Talk:Clonostachys rosea f. rosea

Problem with link to Clonostachys genus

I noticed that when I clicked on the link to Clonostachys in the taxobox, that the link went to a genus of plants with the same synonym. Apparently there needs to be some kind of disambiguation page created. Anyone have any suggestions?

I tried looking at the Clonostachys genus to find a picture. Anyone have a free picture of Clonostachys rosea f. rosea to add to the article?

WriterHound (talk) 18:25, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

• I've made a disambig at Clonostachys. I believe that Clonostachys rosea is the only member of the fungus genus Clonostachys [1]. If that is correct it should be mentioned here I guess. Juzhong (talk) 05:27, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

Benefit Section

RE:Biofuel, To say that C. rosea doesn't generate CO2 emisions is idiotic. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.48.216.233 (talk) 05:03, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

I've removed this misplaced statement about emissions, because clearly the hydrocarbons that this fungus produces would create CO2 emissions if burned. Also, I paraphrased the point that Strobel makes about biofuel production using waste instead of food, and I corrected the related citation. Finally, I retitled this section, as the benefit garnered from using waste instead of food for fuel has socioeconomic implications. Mtobey (talk) 18:24, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

Bionectria ochroleuca

>Is it the anamorph? Are two articles needed ? --Pinof (talk) 10:06, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

Biofuels Section

Dr. Gary Strobel had a new paper (Microbilogy (2010), 156, 3814-3829) about the strain found in the Patagonian Forest. They made a mistake, it's not a Clonostachys rosea strain who produce hydrocarbons founds in diesel, they corrected it's a Ascocoryne sarcoides. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Salome Zaldua (talk • contribs) 21:08, 23 March 2011 (UTC)