Talk:Sarcosphaera

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
Good articleSarcosphaera has been listed as one of the Natural sciences good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
May 12, 2010Good article nomineeListed
Did You Know
A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on May 17, 2010.
The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that a specimen of the bioaccumulator fungus Sarcosphaera coronaria (example pictured) was found to contain the highest concentration of arsenic ever reported in a mushroom?

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Ucucha 20:43, 8 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • Lead could be a little longer.
  • There should be a template for this! Now longer. Sasata (talk) 17:36, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm used to placing the binomial in the |name= parameter of the taxobox for monotypic genera, but upon looking around a little, I'm not sure this is universal practice.
  • I'd go with whatever consensus there was on this, but you're right, there doesn't appear to be any. I've used the same format with FAs Polyozellus and Rhodotus, so at least it's consistent. Sasata (talk) 05:22, 12 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • "A snowbank fungus"—explain
  • I can't entirely follow the taxonomy section. It appears that the other supposed Sarcosphaera species are synonyms of S. coronaria, rather than species which have been moved elsewhere, but this is not clear from the text. Why does Caulocarpa montana merit its own paragraph when all the other synonyms don't?
    • Getting better now. Is there a reason Caulocarpa montana isn't listed in the taxobox?
  • I was trying to figure a way to distinguish between the generic synonym Caulocarpa and the species synonym Caulocarpa montana, but am not sure the best way to do this (or even if it's that important, as it's obvious from the text). Have inserted the species synonym now. Sasata (talk) 17:17, 12 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Any taxonomic context (what family does it belong to, what is it related to)? I listed a few papers below that discuss this.
  • "Microscopic characteristics" has a few jargon problems: hyaline, apex, septate are unexplained; asci is explained at second instead of first occurrence.
  • "Mature specimens somewhat resemble the "earthstar scleroderma" (Scleroderma polyrhizum), but this yellowish-brown species does not have the purple coloration of Sarcosphaera coronaria."—I don't think this sentence is supported by the next ref (to the synonymy of Peziza ammophila).
  • "remiiscent of rhubarb—was it so bad that you ran away halfway through typing out that quote?
  • Argh! I finished the quote but now cannot find the ref from which it came. Will remove it if I can't find it again in the next couple days. Sasata (talk) 16:11, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • The raw data about the content of the fruit bodies seems a little too much for the article.
  • Now moved to a footnote (thanks, btw, for the #tag trick, didn't know that one). Sasata (talk) 17:17, 12 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Any more precise data on its European distribution? Also, it's been found in the Asian part of Turkey, so that should be mentioned separately.
  • European distribution now given in much more detail in a footnote. Sasata (talk) 05:22, 12 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Typically, the arsenic content of mushrooms collected from unpolluted areas is lower than 1 mg/kg."—mushrooms in general or Sarcosphaera mushrooms?
  • Clarified (mycorrhizal fungi). Sasata (talk) 17:36, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Now off to some nitpicking in the refs:

  • No online source for Auerswald 1869?
  • You have two Czech journals with what is apparently the Czech name for the mushroom in the title ("banky velkokalisne", depending on case), but in one the Czech name is translated with the scientific name, and in another with "violet crown-cap".
  • I was just using the translations provided by the Web of Knowledge, but I see the problem. However, I was unable to determine the meaning of neither velkokalisne nor velkokalisnou with a search, so am unsure how I should fix this. I'll find a Czech speaker to translate for me if I decide to take this one to FAC. Sasata (talk) 17:27, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • I believe velkokalisne and velkokalisnou are both declined forms (most likely dative and instrumental, respectively), so not the forms you'd find in the dictionary. All this is of very little consequence of course, and I doubt many people would even notice the discrepancy. Ucucha 21:21, 12 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • No title for Lundell and Nannfeldt (1953)?
  • Fixed (was a book series, not a journal). Sasata (talk) 17:27, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Now the title and the trans_title don't match, though. "Fungi exsicccati" doesn't mean "Publications from the Herbarium". Ucucha 17:47, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Changed trans_title to series; cannot translate the title (can you help?). Sasata (talk) 17:17, 12 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • If Medel et al. 2006 is in Spanish, why don't you have a Spanish title?
  • No publisher for Schröter 1893?
  • Added (+ location + trans_title). Sasata (talk) 17:27, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • All seem reliable enough.
  • Images look good (all from Mushroom Observer).

Source check:

Title: Macrofungi of Karci Mountain (Denizli, Turkey)
Author(s): Gezer, Kudret; Ekici, Fatma Taskin; Turkoglu, Aziz
Source: Turkish Journal of Botany Volume: 32 Issue: 1 Pages: 91-96 Published: 2008
  • Not very interesting, except that it confirms that it's been found in Asian Turkey. There are a couple other similar ones.
Title: Minor element and heavy metal contents of wild growing and edible mushrooms from Western Black Sea Region of Turkey
Author(s): Konuk, M; Afyon, A; Yagiz, D
Source: FRESENIUS ENVIRONMENTAL BULLETIN Volume: 16 Issue: 11A Pages: 1359-1362 Published: 2007
  • More chemical contents. (This appears twice in Web of Knowledge, and the second one spells the authors as "Komk" and "Yagz"; haven't checked which is correct.)
Excellent! Added Sasata (talk) 05:22, 12 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Title: Heavy metals in edible mushrooms in Italy
Author(s): Cocchi, L; Vescovi, L; Petrini, LE, et al.
Source: FOOD CHEMISTRY Volume: 98 Issue: 2 Pages: 277-284 Published: 2006
  • Added as supplementary citation. Sasata (talk) 16:11, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Title: Molecular and morphological diversity of pezizalean ectomycorrhiza
Author(s): Tedersoo, L; Hansen, K; Perry, BA, et al.
Source: NEW PHYTOLOGIST Volume: 170 Issue: 3 Pages: 581-596 Published: 2006
  • Suggesting it's ectomycorrhizal.
Title: Scanning electron microscopy use in identification of spores of poisonous macrofungi.
Author(s): Lazar, Z.; Pal-Fam, F.
Source: Mikologiai Kozlemenyek Volume: 42 Issue: 1/2 Pages: 45-70 Published: 2003
  • Has a description of the spores, which may be helpful.
Title: Geopora sumneriana, an often overlooked, but common spring ascomycete.
Author(s): Stijve, T.
Source: AMK Mededelingen Issue: 3 Pages: 80-84 Published: 2002
  • Another similar species.
Title: Phylogenetics of the Pezizaceae, with an emphasis on Peziza
Author(s): Hansen, K; Laessoe, T; Pfister, DH
Source: MYCOLOGIA Volume: 93 Issue: 5 Pages: 958-990 Published: 2001
Title: Towards a subordinal classification of the Pezizales (Ascomycota): phylogenetic analyses of SSU rDNA sequences.
Author(s): Landvik, S; Egger, KN; Schumacher, T
Source: NORDIC JOURNAL OF BOTANY Volume: 17 Issue: 4 Pages: 403-418 Published: 1997
Title: Macrofungi of beech forests in the northern part of Czestochowa Upland (southern Poland)
Author(s): Adamczyk, Jolanta
Source: Lejeunia Volume: 0 Issue: 150 Pages: 1-83 Published: 1996
  • European distribution (including Poland) now covered. Sasata (talk) 17:17, 12 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • It's a pretty long paper which suggests that it may have useful ecological data. Ucucha 21:13, 12 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Title: Comparative study of elongated and globose Woronin bodies using electron energy loss spectroscopy (EELS) and imaging (ESI)
Author(s): Turnau, Katarzyna; Kottke, Ingrid; Oberwinkler, Franz
Source: Mycological Research Volume: 97 Issue: 12 Pages: 1499-1504 Published: 1994
This may have some material to include, will check at the library. Sasata (talk) 17:17, 12 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Title: ARSENIC ACCUMULATION IN SOME HIGHER FUNGI
Author(s): STIJVE, T; VELLINGA, EC; HERRMANN, A
Source: PERSOONIA Volume: 14 Pages: 161-166 Part: 2 Published: 1990
  • May not add to what you already have on the subject
  • I think the arsenic accumulation aspect is pretty well covered now, but I do have this journal in the library and will check it next time I'm there. Sasata (talk) 17:17, 12 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Title: TRANSFER RNAPHE AND MODIFIED FLUORESCENT NUCLEOSIDES IN SEVERAL SPECIES OF FUNGI
Author(s): SEIGLEMURANDI, F; STEIMAN, R
Source: PHYTOCHEMISTRY Volume: 20 Issue: 9 Pages: 2093-2096 Published: 1981
The fungus has an unusual tRNAPhe, but its pretty esoteric so am leaving it out for now. Will rethink before FAC.Sasata (talk) 17:17, 12 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I would include it. Not necessary for GA of course. Ucucha 21:13, 12 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Title: PEZIZALES OF ISRAEL .2. PEZIZACEAE
Author(s): AVIZOHARHERSHEN.Z
Source: ISRAEL JOURNAL OF BOTANY Volume: 23 Issue: 3 Pages: 151-163 Published: 1974
  • No summary given, but an Israel record would be outside the range you have now.
  • I found a different, more recent source to verify Israeli distribution. Sasata (talk) 05:22, 12 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Title: SARCOSPHAERA-CRASSA NEW COMBINATION THE CORRECT NAME FOR SARCOSPHAERA-CORONARIA PEZIZACEAE
Author(s): POUZAR Z
Source: Ceska Mykologie Volume: 26 Issue: 1 Pages: 32-36 Published: 1972

Why is this fungus such a favorite with the Czechs? A lot of these look either very esoteric or unlikely to add to the information you have now, but a few (like the Israeli record and the phylogeny papers) do seem promising. Ucucha 20:43, 8 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • Nice review! Yeah, the taxonomy section is weak... I will buff it up and the other issues as well this weekend. Thanks! Sasata (talk) 21:11, 8 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Update: have added a few more sources, some others I can't access, and a few others are in print form in the library. I also need to visit the library to work on the taxonomy section, so it will have to wait a few days. Sasata (talk) 16:11, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • I struck some. I'll have a look later whether I can access those. Ucucha 17:47, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • I've expanded the taxonomy section the best I could without actually going to the library. Reduced summer hours are making it difficult for me to find a time to go there, but it'll get done eventually. Although not totally comprehensive, I think it's good enough for GA, dontcha think?
Sure. There isn't much left open here, and it certainly meets the GA criteria. I'm passing it now. Ucucha 21:13, 12 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Sarcosphaera&oldid=1205195782"