Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Fungi/Archive 10

Archive 5

←

Archive 8

Archive 9

Archive 10

Archive 11

Archive 12

→

Archive 15

This page is an Archive of the discussions from WikiProject Fungi talk page (Discussion page). (January 2014 - December 2014) - Please Do not edit!

Plant diseases

A heads up. There a bunch of recently created articles on plant diseases (complete with taxobox) where there is already an existing stub on the pathogenic fungus that causes the disease. It looks like this is probably a class project of some sort. The new articles need some edits for Wikipedia style, and it's probably not necessary to have separate articles on pathogen and disease (certainly both articles shouldn't have the same taxobox). A few examples are tomato leaf mold, aspen trunk rot and banana freckle, more can be seen here. Plantdrew (talk) 21:11, 8 December 2014 (UTC)

I've seen quite a few of these too. I will help clean up as time permits. Sasata (talk) 22:58, 8 December 2014 (UTC)

Yeah, it's pretty routine to merge these things, unless a) the disease is caused by more than one species, or b) the species is notable for something other than the disease. I'm also occasionally running into junior synonyms of things having separate articles.  — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽^ʌⱷ҅_ᴥⱷ^ʌ≼  20:23, 10 August 2015 (UTC)

WikiCup 2015

Hi there; this is just a quick note to let you all know that the 2015 WikiCup will begin on January 1st. The WikiCup is an annual competition to encourage high-quality contributions to Wikipedia by adding a little friendly competition to editing. At the time of writing, more than fifty users have signed up to take part in the competition; interested parties, no matter their level of experience or their editing interests, are warmly invited to sign up. Questions are welcome on the WikiCup talk page. Thanks! Miyagawa (talk) 21:51, 29 December 2014 (UTC)

WikiProject X is live!

Hello everyone!

You may have received a message from me earlier asking you to comment on my WikiProject X proposal. The good news is that WikiProject X is now live! In our first phase, we are focusing on research. At this time, we are looking for people to share their experiences with WikiProjects: good, bad, or neutral. We are also looking for WikiProjects that may be interested in trying out new tools and layouts that will make participating easier and projects easier to maintain. If you or your WikiProject are interested, check us out! Note that this is an opt-in program; no WikiProject will be required to change anything against its wishes. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thank you!

Note: To receive additional notifications about WikiProject X on this talk page, please add this page to Wikipedia:WikiProject X/Newsletter. Otherwise, this will be the last notification sent about WikiProject X.

Harej (talk) 16:57, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

The most written about fungi we don't have

1. Glomus mosseae (Synonym), == Funneliformis mosseae Glomus (Glomeromycetes, Glomeromycota)
2. Gliocladium virens (synonym) = Trichoderma deliquescens, Trichoderma (Sordariomycetes, Ascomycota)
3. Glomus fasciculatum, (synonym) = Rhizophagus fasciculatus, Glomus (Glomeromycetes, Glomeromycota)
4. Aspergillus awamori, Aspergillus (Eurotiomycetes, Ascomycota)
5. Zygosaccharomyces rouxii, Zygosaccharomyces (Saccharomycetes, Ascomycota)
6. Candida lipolytica (synonym) = Yarrowia lipolytica, Yarrowia (monotypic) (Saccharomycetes, Ascomycota)
7. Ceratocystis ulmi (synonym) = Ophiostoma ulmi, Ophiostoma (Sordariomycetes, Ascomycota)
8. Mucor miehei (synonym) = Rhizomucor miehei, Rhizomucor (Not assigned, Zygomycota)
9. Rhodotorula rubra, Rhodotorula (Microbotryomycetes, Basidiomycota)
10. Gigaspora margarita, Gigaspora (Glomeromycetes, Glomeromycota)
11. Rhodotorula glutinis, Rhodotorula (Microbotryomycetes, Basidiomycota)
12. Trichophyton verrucosum, Trichophyton (Eurotiomycetes, Ascomycota)
13. Hansenula anomala (synonym) = Wickerhamomyces anomalus, Wickerhamomyces (Saccharomycetes, Ascomycota)
14. Penicillium verrucosum, Penicillium (Eurotiomycetes, Ascomycota)
15. Candida cylindracea, Candida (Saccharomycetes, Ascomycota)
16. Cryptococcus laurentii, Cryptococcus (Tremellomycetes, Basidiomycota)
17. Helminthosporium oryzae (synonym) = Cochliobolus miyabeanus, Cochliobolus (Dothideomycetes, Ascomycota)
18. Coniothyrium minitans (synonym) = Paraconiothyrium minitans, Paraconiothyrium (Dothideomycetes, Ascomycota)
19. Candida boidinii, Candida (Saccharomycetes, Ascomycota)
20. Trichoderma longibrachiatum, Trichoderma (Sordariomycetes, Ascomycota)

If you're looking for a fungus article to start, these could be good candidates. These are the binomial names of fungi species which we don't have articles for, with those found in the most books or volumes listed first. Only books published between 2000 and 2008 were counted. The results tend to skew heavily towards research papers/journals. Many of the synonyms just need a redirect (or perhaps a disambiguation page). —Pengo 01:40, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

Interesting - none are mushrooms, but some no doubt have an interesting story to tell.....Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 05:04, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

Very useful list, thanks. With the recent changes in fungal nomenclature (i.e., the "One Fungus-One Name" concept), many of these species have new names (or will have new names once all the taxonomy gets sorted out) ... so check your favorite nomenclatural database before tackling these unwritten articles. Perhaps when these get bluelinked, we could request the next 20 entries? Sasata (talk) 19:37, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

Yep, for sure. I was wondering if there'd been major nomenclature changes. For most other kingdoms I have included books published from 1950 onwards, but if I did that for the fungi then the most frequently found binomials were mostly synonyms (54 of the top 100), so I limited it to 2000 onwards, which reduced it to 36/100. (I could have just hidden synonyms, but I take it more of an indicator)

Here's the top 200 if you want to peak ahead. I'd be interesting in limiting a search to just mushrooms, but as I guess they're not monophyletic I've got no idea how I'd do it. —Pengo 22:19, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

New lichen in Dictyonema to be added

http://www.bioone.org/doi/full/10.1639/0007-2745-117.4.386 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:630:12:2430:ADF0:977:E61F:E225 (talk) 23:12, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

Added to genus page. Sasata (talk) 23:35, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

Inkcaps

I would like some advice here.

I find that inkcap is a redirect to Coprinopsis atramentaria, which states that its subject "is the second best known ink cap", the best known being C. comatus. So it would apparently make more sense for "inkcap" to redirect to the best-known species, or to be a disambiguation page. I was going to correct this, when it occurred to me that there may be a reason: Coprinopsis atramentaria is sometimes toxic while Coprinus comatus is good to eat. So maybe it is better, for safety reasons, to direct readers who look up "inkcap" to the page that warns about toxicity. Another possibility would be a disambiguation page with pictures.

What do people think? Maproom (talk) 16:51, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

A dab page would be a good idea, but there are more species involved than just these two. The British Mycological Society list of common names for fungi lists 16 species that have "inkcap" in their names. Sasata (talk) 17:37, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

New Essay

There is a new essay, "Identifying primary and secondary sources for biology articles", you are invited to comment on.DrChrissy ^(talk) 12:16, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

Merger of two genera (back in 2000!), big mess

So, rDNA sequencing in 2000–2001 merged Sphaerotheca into Podosphaera, as Podosphaera sect. Sphaerotheca, and WP has not caught up with the resulting taxonomic mess.

Sphaerotheca (fungus) still says it's a genus, but it's now a section of Podosphaera. To complicate matters, this Sphaerotheca has a subsect. (in the botanical sense; I'll abbreviate so we know I mean the botanical term not article sections) also named Sphaerotheca, as well as one named Magnicellulata, which doesn't exist on WP yet. Actually, two sources seem to commingle the spellings Magnicellulata and Magnicellulatae from one paragraph to the next. I'm running with the former, because the latter doesn't look right. Maybe the plural form is used when two or more species are referred to? One of them also refers to it as a sect. and a subsect. in the same paper, which I take to be a typo; it's a subsect., and Sphaerotheca is the sect.

Podosphaera has a second sect. also named Podosphaera, and whether it has any subsects. I know not.

There are lots of resultant binomial (and lower) reclassifications. The one I have the most details on is the merger of Sphaerotheca fuliginea into Podosphaera xanthii, as the comb. nov. Podosphaera (sect. Sphaerotheca) xanthii. At least one source (2008) wants to merge P. xanthii into P. fusca, but some sources as recent as 2011 continue to classify them separately, both in Podosphaera, sect. Sphaerotheca, subsect. Magnicellulata/Magnicelluatae. I believe some earlier (1990s?) sources may have also wanted to merge P. xanthii and P. fusca, but I have not identified any specifically, and they're surely moot anyway.

See Sphaerotheca fuliginea/sandbox for a rewrite of Sphaerotheca fuliginea (including the sources for all of the above notes), intended to be moved to Podosphaera xanthii, which presently redirects to Sphaerotheca fuliginea. What little info was present at the original P. xanthii stub, I have merged into the /sandbox draft, sans any synonyms that belong to P. fusca. I've started, at Talk:Sphaerotheca fuliginea#Requested move 10 August 2015 a WP:RM to history-merge Sphaerotheca fuliginea/sandbox into its parent page, and move the result to Podosphaera xanthii

I'll leave it for later peeps to figure out the P. fusca situation, and the rest of the Sphaerotheca → Podosphaera sect. Sphaerotheca cleanup. The sources I cited should provide most or all of the needed details as of 2001, but newer materials will be needed to do this properly. This whole area is a moving target, with physiological and genetic classification attempts clashing, new races popping up and being classified and reclassified, and so on. I'm not a subject-matter expert, and am out of my depth on that mess, and only have access to a few journal search services anyway.

A few other things:

Erysiphales#Genera equates Erysiphe and Oidium, but these exist as separate articles (the former a tiny stub). Euoidium is missing mention at Erysiphales, and is probably synonymous with Podosphaera, or with Sphaerotheca, or some other section or subsection of Podosphaera.

(groan) on the genera - will try and digest whrn I have more than a few minutes free. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 22:28, 10 August 2015 (UTC)

Coolio. I'm still adding a few bits here and there, but much of it's at powdery mildew, etc., not at the organism articles. I put most of the races info in the organism article sandbox, but the cultivar "arms race" details are going in the disease article. As for the sandbox, I think it's ready for "prime time", but I wanted some one with mycology brackground to give it a once-over first.  — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽^ʌⱷ҅_ᴥⱷ^ʌ≼  12:57, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

sigh....I hate seeing updates pop up...really need to sleep. later. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 13:12, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

No article on chasmothecium

Missing article: chasmothecium (plural chasmothecia), a feature of fungal biology.  — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽^ʌⱷ҅_ᴥⱷ^ʌ≼  21:42, 10 August 2015 (UTC)

Articles I'm planning to work on in fall 2015 in medical mycology course

I wanted to give you all a heads-up that I'm planning to work on the following articles as part of the Wiki Education Foundation project for an upper-year/ graduate course I teach at University of Toronto on medical and veterinary mycology. There is more information on this effort on the course page for those interested. A few of these map to articles that have been suggested as needing some work. We probably won't get to all of these, but I hope to make some serious headway on them. Any advice or offers of editorial support would be greatly appreciated!

1. Alternaria tenuissima
2. Aspergillus alabamensis
3. Aspergillus tubingensis
4. Aspergillus unguis
5. Candida tropicalis
6. Chaetomium atrobrunneum
7. Chaetomium cupreum
8. Cladosporium cladosporioides
9. Cladosporium sphaerospermum
10. Cunninghamella bertholletiae
11. Epicoccum nigrum
12. Exophiala phaeomuriformis
13. Fusarium solani
14. Fusarium sporotrichioides
15. Geosmithia argillacea
16. Histoplasma duboisii
17. Inonotus tropicalis
18. Kluyveromyces marxianus
19. Malassezia sympodialis
20. Penicillium aurantiogriseum
21. Penicillium brevicompactum
22. Penicillium citrinum
23. Penicillium digitatum
24. Penicillium verrucosum
25. Phialemonium obovatum
26. Rhodotorula glutinis
27. Tolypocladium inflatum
28. Trichophyton concentricum
29. Trichophyton verrucosum
30. Trichothecium roseum

Medmyco (talk) 15:53, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

• Yay! Inonotus tropicalis and several other Inonotus species have been moved to the new genus Tropicoporus in 2015 (stub coming up shortly...) I've had in mind to tidy up some of the previous students efforts and increase the taxonomic diversity of our good article repertoire; several are already quite well-written and will need only minor updating and formatting tweaks. Happy to offer any "editorial support". Sasata (talk) 16:50, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

• Thanks Sasata, I updated the Inonotus to Tropicoporus (I'd checked it before I listed it, but shame on Zhou et al. for not updating the Mycobank reference - http://www.mycobank.org/BioloMICS.aspx?Link=T&TableKey=14682616000000067&Rec=410993&Fields=All). I'm only likely to have about 25 students at most so we may not get to it, but if not this year than next year. Although next year I'm thinking of taking on Penicillium. Medmyco (talk) 17:50, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

Unidentified spherical clusters

unidentified eggs(?) in Hainan

Anna Frodesiak is seeking identification on these spherical structures, located on the underside of a paifang in Hainan (original post here). At first I was thinking perhaps slug or snail eggs, but perhaps they are not animal at all but fungi or slime mold (cf Lycogala epidendrum). Any help is appreciated. Cheers, --Animalparty! (talk) 20:31, 17 August 2015 (UTC)

Hi, Animalparty. Thanks for the reply. The images of Lycogala epidendrum show the spheres are all intact. Close inspection of these eggs in Hainan show shells with empty insides. They sure look like eggs to me. Maybe lizard? Anna Frodesiak (talk) 21:04, 17 August 2015 (UTC)

I am puzzled...errr....need to cast the net wider....Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 01:37, 7 September 2015 (UTC)

Top-cited missing journals

WP:JCW recently updated, and a couple of fungi-related publications are highly cited, but missing articles on Wikipedia (see old thread). In particular, the following journals and magazines could probably have an article written about them:

• Bulletin de la Société Mycologique de France (68th)
• Ceská Mykologie (239th) / Czech Mycology (593rd)
• Documents Mycologiques (528th)
• Fungal Diversity (4th most cited missing journal!)
• International Journal of Medicinal Mushrooms (497th)
• Mycopathologia (68th)
• Revue de Mycologie (295th)
• Studies in Mycology (24th)
• Sylloge Fungorum (949th)
• Zeitschrift für Mykologie (791st)

Any help you can give writing these articles is greatly appreciated. You can consult our writing guide at WP:JWG (journals) and WP:MWG (magazines) for some guidance on writing articles on journals and magazines. Note that some of these might be better as sections of another article (usually publisher or affiliated society), similar to Australia ICOMOS#Historic Environment. Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 19:14, 26 August 2015 (UTC)

Going to @Sasata: here since that worked well last time. Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 19:15, 26 August 2015 (UTC)

It should be mentioned that Ceská Mykologie and Czech Mycology are the same publication (it changed its name and issn, but not the numbering), and Sylloge Fungorum was a single work, but published serially (I think it even has less workers on it than Die Natürlichen Pflanzenfamilien, which is probably a good comparison). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Circeus (talk • contribs)

Works like Sylloge Fungorum are still likely notable though. The list is based on a bot's compilation of all |journal= in citations templates. Just need to make sure to accurately describe the type of work it was. A book series / monographic series / whatever. Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 17:41, 12 September 2015 (UTC)