# Talk:Gymnarchus

This review is transcluded from Talk:Gymnarchus/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Nominator: Chiswick Chap (talk · contribs) 14:37, 25 November 2024 (UTC)
Reviewer: Esculenta (talk · contribs) 15:48, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
Hi CC, I'll review this in a few days. Before I get started, might you be able to add a taxonomy section that tells us who/what/when/why the species, genus, and family were published, and briefly mentions any other relevant taxonomic details? I think the taxonomy templates need adjusting too (i.e, the genus and family should be bolded and unlinked in the taxobox). Esculenta (talk) 15:48, 1 December 2024 (UTC)

Many thanks, I'll do the section.
Esculenta: The genus and family appear automatically in the taxobox and I've no idea how to format the invisible and quite possibly ineditable. Certainly Template:Speciesbox#Monospecific genera gives no clue to such formatting. Maybe there's a parameter for monotypic genera or something? If you know how, please fix it! Chiswick Chap (talk) 16:24, 1 December 2024 (UTC)

 Done Esculenta (talk) 16:29, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
Super, thank you very much. Taxonomy done too. Chiswick Chap (talk) 16:48, 1 December 2024 (UTC)


### Comments
Here's some initial commentary, focussing on general impressions and assessment of WIAGA criterion 3a (broad coverage):

There's a "[10]" citation in the Human Use section that uses incorrect formatting and appears to be a dead reference.
Fixed.
"It is sold in large numbers during the spring and summer." is cited to a 100+-year old source. Anything more recent to show this still happens? Following up on this, is there any info about the economic importance of this species?
Removed the phrase, but refs [4] and [7] are both recent and support continued importance in West Africa.
The Description section mixes physical characteristics with feeding behavior; these could be separated into distinct sections (perhaps after some supplementation with additional info from sources below?)
Edited. Additions will largely go into other sections, yes.
missing content I'm left wondering about:
breeding season timing?
Flooding: added to Repro. section.
habitat depth preferences?
Not stated anywhere obvious. Rivers like the Niger are pretty large.
any predators or other natural threats?
Not stated anywhere obvious. Crocodiles, presumably.
any non-electrical behavior?
Feeding and reproduction described.
the range map suggests there's might be introduced populations in Cameroon, but this isn't mentioned in the text
Search is confounded by false positives, so I don't know, beyond the marked area on the IUCN map as stated.
this source confirms that the fish is a high-fat good protein source
Added.
might want to mention that the species utilizes median paired fin (MPF) propulsion doi:10.1007/bf03399478
That paper's abstract agrees with the consensus and observation that the species swims by undulating its dorsal (unpaired) fin. MPF (pectoral fins) are used at most for small adjustments.
this source has some extra interesting info about the fish's cultural significance in Nigeria, as well as its role in floodplain ecology (not currently mentioned), food and feeding habits, breeding behavior, etc.
Added details to Reproduction and to Human use.
this study (doi:10.1111/j.1096-3642.1940.tb02417.x) discusses "Unique features in Gymnarchus not present in any known living teleosts", which seems like it might be worth a mention.
Mentioned briefly.
this and doi:10.4314/jasem.v25i8.5 source discuss reproductive biology, some details of which could be included, e.g., fecundity, sex ratio, etc.
Added. I'm getting Déjà vu from several of these papers; the same details are being reported over and over, with diminishing returns of anything particularly new. The paper has dissection photos but they aren't specially enlightening.
For the section "Human use", I think it would be a shame to not mention the "undulating robotic fin inspired by Gymnarchus niloticus", described here: doi:10.1016/j.mechmachtheory.2008.08.013
Added.
this source doi:10.1002/jmor.1051380305 discusses the development of electric organs in this species. Worth including?
Added.
doi:10.4314/jasem.v25i8.5 this OA source has many details about anatomy and histological features, and images of dissected fish parts
Added, mainly for Ecology. Paper is similar to one already cited by first two authors; no such images seen, perhaps that was a different paper.


### Comments round 2
Since the article is about three taxa in one, I think it should mention how the Gymnarchidae are classified within its parent (e.g. Mormyroidea:Notopteroidei), and how the family is sister to the Mormyridae.
Added.
the first sentence of taxonomy implies that Cuvier erected both the genus and family, but the taxobox say differently about the family author
Attributed.
Images: 2/3 images have appropriate licenses for use on Wikipedia. The image caption for "File:Gymnarchus niloticus habitat distribution (cropped).png" needs improvement. There is also no source given for this map (in the original image)
Update: I found the source for this image: doi:10.1093/biolinnean/bly098; I don't think this is under an open source license.
Although the image can't be used, this study does in fact have useful information about the evolutionary dynamics of the Gymnarchidae that could be summarised from its conclusion and added to this article...
Added.
the lead of course needs expansion; it currently doesn't say, for example, what it looks like, the fact that many people like to eat it, or where in Africa could find it.
Extended lead slightly to reflect article contents.
this recent OA review article doi:10.1002/jez.b.23242 has some information that I think would be beneficial to include, e.g.
egg size (and the fact that the eggs of this species are the biggest amongst the Mormyroidea)
the male-biased breeding season sex ratio "may indicate a reproductive strategy to ensure a small number of eggs have a very high chance of being fertilized."
"Gymnarchus and Pollimyrus are also the only two genera of mormyroids known to perform parental care"
Added these.
there's only a mention of a single English common name, whereas other sources mention several English common names "Other common names include Freshwater Rat-tail, Nile Knife Fish, Aba Aba, Aba Knife Fish, Abba, Frank Fish and Trunkfish." (eg. Oluwale et al. 2019)
"Common" has multiple meanings. I've added a note on these other names.
this source (doi:10.4314/ijs.v20i3.8) tells us its karotype, and also mentions "The fish is unique by its lack of anal and pelvic fins and by its possession of a modified caudal fin that resembles the tail of rat". which is an evocative (and sourced) description that might be worth including (and explains one of the common names listed above).
Added.
the IUCN source mentions that the species is demersal and potamodromous, that "this species builds large elliptical floating nests in densely vegetated swamps at depths of about 1-1.5 m", and mentions frogs and snails as part of its diet, all of which seems like useful broad coverage-type information that could be integrated
Added.


### Comments round 3
In Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Organisms#Abbreviating_names, the MOS suggests to write out the genus in full when the binomial first appears in any section.
Done.
there's still a paragraph in the Description section that feels like it should be in ecology
Just one sentence, and it basically duplicated the ecology content.
suggested links for lead: genus, family, pelvic fin, anal fin, tail fin, dorsal fin,
Linked.
the lead doesn't cover anything from the Conservation section
Added.
in "Biology", suggest linking: taxon, gill, pectoral fin, allometric, copepod, ovary, testis, sperm, floodplain, sex ratio
Added.
"There is a single lung which arises via a slit on the right side of the throat on the right side of the body"  redundant "right side" reference
Fixed.
"Juveniles start off small" seems redundant (all juveniles are small)
Removed.
what's a cycloid scale?
Linked and glossed.
it's a bit confusing that "anguilliform" is first glossed as an adjectival descriptor, but soon after, it's linked as a form of locomotion. Maybe clarify the distinction, e.g. "It has an anguilliform (eel-like) body... This eel-like form enables anguilliform swimming, where the whole body undulates..."
Removed the first usage.
"and weighing 0.9–0.31 grams." range error
Fixed.
in "Distribution", suggesting linking endemic
Done.
in "Conservation status", suggest linking conservation status, IUCN Red List, least concern, endangered species, habitat destruction, overfishing, effluent, climate change,
Added.
in "Human use", suggest linking aquaculture, ethical sourcing
Added.
"The fish's unusual mode of swimming has inspired a biomimetic study of an undulating robotic fin. This has created a prototype, RoboGnilos, which enables the mechanism to be examined in detail." suggest "The fish's unusual mode of swimming has inspired a biomimetic study that resulted in a prototype undulating robotic fin called RoboGnilos, enabling detailed examination of the swimming mechanism."
Done.
Spot checks:
this line seems problematic: "They mainly inhabit swamps and the vegetated edges of rivers but are also found living in slow-moving or stagnant bodies of freshwater such as marshes and pools." The IUCN text only mentions swamps in the context of breeding nests, and doesn't discuss vegetated edges, marshes, or pools. This statement needs a different citation.
Removed.
One nuance - when discussing threats, the article could better reflect that the IUCN text specifies these are regional threats (e.g., deforestation and drought in western Africa, dams and pollution in northern Africa) rather than presenting them as uniform threats across the species' range.
Added.
other spot checks were fine
Noted.
The range map citation/licensing issue needs resolution. I think this exhausts my suggestions for improvement, so I'll place the article on hold now. Esculenta (talk) 17:12, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
Well I already cited it; since it still seems to be troubling you, I've removed it.
I must have not expressed myself clearly. The range map that you removed was fine. The remaining distribution map (original image here) is copied directly from the not open-licensed source (doi:10.1093/biolinnean/bly098) and unattributed. The extracted image appears to be the same image, cropped, with the black dot removed. In my (very limited) understanding of image copyright, this is not acceptable. If I'm wrong, please advise as to the policy I am misinterpreting. Esculenta (talk) 19:38, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
OK, swapped the deletions. Chiswick Chap (talk) 19:50, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
All right, we're done here ... promoting article now. Esculenta (talk) 19:59, 8 December 2024 (UTC)