Talk:Lasioglossum cressonii

Comments and Changes Made 9/27/2015

The Lasioglossum cressonii entry provided some interesting facts and was a good start for a more detailed entry in the future. Although there was some grammatical issues, the writing was condense and very accessible for a wider audience. I was very interested in the effects of logging on this bee species and had no idea that logging actually increased diversity of this species. I did a lot of editing to both the structure and information of this paper. I first edited the descriptive overview to include more taxonomy information and re-wrote two sentences to help the paragraph connect better. Lastly, I added a sentence discussing the bee’s pollination habits to make the reader more excited about this entry and linked eusocial as it is the first time it was mentioned. Throughout the whole paper I rewrote the species name as “L. Cressonii” which was a stylistic change that helped the entry look more professional. Within the “Taxonomy” section, I linked the family name so the readers could use these other entries as references. Within the “Description and Identification” section, I linked many different parts of the bee’s anatomy, including ocelli, scutellum and clypeal. Without providing any explanation for these words, the reader would have a very difficult time understanding distinctive features. I also rewrote a few sentences to ensure that the reader understood what anatomical regions were being referred to. Within the “Colony Cycle” section, I linked diapause, overwintering and gyne. I linked these words because the small section is essentially meaningless without understanding these concepts. I also linked spermathecal within the "Mating Behavior" section so the readers could get a clearer understanding of its function. Lastly within the “Diet” section, I italicized all the names of the pollinated plant species just to make the article seem more professional and trustworthy to the readers. Helenaxeros (talk) 21:16, 27 September 2015 (UTC)