Talk:Whiskers

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 7 September 2020 and 11 December 2020. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Kayvelasquez23.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 12:54, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Move
I moved the page vibrissa to vibrissae because it is rare that people would talk about one whisker and rarer still that someone would search on the term vibrissa. Most mammal articles talk about vibrissae so this makes logical sense for people to find. Pschemp 04:10, 20 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Wow
Knowing that cutting off the left side of my cat's whiskers makes it walk lop-sidded and possibly run into things makes me want to do it... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.0.8.148 (talk) 19:44, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

That cat is soo cute.
OMG, I want to pet it! big fat butthloe — Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.108.106.181 (talk) 19:06, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

Meow!
That cat is really cute. =^_^=  asshole

Maybe the article should mention that housecats use their whiskers to determine whether they can fit through a crevasse. -- Myria 15:20, 28 July 2005 (UTC)


 * Possibly you mean crevice? Crevasse isn't often used for anything less than a metre wide, so unless you have a particularly obese housecat in mind... Tyrhinis 11:01, 11 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Is that actually true? Do cats really use their whiskers to tell whether they can fit into an opening? Wbrameld 03:12, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Distribution among mammal species
I'd like to see more information in the article about which mammal species have whiskers and which don't. The article says "most mammals," but which ones, and what's the evolutionary history? Do all mammals with whiskers share a common ancestor that had whiskers? Are there mammal lineages that once had whiskers but subsequently lost them? Wbrameld 21:26, 16 December 2006 (UTC) I'd like to second Wbrameld, I think it's important Kalisky (talk) 19:06, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

can humans have whisker(s)?? i mean, i have a friend who happens to have one, so, is that possible?? cyrille 22:58, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Related to this, I suppose. When trying to detect a leak on a high pressure nitrogen gas (or other inert gases) line, it is fairly common practice to use the skin of the cheeks and upper lip to search for the leak by feel, because these areas are very sensitive. I was wondering if this in anyway related to this article's subject matter. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Eismanweiss (talk • contribs) 05:02, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

Replaced Cat Pic
I put the picture of the cat and its vibrissae back on because the vibrissae are easily seen. Also, the cat is the most common animal associated with whiskers (in my opinion and in the opinion of the people I know, at least). --Kevin (TALK) 01:03, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Vibrissa useful in localizing odors
Vibrissae are found in many different species and are associated with connections to a significant amount of neural tissue. Something so ubiquitous must have an important function. I would like to suggest that an important function of this sensory organ is to add a directional component to the sense of smell. An animal that relies heavily on the sense of smell will benefit greatly if it can tell from which direction the smell came - in other words which way the wind is blowing. Most vibrissae are located around the nose, ideally located to sense the direction from which an odor arrived. Humans pay little attention to their own olfactory sense and I fear we also overlook the importance of this in other species. GeoOlive 17:53, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Mechanoreceptors??
Why is there nothing on this page about mechanoreceptors? These receptors are what allows vibrissa to function as they do (they are what allows an animal to sense things with its whiskers). More specifically, it is the stretch-activated ion channels of the mechanoreceptors that turn mechanical stimuli (i.e., a touching of the whiskers) into nerve impulses. This is hugely important to this article, as without the above mentioned functions, vibrissa would not be at all useful. Fuzzform 02:59, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Removed picture
The above picture was removed from the article for aesthetic reasons. I've left it here so that if the article is expanded a great deal in the future, this picture can be replaced on the article. Thanks, Spawn Man 05:10, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Dark spots
I notice that cat vibrissa dent to have dark, spot-like patches of hair color at the base. Is there a biological reason for this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 118.92.27.198 (talk) 15:43, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

Cutting off any side of a cat's whiskers always causes them to cut left corners too quickly ...
"For example, cutting off the vibrissae on one side of a housecat's face will cause it to cut left corners too quickly and walk in a lopsided manner until the vibrissae grow back."

--Surely the editor meant to say that cutting of the cibrissae on one side of a housecat's face will cause it to cut that same side's corners too quickly. -- or is it always the left side? 41.208.50.160 (talk) 16:16, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Article name
I understand that this is the scientific name, but shouldn't the most common name be used ie whiskers.Wapondaponda (talk) 22:01, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Requested move
Someone has already moved it. Anthony Appleyard (talk) Vibrissa → Whiskers &mdash; (no reason given) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.167.70.132 (talk) 02:34, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Support. Common name. The target page already redirects here. Jafeluv (talk) 04:03, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
 * If anything it would have to be Whisker, as whiskers is plural. 199.125.109.126 (talk) 04:10, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Strong support for either Whisker or Whiskers: the singular is less often used (search each word on Google) and common names are preferred, but singular names are also preferred. Never even heard of Vibrissa until a Jeopardy! episode I saw a few days ago. --an odd name 20:41, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Support. I agree whiskers is the common name. Kobolola (talk) 19:14, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

House mice can detect air movements with their whiskers?
Maybe there should be a qualifier there - strong enough air movement and detecting it isn't exactly a problem. 62.106.48.217 (talk) 01:55, 18 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Perhaps that's why someone said it could use a citation? It's not exactly an outlandish claim (if I can feel a light breeze with the hairs on my arm, I'm pretty sure a mouse could feel it with his whiskers), but a source probably would have more information on how small those air movements could be. Chaos386 (talk) 01:20, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

Whisker replacement
Article should state: Is there any difference between the replacement of whiskers vs. the replacement of ordinary hair via the hair follicle? Comet Tuttle (talk) 17:27, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

Seal's Whiskers
I just found this article on Science Now. The web article links to an article published in the Journal of Experimental Biology. I recommend someone (more industrious than myself) incorporate this very interesting, useful information into this article. 70.65.244.239 (talk) 18:13, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Some expansion
Hi. I've added some additional material 29 Oct 2011, and provided references for most of the material that was already there. I've removed some stuff about the functional role of blood sinuses because I was unable to substantiate it. I'll add back some related material that I can find references for shortly. More work to do; I'll try and address some of the points above, at least. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Benmitch (talk • contribs) 12:23, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

Genetics
I've removed this point from the page because it seems to me to be likely to be of interest to only a small number of readers, and probably therefore belongs elsewhere. It's stored here for reference.

These are not true whiskers (humans lost function in an enhancer of the androgen receptor gene that controls the growth of whiskers about 700,000 years ago.

Nerves or no nerves?
The anatomy section is confusing, if not contradictory. It says:

Vibrissae are usually thicker and stiffer than other types of hair[12] but, like other hairs, consist of inert material and contain no nerves.[12]

Then it is said:

However, vibrissae are different from other hairs because they are implanted in a special hair follicle incorporating a capsule of blood called a blood sinus and heavily innervated by sensory nerves.[13][14]

Which is it? Nerves or no nerves?

ANSWER: I think this is clear in the text. The "vibrissae ... contain no nerves". However, they are "implanted in a special hair follicle ... heavily innervated by sensory nerves". It is the follicle that is served by nerves - the vibrissae, which grow from the follicle, contain none. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Benmitch (talk • contribs) 23:31, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

Proposed move or rename
When most of us (including myself) talk about "whiskers" on non-human animals, we are almost always referring to vibrissae near the mouth. But, vibrissae can be found all over the body. Cats have vibrissae on their carpals and manatees all over their bodies, but these would rarely be called "whiskers". This interpretation that whiskers are locality-specific vibrissae is supported by several on-line dictionaries.

Websters- One of the long, projecting hairs growing at the sides of the mouth of a cat, or other animal.

merriam-webster- a hair that grows on a man's face any one of the long, stiff hairs that grow near the mouth of some animals a very small distance or amount

Babylon English Dictionary- beard, facial hair one hair of the mustache or beard; one facial hair; long facial bristles near the mouth of an animal (i.e. cat, mouse, etc.)

This Whiskers article indicates the terms "whiskers" and "vibrissae" can be used interchangeably (which has been causing problems on Pinniped recently). This is incorrect, or at best misleading. Whiskers are a sub-set of vibrissae. I propose Whiskers be moved or re-named as Vibrissae with a mention/sub-section that when these are found around the mouth, they are sometimes known as "whiskers".__DrChrissy (talk) 20:53, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

[RESPONSE] This article was originally named "vibrissae", and was renamed to "whiskers" because "whiskers is the common name" (see above). You're right, they're not synonymous, but at the time the article was at an early stage of development so perhaps it made sense back then. In any case, either it's a page about whiskers, in which case it should include material about non-mammalian whiskers or whisker-like appendages, or it's about vibrissae, in which case it should include carpal vibrissae etc. but not non-mammalian non-vibrissal whiskers. Historically, it's a page about vibrissae - that was the focus before the non-mammalian section was added. I therefore would suggest that it _is_ renamed to "vibrissae", and that the non-mammalian material is moved perhaps to a separate page called "whiskers" or perhaps to a page that gives a general overview of tactile sensing in animals. I'd support this approach over trying to make this page about "whiskers" because I can't think of how to present the information about vibrissae in general other than on a page called "vibrissae" - thus, if it doesn't exist after this article is renamed, we'd have to invent it anyway ;). That is - if we're to be strict about definitions, as you suggest, we're going to need two pages, one for whiskers and one for vibrissae, presumably fairly well inter-connected. Benmitch (talk) 16:18, 15 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks for this. Am I correct in thinking you want to distinguish mammalian from non-mammalian structures because in mammals it is a hair, rather than a feather or fish-part?  If we are describing according to function, the non-mammalian stuff could be described under a sub-heading e.g. "Similar structures".__DrChrissy (talk) 17:56, 15 December 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, you are right, but I think the tricky bit is the point you make about the everyday usage of "whiskers" not being a synonym for the scientific usage of "vibrissae". There is a very large scientific literature focusing specifically on vibrissae, and this is where much of the material in the current article is sourced. This literature is built on data collected in rats, mice, shrews, and a handful of other morphologically-similar small land mammals, plus some marine mammals (seals and manatees, at least). I agree that the non-mammalian structures should be presented alongside - I am aware, at least, of studies of functionally related but anatomically distinct structures also in crustaceans (e.g. lobster Antenna_(biology)), insects (e.g. cockroaches), and the Star-nosed_mole, to go with the examples you added, all of which have significant (though far smaller) associated literatures. There are doubtless other examples. Workers in this area tend to use the term "whiskers" as a synonym for vibrissae, regardless of location, in contrast to its everyday usage (as you point out), which is perhaps where the confusion has arisen. I also recognise the strength of the argument for the page to be called "Whiskers", since this is where people will expect to find it. Therefore, I think it makes sense to leave the page title as is: "Whiskers". I would then suggest we can address the confusion through a rework so that the article begins by discussing the facial whiskers in detail and goes on to discuss the broader arrangement of non-facial vibrissae with distinct functional roles. This should work just fine, because very much less is known about the non-facial whiskers, so there won't be much material in that section beyond the anatomical groups. Finally, a section with the non-mammalian whisker analogues, linking out to more detailed pages where available. The end result would then read intuitively for both scientists and laypersons. This should amount only to a re-ordering of text already there, and I'm happy to do this. What do you think? Benmitch (talk) 01:54, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

Images
The images at the end of the article appear rather jumbled and not aesthetically pleasing, at least in my Chrome browser at 100% zoom. I assume someone could fix this pretty easily. Machdelu (talk) 21:55, 2 March 2014 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress
There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Whisking in animals which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 03:48, 19 July 2020 (UTC)

Merger proposal
Please ignore the page move proposal above, what this requires is a merger. I'd like to propose that Whisking in animals be merged here into Whiskers, given that only animals have whiskers and the information therefore should all be in one place. A loose necktie (talk) 04:38, 19 July 2020 (UTC)
 * A loose necktie, is most of the material in the Whisking article already in here? If so it may make sense to do as you propose and merge the remaining information into the Operation section of this page.--Yaksar (let's chat) 14:41, 21 July 2020 (UTC)
 * I see no opposition to the idea, am going to go ahead and merge now. Thanks! A loose necktie (talk) 07:26, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

Readability
I'm doing some readability edits. Does any know a better way to say "well-innervated" as in the first sentence of this section: Vibrissae are anatomically characterised by their long length, large and well-innervated hair follicle, and by having an identifiable representation in the somatosensory cortex of the brain. Pyrrho the Skeptic (talk) 22:30, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

Rictal Bristles in Birds
"Bird Whiskers" are specialized feathers called Rictal Bristles around the Beak that serve the same function as whiskers in some birds. 207.112.55.242 (talk) 13:46, 20 May 2022 (UTC)


 * Yup, and it's in the article right here. Pyrrho the Skipper (talk) 15:52, 20 May 2022 (UTC)

Human Eyebrows
Do human eyebrows function as Vibrissae? Also, could they work differently based on how they are groomed? Kaleb.G (talk) 07:13, 8 October 2023 (UTC)