This project page does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
Fungi This page is within the scope of WikiProject Fungi, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Fungi on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.FungiWikipedia:WikiProject FungiTemplate:WikiProject FungiFungi

Archives

Archive 1 (2006) Archive 2 (2007) Archive 3 (2008) Archive 4 (2009) Archive 5 (2010) Archive 6 (2011) Archive 7 (2012) Archive 8 (2013) Archive 9 (2014) Archive 10 Archive 11 Archive 12

This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 5 sections are present.

Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 16:56, 1 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

User:SageOst2024 is trying to get Draft:Complex Xylaria Hypoxilon through AfC. This article is about a species complex including Xylaria hypoxylon. I have proposed incorporating information about the species complex into Xylaria hypoxylon, but I don't know enough about fungi to know whether the species complex should have a separate article. Can anyone help out? Un assiolo (talk) 14:24, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You are correct, the species complex information should be incorporated into the main Xylaria hypoxylon article. As individual species in the complex get described, separate articles will eventually be made for them. For an example, see the taxonomy section of Parmelia saxatilis. Esculenta (talk) 15:31, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. There seems very little information to justify an article on the complex. It's not clear what species should be included, only that polymorpha and longipes are excluded. I might be misreading the situation, but it seems most of the specimens in the complex are actually described as Xylaria hypoxylon and that it needs further study to define the species more clearly, i.e. X. hypoxylon as currently understood is probably a species complex including yet to be described species. The iNaturalist forum discussion suggests the work was preliminary in 2022, but I don't see a reference for a "resolution in 2024". Something on the complex in the taxonomy section of X. hypoxylon seems the appropriate approach.  —  Jts1882 | talk  16:15, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Un assiolo: To clarify, a species complex is a separate rank from a species, and could have it's own article (and many do already, see Category:Species groups). However this draft is not really distinguishing between Xylaria hypoxylon the species and the Xylaria hypoxylon species complex, nor is it especially long. I agree with Esculenta that it should be 'merged'. awkwafaba (📥) 16:16, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There seems to be some controversy going on over at Talk:Stachybotrys chartarum. I'm really not familiar with this topic; however, the article is quite popular and seems to need some work. It seems like this page may be particularly valuable to WP:FRINGE. I just wanted to put this on people's radar, as I know these controversial topics can cause some issues with Wikipedia pages. (Also commented on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Plants and Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine) CursedWithTheAbilityToDoTheMath (talk) 06:07, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is a high importance article in the project, so I thought I would notify the project that I have removed a reasonably important paragraph. See Talk:Saprotrophic_nutrition#Nitrogen_and_cofactors for my full reasoning.

I would appreciate it if there is anyone with reasonably basic saprotroph knowledge to rewrite the paragraph.

Thanks :) AllPurposeScientist^blah 17:39, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This species is redirected to Clavaria sulcata. But the text of that page says they have been differentiated and are not the same. This is problematic. A side issue, are both known as flame fungus? FloridaArmy (talk) 16:49, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I updated the synonymy in the article and it seems like Clavaria miniata is still acknowledged as a synonym by Index Fungorum. I adjusted the text to soften Reid's suggestion of non-synonymy, as this was written in the days when some mycologists thought ellipsoid spores vs. spherical spores was enough to differentiate a new genus. I also softened the Wiki-voice on the "common name" of this fungus, as the authority of the single cited source is too weak to say this definitively. Esculenta (talk) 17:47, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

should be an article. This Subkingdom is too significant to be a draft. Make Mucoromyceta a article Atlas Þə Biologist (talk) 00:45, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Species only sourced to predatory journals. Please participate. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 13:59, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'll second this. The big question I'm seeing is if Species Fungorium/Index Fungorium and Mycobank that list this species are enough independent verification to compensate for the predatory journal issue. I'm not seeing a strong case being made for that, but I'm not as familiar with the fungal taxonomy organizations either. KoA (talk) 18:46, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]