Talk:Electroreception and electrogenesis/Archive 1

Archive 1

Shark attacks on cables

The article could do with a reference for "A problem with the early submarine telegraph cables was the damage caused by sharks who sensed the electric fields produced by these cables". Shark attacks on cables are well documented, but the closest I could find to indicating it's because of their electroreception was http://luna.cas.usf.edu/~motta/fishbite.html "Previous work on nuclear submarine towed acoustic arrays determined likely candidate organisms biting the arrays from tooth patterns and analyzed the distribution of bites to determine if the damage was random or clumped near particular electronic parts or couplers." --Huffers (talk) 20:54, 22 April 2008 (UTC) BRYAN ROCKS! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.221.145.104 (talk) 20:27, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Infrared receptors

Wouldn't the electrophysiology of Infrared sensing in snakes qualify as 'Electroreception'? ~E:74.60.29.141 (talk) 02:04, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

No -- if you extend the term that far, you would have to include vision too. Looie496 (talk) 03:37, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

Is the definition good enough?

The recent edit to include cockroaches steered me to the cited reference. In the discussion section of this paper, it is stated "Vertebrates such as mice and pigs exposed to 60 Hz electric fields (similar orders of magnitude to those found in the environment), when given a choice, spend more time out of the field rather than under it (Hjeresen et al., 1982)". However, what is being talked about here (including the cockroaches) is simply avoidance of electrical fields. To my mind, that is not what this article is about - it is more about detecting electrical fields produced by other animals or emitted by the sender themselves. So, is the definition in this article an appropriate one?__DrChrissy (talk) 19:20, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

Perhaps a better wording is "The biological ability to detect natural electrical fields and use these in electrolocation or electrocummunication". We could then state that other animals have been identified as sensitive to electric fields, but this ability is not used in electrolocation or electrocommunication. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.111.122.34 (talk) 19:45, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

The previous posting was mine - apologies for not signing it.__DrChrissy (talk) 19:49, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

Bees

"and use this information to know if a flower has been recently visited by another bee and is therefore likely to have a reduced concentration of pollen" Don't bees not really cares about pollen? Pollen is for the plant, the bee only cares about getting the nectar. Nectar instead of pollen would be more accurate I believe. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2604:5500:13:9FD:8CCB:944F:A3D8:AC3F (talk) 10:40, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

Good point -- I've changed it. In future please feel free to make such changes yourself, if you want to. Looie496 (talk) 13:49, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

Unless the plants are playing tricks on the bees! Not a serious suggestion (at this point!), but we are becoming more aware of examples where an organism can change the behaviour of individuals of another species to increase the biological fitness of the first.DrChrissy ^(talk) 13:55, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

WRONG ! Many bees also collect and use pollen.

References

Electroreception in humans

The article points out humans can detect electricity by sensations of their hair reacting to electrical fields like static electricity. I personally can sometimes feel electricity in electronic devices. I can feel when a battery is being charged by physically touching the device. Most noticeably for me is when a cell phone is charging. I can feel the electricity on my legs if my laptop is on my lap, and on my arms if I lean my forearm on the laptop when typing. Often the power I feel from the laptop is too strong and hurts me. Also, I have a problem with simple electric sensing buttons that are used in elevators and street crossing buttons. I have found evidence this is experienced by others, who call this problem zombie finger. Please contact me, somebody else must have this ability as well.. And if not, I would be willing to meet with an expert in this field. Moxyman (talk) 16:13, 3 April 2016 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

• Platypus.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 06:08, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

As the image was not deleted and I feel that the photo better shows the subject then the painting does, I have reverted the article. Further discussion is of course welcome. Pinging involved editor: @Chiswick Chap: Sario528 (talk) 13:31, 14 January 2019 (UTC)

Many thanks. Chiswick Chap (talk) 18:19, 14 January 2019 (UTC)

Monotremes

The Echidna article describes four species, rather than the two referred to here- I do not know which we would say is right. It also speaks of the echidna swimming well and quite a lot, rather than speaking only of living in damp environments, as it does here. I suggest that if it swims quite a bit, then its electroreception may be of more use than we otherwise think. IceDragon64 (talk) 01:07, 7 January 2021 (UTC)

Clarification needed in the "Bees" section

The last sentence says: "During the waggle dance, honeybees appear to use the electric field emanating from the dancing bee for distance communication." What does "distance communication" mean? Does it mean communication from a distance, communication of distance, or both? I did a quick ctrl+f on the referenced material for "communication" and "distance" and read for a few minutes, didn't find the answer that quick or else I would have edited it myself. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2603:8001:9200:80A7:8D2C:D559:266:9869 (talk) 07:35, 19 December 2021 (UTC)