The source of information I have chosen is an article titled
“Prevalence of the pathogenic chytrid fungus, Batrachochytrium dendrobatidis, in an endangered population of northern leopard frogs, Rana pipiens“. This article can be accessed at https://bmcecol.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1472-6785-10-6.
I evaluate it as academic, peer-reviewed research material.
The article is academic because it is written by experts in the field, contains in-text citations, and contains a bibliography. We can classify the authors as experts in the filed because of their affiliation with the University of Victoria Biology department. In-text citations and a bibliography section can be found in the paper.
The article has been peer-reviewed. Evidence of peer-review is in the acknowledgements section of the article, where the authors thank both a named and unnamed reviewer for helping them to improved the manuscript.
This article can be classified as research material because the authors conducted an original scientific study. Evidence of this is detailed in the Methods and Results sections of the article. The authors describe their research question (how is the fungal infection with Batrachochytrium dendrobatidis affecting the endangered BC populations of Northern Leopard frogs). They detail the length of the study (3 years) and their tissue sampling and individual recognition methods for the frogs.