Talk:Fungus

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Fungus article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4: 3 months

Fungus is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.

This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on November 17, 2009.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
May 25, 2009	Peer review	Reviewed
August 22, 2009	Featured article candidate	Promoted

This article was on the Article Collaboration and Improvement Drive for the week of July 16, 2006.

Current status: Featured article

Fungi Top‑importance

	Fungi portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Fungi, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Fungi 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.FungiWikipedia:WikiProject FungiTemplate:WikiProject FungiFungi
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Microbiology Top‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Microbiology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Microbiology 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.MicrobiologyWikipedia:WikiProject MicrobiologyTemplate:WikiProject MicrobiologyMicrobiology
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Tree of Life Top‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Tree of Life, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of taxonomy and the phylogenetic tree of life 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.Tree of LifeWikipedia:WikiProject Tree of LifeTemplate:WikiProject Tree of Lifetaxonomic
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Environment High‑importance

	Environment portal This environment-related article is part of the WikiProject Environment to improve Wikipedia's coverage of the environment. The aim is to write neutral and well-referenced articles on environment-related topics, as well as to ensure that environment articles are properly categorized. Read Wikipedia:Contributing FAQ and leave any messages at the project talk page.EnvironmentWikipedia:WikiProject EnvironmentTemplate:WikiProject EnvironmentEnvironment
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Section sizes

Section size for Fungus (51 sections)
Section name	Byte count	Section total
(Top)	9,204	9,204
Etymology	4,867	4,867
Characteristics	6,960	6,960
Diversity	3,527	3,527
Mycology	1,293	3,155
History	1,862	1,862
Morphology	16	4,333
Microscopic structures	2,775	2,775
Macroscopic structures	1,542	1,542
Growth and physiology	3,708	3,708
Reproduction	1,014	13,336
Asexual reproduction	917	917
Sexual reproduction	4,310	4,310
Spore dispersal	4,286	4,286
Homothallism	2,106	2,106
Other sexual processes	703	703
Evolution	9,942	9,942
Taxonomy	13,331	23,884
Taxonomic groups	7,132	7,132
Fungus-like organisms	3,421	3,421
Ecology	740	17,847
Symbiosis	452	14,516
With plants	2,589	2,589
With algae and cyanobacteria	2,190	2,190
With insects	3,787	3,787
As parasites	2,556	2,556
As pathogens	1,831	1,831
As targets of mycoparasites	1,111	1,111
Communication	1,432	1,432
Possible impact on climate	1,159	1,159
Mycotoxins	2,127	2,127
Pathogenic mechanisms	2,582	2,582
Human use	4,854	19,700
Therapeutic uses	600	4,496
Modern chemotherapeutics	171	3,896
Antibiotics	1,605	1,605
Other	2,120	2,120
Traditional medicine	1,082	1,082
Cultured foods	1,048	1,048
In food	1,952	1,952
Poisonous fungi	1,979	1,979
Pest control	2,009	2,009
Bioremediation	557	557
Model organisms	1,169	1,169
Others	554	554
See also	256	256
References	15	80,830
Citations	79,329	79,329
Cited literature	1,486	1,486
Further reading	479	479
External links	1,406	1,406
Total	208,143	208,143

This article has previously been nominated to be moved. Please review the prior discussions if you are considering re-nomination.

Discussions:

RM, Fungus → Fungi, Not moved, 16 December 2007, discussion
RM, Fungus → Fungi, Not moved, 24 October 2022, discussion

Tip: Anchors are case-sensitive in most browsers.

This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.

[[Species#The isolation species concept in more detail|biological species concept]] The anchor (#The isolation species concept in more detail) is no longer available because it was deleted by a user before.

Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. | Reporting errors

Suggest moving two paragraphs about taxonomy

The first two paragraphs under [Taxonomy] should be moved to [Taxonomic groups] (or possibly be deleted). The problem with their current position is that they, and the first paragraph in particular, obfuscate the reclassification of fungi as a separate kingdom. 12:31, 11 September 2023 (UTC)

Btw, the comprehensive fungal taxonimical system Outline of Fungi by Wijayawardene et al., 2020 (broad collaboration of mycologists from many research organizations all over the world; [1]) should be mentioned (at least) in the second paragraph. --Petr Karel (talk) 17:45, 13 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Remove Chromista from lead para

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

These organisms are classified as a kingdom,[4] separately from the other eukaryotic kingdoms, which, by one traditional classification, includes Plantae, Animalia, Protozoa, and Chromista.:
Remove Chromista as it is not traditional nor supported by any references in article :
No references support its inclusion.:

FixitFelixicus (talk) 03:20, 13 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Kingdom Chromista is "traditional" (originated 1981 [2] or earlier; then used in "Cavalier-Smiths" system (e.g. [3]; [4]) and survived at least till his last study published 2022 ([5]). The same or similar system with 5 eukaryotic kingdoms containing Chromista is applied in many other projects (AlgaeBase; WoRMS...) The only problem is, that it is (most probably) not a monophyletic taxon (for the death of the "Chromalveolate hypothesis" see e.g. https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1550-7408.2012.00644.x and its references). The same problem as Chromista has the "traditional" kingdom Protozoa.

So, I agree either with removing or maintaining of both Chromista and Protozoa. --Petr Karel (talk) 07:23, 13 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Given the response by Petr Karel, this edit request should probably be marked as responded to. This edit very likely needs a response/decision from someone with specific knowledge of this field (such as Petr Karel). I suggest someone with that knowledge be bold and make a decision about Chromista and possibly Protozoa and then implement it. -- Pinchme123 (talk) 03:00, 5 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

IMO the "definition" of Fungi as 1 of the 5 eukaryotic kingdoms is OK for lay readers. As a reference, one or more of the refs to Cavalier-Smith's system could be added (see my previous answer). The problem of this approach for phylogenetical taxonomists is that Chromista, even in the modified definition since cca Cavalier-Smith 2015), are probably paraphyletic (not a clade inside Diaphoretickes) and Protista polyphyletic taxon, as I mentioned.

The lead paragraph could be completed by the phylogenetic quasidefinion: Fungi ≈ sister group to Cristidiscoidea Page, 1987 (syn. Nucleariae Tedersoo, Sánchez-Ramírez, Kõljalg, Bahram, Döring, Schigel, T. May, M. Ryberg & Abarenkov 2018 syn. Rotosphaerida Rainer 1968), making together an opisthokont clade Holomycota Liu et al. 2009 (syn. Nucletmycea Brown et al. 2009). (I mentioned most of the significant synonyms to show, that individual approaches in systematics and taxonomy for the basal opisthokont groups vary at least in nomenclature; in the lead paragraph only one taxon name, without authority and year, shoud be presented which equals to the name of the wikipedia article.) Also for this approach there is a problem of competition: Instead of the broad definition by mycologists (Outline of fungi, 2020, [6]), protistologists would like to rule above the Opisthosporidia (paraphyletic group of rozellids, microsporidians and aphelids) so they prefer narrower definition of kingdom Fungi without the whole Opisthosporidia or at least without rozellids and aphelids (see [7]); this narrower group/clade is sometimes called true fungi (Eumycota).

The cladistic definition as another alternative is too complicated for wikipedia: "The smallest crown clade containing Rozella allomycis F. K. Faust 1937, Batrachochytrium dendrobatidis Longcore, Pessier and D. K. Nichols 1999, Allomyces arbusculus E. J. Butler 1911, Entomophthora muscae (Cohn) Fresen. 1856, Coemansia reversa Tiegh. and G. Le Monn. 1873, Rhizophagus intraradices (N. C. Schenck and G. S. Sm.) C. Walker and A. Schüßler 2010, Rhizopus oryzae Went and Prins. Geerl. 1895, Saccharomyces cerevisiae Meyen 1838, and Coprinopsis cinerea (Schaef.) Redhead, Vilgalys and Moncalvo 2001)" (Phylonyms, 2020, ISBN: 978-1-138-33293-5, p. 109).

I hope my answer could help you to make the decision about the lead paragraph. You can also ask the projects Wikipedia:WikiProject Fungi and Wikipedia:WikiProject Tree of Life for support. I am not a native speaker so I will not implement the decision into the text. Petr Karel (talk) 14:07, 5 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

How about:

These organisms are classified as one of the traditional eukaryotic kingdoms, along with Animalia, Plantae and either Protista^[1] or Protozoa and Chromista.^[2]

Reasonably concise and covers the main alternative traditional schemes.— Jts1882 | talk 14:33, 5 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Perfect for the intro paragraph, thank you.

(But IMO any featured article about a higher taxon should also have a precise taxon definition based on recent knowledge - I'm missing a paragraph on the phylogenetic position of fungi e. g. between the paragraphs Evolution and Taxonomy.) Petr Karel (talk) 04:55, 6 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

References

^ Whittaker, R.H. (January 1969). "New concepts of kingdoms or organisms. Evolutionary relations are better represented by new classifications than by the traditional two kingdoms". Science. 163 (3863): 150–60.
^ Cavalier-Smith, T. (1998). "A revised six-kingdom system of life". Biological Reviews. 73 (3): 203–66.

Semi-protected edit request on 31 December 2023

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Please add the missing hatnote: {{Redirect-distinguish|Fugus|Fugu}} 134.199.113.124 (talk) 18:51, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Done Liu1126 (talk) 20:15, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Organization and Writing Quality

The article is detailed yet brief enough to read and comprehend. It is well-written for both the public and experts. The content is very well-organized into sections, as well as related groups. Mr21782 (talk) 04:31, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Fungi is multicellular or unicellular

Both because it depends it's condition 2409:4089:AA81:D197:0:0:FF08:AF12 (talk) 14:29, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is in the article where it says "and morphologies ranging from unicellular aquatic chytrids to large mushrooms." Graham Beards (talk) 14:32, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

[1] Whittaker, R.H. (January 1969). "New concepts of kingdoms or organisms. Evolutionary relations are better represented by new classifications than by the traditional two kingdoms". Science. 163 (3863): 150–60.

[2] Cavalier-Smith, T. (1998). "A revised six-kingdom system of life". Biological Reviews. 73 (3): 203–66.

[1]

[2]