Talk:Edaphosaurus

	Paleontology portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Palaeontology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of palaeontology-related topics and create a standardized, informative, comprehensive and easy-to-use resource on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PalaeontologyWikipedia:WikiProject PalaeontologyTemplate:WikiProject PalaeontologyPalaeontology
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Animals Mid‑importance

Edaphosaurus is within the scope of WikiProject Animals, an attempt to better organize information in articles related to animals and zoology. For more information, visit the project page.AnimalsWikipedia:WikiProject AnimalsTemplate:WikiProject Animalsanimal

Mid

This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject Animals To-do:

Here are some Open Tasks :

Copyedit:
Merge: GLAM/ARKive donated texts into articles about endangered species.
Improve: Photoperiodism, Tool use by non-human animals, Omnivore, Animal suicide, Sphaerium beckmani (a species in family Sphaeriidae),
Requests:
- Mammals:
- Invertebrates: Campocraspedon
- Fishes: Zaniolepis frenata
Merge: GLAM/ARKive donated texts into articles about endangered species.
Expand: Junqueira cow, Atka mackerel
Nominate and vote: Science collaboration of the month, Article Improvement Drive, WikiProject Animals Collaboration

The "Gallery" section is disjointed. There are too many images here in comparison to the text, so we need to decide how to arrange them better, or which ones we should drop. John.Conway 14:36, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Here are some synonyms concerning Edaphosaurus according to the Paleofile.com: http://www.paleofile.com/Demo/Mainpage/Taxalist/Pelycosaurs.htm

Genus: Edaphosaurus COPE, 1882
= Brachycnemius WILLISTON, 1911
= Naosaurus COPE, 1886
E. cruciger (COPE, 1878)
= Dimetrodon cruciger COPE, 1878
= Naosaurus cruciger (COPE, 1878)
= Edaphosaurus microdus COPE, 1884
= Naosaurus microdus (COPE, 1881)
E. pogonias COPE, 1882 (Type)
= Naosaurus pogonias COPE, 1882
= Naosaurus claviger COPE, 1886
= Brachycnemius dolischomerus WILLISTON, 1911
E. novomexicanus WILLISTON & CASE, 1913
E. boanerges ROMER & PRICE, 1940
E. colohistion BERMAN, 1979

incertae sedis:
E. raymondi CASE, 1908
= Naosaurus raymondi (CASE, 1908)
= Ianthasaurus raymondi CASE, 1908

Elatrin (talk) 19:05, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Papers & references

I have these papers, whenever anyone wants to collaborate on this article:

Modesto, S. P.; Reisz, R. R. (1990). "Taxonomic status of Edaphosaurus raymondi Case". Journal of Paleontology 64: 1049–1051.
Modesto, S. P.; Reisz, R. R. (1992). "Restudy of Permo-Carboniferous synapsid Edaphosaurus novomexicanus Williston and Case, the oldest known herbivorous amniote". Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences 29: 2653–2662.
Modesto, S. P. (1995). "The skull of the herbivorous synapsid Edaphosaurus boanerges from the Lower Permian of Texas". Palaeontology 38: 213–239.
Bennett, S. C. (1996). "Aerodynamics and thermoregulatory function of the dorsal sail of Edaphosaurus". Paleobiology 22: 496–506.

Also I have created a full ref-list for Edaphosaurus here. Liopleurodon93 (talk) 00:46, 24 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Nature of sail

I recently visited the AMNH. While photographing the Edaphosaurus skeleton, I noticed that the spinal processes on its vertebrae had lateral protrusions at various intervals along their length. I do not believe these extensions would be present if they did not serve a physiological purpose. Their presence suggests that the sail of Edaphosaurus was not a simple skin membrane, but may actually have been much thicker, perhaps cartilaginous, in life. Unfortunately, I can provide no further information to support my hypothesis, but I hope you will take this into consideration. 192.160.131.27 (talk) 19:54, 30 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It can not be taken into consideration if it isn't published. FunkMonk (talk) 20:21, 30 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

E.C. Case and Naosaurus's demise

Contrary to what the article claims, while Case's 1907 Revision argues that there are no certainties with regards to the skull of Naosaurus cruciger, nowhere does he claim an Edaphosaurus skull is more likely - if he does, I sure can't find it in the paper. --Ilja.nieuwland (talk) 09:12, 22 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I have slightly reworded the text to add the page numbers (145, 146) in which Case states that Naosaurus is likely the same as Edaphosaurus:

"It will be remembered that the type specimen of Naosaurus microdus has such a plate associated with the other bones and is the single other specimen of Naosaurus which has any portion of the skull associated with it. It was originally called Edaphosaurus microdus by Cope. If this association is a true one, as seems certain, the name Naosaurus must be given up, as it is preoccupied by Edaphosaurus and the subfamily Naosaurince of this paper will disappear and the members will be placed in the family Edaphosauridae.

Family : Edaphosauridae. E. pogonias, E. microdus, E. crucigcr, E. claviger.

....

This materially alters our conception of the character of Edaphosaurus (Naosaurus). We recognize that the long-spined forms were specializing toward a diet of shell-fish and crustaceans, perhaps even toward a herbivorous diet (Edaphosaurus), as well as toward a purely carnivorous diet and predatory nature (Dimetrodon)." 24.143.105.91 (talk) 22:07, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]