This article is part of WikiProject Hypericaceae, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of the plant family Hypericaceae and related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.HypericaceaeWikipedia:WikiProject HypericaceaeTemplate:WikiProject HypericaceaeHypericaceae articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Turkey, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Turkey and related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TurkeyWikipedia:WikiProject TurkeyTemplate:WikiProject TurkeyTurkey articles
link authorities in taxobox; authorities should be unspaced
Unspaced
link gland; Hypericum aegypticum
H. aegypticum is linked at its first mention in the lead
"It has a chromosome number of n=10." a bit factoid-y without any context … is this a typical, unusual, or significant number for this genus?
The genus exhibits a wide range of chromosome numbers. They have been used in other Hypericum species to determine relationships and hybridization
"The stems of Hypericum russeggeri have four lines" don't know what lines means in this context (prominent longitudinal ridges or grooves?)
They are longitudinal which I've specified, though I can't speak to their 3d characteristics
"They remain on the plant until its second season." is the implication that they then fall off?
They become deciduous, shedding once per year after the second year
link bracteole, deciduous
Done
FYI, the tegmen link goes to an insect-related, not botanical, term
Thank you, re-linked
"Most of its chemicals are present in the flowering structures" I think "secondary metabolites" is a more appropriate terms here than the generic "chemicals".
Changed to "phytochemicals", not all of which are necessarily secondary metabolites, at least to my understanding
is there anything more that could be said about the metabolites so that's it's more than just a list of names?
I wish there was, but neither paper goes into any more depth than listing concentrations of chemicals in various species
"first collected in 1836 by Theodor Kotschy and Ernest Coquebert de Montbret." could mention that they're botanists; Montbret could have an interlanguage link to French or German wikis if you think it's useful.
"its Syrian habitat" -> suggest "its occurrence in Syria" (a location isn't a "habitat")
Done, thank you
"and its similarity in appearance to Triadenia thymifolia (now Hypericum aegypticum subsp. webbii).[9]" does source 9 (written in 1842) really support this statement about current nomenclatural status?
Added POWO link to verify
link new combination; synonym, describe
Done
I think the lead should mention that this species is the type of its section
Done
"thus making it the type and only species of Hypericum section Adenotrias." suggest adding "…at that time, only species"
Done
I don't understand the taxonomy … if Engler was the one who transferred this taxon to Hypericum, why isn't his name given as the recombining authority? Who is "R. Keller"?
Got it, Engler is the editor of the book it was published in, R. Keller was the one who worked on the part of the book about Hypericum. I've clarified in the text, that took me a while to sort out lol.
"Enger moved the species into Hypericum, noting its previous placement in a separate genus was unacceptable" why was it unacceptable?
The differences between species didn't rise to the level of generic separation; I've changed the word to "unwarranted" to reflect this
Does the molecular phylogenetics work alluded to (" the species has continued to be retained in Hypericum since then") given any indication of its closest relatives in the genus (i.e., does it confirm the close relationship of the three sectional members?) In a similar vein, Hypericum aciferum is the other species in section Adenotrias but is not mentioned in this article (other than by name in the lead); should it be mentioned as a similar species (particularly since it's found in similar habitats)?
About the phylogenetics, no it doesn't. It just confirms the placement of the section as a whole, from which the placement of H. russeggeri can be inferred since it is the type. As for H. aciferum, I've added a sentence about its similarities to this species.
with such a limited distribution, a range map would seem to be a useful addition …
I've added a map
more categories? Taxa named by; Plants described in year; Flora of …
I think that's all I've got. Images are fine (properly licensed and captioned). Random spot checks show no problems. Promoting GA. Esculenta (talk) 13:59, 15 May 2024 (UTC)Reply
