Talk:recover

Include

Pancrustacea on Wikipedia (specif. this edit by Hemiauchenia): "As of 2010, the Pancrustacea taxon is considered well accepted, with most studies recovering Hexapoda within Crustacea." I'd hesitate to add this without finding at least one durable source. Simplificationalizer (talk) 01:39, 11 November 2022 (UTC)

Searching for "recovering the clade" on Google yields some durably archived results, as does searching for "recover Hexapoda". I'm not sure what it means precisely, though. Something to do with the results of phylogenomic or taxonomic analyses, obviously, but I'm not sure if it's called "recovering" because the clades were previously discredited, or because it's supposed to be reconstructing an historical tree based on current data, or something else entirely. 98.170.164.88 01:50, 11 November 2022 (UTC)

Thanks, I was just coming here to see if we listed the biological sense. We see it also on Pentastomida. I think it could be a sub-sense of one of our existing senses, but I wouldnt know which one. It does seem vaguely dismissive .... "oh, your analysis was completely wrong, but it's okay, we picked up the mess you made!" —Soap— 17:03, 27 October 2023 (UTC)

On Pentastomida the wording has been there since late 2009. This is not the actual diff, but that article had a lot of edits in a very short time mostly by a few IP editors who may even have been the same person. My guess is that it's unlikely this IP (or IP's) are the same person who used the same wording in 2021, so this probably is a well-established sense of the word as used by taxonomists. —Soap— 17:25, 27 October 2023 (UTC)

Here's a paper that uses it ten times: The Phylogeny and Evolutionary History of Arthropods —Soap— 21:00, 27 October 2023 (UTC)