Talk:Heptamegacanthus

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Heptamegacanthus/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: Mattximus (talk · contribs) 17:30, 1 April 2024 (UTC)

Reviewer: Esculenta (talk · contribs) 19:06, 1 April 2024 (UTC)

Hi, I'll review this. Will have comments here within a few days. Esculenta (talk) 19:06, 1 April 2024 (UTC)

Thank you! I will get to these comments soon. Mattximus (talk) 21:35, 7 April 2024 (UTC)

lead

• link rectal Done
• "Its body consists of … and a short, wide body." should be reworded Done - You caught an error, the second body should just be "trunk". Mattximus (talk) 22:46, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
• I'm thinking a good lead on a parasitic worm should probably mention the worm's organs for attachment, sensation, and reproduction, but only the first of those is mentioned currently.

• I agree, however there is no known information on the latter two specific to this species. I did some inferring based on the phyla for the life cycle in the life cycle section as per previous Featured Article nomination recommendations for a related species, but I'm not sure the inference should be also in the lead? If you feel strongly I'm happy to add it, but there exists nothing for sensation. Mattximus (talk) 22:55, 10 April 2024 (UTC)

• "The hooks in the anterior ring are twice as large as those in second ring" I'm confused … what is the anterior ring, a second ring, etc. Rings haven't yet been mentioned and I don't understand where these rings are positioned.

• Tried to fix wording, does it make more sense now?

• Yes. Esculenta (talk) 00:31, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

• "and 2 millimetres (0.079 in) wide." please fix the false precision implied in the output of the convert. Done
• should have a citation for the type locality in the range map Done
• not strictly necessary for GA, but it's good to be consistent with either Am. Eng. (feces, molts) or Br. Eng. (millimetres) but not both

• I'm in an interesting spot here as a Canadian, as we use feces but also millimetres. I'll switch to American just for consistency, though I don't know how to do this in the template as it's generated automatically. Mattximus (talk) 22:51, 10 April 2024 (UTC)

• FYI, the convert template allows you to specify American English usage by including "sp=us". Esculenta (talk) 00:31, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

Taxonomy

• links: morphological, phylogenetic Done
• "species name niekerki" this should be specific name or specific epithet (species name refers to the entire binomial) Done
• is Jan van Niekerk a scientist?

• He is quoted as "Mr." and not doctor, but also part of the Department of Zoology at the university. Job at the time is unknown other than that. Mattximus (talk) 22:53, 7 April 2024 (UTC)

• "Oligacanthorhynchidae family" (x2) the standard scientific convention to is use "family Oligacanthorhynchidae" Done
• it's probably useful encyclopaedic information to mention the name of the original discoverer, and the year they discovered/published it. In the lichen articles I write I often include some details about where the type was collected, especially for little-known species. The type locality detail in the caption should be repeated in the article text.

• Added the name and year of discovery in the taxonomy section and linked type-locality in the distribution section, I believe this is what was recommended? Mattximus (talk) 15:03, 12 April 2024 (UTC)

• the second sentence is long, tortuous, and jargon-filled. May I suggest dividing it into more sentences with additional explanatory bits to keep it easier for laypeople to follow? Sample suggestion: "The classification of the genus Heptamegacanthus within the family Oligacanthorhynchidae is supported by six distinct morphological features. Firstly, its proboscis is more or less spherical, and equipped with hooks that feature an anterior manubrium and a robust root for attachment. Additionally, sensory papillae on the proboscis enhance its sensory capabilities. The proboscis receptacle, a complex structure for housing the proboscis when retracted, consists of a thin, non-muscular outer layer and a thicker, muscular inner layer, which is pierced dorsally by muscles that retract the proboscis. The lemnisci, which are long, flattened structures containing several giant nuclei, play a role in the worm's sensory system. The presence of eight cement glands, each with a large central nucleus, is another distinguishing feature; these glands produce a substance used in the reproductive process. Finally, the eggs of Heptamegacanthus have an oval shape and distinctly textured outer shell."

• Done I personally would try to avoid words like additionally and finally, I trust your edit and used it verbatim. I think it reads better now, thank you. Mattximus (talk) 15:18, 12 April 2024 (UTC)

• "There has been no phylogenetic analysis on Heptamegacanthus to confirm its position as a unique genus in the Oligacanthorhynchidae family." I don't see how the cited source supports the given statement.

• Yes this has been a problem of mine for years, sourcing "no data". I linked to the best archive of genetic information on earth. It has a complete list of all genetic sequencing done. It shows no Heptamegacanthus sequencing done, which is what I was trying to source. Any suggestions? Mattximus (talk) 15:05, 12 April 2024 (UTC)

• How about this: "The National Center for Biotechnology Information does not indicate that any phylogenetic analysis has been published on Heptamegacanthus that would confirm its position as a unique genus in the Oligacanthorhynchidae family." - Done

• might want to mention that the unique dimorphism seen in this genus has also been recorded in genus Corynosoma. Done
• I think it would be worthwhile to mention why the author ruled out dwarfism as the reason for the relatively small size of the organism. Done

• I added all your recommendations here so the first paragraph of this section is now quite different, and better.

Description

• "H. niekerki consists" scientific style guides suggests sentences, and especially paragraphs, shouldn't start with an abbreviation. Done
• the second and third paragraphs have a high density of technical terms and measurements without any simplification or introductory explanation might make it less accessible to a general audience. Encyclopedias aim to be informative but also accessible, so including a brief introduction to some of the more specialized terms (e.g., "lemnisci," "manubria," "protonephridia") or processes could improve its readability for a broader audience. I'll make some specific suggestions that might help:

subspherical -> nearly spherical Done

"There are four types of hooks: hooks in anterior 2 rings with large manubria and roots (243–275 μm long in male and 256–297 μm long in female), hooks of first ring being twice as large as those in second ring (81–180 μm long in males 103–199 μm long in females); posterior hooks spine-like, acuminate and decrease in size progressively posteriorly (43–84 μm long in males and 34–71 μm long in females to 28–52 μm long in males and 31–58 μm long in females)." suggestion: "The hooks come in four distinct types: the first two rings of hooks have large bases (manubria) and roots, with the hooks in the very front (243–275 μm long in males and 256–297 μm long in females) being twice the size of those in the second row (81–180 μm long in males and 103–199 μm long in females). Hooks towards the rear are spine-like, tapering to smaller sizes (43–84 μm long in males and 34–71 μm to 28–52 μm long in females)." Done - used your wording, thanks!

• "There are no protonephridia." suggestion "The worm does not have protonephridia, which are found in other species for excretion and water regulation." Done
• link: sensory nerve fiber, giant nucleus (syncytium?); uterus

• Done except I'm not certain syncytium is the best link as I believe the giant nuclei are part of it? Not sure here, so erred on side of caution. Mattximus (talk) 15:34, 12 April 2024 (UTC)

• "and feeds into bursa." the bursa? Done
• current: "In the female, the female reproductive system consists of a uterine bell (a funnel like opening continuous with the uterus) is large and short (179–218 μm long to 140–173 μm wide) and the uterus (396–461 μm long and 166–224 μm wide) and vagina (102–186 μm long and 32–173 μm diameter) are short and muscular, and the outer egg shell is highly sculptured. Pseudocoel contains numerous oval eggs (56–96 μm long and 43–52 μm wide) with sculptured outer shells." suggestion: "Females have a short, muscular reproductive system, including a uterine bell (a funnel-like opening continuous with the uterus) and vagina, and produce numerous oval eggs (56–96 μm long and 43–52 μm wide) with sculptured outer shells, stored in a space called the pseudocoel."

• I did a bit of a hybrid of your wording and mine here, just so I can include a few measurements. Hope that is ok. Mattximus (talk) 15:39, 12 April 2024 (UTC)

Distribution

• link endangered species done
• it might be worthwhile to add a few more words about the major threats to the host summarized from its IUCN report, considering that the fate of this worm is apparently so closely linked to its host. Done - I think this is what you were looking for
• should it be mentioned that this species appears on the 2018 updated Checklist of acanthocephalan parasites of South Africa? PMC 6193052

• While there is no harm in doing so, the entire contents of the checklist is from the article I linked already, nothing new is added. Mattximus (talk) 21:49, 10 April 2024 (UTC)

Hosts

• link life cycle done
• text: "The life cycle of an acanthocephalan consists of three stages beginning when an infective acanthor (development of an egg) is released from the intestines of the definitive host and then ingested by an arthropod, the intermediate host. Although the intermediate host or hosts of Heptamegacanthus are not known, the known intermediate host for the order Oligacanthorhynchidae are primarily insects." suggestion: "The life cycle of a thorny-headed worm, or acanthocephalan, unfolds in three distinct stages. It begins when an egg develops into an infective form known as an acanthor. This acanthor is released with the feces of its primary host, typically a vertebrate, and must be ingested by an intermediate host, usually an arthropod like an insect, to continue its development. Although the specific intermediate hosts for the genus Heptamegacanthus remain unidentified, it is generally accepted that, for the broader order Oligacanthorhynchidae to which it belongs, insects serve as the primary intermediaries." … continuing "Once inside the intermediate host, the acanthor sheds its outer layer in a process called molting, transitioning into its next stage, the acanthella. At this stage, which for H. niekerki measures between 38 to 60 micrometers in length and 19 to 26 micrometers in width, it burrows into the host's intestinal wall and continues to grow. The lifecycle culminates in the formation of a cystacanth, a larval stage that retains juvenile features and awaits ingestion by the definitive host to mature fully. Once inside the definitive host, these larvae attach themselves to the intestinal walls, mature into sexually reproductive adults, and complete the cycle by releasing new acanthors into the host's feces. There are no known secondary hosts where Heptamegacanthus might reside without undergoing further development or reproduction."

• I believe I have reworded this paragraph to match your suggestions with only a few minor deviations. What do you think?

• is there any literature mention on the pathological impact of infestation by this worm on the host?

• I can safely say that there is none. At least that I can find. Mattximus (talk) 21:49, 10 April 2024 (UTC)

• Both images have suitable licences.
• All sources look scholarly and reliable.

I have completed all recommendations and when I was unsure I made a comment for your approval. I want to thank you, Esculenta, for such an excellent review, it's easily the most thorough review I have received on wikipedia and I hope I have used your time wisely and will try to bring this up to Featured Article should it pass good article status. Thanks again. Mattximus (talk) 15:52, 12 April 2024 (UTC)

You're welcome! The changes look great! I've responded to a couple of your comments/queries above. I reread the article again and have another list of minor tweaks that I think might be helpful.

• I think the linking in the lead could be slightly improved by linking parasitic worm in the first sentence, and then linking parasite in the following sentence. Also trunk could be linked. There's also a useful link for radial symmetry. Done but not sure about last link.
• link Transkei in range map - Done
• "The species was discovered in 1990 by Mary E. Spencer Jones" Is this really the case? If Mary identified a new species from a sample that was collected and sent to her by someone else, I think it would be more accurate to say she "formally described" the species rather than "discovered" it. Done
• "The genus Heptamegacanthus refers to its seven large hooks" -> "the genus name…" - Done
• any link for "Sensory papillae" (at least papillae should be linked somewhere)?

• This is the only one I cannot find a good link for. Mattximus (talk) 14:20, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

• That's unfortunate. From a quick literature search it seems that "sensory papilla" is a topic worthy of a dedicated article. Esculenta (talk) 15:58, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

• Added a red link for anyone in the future who might want to do this! Mattximus (talk) 17:19, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

• link Oligacanthorhynchidae - Done
• link μm (and perhaps spell it out on the first usage) - Done (linked it but had a hard time adding the spelling it out as there would be nested brackets)
• "muscular wall with well-developed retractor muscles penetrating receptacle wall dorsally" -> "penetrating the receptacle wall" - Done
• link excretion - Done
• ""In the male Heptamegacanthus niekerki, the testes are large and oblique (409–832 μm long and 204–525 μm wide) and pre-equatorial..." oblique and pre-equatorial are somewhat jargony (I had to look them up to make sure I knew what they meant in this context). How about "In the male Heptamegacanthus niekerki, the testes are large and tilted (ranging from 409 to 832 μm long and 204 to 525 μm wide), and are positioned towards the front half of the body, before the central dividing line (pre-equatorial)…" - Done
• link copulation - Done
• "isolated forest ranges Pirie Forest" missing "in" - Done
• link King William's Town, East London (earlier), Port St. Johns, urbanization, fragmentation, habitat loss - Done
• "It begins when an egg develops into an infective form known as an acanthor." According to MOS:WORDSASWORDS, acanthor should be italicized in this instance. - Done just the first instance correct?

• Correct. Esculenta (talk) 17:30, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

• link arthropod - Done
• both "life cycle" and "lifecycle" are used - Done
• I think the lead should mention that its only host is endangered. - Done
• There's no mention of any of the information from the "Lifecycle" section in the lead.

• I'm a bit hesitant to add any of the life cycle information as it is all inference based on related species, there is no actual data on the life cycle for this genus. I suppose a general one couldn't hurt? What about: "The life cycle of H. niekerki is not known, but acanthocephalans have complex life cycles involving at least two hosts. Larva are consumed by an intermediate host (which is not known for Heptamegacanthus but is likely an arthropod), where they grow into infectious cystacanths that are then consumed by the definitive host and grow and reproduce sexually in the intestines producing eggs that are then expelled and grow into larva."

• How about breaking into smaller sentences for more ease of readability, e.g. "The life cycle of H. niekerki remains unknown; however, like other acanthocephalans, it likely involves complex life cycles with at least two hosts. Although the intermediate host for Heptamegacanthus is not definitively identified, it is presumed to be an arthropod. In this host, the larvae develop into an infectious stage known as a cystacanth. These are then ingested by the definitive host, where they mature and reproduce sexually within the intestines. The resulting eggs are expelled and hatch into new larvae." Esculenta (talk) 15:58, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

• Done

I'll put the article on hold to you give a chance to address these minor points. Esculenta (talk) 00:31, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

• I addressed all your excellent suggestions Esculenta. Just a few questions (especially the very last point) that require your opinion. Thanks again! Mattximus (talk) 14:20, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

• One last point: even though there are no data on pathological impact of infestation by this specific species, I think it would still be useful to briefly let the reader know the general pathological effects of Acanthocephala infestation. A single sentence summary of the "Clinical Presentation" section in the CDC ref would be sufficient for this. Esculenta (talk) 15:58, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

• While I completely agree this should be there, the CDC source is human specific, which seems to be in contrast to that from other animals where it gets more or less severe. For example in another related species it causes "partial obstructions of the intestines, severe lesions of the intestinal wall, and may lead to death". Since the pathological impact can range from asymptomatic to death I'm not sure I can write anything that applies to this species with confidence. We don't even know if the symptoms are closer to asymptomatic or to death. Mattximus (talk) 17:24, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

• Fair enough. Esculenta (talk) 17:30, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

• I think I have completed your second round of excellent comments with one question left (also the last comment). Thanks again Esculenta! Mattximus (talk) 17:25, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

Ok, I think we're done here! I spot-checked many citations and found no issues, and am confident the article meets the GA criteria. Promoting now. Esculenta (talk) 17:30, 14 April 2024 (UTC)