User talk:Cobiadi/sandbox

Hello, my name is Cheryl bold bold

Cheryl Obiadi 10/26/2016- Edits I wish to add to the article (Continuation of the last assignement)

E.amylovara unfortunately does not have it's own wikipedia page up yet, and links directly to the fireblight article on wikipedia. This prompts me to want to start an article page on E.amylovara on Wikipedia, which  feel would be dandy as I noticed the current quams with the fireblight article currently on Wikipedia.

a) The history of E.amylovara on the article is rather quite minute and could contain a tad bit more information. Like the belief of how E.amylovara was imported into Northern Europe through fruit containers. No dates are mentioned in the article supporting the time of entry and dispersal. There isn't much information on how the disease spread in Europe. The article focuses more on the possibility of it's occurence in Australia do to frequent importations from New Zealand.

b) There is supple information concerning the dispersal and dissemination of E.amylovara, as well as the primary host of the bacteria which is the family Roscacea sub-family pomoideae, the article even goes further on to discuss the exact species-plants most susceptible to the effect of the bacterium. It would be nice though if the subfamily name could be added to the article as well. Also, the acrticle could go further on to discuss other modes of entry such as through the host plants xylem and cortical paranchyma tissues and not just stomata.

c) The article could also shed more light on control methods, As well as shine light on the reason why prevention is better than cure for E.amylovara. Which is because the bacteria once it enters the cell spreads in the endophytic phase of pathogens. It could also be more favorable if the article could speak more on the disadvantages of using antibiotics such as streptomycin, which is due to the fact that bacterium can transfer favorable genes horizontally, even from bacterium not of the same species. Although, I must admit that I like how the article made mention of the exact states where E.amylovara had gained resistance to streptomycin such as Washington, and Oregon. Which I am not too sure may still hold true? Possibly other areas have developed a resistance to the antibiotics already. Also, the use of copper as a form of prevention was not mentioned at all not to even speak of mentioned extensively.

The article of which I plan to contribute to is ""erwinia amylovora"" [Amylovora]

""Content I wish to add to article""

""History of E.amylovora""
        It has indeed been accepted that this destructive crop bacteria (pathogen) initially originated in North America. E.amylovora can currently be found in all the provinces of Canada, as well as in some parts of the United States of America some states include (Alabama, California, Colorado, Connecticut,

Georgia, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Michigan, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Texas, Utah, Virginia, Washington, West Virginia, Wisconsin), Mexico and Bermuda.

        It is believed that the pathogen was first introduced into Northern Europe through bacterial ooze from fruit containers in the 1950's. From the 1950's-1960's, E.amylovora had spread through Northern Europe, yet large areas of Germany and France seemingly remained unaffected from the disease. By the 1980's E.amylovora had begun separately to the Eastern Meditteranian region. Finally from the years 1995-1996 cases of fireblight had begun to be reported in Hungary, Romania, Northern Italy and Northern Spain.

""Hosts/ Biology""

      The preponderant hosts of the deadly pathogen are in the family Rosaceae, the sub-family pomoideae. It makes it's entry into it's host xylem or cortical paranchyma. It can also enter through stomata, lenticles and hydathodes.  It is dispersed by rain and or insects naturally, but this mode of dispersal is very ineffective and can only be effective for local transmission of the pathogen. 
      It is a gram negatice bacterium (as stated above).
It indeed has cells, short rods with rounded ends made motile by many pertichous flagellae. 
      E.amylovora can only be destroyed externally, before it enters the cell. This is because once it enters the host, it spreads in the endophytic phase of pathogenisis. Once this happens external control methods become ineffective. The ideal control method is done by making use of copper and antibiotics on the external of the plant. This is the only effective method and it is indeed preventative. Currently it has been noted that E.amylovora is resistant to the antibiotic streptomycin.

Sources 1)https://www.eppo.int/QUARANTINE/data_sheets/bacteria/ERWIAM_ds.pdf https://www.eppo.int/QUARANTINE/data_sheets/bacteria/ERWIAM_ds.pdf 2) American Society for Microbiology Article ^[1] 3) Virulence(N.I.H) ^[2]

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Cobiadi (talk • contribs) 21:37, 12 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Cheryl. This is Shireen from biology class.

You have so much great info here! Nice work. I wonder if maybe the overall writing could be simplified a little. In addition, defining technical terminology and concepts would be helpful for people not as versed in biology. In addition, I think it's important to expand on how there's not really treatment and prevention is key.

For example, this part could be expanded (on treatment) and the technical concepts could be explained.

"This is simply because once it enters the host, it spreads in the endophytic phase of pathogenisis. Once this happens external control methods become ineffective. The ideal control method is done by making use of copper and antibiotics on the external of the plant. This is the only effective method and it is indeed preventative. Currently it has been noted that E.amylovora has developed..."

Shireenzameen (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 22:16, 12 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Erwinia Amylovara

10/26/2016

  Content I wish to add to article Erwinia Amylovara/Fireblight article

 History of E.amylovora/ Geography
       First and foremost it is important to note that in the early 1800's E.amylovara was the first bacterium that could be used to demonstrate that it did indeed cause disease in plants. It is accepted that this destructive crop bacteria had initially originated in North America. It can currently be found in all the provinces of Canada, as well as in some parts of the United States of America some states include Alabama, California, Colorado, Connecticut,

Georgia, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Michigan, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Texas, Utah, Virginia, Washington, West Virginia and Wisconsin. Other countries of its occurrence include but are not limited to Mexico and Bermuda. On the African continent E.amylovora has been confirmed in Egypt.

        It is believed that the pathogen was first introduced into Northern Europe through bacterial ooze from fruit containers in the 1950's, imported from Northern America. During the 1950's-1960's, E.amylovora had spread through much of Northern Europe, yet leaving large areas of Germany and France seemingly untouched by the disease of which the bacteria causes a devastating disease known as "fireblight". This was short lived, as E.amylovora made it's presence known when it was discovered in the later 1990's in Germany. Nonetheless by the 1980's the E.amylovora bacteria had been found in the Eastern Meditteranian, although it's appearance in this region is thought to be an isolated appearance and not as a result of local transmission. Finally from the years 1995-1996 cases of fireblight had begun to be reported in countries such as Hungary, Romania, Northern Italy and Northern Spain.

   Hosts/ Morphology
      The preponderant hosts/most susceptible plantae of the deadly pathogen are in the family Rosaceae, the sub-family pomoideae. The bacteria makes it's entry into it's host xylem or cortical paranchyma. It can also enter through stomata, lenticles and hydathodes. It indeed has cells, short rods with rounded ends made motile by many pertichous flagellae. E.amylovara is a gram negatice bacterium (as stated above).

Dispersal and Control
It can be naturally dispersed by rain and insects, but this mode of dispersal is very ineffective and can only be effective for local transmission of the pathogen. Aerosols are also suspected in playing a role in it's transmission due to the detection of E.amylovora in Meditteranean regions.
E.amylovora needs to be destroyed externally, before it enters the cell. This is simply because once it enters the host, it spreads in the endophytic phase of pathogenisis. Once this happens external control methods become ineffective. The ideal control method is done by making use of copper and antibiotics on the external of the plant. This is the only effective method and it is indeed preventative. Currently it has been noted that E.amylovora has developed a resistant to the antibiotic streptomycin, as do most bacteria due to their flexible ability to transfer preferential genes promoting resistivity horizontally from species not even similar to it as all bacterium can.
Phytosanitary measures have been employed as the best sanitary measures against E.amylovara dispersal. High risk countries are encouraged not to import susceptible plants of the pathogen into their territory because, once the bacteria becomes established in an area it is nearly impossible to eradicate. Nurseries and orchards in such regions are placed on strict phytosanitary surveillance measures and well-monitered. Imported and infected crops are destroyed as soon as they are noticed since the bacteria spreads very rapidly and eradication methods are usually costly and inefficient.

Sources:- Sources 1)https://www.eppo.int/QUARANTINE/data_sheets/bacteria/ERWIAM_ds.pdf https://www.eppo.int/QUARANTINE/data_sheets/bacteria/ERWIAM_ds.pdf 2) American Society for Microbiology Article ^[3] 3) Virulence(N.I.H) ^[4] 4) Superbug Aricle ---Given in class by Professor Hirshorn 5) Virulence Factors of Erwinia amylovora: A Review;Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2015, 16(6), 12836-12854; ^[5] — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cobiadi (talk • contribs) 03:42, 27 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

peer review

I think overall your information and everything looks very good and organized. You can maybe add some more specific diseases that are involved with this bacterium if there are any. If there are any, then it be nice to know how they spread and such. I would want to know if there are any treatments for these diseases. I like that you added some history and geography into this. It also help to explain some concepts and phrases such as endophytic. I think you did a good job overall though.Ashia2001 (talk) 03:14, 17 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Draft Feedback

Cheryl, you have done a great job researching your topic, and your writing and organization here is very clear. I also like the topics you have chosen to focus on for your article addition, and I think that these will mesh nicely with the current Fire Blight article. My first overall suggestion would be to think more about how your work will fit into the Fire Blight article, and then to state that in your work. As you do this, I think you may need to have your writing in your Sandbox User page to move it over into Wikipedia, so it may be helpful to work on your final draft in that page.

In terms of the sections of the Fire Blight article relative to your sections, I think that your history section would make for a good additional section in this article - perhaps simplify the title of this section to just "History" though. Would "Distribution" be a good separate but short section? "Hosts" seems like a good new section as well. Your last section, "Dispersal and Control," seems like it wold fit nicely under the current "Management" section in this article.

My second suggestion would be to be sure to cite all of your references in the body of your work. And, when you list your references at the end of your work, do list its full information, including journal, author, year, etc. The superbug article is here: http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/news/080401_mrsa (you can just reference it with this information).

Last, your other referees suggested that you explain some of the science terms that you state in greater depth. Another thing you could do, however, is to refer the reader to a Wikipedia page that explains each major term or concept, by linking to that page for each term. Rhirshorn (talk) 00:12, 24 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[1] ttp://aem.asm.org/content/61/7/2636.full.pdf

[2] ttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4490474/

[3] ttp://aem.asm.org/content/61/7/2636.full.pdf

[4] ttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4490474/

[5] ttp://www.mdpi.com/1422-0067/16/6/12836/htm

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]