Talk:Suillus luteus

Bookmarks

Wow, trying to digest this. Need to chase Sagara 1995. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 04:20, 29 July 2015 (UTC)

Yes, interesting ... I started ammonia fungi a while back, but did not realize S. luteus was in this group. Sagara 1995 is here: [1]. Sasata (talk) 04:54, 29 July 2015 (UTC)

More - [2] and [3] Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 13:52, 3 August 2015 (UTC)

• "In Europe, the related Suillus grevillei is found under larch and has a yellow ring..." Cas, can you check that Haas source and see if maybe it says yellow cap? Sasata (talk) 05:26, 5 August 2015 (UTC)

Yep, a typo..what was I thinking....Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 05:54, 5 August 2015 (UTC)

• Do we want to include a "Bioactive compounds" or "Chemistry" section with discussion of exotic chemicals like this PMID 18205114, PMID 22324410, PMID 17061830? A secondary source discussing suillumide is here. Sasata (talk) 20:21, 5 August 2015 (UTC)

In two minds about this, I often come across papers where some compound is isolated from a mushroom and am inclined not to use it if there is no immediate practical application (i.e. if an antimelanoma drug had been developed and marketed then maybe). Medical/plant/fungus/invertebrate articles would otherwise be filled with many thousands of potentially useful chemicals, 99% of which would not ever be used. However if you want to add I am not fussed. I think medical editors may not be happy though... Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 02:50, 6 August 2015 (UTC)

• Include this? "A case of mushroom poisoning from Suillus luteus". Mentioned in a secondary source here ("Apparently, only a single case has been reported") Sasata (talk) 20:49, 5 August 2015 (UTC)

yes, I can't see the book from google au but I think adding both is interesting, particularly how he tested exposure on himself Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 02:45, 6 August 2015 (UTC)

• Some basic nutritional info is found here in Spanish, but I can't figure out what the values mean (% of dry/fresh weight?) There's some other S. luteus info throughout this book that might be worth including (it's freely searchable). Sasata (talk) 22:59, 5 August 2015 (UTC)

Aha ... found it in a different source ("Datos en porcentaje sobre peso seco") Sasata (talk) 23:03, 5 August 2015 (UTC)

What else you wanna do before a GA nom? I was looking for some tourism stuff as busloads of polish and ukrainian people in Sydney drive beyond the city outskirts to radiata plantations to pick these: [4][5][6] - last one is possibly a reliable source....Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 14:16, 13 August 2015 (UTC)

I think it's ready for a GA nom. The tourism info is interesting, and I agree the last website could be used to source this. Sasata (talk) 14:44, 13 August 2015 (UTC)

yeah its funny - every autumn (Easter) buses are organised and are full of Poles and Ukrainians heading out to these plantations 1.5 hrs out of Sydney. Many Polish friends of mine have gone. One of my earliest memories is eating Suillus luteus/granulatus in NZ with my dad...but I didn't like them much - saffron milk caps nicer ++ Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:39, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

• there's more more taxonomic wrangling about S. luteus as the type of Suillus in JSTOR 1220899 ... how much of this do we want to include here (vs. in the genus article?) Sasata (talk) 23:56, 15 August 2015 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Suillus luteus/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: J Milburn (talk · contribs) 19:47, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

Happy to offer a review, but only a few minutes right now. I'll offer an initial few comments and then finish up later tonight/tomorrow. Josh Milburn (talk) 19:47, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

• "in a different family as well as genus" and "produces spore-bearing fruit bodies" I don't know if this is meant for easy-of-understanding for the lead, but do these not include redundant information? (You also link "spore" twice.)

I guess I am trying to think of a way to highlight how distant the relation to B. edulis actually is - i.e. different family. However I could just write "distantly related"...? Second "spore" delinked Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 21:00, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

• What does "in subordo Suilli" mean?

I have linked it to Order_(biology)#Hierarchy_of_ranks as it is Latinized suborder, though not sure that at this early point in Linnean taxonomy how exact that meaning is... Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 20:57, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

• Changed to "Batsch placed both of these species, along with B. bovinus and the now obsolete names Boletus mutabilis and B. canus, in a grouping of similar boletes he called "subordo Suilli"." Subordo translates to suborder, but his usage is not analogous to what the term means today. Sasata (talk) 21:00, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

• Just a little thing, but as this is originally a European species, would British dates not be preferable? If you're set on the current format, that's fine!

yeah, I Britishized the dates as I'd already put accessdates in that format anyway Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 20:53, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

• "This species is one of the few members of the genus Suillus that sport such a ring" This doesn't quite work

tweaked Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 10:54, 15 August 2015 (UTC)

• "with dimensions of 14–18 μm" I assume that's the width- how about the length

• Oops .. now added. Sasata (talk) 18:53, 15 August 2015 (UTC)

• "In North America, Suillus borealis and S. pseudobrevipes have similar with veils"

tweaked Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 10:54, 15 August 2015 (UTC)

• "In Ecuador, Pinus radiata plantations were planted extensively around Cotopaxi National Park, and Suillus luteus boletes appear year-round in abundance, with a 1985 field study estimating 3000–6000 mushrooms per hectare—unlike its seasonal nature elsewhere" This doesn't quite work

reworded like this, then? Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:09, 15 August 2015 (UTC)

• " In a Finnish study, researchers found that 70–95% of fruit bodies in an intermediate stage of growth were infested with larvae. In contrast, fruit bodies collected from pine plantations were relatively free of larvae." Are these really comparable? Where were the first lot from/what stage of growth were the second lot?

• I've reworded this a bit to hopefully stress not the direct comparison between collections from different studies, but that slippery jacks in their native habitats are far more buggy than those in artificial pine plantations. Sasata (talk) 19:18, 15 August 2015 (UTC)

• "Slippery jacks should be consumed quickly after picking as they do not keep well" A bit how-to

trimmed - was self-explanatory anyway Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:14, 15 August 2015 (UTC)

• " However, some people may find slippery jacks excessively slippery. Gastrointestinal symptoms could be due to high levels of the sugar alcohol arabitol." I assume you forgot to add a reference, here?

• I searched for a reference for this statement, unsuccessfully. I have commented out this part, and will remove before a future FAC if it can't be sourced. Sasata (talk) 18:53, 15 August 2015 (UTC)

Your sources all look fine (a long list!)- I'm not going to quibble about formatting errors, but I recommend looking through before moving on to FAC if that's your aim. (Could you take a look at the Edible & Toxic Fungi of Cyprus source, though? Was it published in English?). Images all look good. I'll admit to being a little distracted while I read this, but I'm confident that it's basically GA-ready. Josh Milburn (talk) 21:50, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

And please double-check my copyedits! Josh Milburn (talk) 21:51, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

they look fine Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:09, 15 August 2015 (UTC)

The Cyprus source is in Greek. I sent a message to the IP editor who added it, asking for a page number. Sasata (talk) 19:33, 15 August 2015 (UTC)

now added. Sasata (talk) 07:00, 16 August 2015 (UTC)

Great- I'm more than happy that this is at GA level. If you're looking FAC-wards, another pair of eyes on the prose probably wouldn't hurt (it's a smidge choppy in places, but certainly OK for GA) and you may want to go through the sources with a fine-toothed comb: there's inconsistency on locations, possibly a few DOIs missing where they could be added, some italics where likely not necessary, etc. Again, not something that's a problem at this level, but something to think about. Anyway, great work, as ever. Promoting now. Josh Milburn (talk) 09:14, 16 August 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Suillus luteus. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131229003422/http://www.forestrytas.com.au/assets/0000/0254/tasforests_16_11_web.pdf to https://www.forestrytas.com.au/assets/0000/0254/tasforests_16_11_web.pdf

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) 19:54, 19 May 2017 (UTC)