Talk:Microascus manginii/Archive 1

Almorenor's Peer Review
General Comments
 * I liked the structure of your paper and found the information to be great
 * At a first reading glance (without actually reading the body) I immediately became confused about why you had two fungi heading in your growth and morphology, maybe not bolding the titles would make it stand out less and ensure the re34ader reads the history and taxonomy fist so they understand why you mention two names in growth and morphology
 * I was unable to find it myself, but maybe asking the prof if there is a Holomorph name to title your article so things are introduced better?
 * You should hyperlink other species names/complicated terms if a Wikipedia page exists so that it is easy to know what you are talking about from a reader's perspective. For example, a high school student doing a project on you fungus might not know what teleomorph is, hyperlinking it will allow him to immediately know what it is.
 * for your taxa box, maybe adding another division like the family Microascaceae or subclass 	Hypocreomycetidae might make it more informative. You should also cite where you got the binomial name and synonyms in your reference list and add a link on your taxa box, for example, if from mycobank then cite mycobank

Habitat and ecology
 * You do not have this Heading, however, I think you should add it and there is information out there and can be considered important when describing the species. For example, it is found in soil, decaying plant material, and indoor environments
 * some useful resources:
 * https://drfungus.org/knowledge-base/microascus-species/
 * http://eol.org/pages/189869/overview
 * https://www.researchgate.net/publication/292017793_Redefining_Microascus_Scopulariopsis_and_allied_genera
 * https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/13693780601103080
 * https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5384890/
 * https://drfungus.org/knowledge-base/scopulariopsis-species/

Clinical Importance
 * I think you should change the title of this heading as it implies that this fungus is important for medicine rather than that it is a human pathogen, maybe "clinical pathogenicity" or "clinical manifestation"
 * this is an excellent section and I think you have a good amount and quality of information here

Other articles/references to consider looking at


 * http://www.nrcresearchpress.com/doi/pdf/10.1139/b61-143 -- more info on microascus manginii
 * https://www.ajol.info/index.php/ajb/article/view/58977/47291 -- has to do about its growth in hypersaline environments and its enzyme production

Almorenor (talk) 23:54, 2 November 2018 (UTC)

Some suggestions
Medmyco (talk) 19:53, 17 November 2018 (UTC)
 * references look OK
 * lots of great content
 * a few links you could make, e.g., cycloheximide, amphotericin-B, etc.
 * try to put some of the technical jargon into common language, e.g., obovate, clavate, etc.
 * good job so far!