Talk:Mysida

Mysida 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.
Review: March 6, 2014. (Reviewed version).

Arthropods Mid‑importance

	Arthropods portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Arthropods, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of arthropods 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.ArthropodsWikipedia:WikiProject ArthropodsTemplate:WikiProject ArthropodsArthropods articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Marine life Mid‑importance

This article is part of WikiProject Marine life, an attempt at creating a standardized, informative, comprehensive and easy-to-use resource on marine life. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit this article, or visit the project page where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. This project is an offshoot of the WikiProject Tree of Life.Marine lifeWikipedia:WikiProject Marine lifeTemplate:WikiProject Marine lifeMarine life articles

Mid

This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Marine life To do:

Have a look at the Marine life WikiProject and sign up.

Here are some tasks you can do, as organized by The Marine life Wikiproject:

Collaboration of the week: Marine life article assessment
Other: See the projects page
Images: Upload any non-copyrighted marine life images to Wikimedia Commons
Featured Articles/Good Articles:
Other: Add {{Portal|Marine life}} to related articles

Size?[edit]

The article only states the Mysidacea are small. I think it would be an improvement to mention length or weight. Pukkie (talk) 08:24, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly incorrect classification[edit]

This is a morphological classification [ADD: i.e. Mysidacea] that has lost support. Molecularly they are no way related. It might be best to copy the content into the Mysida and Lophogastrida respectively (keeping this). --Squidonius (talk) 13:19, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Agree. Lycaon (talk) 14:45, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Moved old Mysidacea to Mysida, to keep the extensive edit history. Mysidacea to be recreated.Mo5b (talk) 21:37, 3 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review[edit]

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

Reviewer: FunkMonk (talk · contribs) 12:55, 3 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I'll review this before long, in the meantime, any of these images[1][2] useful? The article could benefit from some more images, added one... FunkMonk (talk) 12:55, 3 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I thought your suggestions a bit over specialised but I have added a couple more. There are not many on Commons. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 20:08, 3 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The lead doesn't appear to summarise the entire article, for example on description and "culture".

Expanded a bit. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 20:08, 3 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

"are often used as a diagnostic feature of the group." Context could clarify this for the average reader. Diagnosis for classification?

Changed wording. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 20:08, 3 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The stuff about distribution seems to fit better close to behaviour, the content overlaps. Now there's a weird gap between the two. FunkMonk (talk) 15:32, 3 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I have moved the sections around a bit. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 20:08, 3 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

"Mysids are good candidates for large-scale culture," which is what exactly? Aquarium? FunkMonk (talk) 15:38, 3 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Changed wording. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 20:08, 3 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

"benthic and pelagic" Explain in parenthesis?

Done. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 20:08, 3 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

There are some other uncommon terms throughout that could benefit from this too, such as "ghonochoristic".

Removed that word and explained some others. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 20:08, 3 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

with the adults preying on their young" Their own offspring?

I doubt they distinguish between their own offspring and that of others. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 20:08, 3 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for taking on this review. I have hopefully dealt with the points you raise above. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 20:08, 3 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Looking pretty good. Any reason why the article is not located at the common name? Found a pretty good image[3] on Flickr, of any use? FunkMonk (talk) 04:45, 4 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I have replaced one of the other images (which was of the same species) with that one. As for the name, we have Isopoda but Copepod and I am not bothered much either way and usually accept what I find. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 07:35, 6 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, I'll pass! FunkMonk (talk) 09:00, 6 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified (February 2018)[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Mysida. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:23, 10 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ecology[edit]

Mysis relicta caused an unexpected massive change in the Flathead Lake Water System (Montana, USA). The released Opossum shrimps turned out to be a severe competitor to the lokal salmon species in the oligotrophic lake, both feeding on Zooplankton. This led to the extinction of the Salmon Population, the disappearance of salmon feeding eagles, Bears and others and finally to the collapse of tourism. Details in the publication: Craig N. Spencer, B. Riley McClelland, and Jack A. Stanford "Shrimp Stocking, Salmon Collapse and Eagle Displacement Cascading interactions in the food web of a large aquatic ecosystem" BioScience Vol. 41 No.1, 1991 https://doi.org/10.2307/1311531 Ahrfuchs (talk) 10:49, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]