I changed the definition slightly to define sexual dimorphisms as physical differences not including the difference in sex organs. Is it part of the definition that sexual dimorphisms must be readily apparent, or is this just generally the case? If they must be readily apparent, the definition should be modified accordingly.
- You forgot to sign :P
- I always think of this as readily apparent differences in animals, which would make both the new edit and the addition of plants with different sexual components inaccurate. I'm not a biologist, so I think we'll have to ask the experts.
- Aleta Curry 22:57, 1 August 2007 (CDT)