Talk:Simarouba amara

Simarouba amara has been listed as one of the Natural sciences good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
January 14, 2011	Good article nominee	Listed

A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on December 22, 2010.

The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that the seeds of Simarouba amara are more likely to germinate once they have been eaten by monkeys?

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Ucucha 11:28, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'll be offering a review. I'll place some comments here as I read through the article, and do additional checks on the sources. Ucucha 11:28, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot, if it's any use I can email you a .zip of most of the sources. SmartSE (talk) 12:06, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

~~In the lead, why do you not simply say it is one of six Simarouba species, instead of one of three continental species?~~
- Done, and also changed the taxonomy section accordingly as well. SmartSE (talk) 14:26, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The lead says it occurs in the Caribbean; the "Distribution" section does not mention that distribution.
~~"It flowers at different times of the year depending on where it grows."—that's not particularly useful; can't you say it grows in the rainy season, or in summer?~~
- I agree but I'm not sure how to reword it, it flowers during the dry season in Panama, but Costa Rica doesn't have a dry season so there is no way of summarising both. Then there's the problem that there aren't any reports of when it flowers apart from in Panama and Costa Rica AFAIK, which is a tiny part of its total range. SmartSE (talk) 14:26, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  - Then perhaps remove the entire statement from the lead? Ucucha 09:05, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    - I decided to add when they flower in Panama + Costa Rica - personally I think when a plant flowers is a pretty vital thing to mention in the lead so even though little is known, removing it would be worse. SmartSE (talk) 21:38, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
"Fruit bat" refers only to the Old World family Pteropodidae. The bats dispering this tree's fruits will be some kind of Phyllostomidae, or New World leaf-nosed bats.
- I don't have a copy of the paper and can't access it anymore, so I changed it to "fruit-eating bats". The paper may well not even mention what species they are, but if you want to check, I'd be happy to add any info if its there. SmartSE (talk) 21:38, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  - I got it (and can e-mail it to you if you want). The S. amara seeds were found in roosts occupied by a variety of bat species, all phyllostomids, so I've just added "phyllostomid". Ucucha 09:15, 12 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    - Thanks, I'm ok without a copy at the moment. SmartSE (talk) 00:24, 13 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
~~Perhaps change the second paragraph of the lead to be more about the results of the research, and less about saying that it has been studied.~~
- Good point I'll try sorting this out later. SmartSE (talk) 14:26, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  - I've tried to do this now. SmartSE (talk) 21:38, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
~~Who described Quassia simarouba and when?~~
- Taxonomy is certainly no strongpoint of mine, I found this and this which I think mean it was described by William Wright in 1790. SmartSE (talk) 14:26, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  - Added, turns out I'd got the wrong wright beforehand too. SmartSE (talk) 21:38, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
~~Is "Bitter ash" (placed in its own paragraph without context) intended to be another common name?~~
- Yes, we should probably have two sentences for names used in the neotropics vs in the west. Some of the older sources mention others which I will add shortly. SmartSE (talk) 14:26, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
~~"Distribution" says it occurs in savannahs in addition to rainforests; is there a reason why the lead doesn't mention that?~~
- No there isn't a reason, it's my own bias as I've only ever seen it in a rainforest. I've added it to the lead, thanks for catching it. SmartSE (talk) 14:26, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
~~"and that if another tree with a diameter is growing within 5 m of the sapling, its growth is only reduced"—what diameter?~~
- 10cm - fixed. SmartSE (talk) 14:26, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
~~"The heartwood has a density of 0.35–0.45."—unit? Also, what makes the source reliable?~~

Presumably g/cm3. The source is published by this French research centre which looks pretty reliable to me. SmartSE (talk) 14:26, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"The bark of S. amara has been used to treat dysentery, diarrhea, viral infections and other illnesses in traditional medicine in Guyana, Belize, Brazil, Cuba, French Guiana, Haiti and Peru."—the distribution section does not say it occurs in Belize, Cuba, or Haiti.
- This may be because it isn't necessary to have it growing there to be used as a medicine or because it is grown there specifically for its bark but not naturally. I've been meaning to get round to making a distribution map from one of the references so will check this to see if it mentions it growing in these countries. SmartSE (talk) 14:26, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  - While that is possible, it seems unlikely that traditional medicine would use a plant that is not native in the area. Please check. Ucucha 09:05, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    - I decided that http://www.rain-tree.com/ probably isn't reliable and I hadn't noticed it was discussing two species before. I replaced the medical information with a source from Oxford University Herbarium which should be better. (I'll need to work on replacing the other information from that ref (names and synonyms)). SmartSE (talk) 23:59, 11 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
~~"Simarouba amara is recorded as being grown in Kew Botanical Gardens in 1811."—what makes this medical information?~~
- It's not really relevant, so I've removed it. SmartSE (talk) 21:38, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Out of curiosity, I looked through my collection of PDFs (mainly about mammals) for information on this tree. There are a few things that you may want to include (although they are not necessary for the article to become a GA):

HERSHKOVITZ, P. 1997. Composition of the family Didelphidae Gray, 1821 (Didelphoidea: Marsupialia), with a review of the morphology and behavior of the included four-eyed pouched opossums of the genus Philander Tiedemann, 1808. Fieldiana: Zoology, New Series, 86:1–103. says on p. 70 that the opossum Philander opossum eats S. amara fruits in French Guiana.
- Thanks for the extra refs, I'll work them in later on. SmartSE (talk) 14:26, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  - This one is online here (in response to your e-mail). Ucucha 09:08, 12 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    - Thanks for the link. At the moment there is only information about seed dispersing animals and as the source says it probably doesn't disperse them, I think it is best to leave it out for now.
~~[1] says S. amara is invasive on Puerto Rico.~~
- It seems to say it is naturalised, rather than invasive, I'll add this to the distribution later. SmartSE (talk) 14:26, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  - (done) SmartSE (talk) 23:59, 11 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ucucha 12:49, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Could you please reformat the current ref. 3 ("Simarouba Monograph")? Ucucha 09:08, 12 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- I've removed that source entirely and replaced the information with other sources instead as http://www.rain-tree.com/ isn't reliable. SmartSE (talk) 00:24, 13 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I think I'm done on this now. Thanks for the advice so far, let me know if anything else needs tweaking. SmartSE (talk) 01:05, 13 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I think I see one remaining problem (which I hadn't noticed before): the distribution map, File:Simarouba_amara_distribution.svg, contradicts the text, which says it does not occur further north than Costa Rica or further east than French Guiana. It also doesn't show the introduced population on Puerto Rico, though it does appear to show a distribution on Dominica, which is not in the text. Ucucha 15:36, 13 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I only got round to making it a couple of days ago, which is why you hadn't noticed it before. The distribution map is based on the only map I've found showing the distribution, whereas the text is from another ref. It looks as if the Hardesty ref is incorrect, since the map in ref 18 shows it all over Brazil. I've updated the text to match the map and will correct the map in a minute so that Puerto Rico is included. Thanks for spotting it. SmartSE (talk) 11:56, 14 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks; I've passed the article as a GA. By the way, is the Dominican population also introduced? If not, why doesn't it occur on the other Lesser Antilles? Ucucha 12:41, 14 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I think so. I'll add it. Thanks again for the review. SmartSE (talk) 13:13, 14 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

More possible sources

John Redman Coxe (1831). The American dispensatory, containing the natural, chemical, pharmaceutical and medical history of the different substances employed in medicine: together with the operations of pharmacy; illustrated and explained according to the principles of modern chemistry: to which are added, toxicological and other tables; the prescriptions for patent medicines, and various miscellaneous preparations. Carey & Lea. pp. 598–. Retrieved 4 January 2011. more info on medical usage in C19

http://herbaria.plants.ox.ac.uk/VFH/image/index.php?item=1887&project=7813 more medical details (probably more use for finding other sources) SmartSE (talk) 15:11, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]