Talk:Myrmecocystus mexicanus

Untitled
Hello all, I am new to Wikipedia, but I am very enthusiastic about insects. I began research honeypot ants on Wikipedia, and found the articles on this insect woefully small and inaccurate. I decided to start an article on the species of honeypot ant, Myrmecocystus mexicanus, since this species appears to have been well-researched. However, I was surprised to find that most of the recent articles written about M. mexicanus have been by one John R. Conway. Others have written about M. mexicanus occasionally, but Dr. Conway appears to be the specialist. I was able to find two other sources written by other people, but please forgive me for my small range of authors!

Please give me helpful feedback on this article! I need to know if I'm on the right track. Thanks!--Blubird25 (talk) 07:39, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

Peer Review

 * Under “Reproduction,” add source
 * Changed spelling error
 * Repletes can be maybe put under a colony structure subsection that can include other castes such as queen, male and worker
 * Without a lot of information about predation, maybe include the sentence in the introduction

Overall, the article is easy to understand and there are not many mistakes. Pocketkings (talk) 22:42, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

Peer Review, Round 2

I am impressed with how concise and well organized this article is. However, it would be interesting to hear a little bit more on the evolution of some of the foraging behaviors and morphologies, though I understand that the literature might be scarce. Good work!

Amruthapk (talk) 02:00, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

I added more hyperlinks. I also rearranged the sections so that the information regarding replete workers would be categorized under the population structure. I think it would be great to include a section discussing the role of regular workers as well. Rosemaryshanley (talk) 23:04, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

This article is very informative and well rounded, but it would be nice to hear more about how altruism plays a role in the colony structure of these social insects. Thanks for your contribution!

Kellykries (talk) 15:08, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

This essay is concise in the presentation of each category covered and made the information easy to comprehend. However, a category about behavior to better encompass the basis of existing categories could have been added. While the author briefly mentions population structure within a hive, details of each member’s specific role could be added. Under this category, colony life cycle would still fit as well as the role of replete workers, which were elaborated on. Altruism should be added, as it is known some social species engage in altruistic behavior, influencing the well being of the hive as a whole. Sex ratio should also be included to note the dynamics of the hive as a result of variations and discuss relatedness. (Daphnedeng (talk) 20:50, 11 September 2014 (UTC))

This article was informative and satisfactory for readers of all backgrounds. Facts were written in a clear manner with varied sentence structure, and paired with extensive information on specific focus areas, such as development and mating. These were the largest strengths of the article. While the article was balanced, focus areas on communication, altruistic group behavior, and sex ratio determination would have been useful. Considering that insect populations have to work harmoniously towards a common goal, it would be have been useful to understand how they communicate with each other. It would have also been nice for the article to discuss altruistic behavior, and delve into the specific displays of altruism. Furthermore, no information was provided on how sex ratios are determined or if this a phenomena that takes place. Because disproportionate sex ratios influence colony dynamics, especially concerning the queen, the article would be strengthened by this information. Mmc7777 (talk) 00:39, 11 September 2015 (UTC)