Talk:Cyathus stercoreus/GA1

GA Review

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

I an reviewing the article and will post a full review shortly. Miss Madeline | Talk to Madeline 23:33, 6 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I am placing the article on hold because of mostly minor issues with coverage:

*Are there reasons for the fruiting body's variability due to light intensity? If this is a trait of the genus or family, this explanation is not necessary.

The reasons for this variability aren't known for sure, but a hypothesis has been published in the literature, so I put that in the article. It's also not known if this same variability occurs for all members of the genus Cyathus or family Nidulariaceae, but almost all the research on this topic has been performed using this particular species as a model (probably because it's easy to grow in the lab), so I thought it important enough to mention here. Sasata (talk) 04:37, 7 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

*The reproduction section does not say if this fungus reproduces sexually or asexually, or both. It should say so and provide an explanation if necessary.

Good idea. I added a new section to cover this. Sasata (talk) 04:37, 7 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Is there any evidence the traditional use works, and if so what sort of substance causes the effects?

Unfortunately, no. And there's no evidence (that I know of) that the substances mentioned in the bioactive compounds might be responsible for the purported medicinal effects. It's more of an interesting aside, really. Sasata (talk) 04:37, 7 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

*Is there any particular reason why it produces the bioactive compounds? If the members of this species' genus or family also produce bioactive compounds, I don't think this has to be included in this article.

The compounds mentioned are specific to this species. They are recent discoveries (reported in 2007 and 2008), and the authors of those papers did not make any speculations about their purpose. Sasata (talk) 04:37, 7 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

*The use in traditional Chinese medicine and its location in category:Fungi of Asia imply that the fungus is native to China. Is there more specific information about its range? Has it been introduced to anywhere else? I assume that it needs some rainfall because of the use of rain to disperse spores.

It has a worldwide distribution, which was mentioned in the lead, but not in the body of the text. I've now added a "habitat and distribution" section to emphasize it. Sasata (talk) 04:37, 7 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

When these issues are resolved, I think that the article will be a good article. Miss Madeline | Talk to Madeline 00:12, 7 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I feel that my concerns have been resolved and adequately explained, so I am promoting the article. Keep up the good work! Miss Madeline | Talk to Madeline 05:22, 7 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]