Talk:Bridgeoporus/GA1

GA Review

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: J Milburn (talk · contribs) 09:58, 13 September 2015 (UTC)

Happy to have a look through. Josh Milburn (talk) 09:58, 13 September 2015 (UTC)

• "bryophytes, or plants." Bryophytes are plants, aren't they?

• True that. Change to vascular plants. Sasata (talk) 16:13, 14 September 2015 (UTC)

• "texture of the conk" What's a "conk"?

• Term now introduced and linked in the lead. Sasata (talk) 16:13, 14 September 2015 (UTC)

• "subhymenium (the fertile spore-producing surface)" Is your definition not of hymenium rather than subhymenium? Also, a link to hymenium somewhere in this discussion would be good.

• Good catch, fixed. Sasata (talk) 16:13, 14 September 2015 (UTC)

• "Phylogenetic analyses of mitochondrial small-subunit rDNA sequences suggests that B. nobilissimus belongs in the hymenochaetoid clade, closely related to the genera Oxyporus and Schizopora." This is unclear- it's not obvious what is "closely related".

• Tweaked for clarity. Sasata (talk) 16:13, 14 September 2015 (UTC)

• Perhaps a link somewhere (in a see also, even) to Phellinus ellipsoideus, which is now recognised as the largest polypore species, would be nice?

• Done. Sasata (talk) 16:13, 14 September 2015 (UTC)

• "Other bryophytes" Why other?

• Not sure ... removed. Sasata (talk) 16:13, 14 September 2015 (UTC)

• What do you mean by "mature layers"?

• Copyedited this bit. Sasata (talk) 16:13, 14 September 2015 (UTC)

• "simple-septate", "fascicles" and "thin-walled" strike me as jargon- links or explanations would be good

• Done. Sasata (talk) 16:13, 14 September 2015 (UTC)

• You're a little inconsistent on tree names- sometimes you use "common name (Specific name)", sometimes "Specific name (common name)" and sometimes just "Specific name". Consistency would be good.

• Done. Sasata (talk) 16:13, 14 September 2015 (UTC)

• "Species have been found at elevations of 1,000–4,000 feet (300–1,220 m)" Did you mean "specimens", here?

• Yes! Sasata (talk) 16:13, 14 September 2015 (UTC)

• "meaning pre-disturbance surveys and site management are needed." I'm not keen on this- do you perhaps mean something like "...are required before people can [whatever]" or "meaning [agency] has judged that pre-disturbance..."

• Added explanatory bit. Sasata (talk) 16:13, 14 September 2015 (UTC)

Pictures and sources check out. A really interesting species! I've made a few edits- please double-check them. Josh Milburn (talk) 10:29, 13 September 2015 (UTC)

• Edits are fine. Thanks for the review Josh. Sasata (talk) 16:13, 14 September 2015 (UTC)

• Great stuff, as ever. Promoting now. Josh Milburn (talk) 16:59, 15 September 2015 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.