Talk:Microbiology
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] Old discussions
There is a document entitled 'Chapter 1 - Microbiology' at http://www2.ihs.gov/opheng/EH_Handbook/CH-1.doc in Microsoft .doc format that appears to be (at least in part) a work of the U.S. Indian Health Service.
See http://www.opheng.ihs.gov/ehh_index.cfm for more details -- it appears to be a draft.
However, its copyright status is unclear. If it is a work of the U.S. Federal Government or one of its agencies, then it is in the public domain, and we should be able to use it. -- Anon.
[edit] Old discussions, part 2
Is this phrase from the opening paragraph supposed to say "much is NOT known" ? "Although much is now known in the field of microbiology, advances are being made regularly." the "now" and the second clause conflicts with the "although". I do not know anything about microbiology, however, so I present it to you as a possible typo. -jdw
I propose that this page be consolidated with Microorganism. Any opinions? -adam
- I don't think that is such a good idea. There is much to be written about the field of microbiology (esp. in terms of history) that isn't at all appropriate for an article about microbes. --mav
-
- So make this a page about Microbiology as a social undertaking, while microbe deals with the subject matter of Microbiology? Sounds good.
[edit] A Bulgarian innovation:human blood has normal microbial flora.
Dear Sir, November 10, 2003
Everybody can see on color photographs the microorganisms living in the blood of Bulgarian professors of medicine as normal microbial flora[www.585826.iam911.com ],but Bulgaria is one of the poorest country of Europe and this is the reason to ask you what must I do in order to get some information about the taxonomy of this unknown till present microorganisms.? I'm ready to any form of cooperation with anybody who use some kind of DNA investigations.
Sincerely E. Kalfin M. D., Ph. D. e-mail:dr_emil_kalfin@yahoo.com
[edit] Anon "contribution"
This text was added by User:24.131.1.139 but in doing so deleted all the external links. I have moved the text here and reverted. Onco p53 04:25, 28 Jan 2005 (UTC)
There are three classes of microbes, which include prions and viruses, the prokaryotic forms and the eukaryotic forms. Prions and viruses are acellular, meaning that they do not posess the tradition cell structure. They are in fact, not true organisms. Prions are little string of proteins, while a virus is a protein coated string of RNA or DNA. The prokaryotic forms of microbes, which are also the biggest and most important group in microbiology, are bacteria. They are mostly unicellular. Finally, the eukaryotic forms of microbes include algae, fungi and protozoans. They are the most complex of the three classes.
[edit] Considering large addition
I'd like to contribute significantly to this page to raise the quality on what I feel is a very important subject. I'm going to be working on a more detailed history paragraph as well as a better overall description of the field. I may add a picture as well, maybe a microscope or something along those lines. I see the difficulty being to get a good article here that doesn't cross-over with all the other sub-fields of biology. I see microbiology as second only to the larger discipline of biology as the mother of Molecular biology, Biochemistry, Cell biology, etc. Any comments? J Shultz 17:20, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Re: Considering large addition
I'm a student studying microbiology, and completely agree this is an area of science frquently overlooked. It would be nice to have some information on how microbes have contributed to genome projects. The very first was done a virus and the first microbe (Haemophilus influenzae) was completed 1995 almost 10 years ahead of the human genome project.
[edit] Bacteriology - Microbiology
I agree that bacteriology is an important part of microbiology but the latter includes yeasts, protists and virii which are clearly not bacteria. I would vote to keep it separated. Spitshine 17:18, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Chlamydia-like Microorganisms Live in Donor's Blood as Normal Flora
Chlamydia-like Microorganisms can be seen on 2 color photographs and on 10 electron microsop photographs in donor's blood in an article published in English in 2005.Every microbiologist can isolate this microorganisms from his/her blood and see them in his/her laboratory in order to study them moore carefuly and inform patients about the discovery of normal flora in human blood. E. Kalfin M.D.,Ph.d.
- I´ve found a source on the subject, in case anyone is interested, and wants to see if there´s something useful for the WP article. I´ve not read it yet. Chlamydia-like Microorganisms Live in Donor's Blood as Normal Flora --Extremophile 14:59, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Links removed from main page
http://www.bionews.in/ - looks like link spam
What is Link spam? If you think in that way, then, ninty percent links in wiki are link spam. This site I posted is very useful Microbiology News Site. If you think a News site focused on particular subject is link spam, then please delete the link. I am not associated with this site, anyway.
[edit] Earlier ideas on microbiology?
There were nothing like the classic greeks or someone else thinking way further in time, having ideas about microbiology? From the germ theory of disease article I´ve found this:
- One of the earliest references to this theory appears in On Agriculture by Marcus Terentius Varro (published in 36 BCE) wherein there is a warning about locating a homestead in the proximity of swamps which reads "...and because there are bred certain minute creatures which cannot be seen by the eyes, which float in the air and enter the body through the mouth and nose and there cause serious diseases." (Varro On Agriculture 1,xii Loeb)
- Girolamo Fracastoro proposed in 1546 that epidemic diseases are caused by transferable seedlike entities that could transmit infection by direct or indirect contact or even without contact over long distances.
Would not these things be consdiered something like "pre-microbiology"? --Extremophile 14:55, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
Antonie Lee was the fist to find and use the microscope in the history of microbilogy. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.199.209.112 (talk) 18:17, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Wikiproject
Is there a wikiproject pertaining to Microbiology? -- Lost 07:33, 29 July 2006 (UTC) If there is wikiproject i want to know about it so it can be a good talk to the world microbiologists student in the world thanks.
[edit] Spirulina
spirulina could use some help with some of the basic factual stuff, it looks like its been taken over by a bunch of health food nuts. Don't get me wrong, spirulina might cure AIDS, but it seems to me it still needs some citations. --Niro5 15:21, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] embryology
A bit off-topic but I want to cast a wide net: Does anyone happen to know any embryologists? I think Embryology really needs a lot of expert attention. would sympathtic editors consider a positive vote here? [1]Slrubenstein | Talk 19:08, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Alkaline reversion
define alkaline reversion. how can it be avoided —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.89.7.170 (talk) 20:56, 21 November 2006
[edit] See also: Bacteria
A link to Bacteria has been added and removed from the see also. At this point Archaea is still there, so Bacteria should be too, (I put it back for now) but perhaps it's redundant to have those two AND prokaryote. I'm sure whoever removed it had a reason. What was it? Jmeppley 13:22, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
[edit] recent changes
I have to decided to remove this early hypothesizing that such things as microrganisms existed. First of all neither of these early claims resemble in any way that microorganisms existed. Worlds like foul earthly bodies and contagious entities does not in any way mean someone was talking about microbes. I mean were these foul contagious entities made of what? solids, liquids, a combination. Basically by saying these early people were speculating on the existence of microbes is fallacious since one is just amplying a modern interpretation to ancient words. Essentialy one is just assuming, ohh contagious entities, well they must be talking about microbes, but thats just retrospect since we now know such things exist. This early section is best kept in the germ theory page. Lastly, associating microbes with disease is foolish since its not true, not all microbes cause disease. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.36.181.171 (talk) 07:57, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Bergis Manual
At the bottom of the page there is a line saying that one can look in 'bergis manual' for more information on bacteria, I believe the correct spelling is 'Bergey's Manual'. Can anyone verify if this is correct? Jsmith86 (talk) 00:45, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
- I deleted it. Tim Vickers (talk) 00:55, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] A HUGE OMISSION
What about the Archaea? This article does a good job at describing the types of microorganisms that exist, however, the Archaea have been completely left out. Although they are unicellular prokaryotes like Bacteria they are NOT Bacteria. They are in fact a distinct domain of life (the other two being Bacteria and Eukarya). Archaea are more closely related to Eukarya than bacteria (though they seem to have been grouped with the latter). They definitely need to be a part of this article. 66.183.250.66 (talk) 23:31, 17 April 2008 (UTC)Microbiology Honours Student

