Talk:Arbuscular mycorrhiza

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This subject is within the scope of Soil WikiProject, which collaborates on Soil and related articles on Wikipedia. To participate, help improve these articles or visit the project page for details on the project.
B	This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.
Article Grading: The article has been rated for quality and/or importance but has no comments yet. If appropriate, please review the article and then leave comments here to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article and what work it will need.

1 plural
2 Schüßler writes in
3 phytoremediation
4 Washington
5 criticism
6 Glomeromycetes

[edit] plural

Unless someone objects with good reasoning, I'll soon move this article to reflect the standard plural for mycorrhiza, which is mycorrhizae. The majority of references I've been able to find use this form, not "mycorrhizas" as the plural. Even those who use "mycorrhizas" almost always use the standard pluralization for one of the major features of the organism: its hyphae. A Google search turned up only 10 results using both "mycorrhizas" and "hyphas." All the rest use hypha for the singular and hyphae for the plural, so why not follow the same pattern for the mycorrhizae? At some point when I have more time I also plan to expand the article so it's no longer a stub, but first it should have a sensible name. Victor Plenty 12:13, 17 October 2005 (UTC)

I agree that "mycorrhizae" is the most often used plural term, but "mycorrhizas" is also used quite often by Australian and British authors. In either case, I moved the page to Arbuscular mycorrhiza because it makes more sense to use the singular form, as is done with most other biology articles. I have included both plural forms in the article, but I always use mycorrhizae in my own writing. Now we just need to add a whole lot more content. Mycota 00:13, 19 November 2005 (UTC)

"Mycorrhiza" (plural = "mycorrhizas") is the term used and accepted by just about any researcher not from the United States. "Mycorrhizae" is a incorrect application of latin to greek, but it makes some people happy. "Mycorrhizaes" is bizarre (an incorrect application of English to incorrectly applied Latin), but entertaining! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 129.130.115.145 (talk • contribs) 07:31, 9 March 2006.

[edit] Schüßler writes in

I have changed some things, there were some mistakes (e.g., Diversisporales is not one of the ancestral orders). Also some mis citations are in the text. I don't have the time to make it in the best way just now, but you should be careful with the data. Arthur —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 130.83.98.80 (talk • contribs) 13:52, 29 August 2006.

Hi all, which are interested in the mycorrhoza topic. I think we should get through the article. It contains a lot of information, but some details were / are outdated, and my main concern is that there arte several mistakes. E.g. in the beginning it was stated AMF are >1 billion years with citing Simon - this is not correct. Also, 10 mM Phosphate are not possible in soil solutions (see my comment). Many authors were/are written incorrectly. So, my question: would the originator of the article go through it and correct such things? If not, can I feel free to do so and change the things, when I find time? All the best , Arthur Schüßler—Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.58.103.214 (talk • contribs) 19:27, 8 October 2006

If you are the A. Schubler (incorrectly written ?) mentioned in the references of this article, then the help of an expert in this field would be most welcome. The bulk of the text was written by a contributor who certainly knew what he/she was writing about. My contributions were mostly in wikifying the text and making it better readable. But I'm certainly not an expert. So go ahead, and make this article up-to-date. It has the potential of becoming an A class article. JoJan 12:43, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] phytoremediation

Hi there, there's something about mycor. in Phytoremediation at pargrph "Mycorrhizal associations", but I don't quite know where you would place it in here - possibly in the pargrph which I renamed 'Phytoremediation'? Also a few interesting notes in each hyperaccumulators' table, inside the tables and at the bottom of them. Basicdesign 03:15, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

The stub article phycoremediation was saying that it's about algal remediation. I've changed that into fungi remediation. Is that correct? Basicdesign 04:30, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Washington

It says here: http://mason.gmu.edu/~pdonovan/Fungi_pg/myco.html that "mycorrhiza relationships can be very large and cover great areas as the one in Washington state that is many square miles in area and considered the largest single living organism in the world." Is that reliable info? 86.53.51.164 06:06, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] criticism

“black box” of soil biomass etc -- what does this mean? most people would not understand this term —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 130.184.50.38 (talk • contribs) 01:47, 21 February 2007.

This is a pretty bad article on the subject, & someone needs to pare back about half of what's entered: eg, "Paleobiology is a field of inquiry dealing with the biological and ecological functions that can be deduced from fossils...The fossilized plants containing mycorrhizal fungi were preserved in silica. They are prepared for observation by cementing pieces of the rock to microscope slides and then grinding the rock with carbide powder to a thickness of 50-150 µm." ...75% of that's useless. This is not an article on histology - just say "have been observed." We don't want to have the entire instructions for preparing a slide & using a microscope here as well. 70.61.22.110 14:06, 18 June 2007 (UTC)Ubiquitousnewt