Talk:Brown algae

Orders of Phaeophyta

I have started creating articles for the Orders of the Phaeophyta. However, they are inevitably quite short and it might be better to include a section on taxonomy in this article instead, highlighting the principal charecteristics of each order and listing the Genera associated with each. Does anyone have any views as to which way might be best ? Velela 09:05, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Both. --Stemonitis 15:00, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

For the amount we have, I like what you've been doing, Velela. With your permission, though, I'd remove calling them the phylum Phaeophyta on each page. They don't show up that way in all systems (including the one the taxoboxes are using) and I don't think it helps to repeat the same thing for each order. Josh

Please put Chordariales back in, as the latest research showing it is paraphyletic is not wholely resolved--or if it is include this note. KP Botany 23:51, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

I entered "Heterokontophyta" as synonymous with "Phaeophyta" . It looks as if I will have to do some home-work. Will be interested in comments.Osborne 12:25, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

It isn't synonymous. The Heterokonts are the "Stramenopiles" and include the diatoms, yellow-green algae, golden algae, slime nets, water moulds, and a number of other groups in addition to the brown algae. --EncycloPetey (talk) 19:21, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

References:- What have I done with the References?? Help will be accepted!!Osborne 14:26, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Hope my fix is what you were looking for. Regards. Velela 14:32, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Uses

Uses of brown algae will be duplicated under the genera of brown algae - Fucus probably will be one example. This will be most tiresome. What is best (I will be retiring & going home soon so someone else better make the decision.Osborne 15:48, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Osborne, I don't understand what you are saying, are you saying that the uses will be on the genera pages? Yes, they will be, but in detail. This article should give an overview of a few main species, say Fucus and the kelps and how they are used, with specifics left to the genera articles. KP Botany 03:24, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Will have to look at it again to see what I was saying! Prob. the notes on "uses" need not be duplicated under "Brown algae" and under the species of "Brown algae" such as: Laminaria, Kelps, Fucus, Colpomenia etc. - not all of these have a "uses" section \nyhow. Should the "Uses" be left under "Brown Algae" and not noted under the separate species/genera? I may not look at this "Discussion" again so if you wish leave a not under "my talk" Osborne 08:04, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Plants?

Why is the algae referred to as a plant in the life cycle section?? Nathanalex (talk) 03:39, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Botrydium stoloniferum

The yellow-green algae page has Botrydiales as an order of xanthophytes, so there seems to be an inconsistency between that page and this. Googling suggests that Botrydium is not monotypic, contrary to what is implied here. Lavateraguy (talk) 11:24, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Frondose

A "frond" is I believe a "leaf-like" part of the alga.Not all brwn algae hve leaf-like parts. I have therefore removed this sentence.