User talk:Elioeilish/Stickleback

Great work linking to other wiki pages and citing multiple sources for broader statements. You mention that sticklebacks are a good model for eco-evolution because they adapt and colonize new areas rapidly. This is kind of the main point of this section so it might help to explain why those traits are important to eco-evolution modeling. I could use a little more clarification on this statement "Importantly, these feedback loops arise when evolutionary change occurs relatively quickly, potentially outpacing rates of ecological change". I think it is related to the following sentence about rapid environmental colonization but I think you could change the wording to make that more clear/ use sticklebacks as an example of evolution outpacing ecology. Overall I think you could add more detail/ explanation to key concepts for laypeople. For instance, I would also suggest clarifying that you are referring to stickleback ecotypes when you first mention ecotypes to help clue in people who may no know what ecotypes are. Same for sympatric "species" pairs. Like wise, when you are explaining the cattle tank experiment I would explain the factors they included in mimicking a natural environment (i.e. it was more than just abiotic factors and plants) because it caught me off guard when you discussed prey communities. Good job! Lots of good information and quality citations, just try to rework some stuff for non-expert audiences.

Emelyn

Draft 2 review In which section within the three spined stickleback page are you going to put this? Its own section? The last sentence of the first paragraph leaves me wanting more detailed explanation or a specific example of what exactly the predictable pattern is/ how it is useful. Good work defining key terms like ecotype! Also, the mesocosm section is really easy to follow now.Two thumbs up. I might consider breaking the middle paragraph into two at "these experiments demonstrate". Its fine the way it is but I think the division would give the reader a second to process what the set up is and then what the take aways are. I would also suggest adding a picture or figure to this section to help people visualize the setup/ results. As for the last paragraph, it looks like there is already a really pathetic section on parasites in the three spined stickleback page. Maybe this paragraph could be added to that section or your section could absorb the existing parasite section? Cat&#38;Donkey (talk) 18:11, 7 April 2021 (UTC) Emelyn

Hi Noah. To begin I found that your article was extremely well written, and covers a lot of information that I did not previously know. Your article effectively caters to an unknowledgeable audience with the numerous in text links to definitions. I feel that this works wonders because it allows you to present complicated information regarding the eco-evolutionary dynamics of sticklebacks, and yet it is coherent to readers with practically any degree of understanding. Secondly I am very intrigued by your paragraph on parasites. It is especially interesting to consider that sticklebacks could make a great model organism for host-parasite coevolution and its subsequent impacts on a larger scale. I find that your introductory paragraph does a good job giving an overview of your content, but feels a little short ended in the closing sentence. Maybe exemplifying the different stickleback populations or at the least introducing them to be mentioned later could help with the feeling that I am missing out on information. Your second paragraph flows nicely as well but might benefit from some division. The first few sentences feel like a continuation of the introduction that jumps sort of suddenly into a study and I was a bit confused. Where exactly to divide this section would be entirely up to you (and if you would even consider it in the first place) but I think differentiating the first portion of the paragraph and the implications of the studies could work. Although it is probably redundant to attempt to define EVERY term, I had to search up benthic and limnetic ecotypes because I was not all too familiar with the terms. Altogether your article is great in my opinion. I really struggled coming up with edits. EasyBlakeOven (talk) 01:57, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

Noah – overall, the article is well-written and explains complex topics in relatively simple terms. I suggest some restructuring in more specific comments below, but overall the ideas flow from one to the next relatively well. I think you can get away with being a bit more technical in this article than some of the others, given the niche of the topic. However, I would consider having some of your topic sentences and others throughout be just a bit more simplified, with then more technical elaboration, so that readers new to the subject area can grasp the significance. Looking forward to the next draft

Potentially outpacing ecological change, but importantly occurring on a similar timescale as ecological change.

Adapting “frequently” sounds a bit funny. Maybe it is the best word, but consider replacing it with “predictably” or “repeatedly” or something else…or maybe even remove it.

Explain ecotypes if not already explained in article.

What is ecosystem size? Might need some explanation in terms of how the ecological proceses influence the type of ecotypes evolving. I think the last two sentence of the first paragraph are a bit out of place. Consider explaining the primary evolutionary responses to ecology and primary ecological traits that feedback to one another that have been studied, and then use the sentences currently there to start new paragraphs expanding on them (or remove completely). They seem more like lead ins to a further explanation than stand alone statements.

In the second paragraph, I suggest the topic sentence not focusing on methods, but rather the idea of how adaptive radiations can impact ecological processes. Then, you can explain that mesocosms have been the primary approach for studying this. I suggest less emphasis on methods, and more on results.

Ok, now that I see the third paragraph, I suggest the first paragraph sets up the types of dynamics usually researched, then leave the details re: benthic-limnetic to the second paragraph. Otherwise, it seems like the whole section is going to be on ecotypes, when really half is on ecotypes and half on host-parasite interactions. In other words, the first paragraph would be good to be much more broad and lead the reader to expect the second and third paragraphs.Evol&#38;Glass (talk) 17:19, 18 March 2021 (UTC)