Jump to content

Talk:Cestoda

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Proglottid etc

[edit]

This seems to be an awesome article, long and full of interesting information about an important subject. Still I would like to point at some potential improvements.

The word proglottid is not a well-known word. The article shows awareness of this. This word should not be used in the third sentence in the intro.

I don't know what a definitive host host is. My guess is it means obligatory, in the sense that it is necessary for the completion of the life cycle. If that is the case, maybe necessary would be better. I found it means the host is the environment where sexual reproduction takes place. Could not find out whether it is the exclusive host where it takes place.

strobila and scolex are also too poorly known to be used in the intro.

I agree with the points you raise and have rewritten the opening paragraph of the lead which was rather scrappy. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 08:40, 31 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

All tapeworms are hermaphrodites, with both male and female reproductive organs. This is a very small problem. But notice that this says the same thing twice. All tapeworms have both female and male reproductive organs. contains the same information about the world. The writer seems to have the ambition to teach the reader about the term hermaphrodite. But the true task here is to tell about the cestodes. We should do that as directly and as efficiently as possible. The sentence is slightly ambiguous: Is it about the taxon or about the individuals? I suggest: Among the tapeworms, each individual has both female and male reproductive organs. --Ettrig (talk) 20:53, 30 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The definitive host is the one and only site of sexual reproduction. Chiswick Chap (talk) 08:41, 31 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Name

[edit]

Is there any reason the article's name isn't Tapeworm? Cestoda doesn't seem to fall in line with WP:Common names   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  03:29, 18 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

That Eucestoda matches the common name better. Chiswick Chap (talk) 07:38, 18 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
If that’s the case, why does tapeworm redirect here? Shouldn’t it be a disambiguation page?   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  14:59, 18 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Well, not actually an issue for this article. However I've asked that Tapeworm redirect to Eucestoda which accurately matches the tapeworm description. Cestoda includes some distinctly non-tapewormy animals. Chiswick Chap (talk) 15:09, 18 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect for discussion

[edit]

I'm proposing to have Tapeworm redirect to Eucestoda rather than Cestoda as it seems to me a better match. Anyone interested is invited to comment at [1]. Chiswick Chap (talk) 19:07, 19 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

[edit]
GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Cestoda/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Enwebb (talk · contribs) 20:01, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'm willing to review this article. Full disclosure, this is my first attempt at a GA review, so I hope I can do your article justice.

Thank you for taking on the review. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 04:58, 23 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

[edit]
  • Good job at explaining concepts in-text
  • I really like the images found to accompany the article
Many thanks! Chiswick Chap (talk) 09:52, 23 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Inconsistent use of Oxford comma (no use here: "The adult worm has a scolex, or head, a short neck and a strobila, or segmented body formed of proglottids" but used in the following sentence: "Tapeworms anchor themselves to the inside of the intestine of their host using their scolex, which typically has hooks, suckers, or both.")
Done. Chiswick Chap (talk) 09:52, 23 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Their bodies consist of many similar units, known as proglottids, which are essentially packages of eggs and which are regularly shed into the environment to infect other organisms." this can be simplified so that "which" is only necessary once.
    • I see that cirrus is later linked in the reproduction section, though it should be linked at the first occurrence instead per MOS:BUILD
  • taxobox is missing authority
  • "Nerves emanate from the ganglion to supply the general body muscular and sensory ending" should "ending" be plural there?
  • inconsistent usage of whether you refer to the subject in-text as cestodes or tapeworms
  • I do, but in the lead you've established that the word "tapeworm" means the subclass Eucestoda ("The best-known species, in the subclass Eucestoda, are ribbonlike worms as adults, known as tapeworms.") I just wanted to make sure that it was intentional that every time you used "tapeworm" you were referring specifically to that subclass. If that isn't what you mean, maybe you could add to the lede that all members of this class are colloquially called tapeworms, while the Eucestoda are the true tapeworms. This appears to be the distinction you're already making in the reproduction section (tapeworm=Cestoda, true tapeworm=Eucestoda).
  • Hmm, let's go with "Cestoda", "tapeworms and their allies", or just "worms" for the whole class, "Eucestoda" or "tapeworms" for the subclass. It matches the anatomy much better. I've tweaked the article accordingly. Chiswick Chap (talk) 16:35, 23 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Once anchored to the host's intestinal wall, tapeworms absorb nutrients through their surface as the food being digested by the host flows past it." this sentence seems a little clunky—could be rewritten to be more concise.
    • the following sentence again seems a little wordy "Cestodes are unable to synthesise lipids and are entirely dependent on their host, although lipids are not used as an energy reserve, but for reproduction"—I'd recommend "Cestodes are unable to synthesise lipids, which they use for reproduction, and are therefore entirely dependent on their hosts."
  • As written, it appears that the reproduction section only refers to the true tapeworms. A more complete coverage would also include the other subclass.
  • "This animal then becomes an intermediate host, the oncosphere bores through the gut wall and migrates to other parts of the body such as the muscle" comma splice
  • "These are the infective stage" pronoun/noun disagreement, should be stages
  • For the internal phylogeny, it is unclear which sources are the basis for the phylogeny and the information about intermediate and definitive hosts
Repeated the refs for clarity. Chiswick Chap (talk) 09:57, 23 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Beef tapeworm/Taenia saginata is overlinked; so is definitive host
  • You could include more information on how cestodes impact their hosts. Are there lethal or sublethal effects? Perhaps you could rename the "Host immunity" section to "Host response" and include more information on this.
  • Thanks. I've added a paragraph on time and transmission strategies to the lifecycle section, indicating the very long timescales involved. Tapeworms don't kill their hosts at all quickly. Chiswick Chap (talk) 10:20, 23 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ref error (Cite error: The named reference Cheng was invoked but never defined)
  • Fixed.
  • Good job! The article meets the Good Article Criteria. I hope you feel I did a good job reviewing your article; let me know if there are ways I can improve in GA reviews in the future. Enwebb (talk) 17:56, 23 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Enwebb: Thank you for the review. What you did seems fine and you mentioned that the article meets the Good Article Criteria. I can't tell if you checked for copyvios or looked at the licensing of the images, and you may find it helpful to use one of the templates that list the criteria, and then you can tick them off individually. It's up to you. You can get some good hints too by looking at reviews being undertaken by other experienced reviewers. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 19:30, 23 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thoughts on improving this article

[edit]

I think this article would be much better by being:

  • less eucestode-centric (may involve moving some content to Eucestoda)
  • clear on the distinction between the cestodarians and eucestodes
  • clear on the dictinction between adult and larval forms

These key references can be found online (using Libgen and Sci-Hub):

  • General Parasitology (THOMAS C. CHENG) - Already used for reference in the article under 3 different citations. Has separate chapters for Cestodaria & Eustoda and more cestode related info in other chapters. I suggest citing by chapter using relevant DOI from the official site.
  • Encyclopedia of Parasitology (ed. HEINZ MEHLHORN) - Useful for gaining a quick understanding of the subject matter and general disambiguation of terms. Official site.
  • Modern Parasitology: A Textbook of Parasitology (ed. F. E. G. COX) - Is much more limited in scope than General Parasitology, might be useful. Official site.

Edit-pi (talk) 03:25, 27 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

added a paragraph on a new body fossil, Rugosusivitta

[edit]

Added a few lines on the occurrence of a new body fossil, Rugosusivitta, from the Ediacaran–Cambrian boundary interval of the Zhongyicun Member in Yunnan Province, China. This great find shows once again that already many basic animal groups must have developed in the Ediacaran period. So this might have implications for other articles as well, as we have to put the split of Cestodians, then living as bentos feeders, with other Placyzoans somewhere in the Ediacaran. But as Placyzoans are considered very basal bilaterians, this should not come as a big surprise, given the presence of more derived animals as proto-arthropods (Sprigginia) and proto-mollusks (Kimberella) moving around at the last stages of the Ediacaran. Codiv (talk) 12:29, 3 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:Cestoda&oldid=1193682043"