Talk:Escherichia coli

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 This article has been reviewed by the Version 1.0 Editorial Team.
Microbiology WikiProject
Biology Portal
Escherichia coli is part of WikiProject Microbiology, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of microbiology and microbiology-related topics. Please work to improve this article, or visit our project page to find other ways of helping.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the assessment scale.
Top This article is on a subject of top-importance within microbiology.

Article Grading: The following comments were left by the quality and importance raters: (edit · refresh)

much more of the article needs to address the use of antibiotics and the develpment of deadly ecoli strains. see American Acadamy of Science research on over feeding livestock antibiotics. 1978½½½½
Molecular and Cellular Biology WikiProject
MCB Portal
This article is within the scope of the Molecular and Cellular Biology WikiProject. To participate, visit the WikiProject for more information. The WikiProject's current monthly collaboration is focused on improving Restriction enzyme.
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the assessment scale.
Top This article is on a subject of Top-importance within molecular and cellular biology.

Article Grading: The following comments were left by the quality and importance raters: (edit · history · refresh · how to use this template)

much more of the article needs to address the use of antibiotics and the develpment of deadly ecoli strains. see American Acadamy of Science research on over feeding livestock antibiotics. 1978½½½½
This article was the MCB Collaboration of the Month for the month of December 2007.
For more details, see the MCB Collaboration of the Month history.
To-do list for Escherichia coli: edit · history · watch · refresh

Here are some tasks you can do:

    This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Escherichia coli article.
    Article policies
    Archives: 1


    Contents

    [edit] Major clean up

    Anyone who has read this article recently is aware that it had become quite disheveled. It appears that new information was progressively added without consideration of readability or context. Therefore, I've conducted a major revision. Colloquial and dubious information was deleted outright. Information that was well-written, but did not pertain specifically to E. coli, was moved to more appropriate entries. Finally, the article was re-structured to improve the logical flow of sections and sub-sections. Downgrading WP:MICRO rating to "Start" because some sections (e.g. biotechnology) are lacking critical information. I recommend that the WP:MCB rating also be downgraded. More work will be needed to get it back up to "B class". Kindest regards, AlphaEta 18:12, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

    [edit] Title

    There seems to have been no discussion on moving the article to E. coli; in fact, the section above ("Most common name?") suggests a consensus to keep it at Escherichia coli. I have therefore moved the article back to the full name. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 22:40, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

    When I go to E. coli, I'm not automatically redirected to Escherichia coli.--Mumia-w-18 00:09, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
    That's odd. Have you tried WP:CACHE? I've purged the page, that should do it. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 00:16, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
    Thanks, now I'm redirected.--Mumia-w-18 03:04, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

    I whole-heartedly agree that the page should be named Escherichia coli. As a microbiologist, the title E. coli makes me cringe. AlphaEta 02:13, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

    • Full name = better. I think, however, the disambiguation to Entamoeba coli should return as it is a plausible search for "E. coli"... — Scientizzle 16:21, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

    [edit] English Please!

    The first few paragraphs are incomprehensible to the average reader. I personally couldn't understand about 80-90% of the words per sentence... could somebody create a common english version below all the science? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.98.139.32 (talk) 02:48, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

    Is there any particular info you'd like to see in the introductory paragraphs? Did you try clicking through the wikilinks for technical terms you didn't understand? If so, which terms do you think need more clarification? The article is going through some major revision right now, so please let us know what, specifically, you'd like to see included, clarified, simplified, etc.... Kindest regards, AlphaEta 00:28, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

    [edit] Minor issue with link styles.

    • In the second paragraph of the article it has a link to vitamin K2 (menaquinone). Wouldn't it be better to leave menaquinone out of the link like so: vitamin K2(menaquinone). Or is it even necessary to add? Isn't Vitamin K2 the more commonly used name?
    • The links to the different strains of E.coli are inconsistent. Some simply appear as O157:H7, while others are shown as E. coli O157:H7 or

    Escherichia coli O157:H7. I rather like E. coli O157:H7 myself since it is the clearest and yet not as long as the full name.

    Anyway, these are only minor things, but any suggestions would be helpful. --Deepraine (talk) 14:52, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

    Suggested changes have been made. Thanks, AlphaEta 00:28, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
    Seems to me that O157:H7 would in general be the best style (this is an article about Escherichia coli, after all, so context generally prevents ambiguity). The one place I noticed where I'd say something like E. coli O157:H7 would be the sentence "It is believed that this process led to the spread of shiga toxin from Shigella to E. coli O157:H7." where there are two species being discussed in that sentence. Kingdon (talk) 04:19, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
    I agree. AlphaEta 05:27, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

    [edit] Genetics

    To expand the model organism section, details of the genetics of E. Coli should really be included, and details of the genome sequencing project as well. The ways in which genes are knocked out for study can also be included. Million_Moments (talk) 13:15, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

    [edit] "Wild-type E. coli has no growth factor requirements; it can synthesize all the components of its cell from glucose."

    No, it can't. Where is its nitrogen supply? Also trace elements, etc, but I don't think that this is so important. --Wee Jimmy (talk) 16:13, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

    I've removed that sentence, it was incorrect. Tim Vickers (talk) 16:30, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

    [edit] Please do help.

    I would like to see better explanation, definition, disambiguation, direction, assistance,....

    Please.

    Thank You,

    [[ hopiakuta Please do sign your signature on your message. ~~ Thank You. -]] 02:00, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

    [edit] Remove Image:E coli metabolic network.png

    Image:E coli metabolic network.png consists only of a low resolution map of metabolic processes, that is completely incomprehensible to anybody who is not an expert. All components are only referred to by abbreviation and it contains different kinds of arrows, which are not explained in a legend. --134.93.142.245 (talk) 11:37, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

    There is a high-res version available from the same source. But that still wouldn't solve the problem that it takes an effort to figure out what it all is in the figure, and requires you to know the pathways to some degree already. Narayanese (talk) 13:26, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

    [edit] Size

    What is the size of a E.coli? --Saippuakauppias ⇄ 08:18, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

    A few micrometres long. Look at the pctures, they have scales. Narayanese (talk) 10:22, 7 June 2008 (UTC)