Talk:Banksia prionotes/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Hi Cas, I'll be reviewing the article, in an attempt to help reduce the GAN backlog (that I'm contributing to). This will probably take me a few days to finish. Sasata (talk) 18:28, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

The article looks very good already. I did a first-pass copyedit, and added some more links, but feel free to revert if you don't agree with them. Here are my initial comments. I'll read through the article again later, and check references and reference formatting more closely. Sasata (talk) 16:50, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

Lede

*"The Acorn Banksia is pollinated by and provides food for a wide array of vertebrate and invertebrate animals in the autumn and winter months, and is an important source of food for honey-eaters, and is critical to their survival in the Avon Wheatbelt region, where it is the only nectar-producing plant in flower at some times of the year." Suggest this long sentence be split into two, which will help remove a repetitive "and"  Done

Description

*might it be possible to have a photo of the full-grown tree somewhere in the article? I know what the flowers look like, and the lower regions of a burned tree, but still don't have a good idea of what it looks like with its leaves at full-size. (can do)  Done

*the dimensions in the first paragraph are given in metric and imperial, whereas in the second paragraph only in metric.  Done

Physiology

*cite needed tag remains  Done

Taxonomy

*"A sheet at B. prionotes at CGE, labelled "Swan River, Drummond, 1839"," The acroynym CGE needs to be disambiguated; the expression "A sheet at B. prionotes" is awkward ''(CGE = University of Cambridge Herbarium) Casliber (talk · contribs) 14:52, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

*"George has confirmed the obvious" I don't know who George is until a couple of paragraphs later, perhaps this initial mention of George should be linked instead?  Done

*"In 1999, George overturned Thiele and Ladiges' arrangement," Am wondering if George's analysis used molecular data, and if not, why it would overturn the phylogenetic data of Thiele and Ladiges. (George is a classical botanist and has questioned the wholesale acceptance of cladistics. He maintains the importance of floral characteristics in determining taxonomy of the genus. This has been a topic of much discussion in the genus Banksia in recent years) Casliber (talk · contribs) 14:34, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

• "To date, this remains the most recent, and therefore current, arrangement. " recent=current=redundant? (removed 'current')

*"The resultant F1 hybrids are fully fertile, with seed set similar to that of the parent species." seed set? (ok, or reword?)

Ecology

*"...but allows it to put on its main growth for the year." "put on its growth" is an expression I've never heard before... is this Australian English? (no, just awkward. It grows mainly in the summer which is the dry period, but this is mentioned in description, so I just made it 'grow' instead) Casliber (talk · contribs) 13:55, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

*"Flowers open sequentially from bottom to top," bottom to top of the flower or the plant? (flower - explanation below. Casliber (talk · contribs) 14:26, 29 June 2009 (UTC))

• "with a peak rate of around two to three florets per hour..." does florets = flower? Didn't see this term used in the description.

Maybe in the description sentence "Flowers occur in a typical Banksia flower spike, an inflorescence made up of hundreds of flowers densely packed" florets could be mentioned parenthetically in there. Sasata (talk) 04:12, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

• (florets --> individual small flowers, or florets) Casliber (talk · contribs) 07:43, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

• cit needed tag needs to be dealt with

Conservation

*"meaning that the loss of B. prionotes from the region would mean the loss of all the honey-eaters as well." It might mean that, but it might not. Maybe it would be safer to say something like "the loss of B. prionotes from the region would severely affect the food source of honey-eaters as well." or something like that... not quite so definitive.

Thanks for the review. Just one quick comment for now: I'll double-check the source but I believe the "definitive" statement about the loss of B. prionotes meaning the loss of all the honey-eaters as well, is an accurate reflection of what those sources actually say. Hesperian 12:07, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

Okay, I've checked now. Walker (1995), p. 751, says:

"A second, more specific example of the importance of a single-species functional type comes from the wheatbelt in Western Australia, where Lambeck (1992) has shown that a single plant species, Banksia prionotes, is the only source of nectar during a critical period of the year when no other nectar-producing plants are in flower, and all the honeyeaters depend on it. The loss of this one species would result in the loss of all the honeyeaters from the region and, because many of the plants in the region depend on honeyeaters as vectors for pollination (Keighery 1982), the loss of the birds would have far-reaching effects on plant-species diversity."

Hesperian 12:59, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

Fair enough, thanks for confirming. Sasata (talk) 04:12, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

For Sasata, a Banksia inflorescence is made up of several thousand individual flowers. On an orange prionotes spike, the white bits at the top end are unopened flowers, while the orange section below is the flowers already opened. Casliber (talk · contribs) 14:26, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

Also - "seed set" means number of seeds produced. Will think on how to rephrase. Casliber (talk · contribs) 14:28, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

more comments Sasata (talk) 04:12, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

• I fact-checked some of the sources used in the article that I was able to access online, and everything checked out.
• I noticed that Lamont et al., (2003) mention that the distribution area of B. prionotes is "815 × 125 km (extending 600 km north and 360 km south-east from Perth)"; perhaps this could be included in the distribution section?
• If this were FAC, I would recommend checking out the following papers to see if they have any info worth including:

Conservation biology of banksias: insights from natural history to simulation modelling Author(s): Lamont, BB; Enright, NJ; Witkowski, ETF, et al. Source: AUSTRALIAN JOURNAL OF BOTANY Volume: 55 Issue: 3 Pages: 280-292 Published: 2007

Title: Does phenotypic plasticity in carboxylate exudation differ among rare and widespread Banksia species (Proteaceae)? Author(s): Denton, MD; Veneklaas, EJ; Lambers, H Source: NEW PHYTOLOGIST Volume: 173 Issue: 3 Pages: 592-599 Published: 2007

Title: Seedling growth and physiological responses of two sandplain Banksia species differing in flood tolerance Author(s): Groom, P. K. Source: Journal of the Royal Society of Western Australia Volume: 87 Issue: Part 3 Pages: 115-121 Published: SEP 2004

Title: Rooting depth and plant water relations explain species distribution patterns within a sandplain landscape Author(s): Groom, PK Source: FUNCTIONAL PLANT BIOLOGY Volume: 31 Issue: 5 Pages: 423-428 Published: 2004

In general, this is a very good article, and I will promote as soon as a couple of issues above are addressed. Now on hold. Sasata (talk) 04:12, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

GA review (see here for criteria)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS):

Prose is very well written – engaging and articulate. Article complies with MOS.

1. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c(OR):

   Well-referenced to reliable sources; one cite-needed tag remains.

2. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

   Thorough treatment of all important topics.

3. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

4. It is stable.

   No edit wars etc.:

5. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

   All images have appropriate free use licenses.

6. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

Pending a couple of revisions.

All suggestions/requests are addressed, so I will promote to GA. Excellent article! Sasata (talk) 03:46, 6 July 2009 (UTC)