If you ask Wikidata "Does the species lion (Q140) have a parent taxon line up to the Osteichthyes (Q27207, bony fishes)?", it answers yes:
SELECT ?item1
WHERE {
wd:Q140 wdt:P171* ?item1.
?item1 wdt:P171 wd:Q27207.
}
Now, I assume that this must be wrong at some level (I'm no biologist, so please correct me if I'm wrong), so I tried to find the error.
This query displays that path more explicitly, starting with mammals:
- Mammals (Q7377) have Tetrapoda (Q19159) as a parent taxon.
- Tetrapoda (Q19159) have Tetrapodomorph (Q1209254) as a parent taxon.
- Tetrapodomorph (Q1209254) have Rhipidistia (Q150598) as a parent taxon.
- Rhipidistia (Q150598) have Sarcopterygii (Q160830) as a parent taxon.
- Sarcopterygii (Q160830) have Osteichthyes (Q27207) as a parent taxon.
The third point seems strange, because Rhipidistia are described as a taxon of fish, which would mean that all mammals are fish.
Maybe this comes from the fact that tetrapods (and therefore mammals) evolved from Sarcopterygii 390 million years ago, as described here.
Is "having evolved from" considered a parent taxon in biology? If not, which of the five statements above is wrong?