Talk:Ectosymbiosis

Untitled
Ectosymbiosis Outline for page:

Ectosymbiosis is symbiosis in which the symbiont lives on the body surface of the host, including internal surfaces such as the lining of the digestive tube and the ducts of glands. It is typically characterized by a sessile organism existing off of biotic substrate through mutualism, commensalism, or parasitism (Key et al. 1996, Williams & McDermott 2004).

- Add hyperlinks to each so that people can find additional information.

Evolutionary History Ectosymbiosis is found broadly throughout natural ecosystems, and has developed many times independently throughout evolution in a wide variety of ecological niches, both temperate and extreme (Noda, 2002)

- Add to this in order to synthesize the phylogenetic background from the (Noda et al. 2002).

Red Queen Hypothesis - Contextualize Red Queen theory to ectosymbiosis: site Red Queen Theory (da Silva, J. 2018). Also comment on the instability of mutual ectosymbiosis and how selection will lead to the rise of parasitic relationship (Holland J. N., 2004).

- Influence on the host

- Influence on the parasite

Advantages of Ectosymbiosis - Add information about how ectosymbiosis adds to biodiversity

- Unique specialization between species leads to stabilization of symbiotic relationships

An example of an ectosymbiote are the iron-oxide associated bacteria found crusted to the gills of Rimicaris exoculata shrimp.

-- We will remove this ^ example from this section and reincorporate it in the mutualism section.

Commensalism - Definition: where one species experiences a net benefit while the other experiences no net benefit, but also is not negatively

-An example of communalistic ectosymbiotic behavior is the relationship between small sessile organisms and echinoids in the Southern ocean, where the echinoids provide substrate for the small organisms to grow and the echinoids remain unaffected (Hétérier et al, 2008) - Ian Holtz.

Mutualism - Definition: where both species experience a net benefit

- An example of mutualistic ectosymbiotic behavior is the relationship between Branchiobdellida and its relationship as a bacterial gut cleaner for crayfish species (Skelton et al, 2013) - Ian Holtz.

- Move example of iron-oxide associated bacteria here (Corbari, 2008).

- Additional example on how mutualism can work with multiple ectosymbiotes with the same purpose to enhance the relationship for all parties involved (Klepzig et al, 2001; Six & Bentz, 2007).

Parasitism - Definition: Where one species experiences a net benefit and the other is detrimentally affected

- An example of parasitic behavior is a different relationship between Branchiobdellida and its relationship as a nutrient thief in the gut of some crayfish species (Skelton et al, 2013) - Ian Holtz.

Recent Developments in the Field of Ectosymbiosis - Potential advantages in understanding gut microbiomes in the presence of antibiotics (Papot, 2017).

Justification for changes These additions serve as the foundation for the points covered in the article and provide context. The points we discuss here will be referenced and/or expended on in later changes. The proposed changes provided by our group clearly lay out and go through examples of ectosymbiosis in the three main types of symbiosis: parasitism, mutualism, and commensalism. This is an important addition because it makes clear how prevalent the phenomenon of ectosymbiosis is and our examples are much less vague than the previous, single example. - Ian Holtz. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lauracnote (talk • contribs) 03:38, 16 October 2018 (UTC)

this is a decent start but there is a lot of room for improvement here. I'm going to look further into it and add some sources and more of an intro to start with.

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 27 August 2018 and 7 December 2018. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Crhelm, Lauracnote, Ian.holtz1, Mcduffie9. Peer reviewers: Kc258, Hendrickla, Keegan OReilly.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 20:28, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Articles to Cite
1.Klepzig, Kier D.; Moser, J.C.; Lombardero, F.J.; Hofstetter, R.W.; Ayres, M.P. (2001). “Symbiosis and competition: complex interactions among beetles, fungi, and mites”. Symbiosis. 30: 83-96.

2.Holland, J. Nathaniel; DeAngelis, Donald L.; Schulta, Stewart T. (Sept 2004) “Evolutionary stability of mutualism: interspecific population regulation as an evolutionarily stable strategy”. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B. 271:1807-1814. DOI: 10.1098/rspb.2004.2789.

3.Hétérier, Vincent, et al. (2008). "Ectosymbiosis is a Critical Factor in the Local Benthic Biodiversity of the Antarctic Deep Sea." Marine Ecology Progress Series. 364: 67-76.

4.Six, D. L., and B. J. Bentz. (2007) "Temperature Determines Symbiont Abundance in a Multipartite Bark Beetle-Fungus Ectosymbiosis." Microbial Ecology, 54: (no. 1) 112-118.

5.Brown, Bryan L.; Creed, Robert P. Jr. (2003). “Host preference by an aquatic ectosymbiotic annelid on 2 sympatric species of host crayfish” Journal of the North American Benthological Society, 23(1):90-100. https://doi.org/10.1899/0887-3593(2004)023%3C0090:HPBAAE%3E2.0.CO;2

6.Skelton, J.; Farrell, K. J.; Creed, R. P.; Williams, B. W.; Ames, C.; Helms, B. S.; Stoekel, J; Brown, B. L. (Dec 2013). "Servants, scoundrels, and hitchhikers: current understanding of the complex interactions between crayfish and their ectosymbiotic worms (Branchiobdellida)," Freshwater Science. 32: (4) pp. 1345-1357. https://doi.org/10.1899/12-198.1

7.Polz, M.F.; Distel, D.L.; Zarda,B.; Amann, R; Felbeck, H.; Ott, A.J.; Cavanaugh, C.L. (Dec 2009). Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 60(12):4461-4467.

8.Noda, S.; Ohkuma, M.; Yamada, A.; Hongoh, Y.; Kudo, T. (Jan 2003). Phylogenetic Position and In Situ Identification of Ectosymbiotic Spirochetes on Protists in the Termite Gut. Appli. Environ. Microbiol. 69(1):625-633; DOI: 10.1128/AEM.69.1.625-633.2003

Here are articles we wish to cite in our additions to the page Crhelm (talk) 15:48, 4 October 2018 (UTC)

Sierra Cleveland's Peer Review
Content: Your content has a consistent neutral tone, and balanced coverage of many important aspects central to understanding ectosymbiosis. You have a wide variety of sources that contribute to this, and provide great examples and specific details of ectosymbiosis. However, it would be helpful to have examples of species to demonstrate some of the concepts you talk about in the first several sections, such as specific different clades that have evolved this trait independently, or which specific ectosymbiotic relationships improve the fitness of the host.

I'm also confused about the difference between interspecies mutualism and ectosymbiosis. And what is the relevance that rates of extinction should remain constant, to ectosymbiosis?

I would also suggest you edit the wording in your last paragraph to make it active: "In recent research it has been found that these micro-flora will evolve and diversify rapidly in response to a change in the external environment, in order to stabilize and maintain a beneficial ectosymbiotic environment" --> "Recent research has found that these micro-flora will evolve and diversify rapidly in response to a change in the external environment, in order to stabilize and maintain a beneficial ectosymbiotic environment"

Formatting: Change Evolutionary History, Red Queen Hypothesis, Advantages of Ectosymbiosis to section titles likes commensalism, mutualism, and parasitism. You may also want to consider grouping those three into subsections of a greater section "Examples," since the content is mostly about examples of each form of ectosymbiotic relationship, instead of the actual symbiotic relationship itself. This would improve the flow of the article.

Overall, great article so far! But more detail in each section about specific examples would be really helpful and would really enhance your page. Also, make sure everything clearly relates back to ectosymbiosis, avoid details that could be found under another Wikipedia article that you could link to.

Sierrajc (talk) 02:41, 8 November 2018 (UTC)

kc258 peer review
Formatting wise, the sections "Evolutionary History," "The Red Queen Hypothesis," and "Advantages of Ectosymbiosis" appear to be classified on the same level as "Commensalism," etc., as top level sections, but they are formatted in bold as subsections. I would suggest making them sections if that's what you all deem to be most appropriate. Alternatively, the flow does seem like it would be a bit off if that's what you choose to do, so I suggest reorganizing them and/or grouping two or more of them into a new section. I also think some of the info might be more appropriate at a different location. For example, the three forms of ectosymbiosis you outlined appear to be the most crucial information, so I would move them to the top and have sections on "Evolutionary History" and other information below. Depending on how and if you choose to make them subsections instead of sections, the "Stability of Ectosymbiosis" might work better grouped with the aforementioned sections together as subsections.

The overall tone and content of the article is strong and the examples used for each type of ectosymbiosis are relevant. I would improve upon the introduction by elaborating with more information and context. The sentence "Ectosymbiosis is found throughout a diverse array of environments and in many different species" seems to be a bit too general, and might be substituted for more concrete information. I think it might be useful to check out the Wikipedia page for Endosymbiosis as reference to what I mean: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Endosymbiont

Again, the diversity in examples is great. I do think it would be beneficial for the layperson reading the article for some parts to be explained more simply. On that note, some sections would benefit from having links. It might also be better to parse out some long sentences that jam pack a lot of information so that they exist as separate sentences specialized for a certain example. In this way, you may be able to better communicate information on a) functionality/mechanisms and b) how the example can be considered ectosymbiosis, as opposed to just a general example of some form of symbiosis. An example that touches on all three of these points is this sentence: "There are many examples of mutualistic ectosymbiotic interactions; the relationship between Branchiobdellida and its relationship as a bacterial gut cleaner for crayfish species, the iron-oxide associated bacteria found crusted to the gills of Rimicaris exoculata shrimp." Some parts of this sentence are confusing, such as the segue from Branchiobdellida to bacterial gut cleaner, and further explanation about the relationship and some background about these things would help. I would also separate these disparate examples into individual sentences or even paragraphs depending on how much information you have. Lastly, links to some of the more complex terms would help in understanding the scientific jargon. For example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Branchiobdellida

Overall, great job with this so far. I think if you hone in on some specific parts of the article, as I mentioned above, you'll be well on your way to a great final article! Kc258 (talk) 01:51, 8 November 2018 (UTC)

Keegan O'Reilly's Peer Review
The leading paragraph of your article seems to cover the basic importance of the topic and to overview the various specific sections of the article. For the most part, the sections seem to be in logical order and the background topics surrounding ectosymbiosis seem to be covered well enough. However, I would consider grouping the advantages section with the stability section. I think it would be beneficial to specify the examples in the mutualism section. The species are stated, but the benefits conferred to each organism is not truly outlined. A long description would not be necessary and it may be better to eliminate the iron-oxide associated bacteria and to just focus on Branchiobdellida. Along with the change that Sierra proposed for the last section, I think that it would be beneficial to expand this section slightly and to add one or two more statements about the adaptations or the prevalence of mutually beneficial environments.

kc258 peer review
Kc258 (talk) 01:29, 8 November 2018 (UTC)