User:Marythemuffinlady/Aquatic biomonitoring/FreyaPortales97 Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

Marythemuffinlady


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * User:Marythemuffinlady/Aquatic biomonitoring
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * Aquatic biomonitoring

Evaluate the drafted changes
General review of draft:

Good: The information provided is perfectly on topic, using algae as a point of reference for bioindicators. Excellent points were made regarding the tolerance (of algae) to a number of parameters such as chemical pollutants, temperature, and heavy metal toxicity. Sources used appear to be peer reviewed and appropriate.

Suggestions: When referencing the photosystem II of algae, it may be helpful to reference a particular genus or species (or general type) of algae. I was confused as to whether or not the photosystem information was meant to tie into the diatom portion of your contribution. It also helps if you stick with a single type of reference for the photosystem, rather than saying "photosynthesis system", simply state photosystem II again (or whatever photosystem you are referencing in the moment). This will help keep your points concise and easy to understand. In terms of your bibliography, I could not access any of the sources through a provided link (though this may be an error on my part; still learning how to peruse through wiki). Lastly, I would make sure that your thoughts within one sentence are completed in that sentence; incomplete or sometimes confusing sentences may result from carrying a thought over into a new sentence without establishing (or re-establishing context).

Uncertain (but curious): Is it biased to directly state that certain pollutants have an effect on algal growth? Should you consider stating the potential correlation without making claims of influence? I do not know for sure if this would fall under a bias, or just a thorough observation, so I am not suggesting that this be removed. However, I would suggest asking our professor or a wiki staff member for possible guidance regarding potential bias.

Final thoughts: I think that your draft is well written, and the information is relevant to the assigned article. Great job!