Talk:Breonadia

SLU Evolutionary Biology 3010-2

Overall the information you added was great. One suggestion I have is that you watch grammar more closely. In the paragraph that started with “A study done in Saudi Arabia…” I added some commas. Another suggestion is that you briefly mentioned in parentheses that the plant is endangered. I would expand on that. Maybe look into what list is is on according to the official conservations list. Other than that I felt it followed all the guidelines that are given for adding information. Lopezospina (talk) 05:53, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

I really like both the sections that were added. I may expand a little more on the Genetic Diversity section for the next edit, and the information in both parenthesis. If you need I have a couple articles that are more general about genetic diversity in endangered species. Fins42 (talk) 13:57, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

Both of the sections are very concise, however, I think a little bit of expansion on the "Genetic Diversity" section would allow for a better understanding for the reader about the genetic diversity of these plants. While you mention both studies, you don't try to connect the information in any sort of way so that the reader understands what the common theme is between the two studies. Adding this information would allow the reader to better understand exactly what your trying to get at by talking about the results of the study. In addition, I have switched two of your sentences in the "Characteristics" section because you switch from talking about "trees" to "fruit" and then back to "trees." I think it would be easier to just continue with fruits and then go on to the trees. I agree with what other users have said that the "Genetic Diversity" section is a bit lacking in terms of proper explanation of the studies, as I have mentioned above. Overall, both of the sections are well written and to the point with only slight tweaking needed. Great Job! Fireblade7869 (talk) 01:37, 16 November 2015 (UTC)Fireblade7869

I have expanded this article to include information on indentification, genetic diversity, and medicinal uses. The identification section was included in my expansion because it needed to be noted exactly what the tree looks like so it cannot be confused with other specimens. The genetic diversity section is to help contribute to genetic diversity of the plant itself and genetic diversity of endangered plants overall. I decided to just include all information on this page for the genus because the genus only contains one species and I think it would have been redundant to make a new page for the single species. Plantlover95 (talk) 08:35, 10 December 2015 (UTC)

Peer Review Comments

You’ve done a great job describing the characteristics of the flowering plant. Underneath the genetic diversity heading, you’ve summarized the experimental results of two studies. Rather than talking about the study, it is better to state the conclusions and provide an article citation to that study. This way the readers can read the flow of information more efficiently. For the first study, I changed the introductory sentence to: “In a population of Breonadia salicina in Saudia Arabia, genetic diversity was low within individuals of a single population, but was high between individuals from other populations”. For the second study, I got rid of the phrase, “In another study,” and I made the experimental conclusions its own paragraph. Shannon.tai (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 03:01, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Breonadia. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100705085122/http://www2.dwaf.gov.za:80/dwaf/cmsdocs/4116___poster%20protected%20trees.pdf to http://www2.dwaf.gov.za/dwaf/cmsdocs/4116___poster%20protected%20trees.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:06, 8 November 2016 (UTC)