Jump to content

Talk:Armillaria luteobubalina/GA1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GA Review

[edit]

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Ucucha 20:42, 28 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • Lead could be a bit longer
    • Perhaps some taxonomy and phylogenetics can be added.
  • Do you really need those three very short subsections under "Description"? Perhaps eliminate the subheaders.
    • Better now, but I still don't think you need two subsections for a three-paragraph section.
  • Working on it. I plan to soon expand both "microscopic characteristics" and "similar species" so they won't be so short. It'll have to wait for a library visit this weekend though. Sasata (talk) 17:37, 29 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Perhaps better place phylogeny with history, as you did with A. gallica.
    • Why not make it one section?
  • Shouldn't the lead mention the South American occurrence?
  • Coetzee et al. (2003) say its distribution may be Gondwanan in origin. Why not mention that?

More to follow. Ucucha 20:42, 28 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the quick review pickup! I will work on these later tonight or tomorrow. This one will probably be headed to FAC sometime, so don't hold back :) Sasata (talk) 20:54, 28 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I had thought so. I'll add some more comments over the next few days; no problem if you don't get to it right now. Ucucha 20:57, 28 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • "suggested primary attack"—what is primary attack?
  • "Most Australian records referred to A. mellea, based on the presence of black rhizomorphs."—missing a word, and most Aus records of what?
  • gloss pleiomorphic, umbo
  • What does the bubalina part of the name mean?
  • "sinuate"—either link to wiktionary or explain, I think. It means it has the form of a sinusoid curve, I guess?
  • Why don't you mention the two other Armillaria from Australia under "Similar species"?
  • Perhaps mention explicitly that the Karri and Jarrah forests are in WA.
  • "Those of the Karri forests (comprised largely of the species E. diversicolor) of the southwest have paler and yellower caps than those in the Jarrah forests (which contain predominantly Eucalyptus marginata) further north." - isn't this already explicit (bolded for emphasis)? Sasata (talk) 07:25, 30 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yes, sorry for the oversight.
  • Why is Armillaria not italicized in "Armillaria root rot"?
  • "One study showed that above ground examinations detected only 50% of the trees actually infected, leading to underestimation of true infection by 20–40%."—how does that work? Is the 20–40% an absolute percentage (the percentage of infection among all trees is 20–40% higher than expected based on above-ground examination)?
  • Yes, its an absolute percentage. I'm having difficulty rewording the sentence because it makes sense to me as it's written... please feel free to tweak as you see fit. Sasata (talk) 02:41, 1 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Does the paragraph about the aeration system perhaps better fit under "Description"?
  • The other argument is that this is part of its anatomy. Ultimately, virtually every part of an organism's anatomy has some function, but if you describe form and function (anatomy and pathogenecity, respectively, here) separately, it makes sense to put all aspects of form under form. But I can also see your argument and have no real problem with keeping it the way it is. Ucucha 17:49, 29 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Images and sources all look good.

Ucucha 14:48, 29 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Quite a few hits in Web of Knowledge—have you checked them? These are some of the recent potentially interesting ones.

  • I have checked abstracts for most of these. Unfortunately, my library does not subscribe to most of the Australian forestry-type journals, so I will have to order them prior to any FAC attempt. Sasata (talk) 14:38, 2 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Title: Forest health surveillance in Western Australia: a summary of major activities from 1997 to 2006
Author(s): Robinson, R
Source: AUSTRALIAN FORESTRY Volume: 71 Issue: 3 Pages: 202-211 Published: 2008
This is available as print holding only - I will take a look on friday d'oh! it was online - got it now..... Casliber (talk · contribs) 05:01, 30 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Title: Forest health condition in New South Wales, Australia, 1996-2005. II. Fungal damage recorded in eucalypt plantations during forest health surveys and their management
Author(s): Carnegie, AJ
Source: AUSTRALASIAN PLANT PATHOLOGY Volume: 36 Issue: 3 Pages: 225-239 Published: 2007
added. Casliber (talk · contribs) 06:49, 23 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Title: Eucalypt decline in Australia, and a general concept of tree decline and dieback
Author(s): Jurskis, V
Source: FOREST ECOLOGY AND MANAGEMENT Volume: 215 Issue: 1-3 Pages: 1-20 Published: AUG 25 2005
Title: Rhizomorph growth habit, saprophytic ability and virulence of 15 Armillaria species
Author(s): Morrison, DJ
Source: FOREST PATHOLOGY Volume: 34 Issue: 1 Pages: 15-26 Published: FEB 2004
Title: Short-term impact of thinning and fertilizer application on Armillaria root disease in regrowth karri (Eucalyptus diversicolor F. Muell.) in Western Australia
Author(s): Robinson, RM
Source: FOREST ECOLOGY AND MANAGEMENT Volume: 176 Issue: 1-3 Pages: 417-426 Published: MAR 17 2003
Title: Sequence variation in the rDNA ITS of Australian Armillaria species and intra-specific variation in A-luteobubalina
Author(s): Dunne, CP; Glen, M; Tommerup, IC, et al.
Source: AUSTRALASIAN PLANT PATHOLOGY Volume: 31 Issue: 3 Pages: 241-251 Published: 2002
Title: Molecular detection and differentiation of Australian Armillaria species
Author(s): Smith-White, JL; Summerell, BA; Gunn, LV, et al.
Source: AUSTRALASIAN PLANT PATHOLOGY Volume: 31 Issue: 1 Pages: 75-79 Published: 2002
added. Casliber (talk · contribs) 05:53, 23 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Title: Fumigation of regrowth karri stumps with metham-sodium to control Armillaria luteobubalina.
Author(s): Robinson, R. M.; Smith, R. H.
Source: Australian Forestry Volume: 64 Issue: 4 Pages: 209-215 Published: 2001\
Title: Variations in structure of aerial and submerged rhizomorphs of Armillaria luteobubalina indicate that they may be organs of absorption
Author(s): Pareek, M; Cole, L; Ashford, AE
Source: MYCOLOGICAL RESEARCH Volume: 105 Pages: 1377-1387 Part: 11 Published: NOV 2001
  • Yeah, this one is good. I'll think more about what you said about the placement of the rhizomorph info before FAC; it looks like I could expand this info further and make it a subsection, or maybe even a section. Sasata (talk) 15:41, 2 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ucucha 11:52, 1 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the further fixes. There are a few unresolved issues above that I think should be fixed for this to become an FA, but that don't have a bearing on the GA criteria, so I'm passing GA. I don't have access to Australasian Forestry or Plant Pathology either: perhaps Casliber can help? Ucucha 17:16, 2 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the review Ucucha, I'll make sure those issues get dealt with before FAC. Yes, Casliber (or Hesperian) will probably be able to help. Sasata (talk) 17:48, 2 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I should be able to get Aust. Plant Pathology in the next few days. Casliber (talk · contribs) 05:00, 3 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Excellent! I will check the literature again to see if there's anything missing from the list here. I'll work on a distribution map as well. Sasata (talk) 05:22, 3 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Right! Finally sorted access out. So have begun reviewing what I can get and adding. Casliber (talk · contribs) 05:52, 23 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Armillaria_luteobubalina/GA1&oldid=374419886"