# Talk:Leotia lubrica

This review is transcluded from Talk:Leotia lubrica/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Sasata (talk) 16:24, 3 July 2011 (UTC)
I'll review these babies. Sasata (talk) 16:24, 3 July 2011 (UTC)
Comments

"Olive-green in colour" I think it would be better to say it has an olive green tint, this conforms more to the field guide descriptions I've read, and jibes better with the color of the taxobox image
Rephrased, I was aware of that. I personally wouldn't call it olive green or ochre, I've always seen it as lighter than both, but I have to go with what the sources say. J Milburn (talk) 10:21, 4 July 2011 (UTC)
"However, Christiaan Hendrik Persoon, basing his work on that of Scopoli" I'm not sure what this statement means
Rephrased. I had the taxonomy section arranged differently earlier. J Milburn (talk) 10:21, 4 July 2011 (UTC)
you could cite Persoon's 1794 work and give a link with this; Bulliard's Herbier de la France is here
I don't think the Persoon link is actually his publication that gave the description under the new name. It was published a few year's later than the mentioned in the book by Bi, and it cites an earlier work. The Bulliard link, though, is definitely worth including. However, how you go about citing a work like that, I don't know. Does what I've done work? J Milburn (talk) 10:21, 4 July 2011 (UTC)
link valid to correct name (botany)
Done. J Milburn (talk) 10:21, 4 July 2011 (UTC)
publisher for Species Fungorum is CAB International
Done. J Milburn (talk) 10:21, 4 July 2011 (UTC)
it's stem in the lead, but stalk in the description
Done. I've gone with stalk; I want to stress how this isn't a "mushroom", as such.
"with Charles McIlvaine even consider it good." fix
Done. J Milburn (talk) 10:21, 4 July 2011 (UTC)
the single image doesn't do it justice; could you possible fit in a group shot-there's lots of nice ones to choose from at MO. You could perhaps remove the micro characteristics subheader and fit it in left-side in the description. If the article is expanded a couple of paragraphs from the two sources below there should be ample room :)
I've given the group shot pride of place, as it provides more info about the environment and ecology than does the lone "mushroom". I've moved the other pic down. J Milburn (talk) 19:19, 5 July 2011 (UTC)
Additional sources and info: JSTOR 2467537, doi:10.1007/s11557-006-0094-8
I've included some details from the jstor link- most of it is very technical and specific, and probably doesn't belong in an article this short. I will give it another look later. J Milburn (talk) 10:48, 4 July 2011 (UTC)
I've included some from the other article but, again, it's a bit too technical for me. I'll have another look later. J Milburn (talk) 11:22, 4 July 2011 (UTC)
McKnight's field guide calls it a "slippery cap". Should also mention (same source): the stem surface is "scurfy" (or jargon-free equivalent)—this is apparent in the image if you look at full magnification; the spores are hyaline
Mentioned the common name and the spores, but I have already included details about the grains on the stalk surface- is this not the same thing? J Milburn (talk) 15:21, 4 July 2011 (UTC)
Yes, all good. Sasata (talk) 16:30, 6 July 2011 (UTC)
the stalk is "hollow, or more often filled with a gel"; "It is the most common Leotia in North America"
Done. J Milburn (talk) 15:21, 4 July 2011 (UTC)
more common names: "green slime fungus", "gumdrop fungus". Also found in New Zealand.<ref name=Dickinson1982>Dickinson C, Lucas J. (1982). VNR Color Dictionary of Mushrooms. New York, New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold. pp. 16–17. ISBN 978-0442219987.</ref>
Done. J Milburn (talk) 20:23, 4 July 2011 (UTC)
one source suggests that the greenish color of L. atrovirens may be due to infection by an imperfect fungus on L. lubrica, Arora says the species may intergrade; the Zhong and Pfister paper mentioned above should shed more light on their relationship
Ok, had a bash. If you could have a look at the second para of the taxonomy section and make sure I haven't messed up... J Milburn (talk) 18:41, 5 July 2011 (UTC)
another name: "ochre jelly club". This source calls it edible but bland.
Done. J Milburn (talk) 15:25, 4 July 2011 (UTC)
Refs

Ok, I think I've dealt with everything, and I've expanded the lead. Thanks for your thorough review- I'd be happy to look into any other issues. J Milburn (talk) 19:19, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

Looks good JM, I believe all the GA criteria are met, am passing the article now. Sasata (talk) 16:30, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

Hello! This is a note to let the editors of this article know that File:Grüngelbes Gallertkäppchen Leotia lubrica.JPG will be appearing as picture of the day on November 10, 2016. You can view and edit the POTD blurb at Template:POTD/2016-11-10. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 10:47, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

This article's "Edibility" section should point to the dangers involved with eating this fungus. Already in 1985, monomethylhydrazine has been found in this fungus. Monomethylhydrazine is not only extremely cytotoxic (it is the reason of the severe toxicity of Gyromitra esculenta), but also has been confirmed to be highly carcinogenic due to its alkylating properties. The German WP article for this fungus cites this paper:
C. Andary, G. Privat, M.-J. Bourrier: Variations of monomethylhydrazine content in Gyromitra esculenta. Mycologia 77 (2), 1985.
Since this fungus often appears in very large numbers at places in the woods, and because monomethylhydrazine is a volatile compound, even getting poisoned by inhaling the fumes on a hot summer day isn't completely out of the question. Gänseblümchentee (talk) 10:08, 31 August 2023 (UTC)

@Gänseblümchentee: I've added something, but we can't step beyond what's been reported in the reliable sources. If you know of any other sources discussing this issue, please feel free to add them. Josh Milburn (talk) 12:57, 31 August 2023 (UTC)
That's great, thank you! Gänseblümchentee (talk) 06:55, 2 September 2023 (UTC)