Talk:Silene stenophylla

A news item involving Silene stenophylla was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the In the news section on 22 February 2012.

Wikipedia

Plants Mid‑importance

	Plants portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Plants, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of plants and botany on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PlantsWikipedia:WikiProject PlantsTemplate:WikiProject Plantsplant
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Russia: Science & education / Physical geography Mid‑importance

	Russia portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Russia, a WikiProject dedicated to coverage of Russia on Wikipedia. To participate: Feel free to edit the article attached to this page, join up at the project page, or contribute to the project discussion.RussiaWikipedia:WikiProject RussiaTemplate:WikiProject RussiaRussia
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the science and education in Russia task force.
	This article is supported by the physical geography of Russia task force.

Arctic Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Arctic, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Arctic on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ArcticWikipedia:WikiProject ArcticTemplate:WikiProject ArcticArctic
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

It is requested that an image or photograph of Silene stenophylla be included in this article to improve its quality. Please replace this template with a more specific media request template where possible.
Wikipedians in Russia may be able to help!
The Free Image Search Tool or Openverse Creative Commons Search may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites.

Upload

Urocitellus or Geomys

(copied from User talk:ThaddeusB for wider visability) You have to be careful when dealing with Russian scientists. These guys use older sources for identifying species. It also takes them a long time to get published, and if they have a really important result, it often gets published twice or three times, first in Russian, and the third time in a better journal and/or by a better translator. For example, the species Silene stenophylla may not be a good species; I am still trying to track this down. The "gopher" you refer to is a ground squirrel in the genus Urocitellus. Note that the source says that this is a subgenus, because they haven't kept up. Speciate (talk) 20:11, 21 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

From the 2007 source: "We studied the morphology of ancient seeds of Silene species (Caryophyllaceae) excavated from ancient gopher holes (Geomys ssp.) buried under a Pleistocene-age permafrost at a site near Kolyma, Russia." Geomys is indeed a genus of gophers. The team that reported these seeds does not seems to be the same one as reported the regeneration (none of the names are the same). There is no reason that I see to believe that papers are actually referring to the same thing. --ThaddeusB (talk) 20:19, 21 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

In these guy's world, Urocitellus is a subgenus of Geomys. There are only two species that they could be; Urocitellus parryii or Urocitellus undulatus. Russians call these critters "souslik". Anyway, lets continue this on the article's talk page. Speciate (talk) 20:38, 21 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You are probably correct. I am going to change it to "ground squirrels," pending further input. I would prefer not to list the genus in that section since it is different/incorrect in the source referenced. --ThaddeusB (talk) 21:26, 21 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It's so confusing. Grant Zazula calls them Spermophyllis parryii here. Speciate (talk) 21:35, 21 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Contradiction?

It states that attempts with mature seeds "failed", followed by "Seeds from the ancient plants germinated at a 100% success rate". I don't know how to reconcile these statements. Maybe some clearer wording is needed? JMK (talk) 13:46, 22 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

My reading of this (without consulting the sources) was that attempts with the frozen seeds failed, but seeds from regenerated plants germinated. 74.74.150.139 (talk) 14:20, 22 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

74.74 is correct. Frozen seeds failed to generate, but seeds from the adult plants created germinated just fine. --ThaddeusB (talk) 18:27, 22 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

regeneration method

the regeneration method seems like it should have an article of its own? as its mentioned as a possible use in resurrecting extinct species. 70.24.251.71 (talk) 16:52, 23 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Not really - the method doesn't seem especially novel, it's more a matter of what they achieved. Their culture media are based on standard protocols (references dated 1963 and 1978 respectively) or minor modifications from them, and their extraction of tissues from the seeds is pretty much "surface sterilise, then dissect". The culturing placental tissue may be unusual (I'm not terribly sure), but it isn't revolutionary. What is notable here is (a) that they were able to grow Pleistocene plants, and (b) that the placental tissues remained viable despite the fact that they seeds were not. If this is more generally true, it may be a useful source of tissues for trying to resurrect ancient plants. Guettarda (talk) 18:08, 23 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It does have an article: Plant tissue culture. This was linked to in the article, and is linked to on the main page blurb. Speciate (talk) 19:22, 23 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have replaced to word "grow" which is linguistically cognate to "germinate" with the more appropriate word "culture" and piped to plant tissue culture behind it. Speciate (talk) 19:28, 23 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I saw on the main page "Scientists reportedly regenerate specimens of Silene stenophylla from placental tissue frozen approximately 32,000 years ago." Placental tissue? Plants have placental tissue? ~ Kimelea (talk) 22:52, 26 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but obviously not in the same way as mammals. I suggest you follow the wikilink (Placentation#Placentation in plants) in the article for more information. --ThaddeusB (talk) 01:09, 27 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia never ceases to amaze me. Thanks! :) ~ Kimelea (talk) 01:22, 27 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Dates

The article currently says:

In 2012, a team of scientists… successfully regenerated specimens…

and goes on to describe their flowering and the germination, in turn, of their seeds. Since we're only in about the ninth week of 2012, it seems likely that the regeneration from the specimens in question happened in 2011, if not before; and perhaps was announced this year. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 23:40, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You are correct. I will tweak the wording. --ThaddeusB (talk) 01:13, 26 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Right bank?

"located at Duvanny Yar, on the right bank of the lower Kolyma River". So, is a "right bank" usually defined when looking upstream or downstream? It would be far less ambiguous to specify either the east or the west bank, as this river seems to flow north. 2001:56A:F0E9:9B00:75DB:8103:5874:C4B7 (talk) 04:15, 14 May 2020 (UTC)justSomeWikiReader[reply]