User talk:MichaelaSo87/sandbox

Hi Michaela, I'm one of your classmates from HMB436 with some feedback! In terms of the structure of your article, it might flow better if you add the "Conidium development" section to your growth and morphology section, as the two are very closely related. You also need a citation for the statement "heavy growth of T. roseum is rare and therefore unlikely to be significant in human health". I know that trichothecenes were considered as potentially relevant mycotoxins in class (the allergy and asthma lecture), and T. roseum does produce them (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25254921), so you may want to look into other citations about its effects on human health You may want to go into more detail about potential plant pathologies caused by T. roseum, since it infects so many hosts. Here's a PubMed article about potential pathogenic effects on grapes: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4206793/ There's also a really cool article about its potential use as a biocontrol agent against other plant pathogens: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1049964400908296

I hope this helps! Hmrdtlmzamie (talk) 03:42, 31 October 2015 (UTC)

HMB436 Feedback
Hello! First off, good work on collecting information! Looks like it has potential to be an informative page. I just want to offer a few modifications. I would suggest combining your conidium section into your growth and morphology section. In my opinion, some of your points in the Physiology section can also be combined with your growth and morphology section as they are talking about growth conditions of the fungus, e.g. utilizing the different saccharides. It seems like your fungus is often found in many plants and vegetation. Is there any data on the impact this can cause on agriculture or food production? It would speak to the significance of the fungus. Furthermore, if possible, maybe expand a little on the pathophysiology of roseotoxin B for a more comprehensive page. To continue, maybe grouping some of your countries into regions will provide a more fluid reading experience. I'd like to recommend the website 'Mycology Online' as a resource for clear, comprehensive information. Lastly, I would omit the history subsection of the page. It does not have enough information to make it worthwhile to dedicate a section to it. Perhaps you can add the information that is there to the introduction. Other than that, great work! Sinahadipourlakmehsari (talk) 00:17, 31 October 2015 (UTC)

"Review of draft article Overall a very complete picture of Trichothecium roseum. I liked how thorough you were under the growth and morphology section and when looking through a few of the articles I found that you gathered all the important facts and data. I also really like how you were able to find multiple synonyms for the fungus as I was unable to find as many as you did when looking through research. I think that if you expanded on why it is only the important species of the genus it would give readers a better picture of the importance of this fungus. Expansion of the development of conidia could also result in a better picture of the conidia as you describe the morphology and growth in great detail. The other are well researched as well, particularly the habitat in which it's located in.

LewisKurschner (talk) 19:36, 30 October 2015 (UTC)" - Cross post from user talk page LewisKurschner (talk) 03:21, 31 October 2015 (UTC)