User talk:Rptseng/sandbox

Assignment 1
Excellent! Medmyco (talk) 02:18, 21 October 2013 (UTC)


 * Having some trouble finding additional general information about ecology and appearance. Sources tend to group many thermophilic fungi together and details not specific enough to this species. Specific cases and applications have plenty of information, some sections still a work in progress.Rptseng (talk) 07:40, 25 October 2013 (UTC)


 * How about van Oorschot, Studies in Mycology 20 (1980) - it'll be in the ESC library. There might also be something in that book on thermophilic fungi by Jean Mouchacca (I forget the title). Medmyco (talk) 19:09, 25 October 2013 (UTC)


 * Will look into it, thanks. Rptseng (talk) 05:57, 27 October 2013 (UTC)


 * Couldn't find the specific work you suggested, but went to the library and was able to pick out a few other works with useful info. Will add them in.Rptseng (talk) 00:26, 1 November 2013 (UTC)


 * Its there but it might be hard to find. Its a thin orange book. Van Oorschot's monograph is one of the early go-to references on this group. It used to be in the ESC library. I have a copy but its at my other office. Medmyco (talk) 14:12, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

Peer review
Hi Ryan! I see that your fungus has a lot of synonyms; perhaps you can create a short taxonomy/history section explaining why the fungus had its name changed so often? Otherwise, I really like your industrial uses section!

MinnieVW (talk) 21:40, 31 October 2013 (UTC)

Hi there, reading your bullet points gives good idea of where you're headed with the article. That said, I think you need to expand on the morphology of your fungus. Maybe you can discuss how it appears under the microscope, how it grows in culture, what the different states look like. Also, you mentioned that Myceliophthora thermophila degrades plant material, you could expand on the ecology section and describe how it is found to interact with different plant species. It's great that you went beyond the human aspect and wrote about industrial uses. Keep up the good work, can't wait to read the final product!Renatofrart (talk) 22:28, 31 October 2013 (UTC)

I know that you will edit and improve your article in the future but let me help you with some parts. As the person above mentioned, you should include all the morphology information that will help to differentiate this particular fungus from other members in the genus (http://fungalgenomics.concordia.ca/fungi/Mthe.php): macroscopic (culture time, color, temperature), microscopic features (structure of hyphae; shape, size, and location of conidia (spores)), and important molecular regions (DNA or RNA) specific to this fungus. Also, information about history of taxonomy and phylogeny should be moved out of the morphology section and can have its own section if it is important. Hhhzzzani (talk) 00:50, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

Final thoughts
Ryan, it looks quite good overall. I suggest expanding the Morphology section to include a couple of sentences about microscopic morphology. Also, there are some quirky things in the references that could be fixed (e.g. Julius Kane's first name appears to be "et. al."). One small worring detail is that you list the fungus in the Onygenales/ Onygenaceae in the taxbox, yet you note that thevteleomorph is Corynascus heterothallicus which is Sordariales/ Chaetomiaceae. What's up with this? Medmyco (talk) 14:39, 13 November 2013 (UTC)