This is the user sandbox of Grammathon. A user sandbox is a subpage of the user's user page. It serves as a testing spot and page development space for the user and is not an encyclopedia article. Create or edit your own sandbox here. Other sandboxes: Main sandbox | Template sandbox Finished writing a draft article? Are you ready to request review of it by an experienced editor for possible inclusion in Wikipedia? Submit your draft for review!

Lists

• Bulleted are done like this
• or this

1. Numbered like this and
2. this. Note that the numbered list is inset somewhat.

That wasn't too frightening.

Files! Wuhee!

These are in a gallery:

• 
  Caption1
• 
  Caption2

This one is an embedded file, so it says. Yes but how do I upload MY files, dammit? OH BOY! What a journey to WikiMedia Commons ... Now see here:

Why is it right justified? Do they always do that? One at a time then ... http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Sunflower_2011-07-06.jpg OLE!

It Never Stops - Insert ...

Symbols:− ♭♯♮Grammathon# ½ ⅓ ⅔ ¼ ¾ ⅛ ⅜ ⅝ ⅞ ∞ ~ | ¡ ¿ † ‡ ↔ ↑ ↓ • ¶ # ½ ⅓ ⅔ ¼ ¾ ⅛ ⅜ ⅝ ⅞ ∞ ‘’ “” ‹› «» ¤ ₳ ฿ ₵ ¢ ₡ ₢ $ ₫ ₯ € ₠ ₣ ƒ ₴ ₭ ₤ ℳ ₥ ₦ № ₧ ₰ £ ៛ ₨ ₪ ৳ ₮ ₩ ¥ ♠ ♣ ♥ ♦ m² m³ ♭ ♯ ♮ © ® ™ ◌ Math and Logic:- − × ÷ ⋅ ° ∗ ∘ ± ∓ ≤ ≥ ≠ ≡ ≅ ≜ ≝ ≐ ≃ ≈ ⊕ ⊗ ⇐ ⇔ ⇒ ∞ ← ↔ → ≪ ≫ ∝ √ ∤ ≀ ◅ ▻ ⋉ ⋊ ⋈ ∴ ∵ ↦ ¬ ∧ ∨ ⊻ ∀ ∃ ∈ ∉ ∋ ⊆ ⊈ ⊊ ⊂ ⊄ ⊇ ⊉ ⊋ ⊃ ⊅ ∪ ∩ ∑ ∏ ∐ ′ ∫ ∬ ∭ ∮ ∇ ∂ ∆ ∅ ℂ ℍ ℕ ℙ ℚ ℝ ℤ ℵ ⌊ ⌋ ⌈ ⌉ ⊤ ⊥ ⊢ ⊣ ⊧ □ ∠ ⟨ ⟩ ⁄   − ${\displaystyle }$

Grammathon 22:39, 19 September 2011 (UTC) --Grammathon 22:29, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

Experiments with Links

Suppose I want to quote something that is on a different page. Try an internal link. My Grammathon Main page OK. That seemed to work. Now let's try an external link: The Heart of the Nation I keep getting booted out the the editing page if I leave it. Do I need open another tab so I can more easily copy and paste? Ah. I gather I can edit just a section. So put in some more headings. And some more (must be a new line!):

Third level heading

Does this count as a new section, separately editable? Yes!! it bl**dy well does. Good thing really, I guess.

Fourth level

And

Fifth level

OOh La La! - see that lovely Contents table that has been placed at the top of the article.

Grammathon 21:13, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

It'll be easier if I start again here. On a rather different subject, I will practice putting a Contribution on the Stomatal Conductance Talk page. I think it needs a heading. And I need to remember to Save frequently - every time I move away from this page I seem to lose text!

Doubts about ...

I believe there are some confusions in the introductory paragraph.

By definition, stomatal conductance, measured in mmol m⁻² s⁻¹, is the measure of the rate of passage of carbon dioxide (CO2) exiting, or water vapor entering through the stomata of a leaf. Stomata are small pores on the top and bottom of a leaf that are responsible for taking in and expelling CO2 and moisture from and to the outside air. The rate of stomatal conductance, or its inverse, stomatal resistance ...

It is correct that the magnitude of stomatal conductance can be expressed (amongst other units) in mmol m⁻² s⁻¹, which appears to be a rate. However, it is not correct to say the stomatal conductance is a rate.

Let's consider water vapour, in the gaseous intercellular spaces within the leaf, diffusing through stomatal pores to the air in the boundary layer surrounding the leaf. The concentration of water vapour inside the leaf is high (the air is usually reckoned to be saturated with water vapour). The concentration of water vapour in the boundary layer of the leaf is generally a lot lower. This concentration difference creates the transport of water vapour through the stomata by the process of gaseous diffusion. The equation relating the flux density of water vapour through the stomata to the conductance (to gaseous diffusion of water vapour)of the stomata, and the concentration difference (of water vapour) is simply:

Flux density of water vapour = Conductance * Concentration Difference

The units in this equation must be consistent. If the flux density is expressed in mol units as mol m⁻² s⁻¹, and if the Concentrations are expressed in the dimensionless units of (mol of water vapour) per (mol of air) - a choice nowadays favoured by plant scientists - then the units of Conductance will be the same as those of the Flux Density, that is: mol m⁻² s⁻¹.

By definition, stomatal conductance, measured in mmol m⁻² s⁻¹, is the measure of the rate of passage of carbon dioxide (CO2) exiting, or water vapor entering through the stomata of a leaf. Stomata are small pores on the top and bottom of a leaf that are responsible for taking in and expelling CO2 and moisture from and to the outside air. The rate of stomatal conductance, or its inverse, stomatal resistance, is directly related to the boundary layer resistance of the leaf and the absolute concentration gradient of water vapor from the leaf to the atmosphere. It is under direct biological control of the leaf through the use of guard cells, which surround the stomatal pore [1] (Taiz/Zeiger 1991). Stomatal conductance is integral to leaf level calculations of transpiration (E).

Trying out the citation of references. Don't forget - use the menu Cite dropdown above. It creates the the templates dropdown immediately above. How about this? ^[1] Now, I have to add something lower down in the article. I have tried the error check but didn't really understand it. Try Help. Ahah! Closing in, now. Reflist in double {}seems to do the same as references/ in <>. maybe I should try each of the templates available, because the wikitext above gives the clues to which field does what. ^[2]

Parts of books, including encyclopedia articles So let me have another go with: Manuscript published in an edited compilation

Parkinson, K.J. (1985), "Porometry", in Marshal, B.; Woodward, F.I. (eds.), Instrumentation for Environmental Physiology, UK: Cambridge University Press

Dammit. I seem to have lost that last attempt which worked fine with the simple template for a journal citation. Maybe I should have saved before going back to edit. Seems like this was it. Try again. ^[3]

That's better. I think it is fine now.

References