Talk:Nostoc
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
N. Commune is supposed to be bioluminescent [1]. I'll try to back that up somewhere else to. Remind me if I forget, or can someone else do some reasearch on that if they get a chance? Thanks - Taxman Talk 20:20, July 18, 2005 (UTC)
This article presents Nostoc as the answer to Star Jelly. How does it supposedly get up in the air to begin with? The article should be changed to present it as a hypothesis or expand on the vertical movement.
[edit] From Nostoc commune var. sphaeroides
Numerous medical studies in the past decade or so revealed that Nostoc contains a broad spectrum of biologically active compounds and phytochemicals that exert far-reaching nutraceutical and pharmacological effects, ranging from lowering cholesterol level[1][2], improving digestive efficiency, anti-inflammatory responses[3][4], anti-viral activities[5], Einhibiting tumor/cancer growth[6], and possible anti-HIV activity[7]. These compounds include polysaccharides, dietary fibers, proteins and essential amino acids, poly-unsaturated fatty acids, and phycobiliproteins.
This information is general to Nostoc but was placed in a variety or subspecies article. It can be put in this article.
--Blechnic (talk) 06:32, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
- ^ Heather E. Rasmussen,4 Kara R. Blobaum,4 Young-Ki Park,4 Sarah J. Ehlers,4 Fan Lu,5 and Ji-Young Lee4* Lipid Extract of Nostoc commune var. sphaeroides Ku¡§tzing, a Blue-Green Alga, Inhibits the Activation of Sterol Regulatory Element Binding Proteins in HepG2 Cells1¨C3. The Journal of Nutrition. 21 December 2007.
- ^ Hori K, Ishibashi G, Okita T. Hypocholesterolemic effect of blue-green alga, ishikurage (Nostoc commune) in rats fed atherogenic diet. Plant Foods Hum Nutr. 1994 Jan; 45(1):63-70.
- ^ Young-Ki Park, Heather E. Rasmussen, Sarah J. Ehlers, Kara R. Blobaum, Fan Lu, Vicki L. Schlegal, Timothy P. Carr, Ji-Young Lee. Repression of proinflammatory gene expression by lipid extract of Nostoc commune var sphaeroides K¨¹tzing, a blue-green alga, via inhibition of nuclear factor-¦ÊB in RAW 264.7 macrophages. Nutrition Research 28 (2008) 83¨C91. 21 November 2007.
- ^ Gonzalez R, Rodriguez S, Romay C, Ancheta O, Gonzalez A, Armesto J, Remirez D, Merino N. Anti-inflammatory activity of phycocyanin extract in acetic acid-induced colitis in rats. Pharmacol Res. 1999 Jan; 39(1):55-9.
- ^ Knubel G, Larsen LK, Moore RE, Levine IA, Patterson GM. Cytotoxic, antiviral indolocarbazoles from a blue-green alga belonging to the Nostocaceae. J Antibiot (Tokyo). 1990 Oct;43(10):1236-9.
- ^ Smith CD, Zhang X, Mooberry SL, Patterson GM, Moore RE. Cryptophycin: a new antimicrotubule agent active against drug-resistant cells. Cancer Res. 1994 Jul 15;54(14):3779-84.
- ^ Esser MT, Mori T, Mondor I, Sattentau QJ, Dey B, Berger EA, Boyd MR, Lifson JD. Cyanovirin-N binds to gp120 to interfere with CD4-dependent human immunodeficiency virus type 1 virion binding, fusion, and infectivity but does not affect the CD4 binding site on gp120 or soluble CD4-induced conformational changes in gp120. J Virol. 1999 May;73(5):4360-71.
-
- But there is a problem with determining the "correct" current name. Is this still considered a variety of the species Nostoc commune, or is it considered a species in its own right as Nostoc sphaeroides? The Nostoc page currently lists it as a separate species, but the article is named as if it is only a variety. I don't have good resources on current bacterial nomenclature. --EncycloPetey (talk) 18:03, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
- It's a bacterium. As a cyanobacteria there is probably no consensus on the name within the bacterial nomenclature, but there may be a consensus for its name in the plant nomenclature. I don't bother with plant nomenclature for prokaryotic names, though. The research is too fast right now to rely upon the codes. I check algaebase.com which is not a good source for prokaryotes, but has spp. sphaeroides. I found two peer-reviewed current journal article with this species/variety. The 2008 is less reliable--as a nutrition journal--but it lists it as a variety. The 2007 is an engineering journal and uses the species. I included the first as a source on the Nostoc commune var. sphaeroides article to justify that article's name. I'm not sure and it doesn't matter to me. Someone wrote it as a variety, and I found one source sufficient to justify that name, and nothing sufficient to deny that name. Should this be discussed there not here? --Blechnic (talk) 20:45, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
- Usual procedure would discuss the issue at the affected page. However, starting the discussion here is more likely to attract useful comments. --EncycloPetey (talk) 01:30, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
- Maybe it will also attract someone who can improve this sadly short article on an extensively researched species. Bacterial nomenclature is problematic, nobody has good resources on it, because there are none. There are databases, the one I use for viral pathogens also lists bacteria, I think. They're not necessarily accurate or current because bacterial nomenclature is not rigid like botanical (even for the species that are in the botanical codes) or animal nomenclature. My thought was I couldn't find anything to confirm with authority that it should be the species, rather than the subspecies, so I bothered not to change someone else's choice. I think too much time could be spent trying to fix something that can't be fixed. It would be better to pool resources and get editors working on this article.--Blechnic (talk) 06:39, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
- Usual procedure would discuss the issue at the affected page. However, starting the discussion here is more likely to attract useful comments. --EncycloPetey (talk) 01:30, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
- It's a bacterium. As a cyanobacteria there is probably no consensus on the name within the bacterial nomenclature, but there may be a consensus for its name in the plant nomenclature. I don't bother with plant nomenclature for prokaryotic names, though. The research is too fast right now to rely upon the codes. I check algaebase.com which is not a good source for prokaryotes, but has spp. sphaeroides. I found two peer-reviewed current journal article with this species/variety. The 2008 is less reliable--as a nutrition journal--but it lists it as a variety. The 2007 is an engineering journal and uses the species. I included the first as a source on the Nostoc commune var. sphaeroides article to justify that article's name. I'm not sure and it doesn't matter to me. Someone wrote it as a variety, and I found one source sufficient to justify that name, and nothing sufficient to deny that name. Should this be discussed there not here? --Blechnic (talk) 20:45, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
- But there is a problem with determining the "correct" current name. Is this still considered a variety of the species Nostoc commune, or is it considered a species in its own right as Nostoc sphaeroides? The Nostoc page currently lists it as a separate species, but the article is named as if it is only a variety. I don't have good resources on current bacterial nomenclature. --EncycloPetey (talk) 18:03, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
