Talk:Tansy beetle/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Casliber (talk · contribs) 14:13, 27 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, taking a look. Will jot queries below and make straightforward fixes as I go. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 14:13, 27 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

~~Might make more sense to describe it as a chrysomelid/leaf beetle in lead rather than the genus it belongs to (which will not be familiar to any bar entomologists)~~

As it said one then the other, I've just deleted the Genus link, it appears in the taxobox and taxonomy sections anyway.

~~The lead is UK-centric as is. The distribution as a whole should be discussed and then the UK range written.~~

Hopefully resolved. There is something of a bias in the literature about the species, because most recent anglophone research is on the York population.

~~Add where the subspecies occur.~~ my bad - but move the subspecies section (with ranges) into taxonomy where subspecies mentioned.

Done

Add how the subspecies differ (in addition to the two noted).

It's only C. graminis auraria for which I can actually find a description of the morphological differences from C. graminis graminis. Not sure if you meant the description of differences with C. herbacea, which is a different species? Included here because the literature mentions that the common one has been mistaken for the much rarer one.

You have that already - I mean how are ssp artemisiae, mediterranea etc. different?

Ah I see. Well the only key to the morphological features that is available to me is the Bieńkowski 2010 paper. I can't find keys to the other subspecies elsewhere, and they aren't mentioned in the Bieńkowski paper because it is restricted to those present in countries of the former USSR; only C. graminis graminis and C. graminis auraria actually key out there. The Beychne paper is available online but is in German. I just follow the Biolib ref and Bieńkowski's earlier, 2001, paper for the full list of 6 subspecies but they are just lists rather than keys. So I'm stumped. Zakhx150 (talk) 16:29, 28 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm, they must be somewhere...let me think on this...Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 11:50, 29 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The Bechyne paper is in French and is here google translate gives the description of ssp. mediterranea as "Large size, elytres ventrus a bit in females. Head more finely punctuated than the disc of the prothorax. Prothorax without the lateral calus, finer punctuated towards the coasts than in the typical breed, more or less distinctly angular near the middle, shrunk forward and back. . Elytres has a punctuation punctuation with little roughness except for the discal part, marginal interval wide but not very distinct in all its length. Long. 10-12 mm" - needs a French speaker to check/iron this out and add. Circeus speaks French (this subspecies C. graminis mediterranea is on page 85!). Will start looking for the others. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 14:40, 29 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Kudos. Zakhx150 (talk) 16:35, 29 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I believe large here means "wide" and taille (which under b) is described as "fine", i.e. "narrow) should thus translate to "waist" (your guess is as good as mine as to what he's referring to, though).
It says "Finer punctuation toward the sides" (the accent is important!).
I believe rétréci better translates as "narrowing", not "shrunk".

Attempt at an improved translation: "Thick/wide waist, elytras slightly protruding in females. Head more finely punctuated than the disc of the prothorax. Prothorax without lateral calus, more finely punctuated toward the sidess than in the typical breed, more or less distinctly angular near the middle, narrowing toward front and back. Elytra punctuation show slight roughness except for the discal part, marginal interval wide but poorly distinct over its entire length. Length 10-12 mm" (additionally/for reference, nominal subspecies is said to be 7-11mm long, have a calus, a "less transversal clypeus" whatever that means, very variable punctuation of the elytra, and a marginal interval that is indistinct only "at/toward the back"). Circéus (talk) 17:46, 29 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for this @Circeus:, much obliged. @Casliber: - this addition has been put in, I've removed the original table and included the morphological features under 'Description' with the descriptions of other subspecies so far available.

Right, now santonici - Contarini described it as a species in 1847 on page 189 of this book. The name takes precedence over the other subspecies name (schallehni REINEC) for this taxon (the other page, which isn't opening now for some reason, has notes on schallehni IIRC). Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 09:15, 30 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

So I've tried a ham-fisted Google Translate/Wiktionary partial translation of this. Uncertain or obviously clunky parts I've highlighted in bold and comments in italics: "Black mouth and palps, antennae slightly enlarged at the apex, and longer chest length, with the first two articles of the base of the pitch the others (still describing antennae I guess) of a dull bronze like the feet, all under the body, but glossy. Elytra irregularly pointed, black underneath, with the edge, suture and scutellum of a ramineo (no idea. Iridescent?) green. Abdomen red with four brown spots, and apex ramineo. Red wings, with base, and jaline (must be describing the wings) ribs. The wings have 8 veins, five of which are large. Found on salt banks (?) on santonico in August. (Santonico appears to be a plant, Artemisia caerulescens: http://www.kpss.si/it/il-parco/natura/le-piante-alofite/il-santonico)

Finally, christianiae is Mallet 1933. See the ref on page 214. I am having trouble finding stuff on it but thre are a couple of papers that turn up. @Circeus: might have some ideas on how to find that journal. Mr P-M Mallet might deserve a stub too.... Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 09:25, 30 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

In continental Europe, C. graminis spp. is widespread from Scandinavia to the Mediterranean Sea. - why the "spp." here?

Removed.

~~rather than write "phytophagous" why not just write "leaf/plant-eating"?~~

Opted for Herbivorous instead

@Casliber: Thanks for taking on the review [Rolls up sleeves]. Edits ahoy! Zakhx150 (talk) 12:08, 28 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

That would be Miscellanea Entomologica. The BHL run stops at volume 24. I had a quick look at Gallica (French national library digitization project), but no luck. You're on your own there. Circéus (talk) 03:26, 1 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Wrong ref, sorry. Full name is (jesus christs you nonbotanists BADLY need to standardize your periodical abbreviations!) Bulletin de l’Association des Naturalistes de la Vallée du Loing or something like that (the exact form varies a little and often includes references to Fontainebleau). It seems pretty obscure, but at least wit the longer name you,re better armed to locate it on- or offline. Circéus (talk) 03:31, 1 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for that, I had already spotted the full journal name and utterly failed to find it, even via the Open University's rather lovely journal access that I'm currently available to access. The journal and society are still going but that seems little help.Zakhx150 (talk) 20:10, 2 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Casliber:@Circeus: I'm drawing a blank here. Without this info where does this get the GA nom? Zakhx150 (talk) 18:48, 9 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, look I'll take it on board that information on the other is inaccessible and probably if/when we do find it will be meagre at best. Hang on....Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 22:52, 9 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

NB: Earwigs copyvio check clear Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 22:58, 9 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

1. Well written?:

Prose quality: