Talk:Red flour beetle

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 07:55, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 3 April 2019 and 7 June 2019. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): SnarkieGoblin. Peer reviewers: Huynhat2.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 07:55, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Comment
It might be helpful if you add a section that discusses what types of polygamy this species practices, how polygamy may affect behavior, or if polygamy is the same in this species across all environments. This article may be helpful if you want to add a section about factors that affect matting success and/or fertilization success. Snook, R. (2005). Sperm in competition: not playing by the numbers. Trends in Ecology and Evolution, 20: 46-53. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0169534704003131 Emiliaromagna1 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 07:04, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

i am looking to do a section on polygamy in red flour beetles. feel free to give feedback on any of these articles:

Lu, W, Wang, Q, Tian, M, Xu, J, LV, J, Qin, A. 2013. Mating behavior and sexual selection in a polygamous beetle. Current Zoology. 59: 257-264.

Tyler, F, Tregenza T. 2012. Why do so many flour beetle copulations fail? Entomologia Experimentalis et Applicata. 146: 199-206.

Arnaud, L, Gage, M, Haubruge E. 2001. The dynamics of second- and third-male fertilization precedence in Tribolium castaneum. Entomologia Experimentalis et Applicata. 99: 55-64.

Michalczyk, L, Martin, O, Millard, A, Emerson, B, Gage, M. 2010. Inbreeding depresses sperm competitiveness, but not fertilization or mating success in male Tribolium castaneum. Proceedings of the royal society B. 333: 1739-1742

Links:

http://www.actazool.org/temp/%7BECABF1DA-2161-4EA2-A190-9650225A993B%7D.pdf

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1570-7458.2012.01292.x/full

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1046/j.1570-7458.2001.00801.x/epdf

http://rspb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/early/2010/06/12/rspb.2010.0514.short

Article needs more balance
This article is potentially unduly weighted towards reproductive ecology. It is nearly or entirely devoid of basic biology such as description, distribution, and economic impact. I realize this expansion is a part of a class project, but a good encyclopedia article should be a balanced summary of all aspects the organism. --Animalparty! (talk) 21:31, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

Hi --Animalparty - thank you for your interest in the article. It would be awesome if you could add some basic biology to the article!Evol&#38;Glass (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 03:30, 2 November 2015 (UTC)

Repetition in Article
There are a couple sections of this article that tend to repeat information that has already been mentioned. In the section on Mate Choice a majority of the information has already been discussed in the section about Variation Within the same Population: Females and Males. It would make the article more concise to either consolidate these two sections into one, or shorten either section so that they don't repeat the same descriptions. Also, the section titled Polygamy in Red Flour Beetles has some repetition of what has already been stated in the article, by discussing sperm storage of females and ability of polyandrous females to produce more offspring.AnonARK25 (talk) 18:44, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

Peer Review/Addition
A detailed and dense article. Supported it by adding cited info under variation of polyandry. Further elaborated on Male beetle subheading in respect to odor and sexual selection. Mbastani (talk) 00:47, 26 October 2015 (UTC)mbastani

I made a small grammatical change to the polygamy section of this article. I also have a suggestion for the author of this section. In the beginning, you state that "Male red flour beetles engage in polygamous behavior to avoid inbreeding depression," and then later go on to state "Lack of fertilization failure leads to some biologists concluding that there may be no inbreeding depression in red flour beetles." These two statements seem to contradict each other, so I would reword them or expand on them to clarify the points you are trying to make. SLUlax414 (talk) 14:36, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

Overall the article looks great. The headings work very well with breaking up the information. Before each section, there is an intro which helps set the stage for what you will be talking about soon. There was not much reference to specific experiments, yet the sources were summarized very well. The way in which you sited after each sentence works well because some paragraphs use multiple sources and it would get confusing just leaving a citation at the end. At this point only some rewording here and there could be done to put it in more of layman’s terms. Great Work! Adowney31 (talk) 16:59, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

Previous Comments
I addressed a concern that some of the information contradicted each other by expanding on the view that there was no inbreeding depression in the species. This was just a view of some scientists with little research behind it. i clarified how inbreeding depression exists even though some scientists do not interpret it as such. I also clarified that both polyandry and polygamy exist as types of polygamous behavior in the beetles. There was not enough research to discuss the effect of different environment on mating behavior. factors that affect fertilization success are discussed within the article such as effects of last male to copulate. Avoided repetition by removing some unnecessary portions from the article. i also rephrased some information in the genetic diversity section for better understanding and better clarity. rearranged the article for better flow. I also separated some of the information into the polygyny section. Sluology (talk) 09:22, 9 November 2015 (UTC) Update 11/9/2015 Major Article Edit Addressing Talk Page Comments Krish707 (talk) 02:44, 9 November 2015 (UTC)

I added citations following every sentence that goes beyond the reach of general knowledge. In order to improve the flow of the article, I created a general Polyandry and Multiple Mating heading and grouped fitness benefits and fitness consequences under the general Polyandry heading. I believe this structure allows for better flow of information; that is, under this new format, information that is directly pertinent to Polyandry and its effect on fitness is consolidated together. Furthermore, I placed all information related to variation and mate choice near the end of the article. I consolidated all the mate choice information (both females and males) so that there is now very little repetition in the article. I placed the mate choice section (both male and female) at the end of my polyandry section because it provides a good transition into my fellow classmate’s section on polygamy (multiple mating across both sexes). I also changed some headings to make them more relevant to the material being discussed and to better facilitate understanding of the material. I added a sentence, specifying that polyandry refers to multiple mating in females only. I also condensed the female mate choice section, so that the language is easier to understand and that no contradictory information is present. Moreover, I added the term cryptic choice to better describe female mate choice. I added a couple sentences clarifying that although females benefit from polyandry, males can face some consequences through male competition for females and common resources. I deleted the erroneous information that polyandry always leads to an increase in population size; I clarified that polyandry can actually increase genetic diversity which can help a population adapt to a changing environment over time. Krish707 (talk) 02:44, 9 November 2015 (UTC)

11/16/15 Feedback on Polygamy
Originally, this article was composed of two large body paragraphs. The content within each of these two large body paragraphs were quite broad, so I added some sub-headings within each large body paragraph. The first sub-heading I added (Absence of Fertilization Failures in Related Beetles) consolidated all the information pertaining to fertilization failures. I believe this sub-heading was important because the information on fertilization failures is fairly specific and needs to be differentiated from the general information on polygamy. I also added a second sub-heading, Male and Female Recognition of Relatives. The information in this section was not directly relevant to the fertilization failure section above it and as such, I believe that the sub-heading I added better differentiates the two subjects. I also renamed the “Polygyny” heading to “Polygyny and Fertilization Success.” I renamed this heading because it is more specific to the actual content of the paragraph. Krish707 (talk) 23:22, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

I deleted repetitious information. The author mentions that multiple mating is seen when genetic diversity within a population is low several times within the passage. I also deleted other sentences in which the author specifically told the reader to refer to other parts of the article. Moreover, I fixed grammar mistakes and sentence structure issues where I condensed a few sentences. Krish707 (talk) 23:22, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

Important note to the author: Not all sentences are followed by an in-text citation. In text citations are important to ensure that in the case of future edits, all sentences are individually cited.Krish707 (talk) 23:22, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

Wow, this information is organized so well, so great great job on that! It is so easy to follow and I can find exactly what I am looking for! Just a couple things... I feel like Fertilization Failures sounds funny, maybe just adjust it to Failure in Fertilization? "Lack of fertilization failure...." This seems to be a double negative... So you mean when fertilization is successful? I would make this more clear. In the section of "Absence of Fertilization Failure", your last two sentences are contradicting. I see what you're trying to say, but I think this could be clarified. And the last thing I can say is can you explain a little more about the mechanism behind how if the female stores more of the first male's sperm, how does the last male still have an equal capacity to fertilize the egg? But seriously, good job. Cheesecakefantasy (talk) 15:58, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

peer review of the polyandry section
All in all the section looks great. I could barely find any information to edit. Fixed a part where the reference was found in between the word by moving the reference to the end of the word.The information is presented in a nice coherent manner. Very detailed but easy to follow throughout the section. Nice work!Sluology (talk) 09:13, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

Revisions for final draft
I linked other wikipedia articles to the polygamy section.(This includes; Polygamy, Inbreeding Depression, Polygyny, and Genetic Diversity.) I have also linked the red flour beetle article in other articles (Including; Polygyny in animals, Animal sexual Behavior, And Female sperm storage). I also changed some wording that seemed to cause a double negative. Ex 'Lack of fertilization failure' was changed to 'successful fertilization'. I also added a sentence to address how the last male to mate has a chance at fertilizing the egg. Sluology (talk) 09:14, 10 December 2015 (UTC) Sluology (talk) 09:12, 10 December 2015 (UTC)

Peer review of the "Red flour beetle as a model organism" section
I’m impressed that you found a lot of information about the red flour beetle, including the comparison between this beetle and fruit fly, the use of flour beetle for RNAi experiment and CRISPR technology. Your edit fits well into the category that you chose to edit. I find it very interesting that red flour beetle does not have bicoid protein because bicoid is so important in fruit fly development. However, I’m not sure why researchers would want to compare between fruit fly and red flour beetle because they do not seem to relate to each other. Therefore, I think it would be a good idea to include a little more about the similarity they share. Since you already mentioned that the researchers sequenced the genomes of the two species, you might as well include the quantitative result as evidence. For example, "According to XYZ, the genome of the two species shared 95% similarity" would be a good piece of evidence. Other than that, I think you did a fantastic job editing this article. Your writing did not only effortlessly guide me through the paper but also informed me with lots of information. I could not spot any grammatical errors. Your writing is very good! All the information that you provide is cited correctly as well. Good job!Huynhat2 (talk) 21:14, 30 May 2019 (UTC)Huynhat2 (talk) 21:33, 30 May 2019 (UTC)


 * I've added some of the suggestions you made. I went into more detail about the similarities between the red flour beetle and fruit flies. I also tried to add more quantitative results from the sources I cited. SnarkieGoblin (talk) 04:33, 5 June 2019 (UTC)

How this species becomes a pest
An additional section about how specifically this species attacks stored grain and other food products should be added to this article. The introduction describes that this species is a worldwide pest of stored products, and the “Ecology” section mentions that this species attacks food products, but including details about the beetles’ mechanism of attack will provide insight into their feeding behavior and how they seek out habitats. Hipper2305 (talk) 21:52, 13 February 2024 (UTC)

comment
The strength of this article is that it presents important information about the impact of this beetle in a well-organized information manner. I learned that Tribolium castaneum is a danger to stored foods such as grains. This entry would benefit from a category about predation, life cycle, and control. It would be interesting to learn about the predators of this beetle since it is such a pest to human food supply. A category about the life cycle of the beetle would be help readers understand how the beetles end up in human food storage facilities. A category about control would reveal the measures being taken by entities like the UN, which is mentioned in the article, to protect food storage facilities. The entry is ranked Start-class, but I think it could be upgraded to C-class because readers learn alot about the beetle as a pest and as a biological insect model organism, but could use more detail. The article is ranked mid-importance for beetles which I think could be upgraded to high-importance because its genome has been sequenced and experiments have proven its useful as a model organism. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Frenchfrylvr (talk • contribs) 04:38, 15 February 2024 (UTC)

Reiterating Repetition in Article
As has been previously stated, there is a lot of repetition in this article about polyandry and polygamy. The separation of the topics is confusing and they should be consolidated into one section. If the two topics are indeed distinct enough to keep separate, what makes them distinct should be better emphasized. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tommytrope (talk • contribs) 02:21, 16 February 2024 (UTC)

It may be beneficial to add a category about the food resources of this beetle seeing as how prolific of a pest the red flour beetle is. Gbuml (talk) 03:37, 16 February 2024 (UTC)

Comment
While there is ample discussion of the polygamy and polyandry of the red flour beetles, there is not enough information regarding out behavioral and general information of this beetle. There should be a prey and predation category added to the outline, where one can understand the behavioral strategies used by the red flour beetles that have allowed them to live this long. Additionally, this entry is missing a discussion of the anatomy and physiology of the red flour beetle. This section, especially the neurological aspect, is essential in potentially explaining the reason for polyandry and polygamy in the species. Finally, a section that is missing is its diet. The diet and search for food have been seen to be a factor that affects an organism’s behavior; we do not see any discussion of the red flour beetles’ diet other than how it is prone to infesting stored products in households. Sbimal (talk) 05:09, 16 February 2024 (UTC)

Other Topics to Explore
Hello! This article is well-written with a lot of information about its mating behaviors. But, some categories that might be beneficial to include are:

1.     Life history: It’s important to not only understand the mating behavior, but to understand how the offspring survive. How long do they typically live? How long does it take for them to fully mature?

2.     Enemies: I would find it interesting to learn what (if any) animals target this species. Since these are household pests, what environmental control do we have on this species’ population?

3.     Food resources: Although we know it is a common pest, it doesn’t mention anything about its diet or nutrition. If it is commonly found in food grains, then what specific parts of the grains does it use?

Overall, interesting read! Hahelen (talk) 05:06, 16 February 2024 (UTC)