Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
WikiProject iconVital articles: Level 4 / Science B‑class
WikiProject iconSavanna has been listed as a level-4 vital article in Science (Physics). If you can improve it, please do.
BThis article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.


Can somebody correct the reference in the first paragraph? —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 21:43, 8 April 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

First section[edit]

But, the Savannah, Georgia article gives a different explanation for the name:

According to Merriam-Webster's Dictionary (with etymologies), the name "Savannah" means "Shawnee"; it derives from a Muskoghean Indian word—a variant of the native name of the Shawnees. Georgia colonists adopted this name for the Savannah River and then for the city.

So something is amiss. One of these explanations has to be wrong... no its not!!!

Nyh 20:29, 6 November 2005 (UTC)Reply[reply]

the word "Savanna" has no "h" the word savannah does. this is the differece between a grassland and a forest

The presence or absence of an "H" is menaingles, just a spelling variation. The OED is considered the last word on English etymologies and says says "In 16th c. zavana, a. Sp. zavana, çavana, given by Oviedo 1535 as a Carib word. The later form savana (mod. Sp. sabana) is an instance of the usual N. American Sp. substitution of s for z. Cf. F. savane, G. savanne." In short, what this article says is correct WRT to defintion. Savanna/savnnah is an Anglicisation of a Carib word meaning "treeless plain". Whether Savannah Ga. has alternate origins I can't say. It seems unlikely. 07:19, 6 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Big Copyright Problem[edit]

I think this article has a very serious copyright problem. In mid-article it seems to start a-new (while being inconsistent) but the wording seemed to me too much "tourist-guide". A quick google search came up with this site: [1] from which it seems the entire text is derived.

Though I tried to understand the complete procedure in how to deal with this kind of thing - I have faild. I will bring the problems which affected me up in Wikipedia talk:Deletion policy.Havelock 20:25, 7 March 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

It was only the last edit that had inserted a copyvio. In a case like this you can just revert to the last clean version, or simply remove the copyvio. If the copyright owner were to complain, it's possible (but a bit tedious) for an admin to remove the copyvio from the page history. Guettarda 20:29, 7 March 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

the page is very messy[edit]

Since I am too inexperienced and fear destroying the page, I wanted to make a note that the page is very messy and hard to read due to the odd placement of the pink text boxes. So if anyone who knows what they are doing is reading this, please fix it.

Another point, the Native America theory is stated by the Royal Botanical Gardens here in Hamilton, and they are usually right on this theory-- plus the oak savanna habitat is created by controlled fires, and yearly burns are done by the RBG to preserve this habitat.

I've had a go at sorting out the mess but it still seems a tad screwy. Anyone else care to have a try? Michaelritchie200 14:30, 2 August 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I deleted the Native American theory because it seemed controversial and uncited. If good sources can be found for this theory, please present them. 18:33, 5 August 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]


It looks like (Google test) "savanna" is the alternate spelling, while "savannah" is predominant. Is "savanna" regional, or specific to a particular dialect of English? If not, the page should probably be moved to "savannah" and the current "savannah" page to "savannah (disambiguation)". --Yath 19:09, 12 August 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Savannah is the English standard, however "savanna" is almost exclusively used in botanical and ecological journals and texts. I guess that means we decide precedence by whether this is meant to be a generic article or a botanical/scientific one. Cases can be made for either.

C4 grasses[edit]

C4 grasses are mentioned in this article without explanation what these are(in the second sentence even). This is not good for an encyclopedia. Even worse, I cant find the meaning of this term somewhere else on wikipedia. Maybe somebody who knows what these thing sre can add an explanation in this article or a hyperlink to an article that explains this. 21:12, 28 April 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Done. And good catch. I tend to forget that not everyone has what I consider to be basic knowledge in my own fields.Ethel Aardvark 23:33, 29 April 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

no savanna types, climates etc. available in this text. read german version to get missing informations-- (talk) 10:14, 6 March 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Vandalism - rampant ?[edit]

Are the any objections if I nominate this article for semi-protection? There seems to be on going consistent IP vandalism. Ronnam (talk) 07:06, 8 July 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I support that entirely. I think the problem is that Savanna has become a common name amongst children of certain age. They look up the name on Wiki and then vandalise the article. Ethel Aardvark (talk) 00:41, 9 October 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]


A photo included in an article should illustrate some point within the article. The photograph of the lion doesn't do that in this article. A savanna is an ecosystem characterised by trees, while the lion photograph shows a grassland with what may be some out-of-focus shrubs in the background. Do a Google image search on the term savanna restricting the search to .edu sites to see the types of illustrations that should be used. They all show the trees as a prominant part of the photograph, with the continuous grassy understorey that is decribed int he intro to this article. We have a very good photograph of an African acacia savanna as the very first illustration,. Another photograph of the same basic savanna type would serve no purpose even if it weren't a particlularly poor respresentation of a savanna. Ethel Aardvark (talk) 00:59, 13 October 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

someone wrote "you suck" which i obv deleted. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 23:14, 15 October 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Cheers Ethel Aardvark (talk) 01:10, 16 October 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]


At the very beginning: "A savanna, or savannah, is a tropical grassland ecosystem...", what about the eastern savannas of the United States and the post oak savannas? Vultur (talk) 06:14, 4 May 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I removed the word "tropical". The article already talks about temperate, Mediterranean, and montane savannas, so 'tropical' is clearly inaccurate as a defining feature. Vultur (talk) 22:21, 30 August 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Super Mary[edit]

A crazy woman makes the paper of...

Super Mario!

Super Mary[edit]

A crazy woman makes the paper of...

Super Mario! —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 12:56, 28 February 2010 (UTC) more about savanna go to —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 10:04, 23 March 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Savannas on World Map[edit]

It would be good if the article had a map of savannas of the world (see this one for example). –Zinjixmaggir 06:36, 4 August 2011 (UTC) hi — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 07:40, 6 December 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Sources for article expansion[edit]

Also see Tipping point. (talk) 03:24, 10 November 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Removed the following unsourced or irrelevant info

Although the term savanna is believed to have originally come from an Arawak word describing "land which is without trees but with much grass either tall or short" (Oviedo y Valdes, 1535), by the late 1800s it was used to mean "land with both grass and trees". It now refers to land with grass and either scattered trees or an open canopy of trees.
Spanish explorers familiar with the term "sabana" called the grasslands they found around the Orinoco River "llanos", as well as calling Venezuelan and Colombian grasslands by that specific term. "Cerrado" was used on the higher savannas of the Brazilian Central Plateau.[1]

I suppose the original editor was referring to the General and Natural History of the Indies but cursory googling doesn't turn up anything about savannahs in it. Might need someone to slug through the original Spanish version to find it. The OED does relate the word's etymology to Taino (which Arawak would fall under) but, unless OyV provides new and stronger sourcing than Peter Martyr, it looks like they'd both just be wrong and it actually derived from a Panamanian Indian term.

There's no need to include the word's non-use by the Spaniards pending OyV turning out to be right. — LlywelynII 10:38, 4 August 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]


  1. ^ David R. Harris, ed. (1980). Human Ecology in Savanna Environments. London: Academic Press. pp. 3, 5–9, 12, 271–278, 297–298. ISBN 0-12-326550-9.

Factors of savannas[edit]

As far as I know, the Uruguayan Savanna is not exposed to significant variation in precipitation. As a result it is doubtful to quote this as a common feature. -霎起林野间 (talk) 15:38, 5 November 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

"Tanzania, East Africa"[edit]

Don't think it's consistent to list <country>, <subcontinent> for this specific example when other savannas in the article are located with only a region — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2603:8080:5F00:2C8D:B120:44DE:D771:6946 (talk) 04:39, 19 June 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]