Talk:Bioluminescence/Archive 1

Can we get a reference for the note on quorum sensing? I'm only vaguely familiar with this topic, but my understanding was that bioluminescence can be modulated in response to quorum sensing mechanisms, and is used as a reporter of quorum sensing, but is not itself a mechanism. --Chinasaur 18:26, 15 Dec 2004 (UTC)


 * I look back for one. I was getting a bit confused by this quorum sensing stuff. I was getting the feeling that bioluminescence was actually the primary communicator in some instances (or at least hypothesised so) - this is either the glow itself being sensed, or the chemical causing the glow being sensed.--ZayZayEM 03:06, 18 Dec 2004 (UTC)

I really don't think so. Luminescence is just a behavior that is only active in the prescence of a quorum I'm pretty sure. --Chinasaur 09:34, 18 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Quorum sensing is a cell-to-cell signalling mechanism in which bacteria secrete hormone-like compounds called autoinducers, some bacteria use quorum sensing for activating biolumninescence

Remeber saying that certain fish produce red light? Well animals that can produce red light like jellyfish and certain deep-sea fish are completely invisible because red light can't travel down here so anything in red is completely black. This is a great camouflage and a hunting tool. Shrimps and copepods are in red but predators with bacteria that can produce red light can easily find animals that have red coloring or pigments.
 * Red light

cabbage
according to http://www.gullible.info/archive.php?m=2006-08, the second line of August 30 (end of page), "Cabbage is mildly phosphorescent." Anybody know anythnig about this? Slithytove2 22:51, 25 December 2006 (UTC)


 * are you familliar with the definition of the word gullible? --Deglr6328 04:38, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

consistency error
It says there are four main theories of reasons for bioluminescence, but then it lists five different reasons. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.241.197.211 (talk) 05:33, 25 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Fixed. Thanks. Rivertorch (talk) 14:23, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Explanation of process???
I don't see anything here that explains the process of bioluminescence. Exactly HOW is it done? What chemicals are used in this process? What glands in animals and plants produce these chemicals and how are they produced, through some process like photosynthesis or what? It needs more details on the process of bioluminescence. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.166.33.224 (talk) 03:11, 17 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Thus its hard to define a single process. But usually a molecule called a luciferin is involved (or more accurately, the molecule involved gets called a luciferin). More information that you are lookig for is likely at that article. And yes it could be presented better in this article.--ZayZayEM (talk) 05:58, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Thus its hard to define a single process. But usually a molecule called a luciferin is involved (or more accurately, the molecule involved gets called a luciferin). More information that you are lookig for is likely at that article. And yes it could be presented better in this article.--ZayZayEM (talk) 05:58, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Bioluminescent GM Plants and Trees
Citation:
 * Bioluminescent organisms are a target for many areas of research. Luciferase systems are widely used in the field of genetic engineering as reporter genes.

Is it possible to include the bioluminescent genes from any organisms in plants or trees, to obtain the lighting plants/trees, and to use them instead the usual light emitting materials, based on electricity? It would be a New Age of street lighting. Krasss (talk) 05:06, 23 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Yes, entirely plausible. Would generate problems (how to minimize environmental leakage of bioluminescent plant genes? How to regulate on/off cycles?). Also bioluminesence is generally limited. Think about how many fireflies you would need to generate light similar to a light globe. --ZayZayEM (talk) 05:53, 23 December 2008 (UTC)


 * It is just an idea, so as I am an org.chemist, not genetic engineer. But here is the thoughts about your question:
 * 1) I think, that there is no environmental danger of leakage of genes, so as bioluminescent genes (in fireflies, sea organisms, in mushrooms etc.) are usual in wild nature, and they are not migrate in other species.
 * 2) Necessity of regulation of lighting (on/off) cycles is not so evident, so as at day their lighting would be masked by much more intensive sunlight.
 * 3) I do not have a concrete data of bioluminescent lighting, compared to usual lamps or light emitting diodes. But if the genes would be added in each cell of each plant's leaf, the common light from the tree may be much more strong.
 * Also, it can be adapted to GM-Christmas trees (a very actual question before The New Year). Krasss (talk) 09:15, 23 December 2008 (UTC)


 * I'd be happy to discuss this somewhere else. Wikipedia talk pages should be reserved to talking about improvements to the articles, not random discussions on topics themselves (sorry but if I continued this here, I'd be rather hypocritical of my activities elsewhen on this site).--ZayZayEM (talk) 11:59, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Sense?
up to 30 or more

What the hell does this mean? 84.97.254.29 (talk) 19:01, 17 June 2009 (UTC)


 * I think what it means is that there are somewhere in the neighborhood of 30 separate instances of bioluminescence in species that don't share common ancestors. (How's that for encyclopedic precision?) "Up to...or more" is obviously contradictory; it cannot be both. Since the source is a book which I don't have access to, perhaps someone can check it out and see what the source really says. In the meantime, how can we word it so that it makes sense without potentially under- or overcounting? The full sentence, found in the lede, is: Bioluminescence has appeared independently several times (up to 30 or more) during evolution. Rivertorch (talk) 21:59, 17 June 2009 (UTC) The word "several" is also problematic. It carries some leeway, but not anywhere near 30, I'd say. I have tagged the sentence. Rivertorch (talk) 22:06, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

Heterocarpus
Am I right that Heterocarpus belongs? It doesn't appear to be listed directly or indirectly at the moment (we list Crustacean but several things under it, none of which include Heterocarpus) Nil Einne (talk) 11:04, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

Pyrodinium bahamense var. bahamense
Pyrodinium bahamense var. bahamense is a dinoflagellate that uses bioluminescence to glow at night within the water. There are three bioluminescent bays in Puerto Rico. Not sure if they're in other countries as well. http://www.biobay.com/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 167.206.19.130 (talk) 02:36, 15 November 2011 (UTC)


 * I've added it among examples under dinoflagellates.--  Obsidi ♠ n   Soul   05:39, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

potential resourece
A Pollution Fight Powered by Bioluminescent Sea Creatures by Erik Olsen "Edith Widder's New Crusade: The marine biologist Edith Widder has spent a career studying bioluminescent sea creatures." NYT December 20, 2011

See Deep sea communities

97.87.29.188 (talk) 00:45, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 31 August 2020 and 10 December 2020. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): KevinHall2, Chi567. Peer reviewers: Ryanfoster9, LizetteAhlers, Janani sundaresan.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 15:47, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

Use for miners' lamps
I've added a brief note about the historic use of fish skins for illumination in gassy pits. I'm not quite sure this is the best location (the skins weren't "engineered", merely collected and dried). If anyone wants to move it to a more suitable place, please feel free. Martin of Sheffield (talk) 12:41, 29 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Interesting, and nice to get an addition which actually comes with a citation! Chiswick Chap (talk) 13:49, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

Lists
We have 3 instances of list-cruft in the article:
 * the "Bioluminescent organisms" section which desperately needs references; (maybe hive off to a separate list?)
 * now in separate list (still needs refs), linked


 * the "See also" (maybe delete, try to use entries in the article text)
 * removed, all usable entries used, rest deleted


 * the "External links" which contains everything anyone liked with pictures in it (maybe delete, maybe split into sections and keep a few?).
 * dead links deleted, used links moved ...

All need attention. Chiswick Chap (talk) 12:56, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

"Commercial"
Not quite sure how to handle this. The Kickstarter project is quite notable.

Here is a draft. Feel free to edit text.--Nowa (talk) 19:48, 10 May 2013 (UTC) 

Commercial products
− 	In 2013, a crowd funding project on Kickstarter offered to deliver seeds of genetically engineered “glow in the dark” Arabidopsis thaliana to its backers. The plants are expected to give off a dim glow. − 	

List of Different Bioluminescent Reactions
I saw in another Wiki article that not all bioluminescent reactions use luciferin. I can't find the article anymore. Could someone shed light on the issue?173.180.7.3 (talk) 12:47, 6 July 2013 (UTC)BeeCier
 * Ok, found it. Its in the "photoprotein" Wikipedia article. So it states that a photoprotein reaction is different than a luciferin reaction even though both are bioluminescent. Someone who is chemistry savvy should change the article to reflect this and add any other different biolumimescent reactions if they exist.173.180.7.3 (talk) 13:13, 6 July 2013 (UTC)BeeCier

Not sure if this fits into this category, but I feel that it could be useful for the article. I was thinking about adding something to do with mimicry in fireflies and how some females use this to lure in males of different species and use them as prey. I don't have a reliable source on this yet that I know of, but tell me what you guys think about it. Turnbull.41 (talk) 02:54, 2 October 2014 (UTC)Turnbull.41

In the introey/abstract bit at the top it specifies the luciferase/luciferin alone causes bioluminescence. Photoproteins like aequorin also cause bioluminescence, as is recognised further down in the article. I read that luciferin is a generic term used to describe photoproteins in general, yet this bioluminescence article reads as if it is one specific protein. Would someone in the know fix this please? NRZphys — Preceding unsigned comment added by NRZphys (talk • contribs) 22:05, 9 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Extended lead to mention aequorin etc; the article does clearly state that luciferin can vary, but notes it varies little compared to the luciferases. Chiswick Chap (talk) 09:25, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

consumer products
Why doesn't this article include a discussion of (or xref to) glow sticks and similar products? WilliamSommerwerck (talk) 14:22, 11 December 2013 (UTC)
 * You mean chemiluminescence not bioluminescence. Chiswick Chap (talk) 09:08, 28 November 2014 (UTC)

When a See also list is not needed
The See also list is for other items which are not yet discussed properly in the article text. Items which are already mentioned and linked don't need redundant links in a redundant See also list. I have therefore removed such items. Chiswick Chap (talk) 16:20, 2 July 2014 (UTC)

To do...

 * The examples in mimicry and predation overlap the two functions. We could merge ('Mimicry and predation', not great) or rearrange. It might be helpful to analyse the types of mimicry - Batesian etc - and classify/link to each type used.


 * The German Wiki article on Luciferin is full of useful material on the chemistry of bioluminescence, the reaction mechanisms and equations, and major sources.


 * Other Photoproteins than Luciferin also exist, e.g. Aequorin. Aequorin at UniProt


 * Green fluorescent protein changes the overall colour of the glow; extensively used in different forms via GFP genes in cell biology research.


 * There is some history at Osamu Shimomura (Nobel prize for biolum. proteins). A good start for a History section, obviously. More history at Aequorin.

Chiswick Chap (talk) 13:51, 24 November 2014 (UTC)

How bright are the different organisms? How do they compare with household light bulbs? 99.9.112.31 (talk) 03:36, 6 December 2014 (UTC)NotWillDecker
 * Extended the biotech section with more refs. Basically, very poorly at the moment: either they're dim, or don't last long, or are very expensive. Chiswick Chap (talk) 08:18, 6 December 2014 (UTC)

Jellyfish image
I note that the jellyfish image File:Aequorea4.jpg used on this page is not actually showing it bioluminescencing. The caption for the image doesn't mislead, but the glowing nature of the image (from flash?), and its inclusion on this page, may fool people into assuming that is what is being depicted. We don't seem to have any images of actual Aequorea bioluminescence, perhaps an image under normal lighting would be more appropriate. See https://faculty.washington.edu/cemills/Aequorea.html for a description of Aequorea bioluminescence --Tony Wills (talk) 12:29, 16 July 2016 (UTC)

"Phosphorescent wheels"
A current WP:AFD discussion at Wheels of Poseidon led to no WP:RS to support it, but a lot was unearthed on "phosphorescent wheels" as a genuine term for possible bioluminescent phenomenon in, particularly, the Indian Ocean. Noting that "marine phosphorescence" redirects here, I thought I'd leave these references here, lest they might prove of interest. See this report, this report, this paper, this discussion in Nature, and this, and even this French meto wikilog of sightings, and this report from the US Naval Oceaonagraphic Office and this from the National Institute of Oceanography in England. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 00:19, 12 March 2018 (UTC)

"Distribution"
(I'm sorry if I'm not doing this correctly; I created an account to point out this issue!)

I don't think the following claim is correct: "About 76% of the main taxa of deep-sea animals produce light. "

The paper cited is a good, but it only collected data in 240 regions immediately off California's cost (see figure 7).

As written, I think the sentence implies that this is the prevalence of bioluminescence in main taxa of deep-sea animals globally.

Thanks, Nick Milazzo 10:20 AM Nov 17, 2021


 * That's a good point, I have rephrased the paragraph. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 19:29, 19 November 2021 (UTC)

Bioluminescent plant: Euphorbia phosphorea
I don't want to add it to the page because I don't have up-to-date sources, but while reading [https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/page/28862211#page/1/mode/1up    Martius, C.F.P. von in C.F.P.von Martius & J.B.von Spix, 1828. Reise Brasilien 2: 612, page 726], I found that apparently Euphorbia phosporea has Latex that emits light when a branch/stem is broken, at least for a few minutes. The only source I have is the linked book from the 1820s though.–Jérôme (talk) 17:45, 30 April 2022 (UTC)

How kan you add picture?!
It shud be posibel to add pictures... 193.91.164.9 (talk) 18:58, 11 June 2022 (UTC)

humans are bioluminescent
humans are also bioluminescent and glow in the dark but the light we emmit is 1000 times weeker than our human eyes are able to pick up 41.113.239.136 (talk) 18:23, 10 December 2022 (UTC)


 * Can a source be cited for this? 216.247.72.142 (talk) 08:09, 3 July 2023 (UTC)