Talk:Mammalian kidney/GA3

GA Review
The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.''

Reviewer: Ajpolino (talk · contribs) 13:25, 27 January 2024 (UTC)

I can take on this review. Sorry to see you've waited so long and had a discontinued review before. Will try to get through everything as quickly as possible. Ajpolino (talk) 13:25, 27 January 2024 (UTC)

Comments on each of the good article criteria below:

1. Well-written
 * Lead - a type of metanephric kidney. - Most readers won't understand this without context. Could you move this later in the lead (if you think it belongs in the lead) and give it a tiny bit of context?
 * Lead - The kidneys in mammals are usually bean-shaped,[3] located behind the peritoneum (retroperitoneally)[4] on the back (dorsal) wall of the body. This should probably be two separate sentences, or at least separated with an "and".
 * Lead - this part of the kidney is similar to the typical kidneys of less developed vertebrates. seems unnecessary as we, the readers, don't know what you're getting at here. Can probably just be cut.
 * The lead is a bit long. Can you merge the first two paragraphs, both of which deal with the kidney's structure?
 * Actually now looking at it again, the structure material seems divided among the first three paragraphs. I think the lead would be much clearer if you collect it all together and introduce the material in a way that gives the reader some context. For example, see Kidney where the text takes us step-by-step from large structure to small, from outside to inside.
 * Lead - unipapillary (single papilla), with several papillae or multipapillary as this point in the article some readers won't know what the papillae are. Perhaps you could briefly explain or (my recommendation) trim some of the detail from the lead.
 * Lead - The simplest type of kidney in mammals is the unipapillary kidney with single lobe. can probably be cut; seems self-evident.
 * Lead - varying between doesn't seem quite right. Maybe "variations in"?
 * Lead - The human kidney is an example of the mammalian kidney. can be cut.
 * Structure - on the posterior (dorsal) wall of the body "posterior" could be a bit confusing since for many animals we use "posterior" to mean "towards the anus" (like here). Perhaps "back (dorsal)" like you use in the lead is better?
 * Structure - One of the key factors that determine the shape and morphology of the kidneys in mammals is their mass. you should either expand on this or remove it. Right now it's kind of meaningless. If you have a source that describes how mass impacts shape, I'm sure that would be interesting for readers.
 * Structure - In the body, the kidney is surrounded by a mass of adipose tissue. maybe this belongs in the subsection below (general structure) instead of "location and shape"?
 * Structure - kidney is represented by the cortex "is represented by" is a bit confusing. Is "called" an ok alternative?
 * In general, consider reducing the amount of material that's repeated from the article kidney. This article should highlight what's distinct about the mammalian kidneys. In some places it does a great job of that. In places where the story of the mammalian kidney is the same as other animals' kidneys, you can reduce detail.
 * Structure - The parenchyma, being a functional... is "the" more appropriate?
 * Structure - Based on the location of the renal corpuscle, nephrons are classified into 3 types: superficial (closer to the renal capsule), midcortical (in the middle part of the cortex) and juxtamedullary (closer to the medulla) nephrons. According to the length of the loop of Henle, nephrons are classified into nephrons with a long loop and with a short loop of Henle are these classifications important? You don't mention them again. The latter, at least seems self-evident (unless there's some added context about how they differ that you'd like to provide!).
 * Structure - The ratio of cortex to medulla varies between species, in domesticated animals the cortex usually occupies a third or fourth part of the parenchyma, while in desert animals with long loops of Henle it is only a fifth part perhaps this could go in the cortex subsection? Also do you have a source that would allow you to add a bit of context? One assumes desert animals have large medullae to give them greater urine-concentrating power?
 * Structure - "The ratio of the outer and inner medulla" any idea what the significance of this is?
 * Structure - while larger animals have multilobar kidneys, such as those of bovines,[70][8] but bovine kidneys are also externally lobulated (visually divided into lobes). the bovine side note distracts from the point of the sentence.
 * Structure - Kidneys can be unipapillary,[8] as in rats and mice,[73] with few renal papillae, as in spider monkeys, or with many, as in pigs and humans.[8] Most animals have single renal papilla. if each lobe ends in a papilla (per Mammalian_kidney) isn't this just restating what was in the prior paragraph?
 * Structure - In manatees, which are also marine mammals, the kidneys I think it's obvious from the context.
 * Structure - At the same time, killer whale kidneys are reniculate, and each reniculus is comparable to the kidney of mice unnecessary, just covered in the prior paragraph.
 * Structure - from the interstitium that fills the space between the tubules and blood vessels you just described this two subsections above, so it should still be front of mind for the reader.
 * Function - In mammals, nitrogenous metabolic products are excreted predominantly in the form of urea,[7] which is the end product of mammalian metabolism[115] and is highly soluble in water.[116] Urea is predominantly formed in the liver as a by-product of protein metabolism. is somewhat redundant. Can we merge these two and say "which is the end product of protein metabolism..."?
 * Function - urine is being concentrated (or perhaps you meant "as the urine is being concentrated"?).
 * Function - an elevated level is called alkalosis, and a lower level is called acidosis. can probably be cut. I don't think you use the terms again.
 * Function - Perhaps we could have a bit more detail on mammals nearly unique ability to concentrate their urine? We get more coverage of acid-base regulation (which doesn't seem unique to mammalian kidneys?) than osmoregulation. I'm not sure if the Structure or Function section would be more appropriate. But it'd be great if a reader walks away with the sense that the preponderance of loops of Henle, prominent medullae, and salt gradient as you go "deeper" into a kidney all serve this unique purpose of urine concentration. I'm guessing(?) if you asked a physiologist what's unique about the mammalian kidney, that'd be their first answer? I could be totally off base though; you'd likely know better.
 * Evolution - What does the subheading "Definitive mammalian kidney" mean?
 * Evolution - from which multilobar kidneys. is "evolved" supposed to be at the end of the sentence?
 * Evolution - A further adaptation mechanism is an increase in the size of the renal glomeruli in large mammals (and, accordingly, an increase in the length of the tubules), as in elephants, in which the diameter of the glomerulus can be 2 times larger than in killer whales. This doesn't seem quite right. Both animals are quite large. Our articles suggest killer whales are larger than elephants.
 * Evolution - The appearance of reniculate kidneys ... size increases. seems like this should go in the next subsection.
 * Evolution - Earlier the article notes that bears also have reniculate kidneys. Their lifestyle doesn't fit many of the hypotheses in this subsection. Are there any theories on why bear kidneys would be this way?
 * Development - In mammals, the final kidney is the metanephric kidney, but kidney development
 * Development - (processes of epithelialization and tubulogenesis occur) Perhaps this could be cut? I'm not sure it helps.
 * Development - When the formation of new nephrons (nephrogenesis) ends, the number of nephrons in the kidney becomes final. this reads as a truism. Perhaps instead "Once the kidney is developed, the number..."?
 * Injury and diseases - Gradually, but slowly, the number redundant.
 * (I may add a few more as I go through the other criteria, but the above should be the bulk of them. I'll add new ones below to reduce confusion I hope).
 * Lead - Is In mammals, the nephrons can be classified into the nephrons with a short loop and a long loop of Henle important enough to go in the lead?
 * Structure#Parenchyma - According to the length of the loop of Henle, nephrons are classified into nephrons with a long loop and with a short loop of Henle the cited source gives some nice context with this, including that some mammals only have short loops, and correspondingly these mammals are less able to concentrate their urine. Could we include some of that in the article? I'm not sure the core fact that long loops into the medulla underlie urine concentration is coming through quite strongly enough.
 * Structure#Structural differences... - In the first paragraph, I think the digressions to cover the particulars of the bovine kidney are more distracting than enlightening. The section will probably be most digestible to readers if you start with the principles (small animals have small unilobar kidneys; large animals have large multilobar kidneys) and once that is established add the structural exceptions (I'm guessing there are more than just the bovine one). Also I'd gently suggest you organize this subsection to flow from small animals to large animals (as the Dantzler textbook does). Currently it has a paragraph on lobes (et al), then papillae, then reniculate kidneys.

Work in progress! Will keep adding as I have time. Ajpolino (talk) 16:42, 27 January 2024 (UTC)

Pardon the radio silence. Busy week in real life. I'm back to look at the other criteria:

2. Verifiable with no original research
 * Spotchecking a few sources at random (with the help of RANDOM.org). Ref numbers refer to this version.
 * Dantzler 2016 textbook:
 * Ref 16 - A bit funny that the same fact is cited to a different source in the article body. Actually looking into it, the body source is probably more appropriate. It really covers the short vs. long loops in some detail, whereas the Dantzler textbook puts it in an image caption in passing. If you do keep this ref, can we have a page number please?
 * Ref 70 and 75 are good.
 * Looking at ref 21 meant I also had to look at 19, 20, 22, and 23. Every part of the sentence The kidneys of mammals... in regulation of glucose levels is supported by one of the cited sources. I'll admit this style of citations makes me slightly uncomfortable. It'd be better if you could find a source that says "the important things about kidneys are A, B, C, and D.[solid ref]" instead of piecing it together from the introductory sentences of papers on various topics. I think this style leaves us susceptible to WP:SYNTH problems where the article can end up implying something that the sources do not. That said, in this particular case the sentence is fairly uncontroversial, so it's not a huge deal. But maybe something to look out for in your future article crafting. And if you do have a superior source for this statement, that would be nice.
 * Are refs 37, 38, and 39 all necessary to support The potential for regeneration in mature kidneys is limited, because new nephrons cannot be formed? It seems like reference 37 supports all of that just fine.
 * Keogh, et al. 2021 (some ref #s have changed; now using this version:
 * Ref 4, 71 - Good.
 * Ref 80 - Can you point out where The size of the kidneys increases with the mass of mammals is supported in that section? It's almost certainly true, and I'm probably just missing it.
 * Ref 97 - Another small thing, (with exception of some species) doesn't seem to be supported by this review. I'm assuming it's supported by the reference for the sentence above (though I didn't checK)? Maybe you could swap them.
 * Ref 125 (Schulte, et al. 2014) - Good.
 * Zhou, et al. 2023
 * Differences in kidney structure are the result of adaptations during evolution to variations in body mass and habitats (in particular, habital aridity) between species is currently referenced to two places in the Zhou paper and this paper. I would think the second citation to the Zhou paper (which says "Here, we found significant correlations between renal structure and two traits (body mass and habitats) based on..." should suffice? I don't see any kidney discussion in the third paper, but I was skimming pretty quickly and could have missed it. In general, it would be better if you could find a secondary source as a reference here, but I think the claim here is pretty uncontroversial, so it's not a huge deal.
 * Ref 150 - Good.
 * Davidson, 2011
 * Ref 40, 41, 181, 182, 183, 189 - Good.
 * Ref 41 and 182 appear to be the same. I think the difference between a hyphen and a dash may be forcing them to appear separately?

3. Broad in its coverage - Good.

4. Neutral - Good.

5. Stable - Good.

6. Illustrated:
 * The diagrams you've made are really fantastic, and I'm sure will be adopted by various language Wikipedias.
 * In the article's caption to File:Didactic model of a mammal Kidney with numbered parts.png, what's the purpose of reference #45 to ?
 * The article is well-illustrated; all images are available on Commons, properly licensed, and tagged appropriately.


 * Ok, made it through. In general, I'd say the major outstanding issue with the article is criterion #1. Good articles should be "clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience." In several places, sentences are unclear, paragraphs flow poorly and I had to read them several times to comprehend, etc. I marked several things as I read, listed above. Consider the advice at Make technical articles understandable, which criterion #1 links to. I see you've made several edits since I first read the article, and I haven't had a chance to look them over yet. So it's possible you've already made great strides. Again, my apologies for moving so slowly. Feel free to reply interwoven among my comments, just indenting out your reply. If you'd rather continue quoting and commenting as below, that's just fine too. I'll take another look through to assess criterion #1 whenever you're ready. Take as much time as you'd like (or as little, if you're ready now). Just let me know. Thanks, Ajpolino (talk) 22:03, 8 February 2024 (UTC)

Comments

 * Fat layer is more related to the location (the kidney is located inside a fat capsule), it's not a part of the kidney, so it is not suitable for general structure section. D6194c-1cc (talk) 06:15, 1 February 2024 (UTC)
 * I've made some investigations. In humans, perirenal fat surrounds both the kidney and adrenal gland. The perirenal fat is separated from the retroperitoneal space by the renal fascia, which encloses both the kidney and adrenal gland . So perirenal fat is not part of the kidney. But Wikipedia article about the retroperitoneal space argues that the perirenal fat may be considered part of the kidney (being part of the renal capsule). And the source specified at that statement doesn't have such information. An original research? Such conclusions can confuse editors. D6194c-1cc (talk) 16:31, 17 February 2024 (UTC)
 * As the article describes mammalian kidney, it should describe comparative aspects of the kidney. For example birds excrete uric acid, which is end-product of protein and purine metabolism. And uric acid is least soluble in water, defining some properties of the urine and determining kidney function. Thus, soluability is a valuable fact. As for the liver, I've removed its mentioning. D6194c-1cc (talk) 07:03, 1 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Thank you, that's exactly the change I was asking for (if unclearly). Ajpolino (talk) 23:14, 3 February 2024 (UTC)
 * It should be mentioned. Most sources say that the simplest type of kidney is unipapillary, but unipapillary kidneys can also be multilobed. So it's not obvious for the readers what kidneys can be called the simplest (i.e. unilobar, ). D6194c-1cc (talk) 15:41, 1 February 2024 (UTC)
 * You're suggesting that some reader might assume a unipapillary multilobar kidney is "simpler" than a unipapillary unilobar kidney. I find that hard to believe. But this is not a hill I wish to die on. Ajpolino (talk) 23:17, 3 February 2024 (UTC)
 * I've examined the sources for a few days. Crest kidneys are unipapillary too. But crest kidneys can have multiple renal pyramids. The sources usually say that unipapillary kidneys are the simplest (not mentioning that they are unilobar) so that we should do the same way. And only some sources say that the simplest are the unipapillary kidneys with single renal pyramid. Some reader may assume that crest kidneys are as simple as unilobar (although I saw sources that called crest kidneys unilobar, but they might be not reliable). But camel kidneys with renal crest are considered to be unipapillary and multilobar . So I've just changed single lobe to single pyramid as the source says: 1203158083. Also, the simplest kidney is mentioned to prepare reader to evolutionary context, as more complex kidneys are belived to be modifications of unipapillary kidney. D6194c-1cc (talk) 18:00, 5 February 2024 (UTC)
 * I've made this sentence transient between the structure and evolution parts of the paragraph: edits. D6194c-1cc (talk) 21:28, 21 February 2024 (UTC)
 * It means permanent (final) adult kidney, which is mammalian type of metanephros. I've changed the title to "Mammalian metanephric kidney". D6194c-1cc (talk) 15:25, 2 February 2024 (UTC)
 * I've moved the second sentence to the next section, but reniculate kidneys should be mentioned in the "Adaptations to body mass" section, since reniculate kidneys are a mechanism that allows increasing organ size when multilobar kidney has exhausted its capability to increase in size. D6194c-1cc (talk) 16:09, 2 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Not, it isn't. Crest kidneys are considered to be unipapillary too, but they can have multiple lobes. So unipapillary is not the same as unilobar. I've added some explanations to the article: 1202951132. D6194c-1cc (talk) 22:20, 3 February 2024 (UTC)
 * The prior paragraph covers structure but not the size and mass, so I added some details and clarifications and also corrected terminology, since unipapillary kidney might be not the same as unilobar: 1204302376. D6194c-1cc (talk) 21:47, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
 * I've changed the main definition and added explanation. Indeed, mammalian kidney encompasses mammalian metanephric kidney and mammalian metanephros in context of terminology usage. When researchers talk about embryo kidney, they may refer to it as metanephros. And when they talk about adult kidney, they may refer to it as metanephric kidney. So the main definition should remark that mammalian kidney is metanephric, but do it in such a manner that it should not narrow the scope to neither metanephros nor adult metanephric kidney. Also, mesonephros is the kidney that functions some time in embyo of mammals, but it is never called mammalian kidney (it's just a transient organ that is not typical to mammals). Also, probably mammalian embyo metanephros should be described in detail in separate article. D6194c-1cc (talk) 14:10, 7 February 2024 (UTC)

I've reworded some sentences in that section to make text more concise. Please, check it again: 1209342416. D6194c-1cc (talk) 12:50, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

Second look
Hi, I've had a second look through and unfortunately I think the article is still a long way from meeting the first GA criterion. I'll give some examples below. In the meantime, I'm going to mark this review as "fail". It's always a challenge to copyedit your own writing, since you inherently understand what you mean (of course, even professional writers have separate editors). I'd recommend you try to enlist the help of another science-interested editor who can help check your writing and suggest clearer ways to communicate the key information you wish to convey to your audience. You may also consider posting at WP:GOCE for someone with experience copyediting. Folks at the WP:FA project, often recommend the tutorials at User:Tony1/How to improve your writing; linking it here in case you find it helpful. If you disagree with this outcome, I'm sure you're aware that you are welcome to re-nominate the article at GAN any time to get a fresh reviewer. If there's any other way I can be helpful, please let me know. Best, Ajpolino (talk) 03:47, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

Examples of outstanding issues:
 * Unnecessarily wordy or jargon-rich sentences. Consider simplifying to make the information clearer for the reader. Some examples from the first few sections:
 * The mammalian kidneys are a pair of excretory organs of the urinary system of mammals ,[2] being functioning kidneys in postnatal-to-adult individuals[3] (i. e. metanephric kidneys). (You could add a sentence later in the lead explaining that mammals have two kidney precursors during development, but that the final/metanephric kidney becomes active near or after birth).
 * The structure of the kidney may differ between species.[12] The Kidneys...
 * The simplest type of kidney in mammals, from which the more structurally complex kidneys are believed to have evolved, is the...
 * (in particular, habital aridity)
 * The cortex itself is similar to the typical kidneys of less developed vertebrates
 * The stripes differ in that the outer stripe contain proximal straight tubules, while the inner stripe...
 * Structurally, kidneys vary between mammals.[80] What structural type a particular species will have depends generally on the body mass of the animals. → "Kidney structure varies based largely on a mammal's size" (or something like that).
 * In some animals, such as horses, the tips of the renal pyramids fuse with each other to form a common single renal papilla, called the renal crest.[84] Such kidneys are called crest kidneys and are also considered unipapillary kidneys (a modification). (you don't use the term "crest kidney" again; I'm not sure we need to be introduced to it).
 * In manatees, which are also marine mammals, the kidneys are actually multilobar, since the cortex is continuous
 * mammalian kidney is an organ that has the most complex vascular blood system compared to other organs.
 * Confusing run-on sentences. Consider splitting. E.g.:
 * Each kidney consists of a renal capsule, peripheral cortex, internal medulla,[7] which can be split up into renal pyramids[8] forming papillae with their innermost parts,[9] calices, and renal pelvis, although the calices or renal pelvis may be absent in some species.
 * The kidneys can be unilobar (single lobe represented by a single renal pyramid)[13][14] or multilobar, unipapillary (single papilla), with several papillae or multipapillary,[14] may be smooth-surfaced or lobulated,[1][15] also the kidneys may be reniculate, which are found mainly in marine mammals.
 * There is a blood-filtering part of the nephron in the cortex — the renal corpuscle, from which the renal tubule extends to the medulla into the loop of Henle, then the tubule returns back to the cortex and with its distal end flows into its collecting duct that is common to several nephrons.
 * Material is often presented with insufficient context, in a way that flows poorly and makes it challenging for a reader to understand. This is hard to describe, but clear writing uses context to guide a reader through jargon. A couple of examples:
 * Each kidney consists of a renal capsule, peripheral cortex, internal medulla,[7] which can be split up into renal pyramids[8] forming papillae with their innermost parts,[9] calices, and renal pelvis,... Generally, urine produced by the cortex and medulla drains from the papillae into the calices, and then into the renal pelvis, from which urine exits the kidney through the ureter in the lead is jargon-rich; a reader unfamiliar with the topic (and who might seek out an encyclopedia article on the topic) would just read a list of unfamiliar terms. Adding just a bit more context could give something like the below:
 * "The kidney is encased by the renal capsule, and made up of one to many lobes. In each lobe, blood is filtered in the cortex (outer layer). The filtrate moves into the medulla (inner layer), where it is concentrated by passing through the loop of Henle. Concentrated filtrate returns to the cortex and is deposited into a collecting duct. The material exits the medulla through the papilla, and is transmitted through the renal calyces, into the renal pelvis, and on into the ureter. The material is eventually excreted from the body as urine."
 * The cortical labyrinth contains interlobular arteries, vascular networks formed by afferent and efferent arterioles, renal corpuscles, proximal convoluted tubules, macula densa, distal convoluted tubules, connecting tubules and the initial parts of the collecting ducts.
 * Similarly, the article sometimes describes distinctions, but doesn't give us context for why they matter, e.g. The continuous layer of the cortex lying above the medullary rays is called the cortex corticis. or Based on the location of the renal corpuscle, nephrons are classified into 3 types: superficial (closer to the renal capsule), midcortical (in the middle part of the cortex) and juxtamedullary (closer to the medulla) nephrons.,

Comments on Second look
Sorry, I hadn't had access to my notebook till today. And I hadn't finished polishing the article before the February 22 when I went offline. You were too hasty finishing the review. As for the review, consider iterative review process if you want to make the article ideal. When I had worked a programmer, I made many code reviews of merge requests. A good practice is iterative reviews for small fixes and reviewing again large pieces of a work if they were rewritten significantly (for example, in cases of architecture problems). I'll continue to polish the article and comment your notes, but I'll have to slow down the process as I have some other things to do, and the review have been already marked as failed. D6194c-1cc (talk) 10:24, 27 February 2024 (UTC)


 * Well, according to the Manual of Style/Lead section, "the first sentence should introduce the topic, and tell the nonspecialist reader what or who the subject is, and often when or where. It should be in plain English." So the first sentence answers to the "when" question. Although from the same giudeline: "if its subject is definable, then the first sentence should give a concise definition: where possible, one that puts the article in context for the nonspecialist." But the functioning kidney of marsupials after birth is the mesonephros . Probably, I should add this fact somewhere in the article, I'll think about where to put it. D6194c-1cc (talk) 12:34, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Also, you suggested many diffs, but I try not to use them as reproducing them in the article can be qualified as copying from another source with the need for appropriate attribution. I don't know wheither a reviewer can participate in the article, but reproducing diffs may be qualified as contribution to the article. I make a wikilink to the GAR in each borderline situation (when I cannot do things another way), but in each case I use argumentation rather then just reproduce suggested changes. D6194c-1cc (talk) 09:06, 2 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Also, you suggested many diffs, but I try not to use them as reproducing them in the article can be qualified as copying from another source with the need for appropriate attribution. I don't know wheither a reviewer can participate in the article, but reproducing diffs may be qualified as contribution to the article. I make a wikilink to the GAR in each borderline situation (when I cannot do things another way), but in each case I use argumentation rather then just reproduce suggested changes. D6194c-1cc (talk) 09:06, 2 March 2024 (UTC)