Talk:Ginkgo

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Nowadays ginkyo is not a popular reading in Japan; ichô or ginnan sounds better. -- Anon

Arigato. Added. --Menchi 18:13 24 Jun 2003 (UTC)

I was spelling Ginkgo as Gingko until I did a web search and found out I was the only one misspelling it. I don't think we should offer gingko as an alternative spelling. jaknouse 06:27, 17 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Agreed! - MPF 12:54, 17 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Whatever the spelling, it should be the same throughout the article. "Ginkgo" is correct?


A reference would be nice to some of these 300 surveys; also: is ginkgo supposed to be a vasodilator? That's what the description sounds like. If so, the list of claimed benefits could perhaps be listed as claimed benefits of taking vasodilators every day. Also, have the effects of long-term use been studied? I know long term us of vasoconstrictors and coagulants such as nicotine can be very harmful. --Andrew 17:42, May 2, 2004 (UTC)



if it "increases blood flow" but may cause headaches, is this simply a way of saying that it is a vasodialator?

Contents

[edit] nutty morphology

I edited out use of the words "fruit" and "nut" since this only confuses the issue. Since Ginkgo is a gymnosperm it has no fruit. Nuts are a particular kind of fruit and thus inappropriate. The fleshy "thing" in this case is a modified cone with one ovule, and the hard "thing" in the center is the seed.

The fleshy "thing" is part of the seed coat, the sarcotesta. The hard part inside is the next layer of the seed coat, the sclerotesta.--Curtis Clark 14:37, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
But Ginkgo isn't a conifer, so it can't be called a "cone", either . . . - MPF 01:55, 29 Nov 2004 (UTC)

[edit] conservation status

I'm a little confused. How can something widely cultivated for profit be deemed "endangered"? - knoodelhed 17:05, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)

The conservation status only refers to wild populations, not cultivated - MPF 20:59, 13 July 2005 (UTC)
Could this be noted as Endangered in China? Is it even endangered everywhere it naturally occurs?

[edit] Overzealous nonsense

...in the Medical section is really over the top. There NEEDS to be a refrence to all these medical claims. It reads like some 19th. century snakeoil panacea.--Deglr6328 05:00, 19 May 2005 (UTC)

Exp Neurol. 2003 Nov;184(1):510-20. Prevention of age-related spatial memory deficits in a transgenic mouse model of Alzheimer's disease by chronic Ginkgo biloba treatment., Stackman et al. The study showed differences in spatial memory retention in Tg2576 mice given ginkgo extracts in water for six months versus those given plain water.

The International Journal of Neuropsychopharmacology (2001), 4: 131-134 Cambridge University Press. Neuropsychological changes after 30-day Ginkgo biloba administration in healthy participants, Con Stough, Jodi Clarke, Jenny Lloyd, and Pradeep J. Nathan, Swinburne University of Technology, Melbourne, Australia. Placebo controlled double-blind study showed "significant improvements" in subjects given Ginkgo biloba extract. Carlaclaws 22:20, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Ginkgopsida

All my references are at work, but I've never seen the spelling "Ginkgoopsida". A total pedant could claim that because the root word is not Greek or Latin, the vowel shouldn't elide, but common practice among botanists has been to elide, especially when the alternative results in a double vowel. Yes, it is Ginkgoaceae, not Ginkgaceae, but note Magnoliopsida, not Magnoliaopsida.--Curtis Clark 14:42, 31 August 2005 (UTC)

Ginkgoopsida is correct (e.g. ITIS, Gymnosperm Database, USDA Plants Database); as you correctly point out, Ginkgo is not Greek or Latin; the root is Ginkgo, unlike Magnolia, which is a Latinised derivative of the root name [Pierre] Magnol, Magnoli-. So it is correct for Magnolia to drop its final -a (so thus, Magnoliaceae not Magnoliaaceae), but not for Ginkgo to drop its final -o. - MPF 18:14, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
Wow! Someone who is more of a pedant that I am! If the ICBN regulated names above the family level, Reccomendation 60G Note 1 ("In forming some other apparently irregular compounds, classical usage is commonly followed.") would suggest Ginkgopsida. I'll make the trek to my Biology office tomorrow and see if I can document some uses, so I can at least list both spellings.--Curtis Clark 20:01, 31 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Internal organization considered not harmful

There is really no need to remove the subheads in the plant description, as MPF did. The arrangement is standard among botanists, and it makes the information more easily accessible in the table of contents. It seems especially strange to leave reproduction with a subhead, while removing the rest.--Curtis Clark 14:32, 6 September 2005 (UTC)

And I apologise for reverting the rest of your changes--because of the removed subject headers, the diff wasn't especially useful. I think I'll revert back to your version and re-insert the subheads.--Curtis Clark 15:42, 6 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Resistance to mutation

I've been reading a lot about Ginkgo trees having a high tolerance to radiation poisoning, in addition to its' other high tolerances. Is this true, and if it is true- how can that be true?

Wouldn't any living thing have the same problem with nuclear radiation? But I've read something about old ginkgo trees living near the Hiroshima ground zero, healthy and unmutated.

[edit] Fruit?

There seems to be an inconsitency in the article. The introduction says that the tree does not produce fruit, yet two pictures in the article refer to "fruit". Are they really seeds that just look like fruit? Deli nk 14:42, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

Yes. The fleshy outer layer of the seed (the sarcotesta) makes them seem fruit-like.--Curtis Clark 15:14, 27 January 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Anything eat it?

I was told that no wild animal eats the leaves of the ginkgo plant. If this is true I think that is very interesting. If not, listing the animals that do eat it would be good. Thanks a lot.

  • I ate a Ginkgo leaf once. It didn't taste too good. Kalmia 06:09, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] deletion

I removed "An overdose of the pulp could cause poisoning because the pulp produces hydrogen cyanide as a side product" from Cultivation and Uses; in its context, it appears to refer to the sarcotesta, which is unpalatable and not ordinarily eaten. I'm not sure whether that or the gametophyte was the intended meaning of "pulp".--Curtis Clark 04:46, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Alternative but not misspelled

Current dictionaries like Merriam-Webster still define Gingko as an alternative spelling not an incorrect spelling. No reason that edit should have been reverted. I understand that Ginkgos is the same as Ginkgoes and I am fine with that reversion. Do not revert without giving a reason though. --User:Asphaltbuffet 18:44, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

Every other text I've seen treats it as a misspelling. Merriam-Webster is very much an exception here, and I don't see what justification they can possibly have for legitimising it. - MPF 11:30, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
You can also verify it at the Encyclopædia Britannica and the American Heritage® Dictionary. - Asphalt Buffet 15:48, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
Find me one even half-way authoritative botanical publication that accepts it as an alternative spelling, and I might reconsider - though I doubt it, as I just checked over a dozen and couldn't find any that cited it so (yes, I can list them if you really want). Sorry, but dictionaries often have a very poor understanding of science topics; I don't consider them authoritative on matters like this. - MPF 22:19, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] redundancy department of redundancy

Under the "side effects" section, it used to read:

"If any side effects are experienced consumption should be halted immediately. Ginkgo supplements are usually taken in the range of 40–200 mg per day. If the side effects continue usage should be stopped completely."

The first and third sentences are pretty redundant, so I'm deleting one.