Talk:Peanut

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Plants (Rated C-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Plants, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of plants and botany 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.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Food and drink (Rated C-class, Top-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Food and drink, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of food and drink related articles 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.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
Checklist icon
 Top  This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
 
Wikipedia CD Selection
WikiProject icon Peanut is included in the Wikipedia CD Selection, see Peanut at Schools Wikipedia. Please maintain high quality standards; if you are an established editor your last version in the article history may be used so please don't leave the article with unresolved issues, and make an extra effort to include free images, because non-free images cannot be used on the DVDs.
 

Styrene[edit]

I read that styrene occurs naturally in peanuts in low concentrations. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Styrene http://www.styreneforum.org/faq_index.html Styrene has hazardous health effects, it certainly is mutagenic and it might be carcinogenic. As far as I can tell from the second source the concentration of styrene is extremely low (trace amounts which could only be found with the most advanced technology for detecting specific molecules) and shoulnd't be a problem. Maybe someone who is knowledgable can write something about it? 145.132.75.218 (talk) 09:45, 19 August 2016 (UTC)

There doesn't seem to be any quantitative evidence that the content of styrene in peanuts is significant. It's a derivative of the volatile organic compound, benzene, and may contribute a minor aroma quality to peanuts. The medical literature contains no history that scientists have perceived any toxicity danger to human consumers of peanuts in typical snack amounts of finished peanut products. I don't feel it deserves discussion per WP:UNDUE, WP:IINFO and WP:NOTEVERYTHING. --Zefr (talk) 14:32, 19 August 2016 (UTC)

I completely agree with Zefr, Davidbertioli (talk) 17:13, 31 October 2016 (UTC)

Lead sentence[edit]

I stopped by this article out of personal curiosity, but noticed that the lead sentence is pretty awkward: Peanut […] is a crop of global importance. The first sentence in the lead of an article should almost always answer the question "What or who is [the subject]?". In this case, it feels like it's hijacked to overemphasize the importance of peanuts as a crop; it doesn't really tell the reader precisely what a peanut is. Moreover, it's redundant to the second sentence (emphasis added): It is widely grown in the tropics and subtropics, being important to both smallholder and large commercial producers.

It looks like the lead's trying to deal with peanuts as a plant (taxonomic context), as a crop ("nuts", oil, nitrogen-fixing), and cover the obvious comparison to and distinction from true nuts. In that context, it prioritizes the context of peanuts as a crop. I think that we might end up with better writing if we rewrote the lead to start with a short "general" paragraph and dive into specifics in its following paragraphs. I'm not sure where to start with that; in particular I don't want to simply switch to overemphasizing the taxonomic context—the easiest way to write a definitive lead sentence. Perhaps if we went with something more along the lines of The peanut […] is a legume, widely grown for its pods and oil? {{Nihiltres |talk |edits}} 16:19, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

I agree the lead could be improved, and your suggestion is good. You could go ahead and edit it, perhaps after reviewing MOS:LEAD for the key guides, or post a draft here for other editors to review and work before posting to the article page. Thanks. --Zefr (talk) 16:28, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

I went ahead and changed the first sentence, very similar to Nihiltres suggestion (hope that's OK, please revert if not)

"Peanut, also known as groundnut and goober (Arachis hypogaea) is a legume crop grown mainly for its edible seeds"

Possible objections could be that this doesn't emphasise oil enough, or mention the use of the leaves as forage for animals, which is important in some regions, but I guess the first sentence should capture the main use? What do you think? Davidbertioli (talk) 16:58, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

Other suggestions

Peanut, also known as groundnut and goober (Arachis hypogaea) is a legume crop grown mainly for its edible seeds or "nuts"

Peanut, also known as groundnut and goober (Arachis hypogaea) is a legume crop grown mainly for its edible seeds or "nuts" and the oil that is extracted from them

Peanut, also known as groundnut and goober (Arachis hypogaea) is an annual herbaceous plant and legume crop grown mainly for its edible seeds

Davidbertioli (talk) 17:21, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

Reading FAOSTAT data for production and trade[edit]

Today, Crazy2be made a reference query on production and trade content. 2014 production data are now available but oddly only 2013 data remain for exports and imports. I have edited the "Production and trade" section accordingly and added a reference for export/import data which are accessed from a different location among domains, but admit a user has to carefully navigate the FAOSTAT pick lists to select data. --Zefr (talk) 16:07, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for your edit Zefr! Trying to retrieve the data from FAOSTAT was confusing for me, their website is buggy, and I didn't realize they were called 'groundnuts, with shell' in their database. Fortunately, it looks like they are working on a new beta website, which is less buggy, although unfortunately still doesn't seem to support direct links into it. I've tried to clarify in the citation exactly what one must select to get the data described in the article, feel free to edit/clarify further :). Crazy2be (talk) 23:18, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

Recent changes to Botany section[edit]

There have been some recent changes to the Botany section. Sorry, but I think the changes introduced some inaccuracies, and overall weren't an improvement. For instance geocarpy is not a "flower formation". Also the citation for a classic publication on geocarpy was removed and replaced by citation to an encyclopedia. I have started to edit section, but still needs some work. Davidbertioli (talk) 23:49, 28 November 2016 (UTC)

I removed the reference to the Encyclopedia of Life. It has errors and is a poor secondary reference. For instance it refers to the flowers as yellow, and they are not. Have restored the original primary references, a classic article by Ben Smith on geocarpy, and the Monograph of peanut species by Krapovickas & Gregory (both of which are available online free) Davidbertioli (talk) 00:22, 29 November 2016 (UTC)

thanks for improving it. Jytdog (talk) 02:12, 29 November 2016 (UTC)

thanks for your edits too! I will take note of your comment on editorializing Davidbertioli (talk) 02:49, 29 November 2016 (UTC)

I also replaced the reference to a site http://www.gbif.org/species/5353770 "Global Biodiversity Information Facility". Although it sounds like a good source, it really isn't. It is poorly written, eg "Pods are 3 to long, containing 1 to 4 seeds", and wrong in parts "'"nut" specifically refers to indehiscent fruit". If this were true then walnuts and hazelnuts wouldn't fall off the tree when ripe! Of course, they do. In fact, a nut refers to a fruit whose ovary wall becomes very hard at maturity.Davidbertioli (talk) 13:37, 29 November 2016 (UTC)

Anatomy diagram(s) needed[edit]

A diagram showing the names of the parts of a peanut would be very helpful to add to this article. Here's an example of good labels for both the peanut and the flower. I added the subsection "Parts" to at least get a list started. -- Beland (talk) 18:12, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

At Wikimedia Commons, there is this drawing and this one. There are no photographs there that seem useful. --Zefr (talk) 18:24, 25 May 2017 (UTC)