Talk:Acanthurus coeruleus

This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Fishes Mid‑importance This article is part of WikiProject Fishes, an attempt to organise a detailed guide to all topics related to Fish taxa. To participate, you can edit the attached article, or contribute further at WikiProject Fishes. This project is an offshoot of the WikiProject Tree of Life.FishesWikipedia:WikiProject FishesTemplate:WikiProject FishesFishes articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article was the subject of an educational assignment in Fall 2013. Further details were available on the "Education Program:Washington University in St. Louis/Behavioral Ecology (Fall 2013)" page, which is now unavailable on the wiki.

Daily pageviews of this article A graph should have been displayed here but graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at pageviews.wmcloud.org

Overall, very nicely worded and comprehensive article. I have made a few edits, described below, and also I have a few suggestions...

Edits I've made: I reworded sentences in the first paragraph under 'feeding' and also put them in present tense instead of past, and I combined two sentences (on the competition with sea urchin) to make the thought flow better. I added a few hyphens between words that needed them, such as "fast-growing" and "low-biogenic". I also added a hyperlink to 'peripheral' in the wound healing section. I merged the second and third sentences in the 'social modes' section, as it was slightly awkward having that third sentence be so short. I added hyperlinks to 'damselfish' in the 'factors affecting social modes' section. I reworded some of the sentences in the 'factors affecting social modes' section, removing some of the thought breaks and improving upon the flow of the passage.

Suggestions: I think you should add a citation after you mention that the fish are not effective at processing cellulose, and also after the sentence talking about territories with high vs low biogenic structure. Do you have anything more to say about cleaning behavior? I think that this section is fine by itself, but it would be much better if you could add some details about their specific cleaning behavior, etc. Alternatively, you also have the choice of merging the sections titled "cleaner interactions" and "cleaning behavior". I would also suggest adding the scientific name for the green sea turtle. Can you possibly also explain fish posing more, i.e. why a fish who poses is more likely to be cleaned; I think that would help that section make more sense. In the 'social modes' section, you should probably add more citations to the sentences in the paragraph itself, not just saving the citations for the very end of the paragraph.

Overall, this is a very good contribution. In order to achieve Good Article status, I would suggest adding at least one or two pictures, and if you can, perhaps a distribution map (although I don't think that should be a complete imperative). I would also try to expand on general specs (i.e. stuff like life span, etc.) in the description section, and perhaps talk a little bit about the fishery of the tang (if there is information, that is). Nice job! Ldorn1227 (talk) 01:56, 28 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

There was very little included in this article other than the Behavior section, which was added by the author. I looked through the other sections, but made very few edits. I added the following hyperlinks: algae, ecological niche, intestinal lining, cellulose, aggressive, conspecific, congeneric.

It was unclear when the author said, “in this case they clean other fish” in the “Feeding” section, so I changed it to make more sense. I also rearranged some of the sentences because it wasn’t clear as it was. I also had to rework the sentences about sea urchin die off, and added in context about sharing ecological niches. The “Food Competition” section was much better written, and I made just a few edits on grammar and wording.

I ended up making a lot of wording changes and reworked a lot of sentence structure. The author should could consider taking some time to go back and read carefully through their work to clean everything up and make it more legible.

Suggestions for the author:

• You mention the sea urchin die off of “Diadema antillarum” but you do not explain this. Consider hyperlinking it if you can, or just providing more context.
• You say “as such the blue tangs may exploit more resources” in regards to the sea urchin die off. This is confusing; do they already exploit more resources, or do we expect to see them exploit more resources? Clarify what you mean here.
• I think you did a good job with the cleaning behavior section. This is clearly an important part of their feeding behavior. I would say, though, that you should talk a little bit about what kind of altruistic relationship this is and what that means.
• Talk about why the relationship with damselfish density is able to have an effect on factors affecting social modes. Do they occupy a similar ecological niche?
• Go back and look through your writing; it could use some work. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rgolds1203 (talk • contribs) 02:47, 31 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Rgolds1203 (talk) 02:51, 31 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Quick Note

I did end up removing the hyperlink to the sea urchin's scientific name, as the page didn't exist. Ldorn1227 (talk) 01:58, 28 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Under "Feeding":

• Do the blue tang specifically eat algae off of certain species? Or is it nonspecific? Just wondering..
• Was the sea urchin die-off a single event? If so, could you make it more clear by indicating a time period/date?
• Made a few minor grammatical changes

Under "Cleaning Interactions":

• It'd be neat to include a picture of a blue tang posing with a head stand. I looked around online for one but I unfortunately did not find anything.. If someone else does, please add it to the article!

Under "Value":

• Perhaps give this section a different title, or merge this section with "Relationship with humans"?
• It might also be interesting to include more information about the caudal spine -- does it come out mainly when the fish is threatened? That's the impression this section seems to give.

Overall, all the sections were well-written and organized. The use of the subheadings made it easy to follow, and the information was presented in a clear manner that was still thorough while not being too wordy. Lucialemon (talk) 02:13, 1 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Great work! The depth of this article is awesome. You really made great contributions to the behavioral sections. Here are a few suggestions for improvement/changes I made to the article:

I would like to see more information in the introduction. The intro should be a summary of the rest of the article. The reader should be able to glance over the intro and immediately know if the information they are searching for is likely to be found/covered in the article.

Add information of the average size/weight of the fish in the “Description” section.

I changed “The sea urchin Diadema antillarum die off led to a large increase in blue tang population, due to the fact that blue tangs and Diadema antillarum compete for the same algae and thus, occupy a similar ecological niche. After the death of these competitors, algae abundance increased and as such the blue tangs may exploit more resources” to “With the decline in the Diadema antillarum (sea urchin) population, the blue tang population increased since the algal resources that the two animals usually competed for were more abundant.” Claire.Edelman (talk) 20:37, 21 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]