tembadau (ie. Benteng Borneo) = Bos javanicus http://www.degruyter.com/view/j/mamm-ahead-of-print/mammalia-2013-0052/mammalia-2013-0052.xml Yosri (talk) 01:13, 14 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Also search for:

Bos Taurus -
Bos Bali -
Bos sauveli -
Bos gaurus/gayal Bos frontalis
Bos sauveli
Bos indicus

I know about them but limited time to search. Engage at other sites than Wiki. Yosri (talk) 01:20, 14 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Bos taurus indicus (gaur)
Bos frontalis
Bos javanicus birmanicus
Bos grunniens Yosri (talk) 01:25, 14 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Bos primigenius namadicus (Falconer, 1859)

Found this link http://www.academia.edu/459168/What_is_the_taxonomic_status_of_the_Cambodian_banteng_and_does_it_have_close_genetic_links_with_the_kouprey Yosri (talk) 01:34, 14 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Banteng. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:50, 25 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Banteng. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:17, 14 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

[edit]
GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Banteng/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Chiswick Chap (talk · contribs) 09:18, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I remember a night-time walk in East Java using binoculars to gather more light so as to spot Banteng in an inky-black nature reserve ... so I better review this one! Their white socks were about the most visible part! Chiswick Chap (talk) 09:18, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

[edit]
  • It would be helpful to label and wikilink at least the root node of the cladogram, and possibly some of the other nodes too. Are we in Bos or Bovini or Bovinae ...?
  • It would also be useful to wikilink all the species names in the cladogram. It appears that Bison is paraphyletic?
  • You mean the scientific names? The common names are already linked.
OK.
  • In fact it might be helpful to show some wider relationships ... Bovidae, node for Aegodontia (e.g. pic of Springbok), node for Bovinae/Boodontia with maybe just one member of Tragelaphini, (e.g. pic of Tragelaphus angasi) for context.
  • Won't it be better to stick to how far the study goes in showing relations? I have gone up to Bovinae and the cladogram seems large enough.
Yes, it's big enough. I've labelled Bovini to match Boselaphini, certainly clearer. Now it seems that Bos is paraphyletic as you have the Yak sister to American bison, but I guess that's not our concern here (though it should probably be mentioned, actually).
It is apparent but would it be fine to add it if the source does not explicitly say so? Sainsf (t · c) 11:58, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
If we were adding random extra species it would be No but since these are the major groups which are very well attested I think it's fine - we're not changing the tree, just labelling its parts. If you mean the paraphyly then I think it's weird the source doesn't mention it but it's a matter for the article on Bos not here.
  • "cattle-like bovid" - but it is actually farmed as cattle in Sumatra etc, so this description is contradictory. Zebu, too, are called "humped cattle", and Sanga and other breeds seem to be hybrids of B. taurus x B. indicus but they're certainly cattle too. Perhaps best to say something along the lines of "similar to Western domestic cattle, Bos taurus," given the rich scope for confusion here.
  • Right. Fixed these throughout the article (replaced with taurine cattle).
  • Maybe gloss "dhole" (Asian wild dog).
  • Not much info about predators, added "Asian wild dog".
  • Function of the white rump patch (the navigation in the dark theory seems good to me!); white rump flashes are often (other spp.) honest signals to predators that they've been detected (and their prey is running away). But I doubt there's been much research on that in this case.
  • Right, I found just two sources for this. This paper [1] is interesting, but does not really say anything more that we can use here.
  • "8,000–10,000 domesticated banteng occur in Australia" - perhaps "feral" would be closer to the mark given they've gone wilder than the goats of Llandudno.
  • Right, my bad!
  • You say the Aussie banteng are considered vermin, then go on to explain how useful they are...
  • Oops, I meant to show both sides of the story, but the vermin thing is not broadly discussed in most sources. I just found one and added more on their demerits, it should look balanced now.
  • "Domesticated banteng have been hybridised with different types of cattle." They are a type of cattle, see above.
  • Fixed

Well, overall there's very little wrong with this article. It's appropriately structured, cited, and illustrated, and nicely written. Chiswick Chap (talk) 09:52, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much for taking my third GA nom in a row :D Your feedback has just motivated me to work on tough articles like this one, it had a lot of material to cover and I was worried I won't do it right. I'll get to these in a day or two :) Sainsf · (How ya doin'?) 10:32, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
All comments have been addressed. Sainsf (t⋆c) 10:21, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
So we're all done, I guess. Nice work! Chiswick Chap (talk) 13:31, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Did you know nomination

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Yoninah (talk) 15:08, 31 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(
)
  • ... that the banteng is the first endangered species whose clone survived beyond infancy? Sources – [2] quote: "ACT participated in the only other endangered species cloning, that of a gaur calf that died two days after birth from an infection". [3] quote: "The only other member of an endangered species ever cloned - a cattle-like Asian gaur, born in January 2001 - died of an infection less than two days after birth."
    • ALT1:... that the banteng is the second endangered species to be successfully cloned, and the first to survive beyond infancy? Sources same as ALT0

Improved to Good Article status by Sainsf (talk). Self-nominated at 13:52, 16 May 2020 (UTC).[reply]

  • Article became GA recently enough. Long enough, generally within policy. No copyvio, neutrality, or referencing issue found. Hook is present in article, is interesting, and verifiable. QPQ is done. A query, as I am a lay reader: the lead describes it as a wild cattle, but the same paragraph also mentions that wild bantengs have domesticated counterparts. Is it not contradictory to describe it as a wild species if there are domesticated and wild populations? HaEr48 (talk) 03:57, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • HaEr48, thanks for reviewing this. You've made a good point, "wild cattle" for some reason is the common name of Bovini members, and can be removed if it causes confusion. This seems to be the only place where we say "wild cattle", elsewhere there is always a distinction between the wild and the domesticated. I have now reworded that line. Sainsf (t · c) 06:42, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thank you for the clarification. Good to go. HaEr48 (talk) 15:40, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Crossbreeding

[edit]

Hi, the sentence " This, coupled with possibly low genetic diversity in small, isolated populations, is a major concern in Sabah, where water buffaloes might crossbreed with wild banteng." seems completely impossible to me, as Bos and Bubalus are not closely related enough to crossbreed as far as I know. If there is a serious source stating otherwise I am happy to be proven wrong, but there is no source given. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A04:EE41:80:D292:1D5C:99BF:8686:E2FE (talk) 11:03, 4 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Banteng&oldid=1193678211"