# Talk:Strobilurus tenacellus

This review is transcluded from Talk:Strobilurus tenacellus/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: J Milburn (talk · contribs) 12:26, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
Happy to offer a review. Thoughts to follow soon. J Milburn (talk) 12:26, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

As a European but not American species, could I be bold enough to suggest that British spelling should be used? If you'd prefer to keep your own spelling, that's of course fine.
You may be that bold; I have made a similar request recently myself. Sasata (talk) 17:50, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
"It is found in Europe and Asia (Japan[12] and Jordan[13])." Could we perhaps have something like "It is found in Europe[ref] and Asia, where it is known from Japan[ref] and Jordan.[ref]"
Done. Sasata (talk) 17:50, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
Any word on when it fruits/how commonly encountered it is?
"diterpenoids" Not keen on the half-word link. Perhaps you could go for something like "diterpenoids (definition involving link to terpenoids)"
I just linked it to terpenoids instead. Sasata (talk) 17:50, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
"which was first reported in 1977." From this species? If so, is this the only species which produces it?
Clarified. Sasata (talk) 17:50, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
"In nature, the fungus secretes strobilurin A to prevent invasion by other fungi that challenge its nutrient source. It is used as a fungicide to control scab and powdery mildew." When you say "it is used as a fungicide", do you mean by this fungus or by humans?
Removed this. Sasata (talk) 17:50, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
"Because of its sensitivity to light, and a high vapor pressure that causes it to rapidly disappear when applied to the surface of a leaf, strobilurins are not generally useful as fungicides." Presumably, this is by humans.
Yes, now clarified. Sasata (talk) 17:50, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
Could you perhaps specify earlier what "strabulrins" are? I'm assuming it's a group of chemicals which include strabulrin A- which came first? Also, is it perhaps worth a redlink?
I assume this is a typo somewhere but I cannot find it? Sasata (talk) 17:50, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
Sorry, I meant strobilurins, and I now see that the term is linked. J Milburn (talk) 18:17, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
I'm not clear on the extent to which research into this fungus lead to the development of azoxystrobin.
Not directly, but it was a result of research into strobilurin A. Do you think there's too heavy an emphasis on the synthetic chemical that's one step removed from the parent fungus? Sasata (talk) 21:24, 21 June 2013 (UTC)
"include Allegro, and Brio (kresoxim-methyl) Amistar." Worth redlinks?
Had a look around, and I don't think so, as the potential sources are pretty thin. More suited as an entry in List of commercial fungicides or something similar. Sasata (talk) 21:24, 21 June 2013 (UTC)
In the references, you translate some titles but not others
Now all translated. Sasata (talk) 21:24, 21 June 2013 (UTC)
You never define "rooting base"
Done. Sasata (talk) 21:24, 21 June 2013 (UTC)
Phillips, Roger (1981). Mushrooms and Other Fungi of Great Britain and Europe. London: Pan Books. p. 77. ISBN 0-330-26441-9. lists it under Métrod's name, but notes that it is "Frequent", found in Spring, and not edible.
Sterry, Paul; Hughes, Barry (2009). Complete Guide to British Mushrooms & Toadstools. HarperCollins. p. 150. ISBN 978-0-00-723224-6.{{cite book}}:  CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link) notes that it is similar to Baeospora myosura, but can be differentiated by the fact it fruits in spring. It notes the species can have an umbo, and, like Phillips, notes that the centre of the cap is sometimes paler. It has a white spore print. Mushrooms solitary or in small groups. Distribution "widespread but occasional".
Some very detailed notes on distribution and description here, if you can access it- if not, I'll copy it across.
I've added a bit more from this to Habitat and distribution, let me know if you think there's anything that's missing. Sasata (talk) 21:24, 21 June 2013 (UTC)
Page 84 of this book calls it edible.
I've added some details based on these and below sources–thanks! Sasata (talk) 21:24, 21 June 2013 (UTC)
Hope some of this is useful- certainly seems like an important species, if not one that well-covered in my field guides! J Milburn (talk) 13:07, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
Had another look around about the edibility thing. Chapter 18, "Strobilurins and Oudemansins", by Timm Anke and Wolfgang Steglich of this book on page 320 calls it edible, while Phillips, in his newer book, says on page 125 that it's not edible as it's too small. (He also describes it as "occasional".) One of the companies using the mushrooms also describes them as edible. I think, based on these, Phillips was too generous with its occurrence in his earlier work, and I think it's probably fair to say that the species is technically edible but too small to be of much culinary interest without any undesirable synthesis. J Milburn (talk) 18:26, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

I've made a few tweaks. Please double-check that you're happy, and, if you are, I'll go ahead and promote. J Milburn (talk) 17:24, 22 June 2013 (UTC)
All good except the Anka 1999 ref: it seems to be a chapter in the Kukovinets 2008 source, but the publishing year is different? I can see Kukovinets in Google books (p. 84), but not Anke (p. 320) -- could you please check this? Sasata (talk) 17:42, 22 June 2013 (UTC)
I copy-pasted the title from the wrong tab- I've corrected it now. Does that solve the issue? I've also just noticed that some book refs have locations, but others don't. J Milburn (talk) 18:01, 22 June 2013 (UTC)
Looks good now; I've added locations to two refs. Thanks very much for a helpful review! Sasata (talk) 19:18, 22 June 2013 (UTC)
Great, promoting now. J Milburn (talk) 19:58, 22 June 2013 (UTC)