Talk:Metarhizium granulomatis/Archive 1

Archive 1

Belauoft's peer review

Hello Navlall,

Below are my suggestions, I hope you benefit from them, and if anything seems unclear feel free to reach out to me.

• Be careful makes sure that all the genus and specie names are italicized, you can do this by placing two single quotation marks at the being and end of the word, like so Paecilomyces viridis and like so Metarhizium virile .

• It would be nice to see links to other wikipedia pages using internal links. The is accomplished via the us of two square brackets at the start and end of a word, like so conidia .

• You're missing a lead section:

I think your could mention the importance of fungal infections on reptiles. Here is an article that can help you with this: https://journals-scholarsportal-info.myaccess.library.utoronto.ca/pdf/15575063/v24i0003/267_fiirep.xml

• History and Taxonomy Section':

Around the genus Paediomyces, place an internal link.

If possible, elaborated on the pathology of your assigned species, is there a particular way it infects it's host? Is there a particular method used by the host? If so what is it, because simply saying that the pathology of your assigned species is like the pathology of Paecilomyces viridian leaves the reader confused, it would be nice to know in what way is it similar.

• Growth and Morphology :

Around phialide, place an internal link.

Built points three to five and seven appear to be misplaced, I feel that it would be more suitable if they were placed under the section titled physiology.

• Route of infection

Around cutaneous , place an internal link.

You mentioned that different species act as potential vectors, could you further elaborate on this point.

• I was thinking that it would be better to remove the section Sequencing methods and place all that information under the section titled Isolation. You don't have to do this if you find more information about the sequencing methods.

Belauoft (talk) 23:23, 30 October 2018 (UTC)

Elizanpa's peer review

Hi Navlall,

Here are some of my suggestions that hopefully would be of help to you:

• Don't forget to put a lead section summarizing the important points about your fungus. Its basically the part where you talk about/introduce your fungus. Here is a good link to surely help you Wikipedia:How to create and manage a good lead section.

History and taxonomy

• I noticed that you mentioned that Chamaeleomyces granulomatis is the former name for your fungi. It would be helpful to mention it as a synonym in your taxobox

• I think it would be better to concise the points talking about the similarity of M. granulomatis to Paecilomyces viridis (pathology) and to M. viride (phylogentically) into one.

• In your <refname = kepler2017 /> article, I read that the genus Metarhizium typically infect arthropods. I would suggest finding more information about how M. granulomatis came to infect vertebrate hosts, particularly reptiles (DNA sequence information, evolution?). Also, I noticed that you made a mistake on the article published date - I believe its 2014, not 2017

• The last point would be a good information in your lead section

Growth and morphology

• Your Kepler article (ref #3) also mentioned about the Metarhizium genus producing pigmented conidia. I would suggest looking more into that and including it in your article

Physiology

• Your points about conidia structure and shape, nodules, and diameter would fit better in the growth/morphology section

• You have good points relating to the pathogenic effects of M. granulomatis. Since your fungus is basically a disease in chameleons, I think a "Pathogenicity" or "Pathology" section would make more sense than "Physiology" (unless your fungus produces metabolites/substances or changes its morphology to cause disease?). You can also incorporate your "Route of infection" section here as a subheading.

• I think it would help the readers understand the context better if you could add internal links, providing a definition of some terms (i.e phialides, glossitis etc)

Sequencing methods

• I would suggest just incorporating this information maybe in the history/taxonomy section

Isolation

• I think these points would fit better in the pathogenicity section

Elizanpa (talk) 04:22, 1 November 2018 (UTC)

Ningyu's peer review

Hello Navlall, Here are my suggestions, i hope it can help you:

• Please be careful with the genus and species names, they should be italicized. To italicize a word, you should place two single quotation marks at the being and end of the word.
• Also, remember to put the internal link for some word, which will be helpful when people read.
• For Synonyms part, i found that there are actually synonyms for this fungus, you can check this website for further information: http://www.speciesfungorum.org/GSD/GSDspecies.asp?RecordID=806081 .
• Don't forget to put a lead paragraph.
• It will be nice to find if there is a treatment or not and mention it.

History and Taxonomy

• It would better to point out who found it and named it, and maybe why they change its name.
• Since it was originally named Chameleomyces granulomatis, you can add it to Synonyms part.
• If possible, try to find the origin of Metarhizium granulomatis by reading some fungi books in library, usually it is easier to find in the book.

Growth and Morphology

• I found an article says that it grows in captive veiled chameleons (either as pet or in zoological enclosures), may be add this point. Here is the article: https://jcm.asm.org/content/55/3/832.full
• You may also add that what kind of substance (as food) that Metarhizium granulomatis prefer to grow with.
• It is great that you mention growth temperature but you can combine first point to the second point, since they both talk about growth temperature.

Physiology

• Great summary, but try to put points together.

Route of infection

• Try to elaborate Cutaneous route, like which kind of animal's skin...

Sequencing methods & Isolation

• You can combine these two section together, they are pretty much same thing.

Reference

• Try to find more reference, like book and article, to give a strong scientific basis to this fungi.