Talk:Magnaporthe grisea

Name
This page was delibrately named Magnaporthe grisea since it causes more that just rice blast. There is concensus amongst Wikiproject:Tree of Life that the bionomial should be used where the common name is unclear or of restricted geographic use. Please leave it here--nixie 11:26, 23 May 2005 (UTC)

Hasn't this pathogen had it's name changed (again) to Magnaporthe oryzae? Taxonomists are hard to keep up with....(a Mentally Efficient Loonies And Nice Insane Elephants creation 18:39, 19 January 2007 (UTC))


 * No it hasn't —Preceding unsigned comment added by 165.91.10.208 (talk) 04:25, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

The name of this fungus has changed again following the new taxonomic rules by the International Code of Nomenclature for algae, fungi and plants (Melbourne Code) which took effect on January 1st, 2013. The new name is Pyricularia oryzae (follow this link to Wikispecies for the relevant literature). This page needs to be changed accordingly. Bernhard Zelazny 08:30, 24 October 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bernhard Zelazny (talk • contribs)

I agree, that it is difficult with all the name changes over the years, but taxonomy itself is a science, too, and therefore when new relationships are discovered and new evidences appear, name changes become necessary. The problem here is, that Magnaporthe grisea (now Pyricularia grisea) is actually a different species than Magnaporthe oryzae (now Pyricularia oryzae). M. grisea is isolated from Digitaria and studies show that it infects Digitaria, but not other hosts. M. oryzae is also quite host-specific for rice. If we talk about the rice blast fungus (and this article is about the rice blast fungus), we should use the correct scientific name, which is at the moment Pyricularia oryzae. There are several studies/references that explain this and I am currently working on a short explanation for this wikipedia article. --Magistra Sylvia (talk) 23:26, 12 March 2017 (UTC)

# of Genes
It has 11,109 genes, right?
 * This could only possibly be a predicted number of genes, based on what "looks like" a gene in the genome sequence. Some could be non-functional pseudogenes, and some real genes may not have been predicted.  So it might be best to leave an approximate figure in the article. Adrian J. Hunter 04:32, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Naïve questions
This is a nice article. I know nothing about the subject so the most I can contribute is a list of questions I had hoped the article would answer but it did not:


 * Why is it called blast?
 * Are there other things called blast fungus or blast disease?
 * In particular, should there be a more general article called blast fungus or blast disease?

Also, the repeated bolding and lack of links in the taxobox seems to imply that this species is the only member of its class. Surely this can't be?

Hope this is helpful &mdash; Pekinensis 22:48, 15 July 2005 (UTC)


 * I can't find anything definate, but I'd guess that they're called blast diseases since they cause total yellowing, pathogens that cause spots are normally spot or mosaic patterns on foliage are usually caused spot or mosaic diseases. It is a confusing aspect of phytopathology but the same organism can be named as a different disasese depending on the host Magnaporthe grisea on wheat is called rice blast and on wheat it is called wheat blast, even though the symptoms are the same, I'll change the article to say that. The pages you suggest would be good redirects to here, since this fungus causes all the blast diseases. The lack of links in the taxobox is since wikipedia is pretty slack on fungal taxomony an I find a taxobox full of red links pretty ugly, but I've made them wikilinks--nixie 07:49, 16 July 2005 (UTC)

Thank you for the information, and for this substantial article on an important topic, which would likely not exist at all without your contribution. &mdash; Pekinensis 15:17, 16 July 2005 (UTC)

Why does Wheat Blast redirect to here?
Shouldn't it have it's own page? Or if not, some explanation of why "wheat blast" redirects here is in order... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.24.29.176 (talk) 06:50, 27 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Based on this, it seems "wheat blast" is a synonym of Magnaporthe grisea. Adrian J. Hunter(talk•contribs) 15:10, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

It is a good question, if wheat blast and rice blast should be considered the same. A new study defines a new species which is responsible for wheat blast. PMID: 28232765 Although there are different opinions on what is a species, or a pathotype, which could be a population of the same species but infecting a different plant. We should leave it to the taxonomists to decide what is a new species. And yes, this can change fast, but the advantage of wikipedia is that it can also react fast and incorporate new knowledge rapidly. --Magistra Sylvia (talk) 23:43, 12 March 2017 (UTC)