User talk:Casscurteanu/sandbox

Peer Review from Brogan:

-It’s looking really good so far! -Since there are no links or Wikipedia citations, I am not going to comment on those things!

-Would be good to have more than one citation in that first paragraph. -The first paragraph is very concise and descriptive, a good beginning! -It would be nice to have subtitles of like ‘Mammals’, etc.

-The statement “Among mammals, the role of males in infant care is uncommon.” Seems strange since humans are mammals? -For the paragraph beginning with “Among mammals” I think you need more citations for the broad statements! -I don’t know if it is necessary to repeat “Although paternal care is rare among mammals…” in that same paragraph, and also once again, are you talking about other than humans? And if so, I would for sure say that and add a citation. -Maybe you could have a broad short paragraph for ‘Mammals’, and then below have a ‘Humans’ subtitle and paragraph, then ‘Non-human primates’ subtitle and paragraph?

-For your ‘Evolutionary Perspectives…’ section, is this just for non-human primates? Or is it for humans too? Might be beneficial to make that more clear! Maybe if it is just for non-human primates, you could have that as a paragraph after talking about non-human primates for a bit so it doesn’t just jump into it, I feel like it needs some background first! -In the ‘Paternal Care hypothesis’ paragraph, at this part “…care towards their own offspring. groups This allows…” There is the extra word ‘groups’. -In the paragraph “The Maternal Relief hypothesis”, there is a capital ‘I’ in the last sentence on “independent” that you can make lower-case. -Maybe it would look nice to have the names of the hypothesis in bolded font!

-In the Strepsirrhines paragraph, is this info for ALL strepsirrhine primates? If it is not, it would be good to make it more clear as to which ones it applies to? -You can remove the last sentence in the ‘Strepsirrhines’ paragraph: “Strepsirrhini males exhibit the lowest intensity of care towards infants in non-human primates.” You already said this so it’s a bit repetitive! -I had to reread this sentence: “In Cercopiths, male involvement in the infant’s interactions with others is common in many species of baboons but between species paternal care is not always biased towards biological offspring.” It just isn’t smooth and reads kinda strange, might need some clarification! Also, I think you need a citation when you mention something as specific as that! -I think you’re missing a word somewhere in this sentence, “Male Savannah baboons (Papio cynocephalus) direct care towards their own biological offspring (Buchan et al. (2003).” Maybe add ‘demonstrate’? -In this sentence “Long-term care and investment beyond early infancy is better linked to paternity in this species and affecting infant growth and development (Murray et al. 2016).” I am not sure who you’re comparing them to? Is better linked to paternity in this species compared to the savannah baboons? Other Cercopiths? -I am a little confused if what you talk about in the ‘Cercopiths’ paragraph is a blanket statement for the majority of baboons, or for only the ones you mentioned? And is it relevant to other cercopiths? Maybe clarify that a bit at the beginning of the paragraph! -For the platyrrhines paragraph, maybe mention what paternal care is like for other species of platyrrhines then titi and owl monkeys just to clarify that it is not the same as theirs. -It might be nice to also get into some detail about how titi and owl monkeys share the parental care!

-I think the hypothesis would fit better after the ‘Strepsirrhines’, etc.. paragraphs! Gives more context!

-It looks really great so far! I think the tone is neutral and it is very descriptive, looks good so far!

____________

Peer Review from Megan:

Your article is coming along great! It's so interesting :) It's neat too, you can link it to mine in a few places too at the end if you wanted (you'll see if you are peer-reviewing mine, it's exciting! I'll link to yours too in mine).

Paternal care being a rarity/uncommon is mentioned a number of times, maybe target the places you want to include it though? You might already be intending on doing this though.

I think the article might have to start with the topic, but it's an easy fix. Instead of "In biology, paternal care is parental investment provided by a male to his own offspring" >> you could just write "Paternal care, in biology, is..." Also, you could consider using biological parent or caregiving

This is good! "Although paternal care is well documented across species, the consequences and underlying evolutionary mechanisms as to why it evolved in the first place are still not well understood (CITE)" you could end it instead saying something like "its implications/impacts and underlying evolutionary mechanisms leading to its emergence remains poorly understood" or something along those lines.

You could frame "Caring for an infant can result in missed mating opportunities and can come at a high cost for male reproductive success (Minge et al. 2016)." As being an evolutionary tradeoff, or it having evolutionary implications maybe?

For "The Theory of Paternal Investment" you could link it to the socioecological theory (that's really what you do, just without calling it that, I think the Wrangham 1989(?) article goes into it if you want a reference)

I like how you start the Strepsirrhine section with examples of species, maybe that could be something you could do in the other sections too? Also adding pictures in at the end would be really neat! It's a great topic to include images to illustrate. You could also have a short paragraph in the top section, or a sentence or two, describing the types of common forms of paternal parental care they provide? maybe describing it as a spectrum? I know you mention it lower down but it could be a good addition to the top intro topic part maybe? It's neat how it has a practical but also can have social functions too.

Great job!