Talk:Drosophila simulans

Insects Low‑importance

	Insects portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Insects, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of insects on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.InsectsWikipedia:WikiProject InsectsTemplate:WikiProject InsectsInsects articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Diptera Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Diptera, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of flies on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.DipteraWikipedia:WikiProject DipteraTemplate:WikiProject DipteraDiptera articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.

Untitled

D. simulans is actually a very important organism in areas of the genetics research community (of which I am a part). Much of this information may belong elsewhere in more broadly focused review articles, but I added some since it deserves mention. This organism may be unassuming, but I think it merits a more developed article. --WillJeck 23:11, 9 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Good initial draft to this article. I made general edits on sentence structure and phrasing to more clearly communicate the importance of the Wolbachia infection in Drosophila simulans to evolution and studies of the phylogenetic relationships between species. I added one sentence from my text about Wolbachia to add details on the nature of how this bacteria is transmitted vertically from parent to offspring, along with a reference. You might consider adding even more background knowledge to Wolbachia and its pervasiveness in arthropod species today. I also think that the information provided about genetic studies of Wolbachia infection could be more detailed, so that the final results and conclusion are clearer. For future drafts, you might want to look into how different populations of Drosophila simulans vary in terms of infection by Wolbachia. Does this lead to different survival or fitness, or are there patterns in environment where Wolbachia infection is particularly high or low? This might help you answer how exactly Wolbachia infection affects this species by looking at both the infected and uninfected populations.

Anonymous4715 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 13:12, 26 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Revision and Response to Peer Feedback

Dr. Fowler-Finn: I have made several edits to my article based on the comments provided by you and my group members. For one, I made small edits to make the transition between words smoother. For example, I started a new paragraph beginning with "Studies have shown that Wolbachia infections have significantly decreased..." for ease of readability. I also further explained why Drosophila simulans and Drosophila mauritiana were deemed to be more closely related than to Drosophila sechellia, as you suggested I do in your email. Furthermore, I cut out the irrelevant details of the minutia of the experiments (previously I had included the specific laboratory methods, such as the "renografin gradient" and "proteinase K solution" used). Specific references to studies were also removed in favor of the informational content they hold instead. I tried to find more details about what exactly Wolbachia is, and will continue compiling more data on Wolbachia in general for future drafts. Specifically, the importance of maternal heredity was expanded upon in the first paragraph of the Wolbachia section. In response to Anonymous4715's comments, I unfortunately could not find confirmed studies involving differing populations of Drosophila simulans and how they vary based on Wolbachia infections. I will continue searching for relevant studies in order to continue clarifying Wolbachia's role in Drosophila simulans. Otherwise, I believe that this article is pretty well-established so far! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 165.134.212.79 (talk) 12:16, 9 November 2015 (UTC) 165.134.212.79 (talk)[reply]

NeverStopEvolving (talk)

Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a student paper. I have removed content unsuited for an encyclopedia. Scr★pIron^IV 15:20, 9 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Review 11/15/15

Original article deleted by ScrapIronIV because was thought to be unsuited for an encyclopedia and too detailed

-A bit confused, since I think that the information is relevant to Drosophila simulans evolutionary history, genomics, and Wolbachia’s impact on a species. Rarely are primary sources used, and they seem to match the language and detail of common Wikipedia articles. Language can be slightly tweaked to be more clear and understandable. There needs to be an increase in the amount of citations used. Every sentence should have a citation. Possibly find more information on how Wolbachia was first introduced into Drosophila simulans or its origins. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cheungd (talk • contribs) 06:02, 16 November 2015 (UTC) Minor change: if work is returned, I believe that “the benefits of Wolbachia studies” should be more about the “influence of Wolbachia studies on Drosophila simulans genomics” Cheungd (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 05:56, 16 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The article was not deleted; specific issues with testing and trial was removed as too detailed to be relevant to the species. Remember that Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, which summarizes topics. It does not go into such minutiae for these subject. It may be reasonable to create an article about the specific testing, if notable - but it would be linked to, and separate from. the article on this insect. Scr★pIron^IV 17:56, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Final Project

Dr. Fowler-Finn: I have further cleaned up my article for the final project. I have added in citations where necessary information has been cited, as well as removed references to specific studies. Furthermore, I have made simple grammatical and format changes, such as italicizing species names and using words that flow smoothly. I have also added links to the "Symbiosis" and "Non-Mendelian inheritance" Wikipedia pages during relevant parts of my article. Though I considered moving some of the information I added to the end of the Taxonomy section down to the Wolbachia section, I did not do so because I believe that the information relating D. simulans to D. mauritiana and D. sechellia was better reserved for describing evolutionary relationships. I have linked other articles to my article as well: the Wolbachia and Phytoseiidae Wikipedia articles. I believe my article is now relevant and beneficial to understanding how Wolbachia affects and can benefit D. simulans. Thank you. NeverStopEvolving (talk)