User:Huatammy

Evaluating Wiki-Alligators
Nothing was distracting, everything in the article was strictly talking about alligators. It was very much scientific in the sense that it was just talking about facts about alligators. The article was very neutral, especially when talking about human interactions with alligators. For example this statement "Alligators are generally timid towards humans and tend to walk or swim away if one approaches. This has led some people to the practice of approaching alligators and their nests in a manner that may provoke the animals into attacking. In Florida, feeding wild alligators at any time is illegal. If fed, the alligators will eventually lose their fear of humans and will learn to associate humans with food, thereby becoming both a greater danger to people, and at greater risk from them.". It is very easy to place your own opinions about alligators but the writer remained strictly neutral about the topic. The viewpoints mainly represented in the article is the fact that many alligator species is endangered. The links for the citations do work, and the sources supports the article by linking us to articles that would give us more detail on terms that isn't public knowledge such as "egg tooth". From the references I noticed a lot of scientific journals but also references from reputable news sites, such as the Washington Post. Judging from the topic of the article, there is nothing that could change about alligators such as the fact that they are Crocodilian. Unless there is a huge paradigm shift. The conversations on the Talk page is mostly about fixing up things said within the article such as the "intent" of a statement or fixing up external links provided. Alligators are part of the WikiProject Amphibians and Reptiles. And has been rated a class B. I feel the way we talk about things in class is very "for" saving the environment therefore being fairly biased. The article speaks in a very scientific tone in the sense that they are stating what alligators are about, not about how we should be saving/protecting them.

Jellyfish's Response to Climate Change
We plan to contribute to the existing article Jellyfish, specifically their response to climate change. Our main focus is to use the knowledge we learned from 3BO3 and with additional research and provide a proper section onto the article.

Brainstorm
Notes from the Wiki page:
 * can live in oxygen depleted habitats and high nutrients
 * therefore where fishes die, the jelly fish can thrive
 * plus theres over fishing so less predation
 * more nutrients = phytoplankton = food
 * can reproduce asexually and sexually
 * can revert back to polyps for immortality
 * ride the currents

More research:
 * Pelagic jellyfish blooms are increasing worldwide as a potential response to climate-change.
 * Chronic cold treatment caused body mass loss, but no apparent change in aerobic metabolism.
 * Cassiopea sp. medusae seem to acclimate well at 32 °C, gain body mass and reduce the aerobic energy consumption
 * Acute cold/heat treatment decreased/increased Cassiopea 's bell pulsation rate.

(Aljbour et al., 2017)
 * Overall these results suggest an enhanced growth in response to global warming, whereas low temperatures may set the limits for successful invasion of Cassiopea into colder water bodies.
 * increased seawater temperature and CO2 partial pressure (pCO2) on the photochemistry, bleaching, and early growth of the reef coral
 * elevated temperature greatly promoted lateral growth and calcification, while polyp budding exhibited temperature-dependent responses to pCO2.

(Jiang et al., 2017) (Klein et al., 2017)
 * results suggest that increased temperature can mitigate the adverse effects of acidification on the calcification of juvenile P. damicornis, but at a substantial cost to asexual budding
 * Polyp fitness was characterised as asexual reproduction, respiration, feeding, and protein concentrations.
 * pre-exposure to elevated temperature and reduced pH in mitigating the potential negative effects of future ocean conditions on polyps of a dangerous Irukandji jellyfish
 * Pre-exposure to elevated temperature alone partially mitigated the negative effects of future conditions on polyp fitness, while pre-exposure to reduced pH in isolation completely mitigated the negative effects of future conditions on polyp fitness.
 * pre-exposure to the stressors individually may allow Irukandji polyps to acclimate over short timescales, the stressors are unlikely to occur in isolation in the long term, and thus, warming and acidification in parallel may prevent polyp populations from acclimating to future ocean conditions.