Talk:Tapir

Palaeotapirus was nominated for deletion. The discussion was closed on 13 October 2024 with a consensus to merge. Its contents were merged into Tapir. The original page is now a redirect to this page. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see its history; for its talk page, see here.

This  level-4 vital article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Mammals High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Mammals, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of mammal-related subjects 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.MammalsWikipedia:WikiProject MammalsTemplate:WikiProject Mammalsmammal High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

A tapir is a large, browing animal

Just one question... what is a browing animal? ;) --Dante Alighieri 11:21 18 Jun 2003 (UTC)

Probably browsing animal — herbivores that eat grass, like cows. This can usually be determined by what kind of teeth the animal has. --69.214.226.102 00:42, 8 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

A browsing animal eats leaves branches off trees and shrubs.. Cows are grazers, deer are browsers. 66.108.117.254 18:32, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I just expanded the Corcovado National Park stub in which I wrote that it is sizeable enough to support a sizeable population of tapirs. I think I remember hearing that this is one of the few remaining areas where such a large population still remains. Is this true? DirkvdM 19:07, 18 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I moved the following from the article to the discussion page. It does not reflect a neutral POV ("nothing more than apologetic conjecture"), and neither cites nor quotes FARMS articles so that the argument for/against can be weighed. Please quote and cite FARMS articles so this entry can be improved to Wikipedia standard.

The argument has been made by members of FARMS, that tapirs are the animal refered to as "horses" in the Book of Mormon. These individuals argue that a translation error lead to the tapir being misidentified as a horse. This of course is nothing more than apologetic conjecture, with little or no evidence to support the claims that tapirs were used as work animals by ancient Americans. The biologist Jared Diamond has noted that only one large mammal, the llama, was domesticated in the ancient Americas. (See Guns, Germs, and Steel p. 162-167, and "Evolution, consequences and future of plant and animal domestication, Nature 418:700-707 [2002].)

--MrWhipple 16:30, 12 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

How can there be a translation error in the Book of Mormon? Wasn't the whole point that the translation was given directly by God? DJ Clayworth 16:33, 12 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

That's not exactly on-topic, but Mormons do not believe that the Book of Mormon is perfect in a word-for-word sense. The principles it teaches are from God, but the wording is limited by the human authors and the translator. See LDS scripture Doctrine and Covenants 1:24. I still want to see the FARMS articles the article mentions but does not cite. --MrWhipple 16:46, 12 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Here is the farms article

http://farms.byu.edu/display.php?id=129&table=transcripts

Similarly, members of Lehi's family may have applied loanwords to certain animal species that they encountered for the first time in the New World, such as the Mesoamerican tapir. While some species of tapir are rather small, the Mesoamerican variety (tapiris bairdii) can grow to be nearly six and a half feet in length and can weigh more than six hundred pounds. Many zoologists and anthropologists have compared the tapir's features to those of a horse or a donkey. "Whenever I saw a tapir," notes zoologist Hans Krieg, "it reminded me of an animal similar to a horse or a donkey. The movements as well as the shape of the animal, especially the high neck with the small brush mane, even the expression on the face, are much more like a horse's than a pig's [to which some have compared the smaller species]. When watching a tapir on the alert . . . as he picks himself up when recognizing danger, taking off in a gallop, almost nothing remains of the similarity to a pig."8

Thank you for the reference. As I read it, the anonymous FARMS author is not coming to any definite conclusions, but is using the tapir as a possible example of "'loanshift' or 'loan-extension'". He (?) gives examples of other cultures who have done this, and quotes non-Mormon authors who say the tapir has visual and behavior similarities to the horse, so this doesn't appear to be "nothing more than apologetic conjecture."

Also, please note the FARMS article explains that the Book of Mormon never says anyone actually rode a horse, but they do seem to have been used for draft purposes. The stupid Photoshopped image of a "Nephite riding a tapir" has no place in the Wikipedia article.

So, how can the FARMS article be incorporated into a NPOV entry in this Wikipedia entry? --MrWhipple 17:09, 12 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

My proposed entry:

The Book of Mormon refers to horses being used for draft purposes in a handful of passages. The absence of horses from the pre-Columbian archeological record has caused some Mormons to speculate on which animal to which the text could be referring. A research report from the Foundation for Ancient Research and Mormon Studies has hypothesized that the tapir may have been the animal referred to, and that it was called a horse by the early Book of Mormon people when they arrived from the Old World:

"[M]embers of Lehi's family may have applied loanwords to certain animal species that they encountered for the first time in the New World, such as the Mesoamerican tapir. While some species of tapir are rather small, the Mesoamerican variety (tapiris bairdii) can grow to be nearly six and a half feet in length and can weigh more than six hundred pounds. Many zoologists and anthropologists have compared the tapir's features to those of a horse or a donkey. 'Whenever I saw a tapir,' notes zoologist Hans Krieg, 'it reminded me of an animal similar to a horse or a donkey. The movements as well as the shape of the animal, especially the high neck with the small brush mane, even the expression on the face, are much more like a horse's than a pig's [to which some have compared the smaller species]. When watching a tapir on the alert...as he picks himself up when recognizing danger, taking off in a gallop, almost nothing remains of the similarity to a pig.'" ("Horses in the Book of Mormon," FARMS Research Report, n/a, n/d. [1])

--MrWhipple 17:26, 12 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I have no problem with that.

Done. Thanks for working this out. --MrWhipple 17:49, 12 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

i dont think a book of mormon reference is needed at all in a page about an animal. 67.187.228.134 02:02, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I see that this discussion hasn't been updated for quite awhile, so maybe this is a dead issue, but I thought that another point of view might be useful. From my perspective, FARMS's argument is mere apologetics. The tapir/horse connection is far from being accepted by mainstream Mormons. In fact, I would venture to guess that the average Mormon has never even heard of FARMS's proposal.

Furthermore, the proposal itself is fraught with problems. Therefore, I would suggest that if the FARMS reference is used in this article about tapirs, that a counter reference also be included so that those interested enough in the topic can get both sides of the story. An excellent article dealing with the subject of horses in the Book of Mormon is located here: http://zarahemlacitylimits.com/wiki/index.php/Horses, and within this article is a section dealing specifically with FARMS's tapir/horse connection (http://zarahemlacitylimits.com/wiki/index.php/Horses#The_Tapir.2FHorse). KevinM 22:56, 25 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've tried to clean up this section by adopting an NPOV. The very inclusion of this section on the page is an allusion to the theory of horses/tapirs with a brief description of the theory, and not a defense/critique of apologetics. If that is to be the scope of the entry, then perhaps we should create a seperate Book of Mormon Horses/Tapir Debate page. For what it's worth. Wuapinmon 16:40, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm..This bit of the article is still not so hot. It goes too far into Mormon hypotheses, but without just quoting some Mormons. I thought something like MrWhipple's proposed entry above is more the style I would choose, although his is perhaps a bit long. Hey, is MrWhipple a Mormon? Hm, not important...

-Misha Vargas

216.254.12.114 17:22, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This is kruft, pure and simple. The historicity of the BOM is an article of faith, and I know of no historian outside of the religion that would argure that Joseph Smith was not the author of the work. If the BOM says tapirs, then there is a reference with tapirs. If it says horses, it references horses. Because there is no original text, just what is alleged to be a translation, there is no room for argument about the subject. You cannot pose a solid argument without a document in the original language. The reference, which I think has a significant POV problem, should be removed from what is otherwise a good article.

--Dwcsite 22:51, 29 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The article states that the Korean name is "niya", but the Korean syllagram given is 맥 which, as far as I'm aware, is "mait", not "niya". Comments? Tomer^talk 11:09, 12 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not an expert on mammals or mythology, but all the Korean references to real tapirs that I've read have used maek. (Hangul: 맥, Hanja: 貊.) --KJ 12:46, 19 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It seems it was due to vandalism. I've put maek back in, and reverted some other edits. --KJ 05:28, 21 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

do they eat ants as well? Chensiyuan 07:44, 23 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Not on purpose, at least! They're strictly vegetarian. They do often get mistaken for anteaters, but their long noses are used to grab at vegetation rather than get at insects. - Sasha Kopf 17:09, 23 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I hope I didn't step on anyone's toes, but I took out some of the cultural references listed in the article. There have been enough now it didn't seem feasible to keep adding brief mentions and one-liners alluding to tapirs, so I tried to pare it down to instances where tapirs are featured more prominently. However, if anyone thinks that was a mistake or if I accidentally took out something that really belongs there, please go ahead and fix it with my apologies. - Sasha Kopf 00:54, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure the "Grand Theft Auto" reference here is correct. I am playing the game now, and it's not easily heard to be "tapia." There's a possibility it may be correctly pronounced (the character pronouncing it is speaking with either a Cuban or Puerto Rican accent) and I think this entry should be deleted, since it's not definitively mispronounced. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.200.185.108 (talk) 19:09, 8 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why is "sexy" used for the pronunciation guide? I didn't change it because I couldn't tell if it's actually correct, but (1) I don't think it is correct and (2) if it is, there has to be a better word.

That was just vandalism. It's been reverted back now. In the future, if you think something like that is incorrect, a good way to verify is to check the history of the page to see if the questionable assertion is a recent change that's a big departure from previous versions. If so, it's likely to be vandalism. - Sasha Kopf 02:51, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The article does not seem to talk about the range of the various tapir species.

Does anyone have any actual references to tapirs eating dreams in Chinese, Korean, or Japanese folklore? By references, I mean to **scholarly** work, and not a reference to Rumiko Takahashi's manga "Lum Urusei*Yatsura" where tapirs eat dreams. There are some other examples from manga, but they're not references either. I'd like to see a real scholarly reference to this, not something quoting somebody who (to complete the circle) is quoting Wiki. And for an example of *that*, see <http://fantasii-lyrics.blogspot.com/2006_10_01_archive.html> where Japanese "yumekui" is translated as "dream-catcher," "dream-eater," and a footnote says that means a tapir and cites this Wiki article.

In brief, you've got a VERIFIABILITY problem here.

Timothy Perper 18:32, 5 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Should we refer to Baku (spirit)?--Mr Fink 18:36, 5 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You beat me to it, Mr. Fink. We can, but a warning is needed.

I was just looking at the Baku article, and it's not much help at all. The one reference in English, to a paper by Nakagawa, says only (in footnote 39, if you're interested) that baku are "believed to devour dreams." There isn't any clear basis to identify tapirs with baku from Nakagawa's paper, and in fact the images of baku given in both the Wiki article and described by Nakagawa do not resemble living tapirs. Nor does Nakgawa him/herself cite anyone -- folklorists, ethnographers, and so on -- to support the claim that baku *are* in fact believed to devour nightmares.

What we DO have is a fair amount of manga and anime (like "Lum Urusei*Yatsura") that have tapirs (recognizable ones, too) eating nightmares -- very charming, indeed. But it isn't scholarly evidence that Japanese folklore existed in which tapirs -- the real ones, not the chimeras drawn by artists like Hokusai -- had anything to do with dreams.

My guess -- it's only that! -- is that various Japanese writers and artists, like Takahashi, decided that if the Japanese word (kanji or in kana) for "baku" was the same as the Chinese character for "tapir," she'd draw her dream-devouring creature as a recognizable tapir and not as a modernization of Hokusai's chimerical beast.

So we're still in limbo, and it's not that trivial either, since by now lots of people out there think they know that the Japanese believe that tapirs eat dreams. So we seem to have neo-folklore, a possibly **brand-new** piece of manga/anime based folklore. I've been collectiing examples of this "tapirs eat dreams" idea, and my favorite so far is a really quite delightful web game <www.kirstenmunson.com/tapirgame.html>, the only one, Kirsten adds, that features tapirs. But it isn't evidence that the Japanese, or anyone else, believe that tapirs, real ones as re-imagined in folklore, actually eat dreams. Chimeras with a similar name, yes, but tapirs -- so far, no evidence I can find.

Timothy Perper 19:42, 5 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You seem to have overlooked the text in the Nakagawa paper to which the footnote was appended. Here's a transcription of it for you (note that this is a translation of an old Japanese text which introduced various weird creatures from China, and that "mo" is simply the Chinese reading of the same character which the Japanese pronounce "baku", and that brackets are Nakagawa's):

30.Mo

In the mountains of the south, there lives a beast. It has an elephant's trunk, the eyes of a rhinoceros, an ox's tail, and a tiger's paws. Its body is yellow and black, and it is called the Mo [tapir]. By sleeping on its pelt one can ward off pestilence. A man should make a sketch of the Mo in order to be protected from evil. It eats copper and iron and nothing else.

While I guess we can't be certain that the character 貘 always referred to the animal we call a "tapir" today, that certainly seems to be its current usage in Chinese. Tapirs are similarly called baku in Japan. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kotengu (talk • contribs) 20:57, 5 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your quote. I hadn't overlooked it; I just hadn't quoted it. The kanji in question, which is given on Breen's WWWJDIC website in two forms, one apparently a variant of the other, is the same as the Chinese ideogram. Breen's entry gives two pronunciations (baku and mo), so it seems that both exist in modern Japanese.

It's clear, however, from the original Nara ehon cited by Nakagawa, that whatever this beast was, it was fanciful and it doesn't look like a (real) tapir at all (see, for example, the drawing on <www.sirasaki.co.jp/baku/baku.html>). Thus, the question arises of where the visual identification comes from between (biological) tapirs and dream-eating baku. The answer requires someone who knows a *great* deal more than I do about the history of Japanese zoological science, because, prior to the 1850s, we can assume that Japanese naturalists did not know much at all about the non-Japanese (that is, Malaysian) tapir. It is *possible* that a Dutch ship entering Deshima in 1790 (say) had a real Malayan tapir on board, but without good documentary evidence of such a thing, I think we can safely assume that the Malaysian tapir was unknown to Japan prior to 1854 and perhaps years later. And from that it follows that the "baku" in the sense of the Japanese folkloric creature derived from Chinese and is related visually to (Malaysian) tapirs only very indirectly.

But certainly by the 1980-1990s, when Takahashi Rumiko was working on "Lum*Urusei Yatsura," Malaysian and other tapirs would have been known, perhaps well known, in Japan. It is also clear from her drawings that the tapirs she envisioned are based solidly on the Malaysian or related animal. Thus, a transformation seems to have occurred between the pre-1854 era and the time Takahashi was working more than a century later, which apparently shifted the visual sense from the Chinese chimerical beast to the zoologically well-known tapir.

Let me state the idea in another way. If one *does* assert that biologically-identifiable tapirs are one and the same as the folkloric baku, one needs much better evidence -- a matter of VERIFIABILITY -- than what is in the article. The pictures and descriptions we DO have of the baku **prior** to 1854 (the Nara ehon cited by Nakagawa, the drawing referenced above) are **certainly** not biological tapirs. Therefore the article needs to downplay and modify its claim that in Japanese folklore, creatures looking like the modern tapir ate dreams.

And why is it important? Because I have by now encountered a number of websites that cite this Wiki article to prove that the Japanese people believe that (biological) tapirs eat dreams. I think a great deal of care is needed in making that assertion and that, at the moment, it lacks the all-important evidentiary base. Yes, it's a charming idea that creatures looking like Malaysian tapirs ate dreams, and the notion has become quite popular. But we need evidence that such ideas, no matter how charming, pre-date modern manga and anime.

Yes, it may be that in modern Mandarin Chinese "mo" refers to Malayasian and other tapirs. But it's not obvious what connection exists with Japanese visual depictions of baku first as chimeras and later as (zoological) tapirs.

Timothy Perper 22:45, 5 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Here is a reference to an image from 1791 that shows a “dream-eating” Japanese supernatural creature that has an elephant’s trunk and tusks. It is NOT a zoological tapir.

Kern, Adam L. 2007 Manga from the Floating World: Comicbook culture and the kibyoshi of Edo Japan. Cambridge: Harvard University Asian Center. page 236, figure 4.26.

It has tusks, a long trunk, a semi-human face, horns, and a body drawn in swirls and whorls rather like a dragon. Kern calls this creature a “baku.” I’d download the image except that that really would be copyright violation.

By contrast, *modern* dream-eating creatures in manga and anime are unmistakably zoological tapirs. Here’s a reference to Takahashi Rumiko’s dream-eating tapir (the original dates from the early 1980s):

Takahashi Rumiko 1995 Waking to a nightmare. In: The Return of Lum: Urusei Yatsura. San Francisco: Viz. pages 141-156.

So there you have it. The Edo period dream-eater was drawn in at least some contemporary Japanese sources with an elephant’s head. Modern Japanese dream-eaters are zoological tapirs.

Timothy Perper 14:31, 6 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

These guys are so cool. I love the tapir. Why is this page not have more on it? There are all sorts of tapir that you miss off! Why not a big heap of all the documented tapir you can find anywhere. I wish we could have more. Also possibly a link to a site where I can buy or hire a tapir for myself to keep? 217.36.215.32 15:39, 7 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Check out Sasha Kopf's Wikipedia user page. You can find the link at the very top of the tapir talk page. Her website has more material on tapirs. Timothy Perper 23:19, 7 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In roughly the center of the article are two pictures of tapir feet, side by side with the caption; '"The undersides of the front (left, with four toes) and back (right, with three toes) feet of a Malayan tapir at rest". Here's the problem: Unless my eyes deceive me, BOTH photos display a four toed foot! Am I mistaken, or should this picture & caption be scrapped? Rearden Metal 03:19, 27 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Rearden Metal - I think your eyes deceive you. (As the person who took the pictures and labeled them, I can attest to the right number of toes.) I wonder if maybe the middle toe on the back feet is causing a problem? It's sort of a funny shape, and I can see how it would look like a fourth toe. However, if you think the pictures will cause confusion, perhaps one image or both should be removed. - Sasha Kopf 04:07, 27 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The following information was recently added by CassieCamisado on tapir breeding patterns:

Tapirs mating is non seasonal and they go into Oestrus every two to three months. Oestrus usually lasts four to five days and they copulate several times during this to ensure pregnancy. They can reproduce both in and out of water.

For now, I have remove the info and reverted back to the previous text because

1) the information was unsourced

2) the information about going into oestrus every 2-3 months is already in the article, in the "Lifecycle" section

3) "reproduce both in and out of water" is a little vague - will they copulate in and out of water, or give birth?

However, if the info gets sourced and those little problems taken care of, it would be great to have it in the article. - Sasha Kopf (talk) 11:50, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Update: I looked up the information added by CassieCamisado, and I got conflicting answers, as follows:

Are mating habits seasonal?

• Fact Sheet from Young People's Trust for the Environment says 'no
• ARKive implies yes, Animal Diversity Web implies yes

Does oestrus occur every 2-3 months?

• BBC says yes
• Tapir Specialist Group's field manual says no, it's generally 28-32 days but depends on the species
• Animal Diversity Web says 50-80 days

Does oestrus last 4-5 days?

• I couldn't find a source that gave these numbers...
• Tapir Specialist Group's field manual says no, it's generally 1-4 days but depends on the species

However, I did reference two of the other bits of info. So I'm referencing those facts, and taking out the unverified parts for now. - Sasha Kopf (talk) 00:13, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

they are ugly and look weaird —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.237.223.107 (talk) 20:05, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Are tapirs kosher animals? 65.95.59.86 (talk) 15:42, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No, they are not, as tapirs are not cloven-hoofed, and do not produce or chew cud (these being the requirements for a mammal to be kosher).--Mr Fink (talk) 15:55, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dutch naturalist Marc van Roosmalen claims to have discovered a new species of tapir. Is this discovery accepted by the scientific community??

Here's the link: http://www.marcvanroosmalen.org/dwarftapir.htm 189.70.65.130 (talk) 01:41, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The fast answer is no, and it is bordering WP:Fringe. It has not received widespread recognition by the scientific community, and falls within the same category as the Dwarf Manatee (which see) described by the same author, van Roosmalen. 212.10.74.234 (talk) 03:57, 6 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"...G-banded preparations have revealed that Malayan, Baird’s and Brazilian Tapirs have identical X chromosomes, while Mountain Tapirs are separated by a heterochromatic addition/deletion..." What is the conclusion of that? Malayan or Mountain tapirs are phylogeneticaly closer to the other two species? The heterochromatic addition/deletion could be an apomorphy of the mountain tapir that happened before or after the geographic isolation of the asian from the american species?--92.118.191.48 (talk) 10:32, 23 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I ahve removed the translated binomials from the taxonomy section. With only a few noted exceptions, extinct taxa from before the 1600s do not actually have a common name and should be referred to by the scientific name. --Kevmin (talk) 06:03, 12 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Need a source that they are also known as danta? Google it! --Japoniano (talk) 21:27, 3 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

http://www.tapirs.org/tapirs/bairds.html Zeimusu | Talk page 15:18, 7 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, indeed, they are know by that name and, thank you for the above link!. 75.48.8.163 (talk) 04:54, 6 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The citation provided does not indicate that this is an English name, implying that it is a Spanish one, nor does it indicate that the name applies to tapirs in general, implying that it refers specifically to Baird's tapir. So I'm afraid that it is, at the moment, inadequate to support the claim being made. Anaxial (talk) 11:43, 6 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Zeimusu's source says "Other names: Tapir, danta (Spanish), mountain cow (Belize), macho del monte (Colombia & Costa Rica)." Google Translate says "danta" simply means "tapir" in Spanish. As this is the English wikipedia, I'm not so sure how relevant these "other names" are to the article. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 11:58, 6 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Pokemon Drowzee is a tapir, it's Pokedex entry also mentions it being related to Baku. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 156.34.177.156 (talk) 14:39, 4 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The article says it takes at least three years to reach sexual maturity, so there is a dating problem with the sentence:

Hybrid tapirs from the Baird's Tapir and the Brazilian Tapir were bred at the San Francisco Zoo around 1969 and produced a second generation around 1970.

The reference does not include the 1969 date. Wakablogger2 (talk) 19:26, 11 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think a picture of a tapir skull would be more appropriate than a rough sketch of one. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Burriloom (talk • contribs) 02:12, 21 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Tapir. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20060615035144/http://www.cmzoo.org:80/mountaintapir.html to http://www.cmzoo.org/mountaintapir.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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. —^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 16:18, 17 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Tapir. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050831172133/http://www.tapirback.com/tapirgal/ to http://www.tapirback.com/tapirgal/

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) 04:59, 26 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@BhagyaMani: If you are experienced with cladograms, could you add the Malayan tapir to the "Evolution" section of this article? Ddum5347 (talk) 00:01, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nvm, I figured it out. thanks for ignoring me Ddum5347 (talk) 18:04, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

??? 37.39.221.61 (talk) 19:59, 1 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Horses, Tapirs & Rhinoceroses

Although superficially these animals might not seem related, they all belong to the order Perissodactyla, or odd-toed ungulates. The three families included (Equidae, Rhinocerotidae, and Tapiridae) have a total of 17 species between them, including the horse, donkey, ass, zebra, tapir, and rhinoceros. They are a beautiful example of related animals evolving to adapt to different lifestyles, this case animals respectively living in open areas such as grasslands and steppes (horses), dry savannas, and in Asia, wet marsh or forest areas (rhinos), and mainly tropical rainforests (tapirs).

The British zoologist Richard Owen recognised that all these animals were closely related and coined the name for this order. Their most easily recognisable shared trait is the odd number of toes, but another remarkable shared trait is that they are all hindgut fermenters. They store digested food that has left the stomach in an enlarged part of the digestive tract called the cecum (in humans this is the part at the beginning of the large intestine to which the appendix is connected) where it is digested by bacteria. ^{[1] [2]}

Oftapirs (talk) 20:38, 9 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, but all of this is already in the article, and does not need to be added, with the exception of the information about Richard Owen, which belongs at Perissodactyla. Anaxial (talk) 21:04, 9 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

And move Tapirus to Tapir as its common name. Because Tapirus is the only extant genus in the family. MonstrousLeviathanAxolotl (talk) 17:50, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]