Talk:Tremella mesenterica/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Ucucha 05:56, 2 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks kindly for reviewing!

~~Is there anything to say about its relationships within Tremella?~~

Good idea, done. Sasata (talk) 08:20, 2 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

~~Would it be better to make the mycobox just leave out a row instead of saying "N.A."~~

Yes, done. Sasata (talk) 08:20, 2 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

~~What are conidiophores and conidia?~~

Added explanation. Sasata (talk) 18:47, 2 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

~~Poplars and aspens are apparently about the same thing.~~

Indeed. I suck at tree biology... something else to learn I guess. Sasata (talk) 18:47, 2 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ucucha 05:56, 2 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

~~The sentence about T. fuciformis is not in the body of the article. Ucucha 06:04, 2 July 2010 (UTC)~~[reply]

I removed it, it was a remnant from before I started working on the article. Sasata (talk) 18:47, 2 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There are quite a few hits on Web of Knowledge—145. I haven't looked in detail, but will probably go through it tomorrow (working on a little bat now). Ucucha 18:57, 2 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Many of these articles are about chemical/biological analysis of polysaccharides produced by the fungus, and methods for optimizing polysaccharide production in liquid culture; I think most of these details will be of little interest to the casual reader (there is much less known about the medicinal properties of these compounds compared to those of its cousin, T. fuciformis). That being said, tonight I will add a paragraph or two to summarize this research. Sasata (talk) 21:00, 2 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The article certainly meets the GA criteria, so I'm passing it now. I think I'll wait a little with the literature review, if that's necessary at all. Thanks for the extra section. Ucucha 15:05, 3 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]