Scioly.org

I know this question sounds really stupid but... are genus favistina and genus favosites the same thing? I found both in different sources and they have very similar descriptions and I wanted to know for sure. Thanks!

GoofyFoofer wrote:

humanbeingofearth548 wrote:Has anyone ever had a test where in a station they would make you speed ID and categorize random invertebrates into phylums (or was it classes?) and make you count how many of them there were in each?

I had that last year in... the Muscatel invite, I think?

Oh you were there for it?! I was too!

kaorevillo wrote:I know this question sounds really stupid but... are genus favistina and genus favosites the same thing? I found both in different sources and they have very similar descriptions and I wanted to know for sure. Thanks!

From what I found it appears they are different, but favistina isn't as well known as favosites. Since favistina isn't on the list I'd suggest simply not taking info from pages about favistina.

humanbeingofearth548 wrote:

GoofyFoofer wrote:

humanbeingofearth548 wrote:Has anyone ever had a test where in a station they would make you speed ID and categorize random invertebrates into phylums (or was it classes?) and make you count how many of them there were in each?

I had that last year in... the Muscatel invite, I think?

Oh you were there for it?! I was too!

Nice! Were you the team that stole the gold in fossils?

GoofyFoofer wrote:

humanbeingofearth548 wrote:

GoofyFoofer wrote: I had that last year in... the Muscatel invite, I think?

Oh you were there for it?! I was too!

Nice! Were you the team that stole the gold in fossils?

Who knooooows?

Is there a specific source that science olympiad uses for taxonomy? I've noticed that sometimes it varies from source to source.

living_fossil wrote:Is there a specific source that science olympiad uses for taxonomy? I've noticed that sometimes it varies from source to source.

The tests I have seen don't ask for taxonomy that isn't on the list.

chaguy2457 wrote:

living_fossil wrote:Is there a specific source that science olympiad uses for taxonomy? I've noticed that sometimes it varies from source to source.

The tests I have seen don't ask for taxonomy that isn't on the list.

Our coaches tell us to have just the basic kingdom, phylum, class, order, family and such, but some tests have asked for the subphylum or subclass.
I generally just use Wikipedia for classification (the test makers usually rely on that) and then cross check my answers with a more reliable source.

Entomology wrote:I generally just use Wikipedia for classification (the test makers usually rely on that)

Who are these test makers? I tend to go with other sources since most people writing tests (at least at Regional and State tournaments) tend to be professors, and (in my judgement) tend not to use Wikipedia.

Unome wrote:

Entomology wrote:I generally just use Wikipedia for classification (the test makers usually rely on that)

Who are these test makers? I tend to go with other sources since most people writing tests (at least at Regional and State tournaments) tend to be professors, and (in my judgement) tend not to use Wikipedia.

Lazy people, people like me.

I tend to use the field guides first, because the SO test makers use it for info.
Typically, I'll use Wikipedia if no other source is available online or on paper.