User:Esf55/Heterocarpy

Introduction
Heterocarpy describes the production of multiple fruit morphs by a single plant. Each morph is different in size, which influences dispersal and germination rates, meaning that they are adapted to different environments. Some individuals of a heterocarpic species may survive better in moist, dense environments while other morphs are more adapted to dry conditions. The differing rates of germination and dormancy of seeds in heterocarpic species also influences rates of herbivory and seed mortality. It is different from amphicarpy, as amphicarpy refers to the production of two different types of fruit; one produced underground and the other produced above ground.

Evolutionary significance
Heterocarpy is a useful adaptation for plants since it allows seeds to be dispersed over varying distances as well as in different environments. This increases the chances of survival of a plant, since it can adapt to different environmental conditions. However, there are tradeoffs that occur with the differing rates of germination and dispersal differences in the fruit morphs of a heterocarpic species. For example, Kistenmacher and Gibson (2016) found that morphs in Grindelia ciliata that are dispersed further away from the parent germinate soon after dispersal, which is beneficial to quickly establishing new populations. However, this way they are more vulnerable to possibly harsh environmental conditions as well as herbivory. In contrast, locally dispersed and dormant morphs are less susceptible to herbivory, since they germinate later in their growing season, but are more likely to be consumed by seed predators. It is also argued to be an evolutionary response to harsher and unpredictable environments. This is particularly important today, as climate change and ongoing anthropogenic destruction have caused severe, and likely irreversible, damage to natural landscapes globally. It is important that plants are able to adapt to the continuously changing environments around them.

Examples of heterocarpy
Heterocarpy is demonstrated by a number of plant families. One example is the flower Calendula micrantha, a member of the Asteraceae family. C. micrantha produces six different fruit morphs, each adapted to different environmental conditions including light intensity, water availability, and plant density. Another species that demonstrates heterocarpy is Atriplex sagittata in the Chenopodiaceae family,  which produces three distinct fruit morphs. The morphs of A. sagittata disperse in varying amounts across the seasons. The Type C morph peaks in dispersal in the winter while the Type A morph peaks in the spring and the Type B morph disperses the most in winter and spring. Their different morphologies also contribute to the mode of dispersal and dormancy/germination. For example, Type A differs from the Type B and C morphs as it lacks bracteoles, which are essential for dispersal by wind or water.

Peer review - 19345beta
This is a page that I think should for sure exist. Especially since it currently redirects to amphicarpy which is just confusing for readers. Due to this I think it is important to distinguish between the two terms, perhaps even more so then you have done. Further, I would recommend editing the page amphicarpy to make sure people reading that page understand the difference as well. A few questions I had that I think you should address are if this concept only can occur in angiosperms? Are the physical seeds in each morph identical in genetic makeup and in physical appearance? What exactly is seed mortality? Can a plant create multiple morphs in a single year or does production vary annually at the most? However, overall, I thought you wrote well. Your article was easy to understand and I like how it was broken up. In your introduction I think your first two sentences are great. If anything, maybe add some more basic information about what fruit morphs are, something that a 5th grade student could understand. Your third sentence could use a bit of work. It does not follow well from the prior sentences and the jargon is a bit complex for the reader, especially in an introduction. I think that creating a new start to the sentence would be a good first step. The second paragraph reads pretty well. I would not recommend doing an in text citation such as in the 3rd sentence as the people reading this likely do not have access the article, and even if they did, the odds most people care about anything that specific is unlikely. You also use the word ‘they’ which I think could be changed to make it easier to understand what you are referring to. While I like your 2 last sentences, I am conflicted on if it belongs in this style of writing. See if your other reviewer has any thoughts on it. I am not against it completely, but it does feel a bit opinionated. Your third paragraph is my favorite part. I have very little comments for that section, it is what I would expect to read when I clicked on a Wikipedia page. If anything, some pictures would be appreciated in the final draft but not needed.

Response to peer review
Thank you for the feedback! I changed many of the things you mentioned that could improve the article. One of the things that you discussed that I chose not to include a ton about was information regarding genetic makeup of the seeds. While I did find a couple of articles that studied the genetic influence of heterocarpy, I could not fully understand the article myself. So I thought it was best not to include it since I don't think I would be able to articulate the points correctly or well.