Talk:Lampropholis delicata

	Lampropholis delicata is part of WikiProject Amphibians and Reptiles, an effort to make Wikipedia a standardized, informative, comprehensive and easy-to-use resource for amphibians and reptiles. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit this article, or visit the project page for more information.Amphibians and ReptilesWikipedia:WikiProject Amphibians and ReptilesTemplate:WikiProject Amphibians and Reptilesamphibian and reptile articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

New Zealand Mid‑importance

	New Zealand portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject New Zealand, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of New Zealand and New Zealand-related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.New ZealandWikipedia:WikiProject New ZealandTemplate:WikiProject New ZealandNew Zealand articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Distribution, invasiveness

It should be mentioned that these skinks have become quite established in Hawai'i, to the point where the locals call tham "plague skinks". It's also found in New Zealand, and could be displacing native species of skink. Here in Wellsford, it's the only species of skink I see around, and there's a LOT of them. Kinda concerning. Edaemus (talk) 21:15, 30 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've mentioned their naturalisation in both places, and on Lord Howe Island. Much more could be said. --Avenue (talk) 23:47, 2 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Useful Articles on Rainbow Skink Polymorphism

FORSMAN, A. and SHINE, R. (1995), The adaptive significance of colour pattern polymorphism in the Australian scincid lizard Lampropholis delicata. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society, 55: 273–291. doi: 10.1111/j.1095-8312.1995.tb01066.x

Parallel Geographic Variation in Body Shape and Reproductive Life History within the Australian Scincid Lizard Lampropholis delicata A. Forsman and R. Shine Functional Ecology Vol. 9, No. 6 (Dec., 1995) , pp. 818-828 Published by: British Ecological Society Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2389979

Phylogeographic divergence in the widespread delicate skink (Lampropholis delicata) corresponds to dry habitat barriers in eastern Australia David G Chapple, Conrad J Hoskin, Stephanie NJ Chapple and Michael B Thompson,BMC Evolutionary Biology 2011, 11:191 doi:10.1186/1471-2148-11-191

MATHER, P. B. and HUGHES, J. M. (1992), Genetic variation in three species in the Lampropholis delicata (Lacertilia: Scincidae) complex. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society, 47: 135–146. doi: 10.1111/j.1095-8312.1992.tb00660.x — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anon 2214 (talk • contribs) 04:52, 28 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Article Feedback

You did well on your article in describing the two distinct dimorphisms and explaining why both exist in nature due to the environmental reasons. I also like that you mentioned genetic factors as well, even though there is no distinct research yet, because it helps the reader understand what IS know about it so far. One thing I noticed was that you use a lot of "technical" terms like "congruence" and "substrate." While these words may be shorter way in describing what you are trying to say, I think it may not always be apparent to the average reader what message you are trying to convey. I changed some of the wording so it was more in lay terms, but you may want to look at it again, and make sure it can be understandable by someone who has not been taking an evolutionary biology class for the last semester, as well. One sentence that I was completely sure what you were trying to say was, "Australian jurisdiction was analyzed using the distribution of species in congruence with phylogenic characteristics." I think it may be better to reword this sentence, but I did not know how to go about it without losing the meaning you were trying to convey, so I would urge you to relook at that one. Other than that, I think your wrote this article in a very informative way! Biol3010 evo bsp (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 11:54, 26 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

After reading through your article you did an excellent job describing the dimorphisms found in your species. My only suggestion is to break down your material a little further. For exmaple, make sure to define scientific terms like polymorphism or terms editor mentioned above. Overall, great article! Mdanzo0807 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 05:22, 29 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'm a bit confused by the statement: "There are nine species of Lampropholis delicata across Eastern Australia." The convention with scientific nomenclature is that a 2-word name indicates a single species, so this sentence does not make sense. Do you mean there are 9 subspecies of Lampropholis delicata, or that there are 9 species of Lampropholis? ~~A reader~~ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.245.171.109 (talk) 21:59, 9 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Revision #2

Great job with the article. In the article as a whole, I made some slight revisions in an effort to make the article more concise. Throughout the article, you made references to the results of research studies. Even though these weren’t to specific studies, the article should focus more on the color dimorphism present within the rainbow skinks than the conclusions made by these researchers. I made a couple of revisions to remove these references to “researchers.” You mention a couple of reasons why this dimorphism developed and continues to persist, but I think you can be a little more clear as to the mechanisms that are involved within each one of these. For example, you mention that the color dimorphism “affects the mate selection process and influences survival rates in males.” How exactly does it affect the selection process? Which morphs confer better survival rates? Which morphs confer more chances to mate with a female? Another example would be in the third paragraph where you talk about the environment affecting the survival rates of the rainbow skink. In a future draft, perhaps you could elaborate on precisely how the environment plays a role in the rainbow skink’s survival. Great job! Weightedswim94 (talk) 15:48, 15 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The majority of my edits were in sentence structure and rewording to improve clarity. There were times when it wasn't clear which species you were talking about, especially after discussing a related species to the delicate skink. In general, I think this article has great information and is clearly described, but could include more detail when statements are made. For example, as discussed in the previous revision from another student, it says "this particular dimorphism affects the mate selection process and influences survival rates in males," but no details are given about how exactly it affects survival, or which morph is preferred. This also applies to the third paragraph under the Color Dimorphism section--I think this information could use more detail and better explain how the environment might allow for some morphs to survive better than others, whether that be based on color and camouflage in the area, or sexual selection. Finally, I think a lot of detail and attention can be given to this statement: "The ultimate causes behind the dimorphism remain unclear because it takes more than genetics to evoke evolution." I'm not entirely sure what this means, but I'm sure it suggests a lot about how these color polymorphisms are maintained and restricted to some locations. Do you mean that both genetics and environment play a role in the polymorphisms?? If so, how and in which areas? I think you used very useful resources, but in general, more detail and explanation could be added to the statements made! I think this will help you better answer our general question about why this color polymorphism has evolved.

Anonymous4715 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 00:54, 16 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

make sure to not be repetitive--you talk about the "ultimate cause of the dimorphism" being unknown a couple of times throughout your article. Overall, great!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mdanzo0807 (talk • contribs) 05:05, 16 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Revision # 2

In this revision I took all the reviews into consideration and added more information on how the dimorphsim occurs and its advantageous and disadvantageous affect on the species. I also added more information relating to the presence of the dimorphism in each individual sex as it is different between males and females. In addition to the rewording and adding additional information, I linked this species page to the invasive species page and the crypsis page as well as added links to the thermoregulation, crpysis, sexual selection, and dimorphism page to add more clarity to the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anon 2214 (talk • contribs) 04:43, 9 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Lampropholis delicata. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:27, 16 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Citations needed

Hello @Ritusidgal: That's a lot of good expanded information there, however could you add citations as to where you got it all from. Thanks. Invasive Spices (talk) 17:20, 5 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Some new additions

Hi! I saw that there were a few weird formatting errors within the references and have made the adequate adjustments to ensure that the references can be easily accounted for and accessed by the reader.

I created a reproduction section and added information to it from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/297734402_Biology_of_the_invasive_delicate_skink_Lampropholis_delicata_on_Lord_Howe_Island correctly cited it on the wikipedia. This reference shows up as resource 20 on the wikipedia page.

Comments for Class

Hi all. There was some weird formatting stuff going on with the lead, which I changed. However, when doing so, I accidentally deleted citations from the article. I am so sorry, I had no idea that this would happen. This article is really well written. I tried to add some citations back, but I am sure that this is not complete. Again, I am so sorry for my mistake.Tulipsareverypretty (talk) 17:35, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, the edits I made as part of the class assignment are as follows: I created a lead section by moving the first paragraph that was in the Description and Identification section to the beginning of the article and added some sentences that summarized important points from the article. I also made some minor grammatical edits throughout the article and added within-text links so that readers can look at Wikipedia articles about the topic for more context. The links I made are for: Lord Howe Island, sexual dimorphism, L. guichenoti, spermatogenesis, and vitellogenic. Overall, good job on the article! It was well-written and easy to follow. Vportugal (talk) 02:33, 19 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Small Edits

Hello! You've written a very thorough and well-informed article, good job! I just italicized all the lizard Latin names throughout the page. I also consolidated some of the headings into subheadings (such as the Hawaii invasive paragraph under the pest heading). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Quill Quips (talk • contribs) 02:11, 14 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]