Talk:Venom/Archive 1

Archive 1

Disambiguation page?

• I think the Disambiguation page should always be displayed for the root word (Venom, in this case), with choices for the user to follow. Unsigned comment by user:Reo On

In this case, I disagree. "Venom" means venom. "Venom (poison)" sounds wrong to me, & I don't think the page should have been moved there. "Venom (biology)" might be ok. Ventifax 19:46, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

Also, this page was improperly moved before, using cut & paste, so the Talk was in two places. I have cut & pasted it back. If you feel you must move it again, use the move function, & put it under "Venom (biology)," "Venom (toxin)," "Venom (biotoxin)," or the like; instead of "Venom (poison)," which is bizarre, considering the article itself draws a distinction between venom & poison, & does not regard venoms as a subset of poisons. Ventifax 20:08, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

Venom can only take effect if its injected into your bloodstream. Poison must be digested for its effect. Why is the article called Venom (poison) anyways? It seems contradictory to me. (I didnt read the article for the record!) 65.34.72.52 23:09, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

re Merge Sting (biology)

Venom can come from snakes too, which do not "sting". I say, keep them seperate.--Lewk_of_Serthic 16:57, August 18, 2005 (UTC)

I agree with Lewk and I would like to add, that in article about venom shall be more likely chemical (and biological) description of the phenomena, more about the poison, the toxins (chemical characteristics and its action). In article about sting - should be more likely the importance and function of this ogan in ekology and biosphere (the importance for that insect, animal, the ways it uses etc.), and simply sting and venom are not the same things, I think. That seems to me that´s quite different point of view, different subject of interest and different article.--Reo On 15:32, 26 September 2005 (UTC)

see discussion here David Ruben 14:24, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

"Snake poison"

• Snake poison is rather too long to merge into venom, it should be summarized with a "see main" type link. The Venom page should be renamed to Venom (disambiguation) as the principal meaning of venom is the type of animal poison other meanings are derived from that. The Venom (poison) page should be moved to Venom. Zeimusu | Talk page 12:29, 31 October 2005 (UTC)

There is no such thing as "snake poison", unless you mean something that is designed to kill snakes, like "rat poison" is designed to kill rats. I will incorporate this page in 'snake venom', the correct term, after finishing the many corrections it needs, since it is based on an obsolete text that is nearly 100 years old. things have moved a long way since then. anyone more qualified to do so out there is welcome to assist or edit later. ```` harry wilson, PhD

A venom is clearly a subset of poison by most definition of poison ... Chuck Kristensen — Preceding unsigned comment added by ChuckKristensen (talk • contribs) 16:53, 10 December 2013 (UTC)

venom - poison rather artificial distinction?

is the distinction between "poison" and "venom" not rather artificial? a spitting cobra spits poison on you, and injects venom when it bites you? --Soloturn99 06:31, 9 April 2006 (UTC)

Interesting point, but it still has to get in the eye to do harm. Spitting cobra venom in the mouth or nose (both also very common events, assuming you're wearing goggles and not a full face shield) is quite harmless.

There are two different distinctions which are correlated in nature and tend to divide toxins into two classes. In the producing creature, venoms are sequestered in specialized organs and delivered by specialized anatomy. The producing creature does not need a systemic immunity to its own venom. Poisons are spread throughout the producing creature's tissues, and it needs to be protected from its own poison. Poisons are also generally delivered as part of harm done to the poison producer.

The second distinction is route into the victim. Venoms are injected, while poisons are ingested.

The bumper-sticker simplification is "poison hurts if you bite it; venom hurts if it bites you." While there are a few things that straddle the gap, it's still a useful distinction. The existence of hermaphrodites, transsexuals, and XXY karyotypes does not completely destroy the descriptive power of the male/female dichotomy.

The distinction is artificial. Look up "venomous" and "poisonous" in a dictionary; every dictionary I've checked lists them as synonyms of each other. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.222.241.90 (talk) 21:23, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

Webster's Unabridged Dictionary of the English Language (2001) describes "venomous" as various things, including "1. (of an animal) having a gland or glands for secreting venom; able to inflict a poisonous bite, sting or wound; a venomous snake." The entry for "poisonous" does not include a similar description. --Jwinius (talk) 22:47, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

Someone is disregarding: "poison that is produced by an animal (such as a snake) and used to kill or injure another animal usually through biting or stinging" http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/venom ChuckKristensen (talk) 17:00, 10 December 2013 (UTC)

Venoms are a subset of poisons. Consider the comment by the Arizona Poison and Drug Center (http://azpoison.com/venom/rattlesnakes). "Venoms are complex poisons which vary greatly in composition and potency among species and individuals." Also consider the remarks by Findlay E. Russell and Richard C. Dart in Chapter 22 "Toxic Effects of Animal Toxins" in Casarett and Doull's Toxicology: The Basic Science of Poisons, 4th Ed. (p. 753). "In reality all venomous animals are poisonous, but not all poisonous animals are venomous." Findlay Russell's credentials are difficult to match. 2601:500:4000:217A:66B9:E8FF:FEC8:626A (talk) 03:23, 20 June 2015 (UTC)

Snake antivenin description is codswallop

The allergic response is rarely generated by good pure antivenin, and not a bar to giving antivenin again; there will just be more troublesome side effects. And developing personal immunity isn't that easy, and often impossible. A human's blood volume, multiplied by the maximum achievable antibody density, is not enough to neutralize some large-volume venoms (e.g. Bitis, Ophiophagus).

Iguanas and Monitors?

I've never read anything whatsoever suggesting that iguanas or monitors of any species possess venom. It is true that Komodo Dragons (Varanus komodoensis) have a toxic culture of microbes in their mouth, but this is actually acquired and not a native trait to the lizard and does not qualify as venom.

Until this claim is verified by a reputable source, I'm removing it from the article as erroneous information. To my knowledge only the two species of heloderms possess venom among lizards. --Lvthn13 22:38, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Your requested reputable source [here[1]]

That paper states that those lineages (igaunines and monitor lizards) have the venom genes, but they do not have a delivery system (e.g., fang, spine) for the injection of the venom. Additionally, the necessary work for proving that the venom DNA acutally gets transcribed and translated into an actual venom that is somewhere in their body remains untested.

Centipedes

The article states that centipedes inject their venom via "fangs". It's my understanding that the venom is injected via modified legs, and as the OED states that "fangs" are mouthparts, does the article need clarifying? 68.228.208.191 (talk) 02:45, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

It might be worth digging out a text book and working out which segment has the fangs on. I could give that a go when i get home Abergabe (talk) 12:47, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

Dinosaurs?

In the main article, there's a section heading, "Dinosaurs," under which it says:

"The theropod Dilophosaurus is commonly depicted in popular culture as being venomous..."

While it is possible that I just don't get out as much as I used to, and it's true that I stopped watching television years ago, I have to say here that I've never seen any reference to the Dilophosaurus in popular culture at all. Wikipedia's article on that particular dinosaur species only says that it's been mentioned in a Michael Crichton novel, and the film version thereof, twenty years ago.

I am scratching my head here. Perhaps "commonly" is overstating the case? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.61.103.18 (talk) 09:50, 18 February 2013 (UTC) it could help people.2 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.146.236.50 (talk) 20:08, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

I have deleted it because there is no documentation of any dinosaur having venom or a functioning apparatus for delivering venom. There is no more proof of a venomous extinct dinosaur than there is of venomous birds. Pbrower2a (talk) 19:15, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

Evolution

I think it would be useful to add a section that discusses the evolution of individual species evolution of venom and the convergent evolution of venom between species. Some snakes and lizards produce similar molecules in their venom to platypus venom. These components of both species' venom has evolved separately, suggesting convergent evolution. Source: http://genome.cshlp.org/content/18/6/986.full.pdf+html

Wesselkamper.1 (talk) 17:03, 29 September 2014 (UTC)Wesselkamper.1 [[User:|Wesselkamper.1]] (talk)

References

Snakes and Platypus

We can include additional information to each of the sections or into a specific evolution section about the evolution of the specific glands that the venom is secreted from. It is known that the the snake venom glands evolved from what were originally their modified salivary glands while platypus venom glands evolved from their modified sweat glands. Wesselkamper.1 (talk) 17:22, 29 September 2014 (UTC)Wesselkamper.1

References

Additional Information for Snake Venom

Studies found that the composition of snake venom within species varies with geological location. The study showed evidence that the variation was not due to gene flow or phylogenetic relationships, but rather with differences in diet. Wesselkamper.1 (talk) 17:36, 29 September 2014 (UTC)Wesselkamper.1

References

Chimaera Venomous Spine

I am considering adding additional information regarding the structure of the venomous spine in the Chimaera. Attached below is an article resource that relates more to this topic. Does this merit inclusion onto the page? If not, is there a page were this would be better suited?

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1095-8649.2009.02362.x/abstract Benson02 (talk) 02:05, 18 March 2017 (UTC)

Venom resistant animals

For https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Venom#Venom_resistant_animals :

From https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/animals-venom-cant-touch-180960658/ The scorpion’s sting. The rattlesnake’s bite. The jellyfish’s slimy embrace.

In fact, numerous critters have shown a honey-badger-like moxie when it comes to weathering the effects of chemical weapons. In the mammalian realm, hedgehogs, skunks, ground squirrels, and pigs have shown resistance to venom. Some scientists even believe the lowly opossum, which wields a venom-neutralizing peptide in its blood, may hold the key to developing a universal antivenom. Egyptian mongooses may be even more venom-indifferent than opossums, but alas, their protections don’t seem to be transferable. (Instead of antivenin blood, mongooses possess mutations on their very cells that block snake neurotoxins like a wad of gum in a keyhole.)

For instance, grasshopper mice can shrug off the paralyzing effects of bark scorpions, upon which they feast. Same goes for the fan-fingered geckoes of the Middle East and the yellow scorpions they hunt. And Texas horned lizards are 1300 times more resistant to harvester ants than mice, a general indicator of toxicity.

Just look at leatherback sea turtle, says Wilcox. These oceanic behemoths make a living slurping up super-venomous jellyfish, stinging tentacles and all, like it ain’t no thing. As far we know, leatherbacks are not immune to the jellyfish’s sting. It’s just that they never get stung. From their shells and scaly skin to an esophagus that looks like the business end of a Sarlacc, the turtles have evolved countermeasures that prevent jellyfish from delivering their microscopic venom harpoons.

Venenous spiders

What are the poisonous spiders in Florida? Halcol2 (talk) 04:29, 13 August 2020 (UTC)

Amphibians

Potential sources for further information

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0960982215007885

https://physoc.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1113/jphysiol.1975.sp010810

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/BF02152303

https://www.mdpi.com/2072-6651/11/11/666/htm

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0041010120300441?casa_token=gOESrvy9t8kAAAAA:c7ZdhmN8yiRtC9FV1S4KpblF6fQZRb8-mS-nxIcSwdVKpxNVJXdNrrmt_M9TNLC6K515mY8jSzA

BarredOwl.00 (talk) 01:31, 2 February 2021 (UTC)

Necrotoxin not an additional type

As it says in the article on cytotoxin, necrosis is just the most common cell fate due to cytotoxins. Necrotoxin is therefore not a valid type of it's own. It does not exist as a separate lemma, either. Should we reduce it to 3 types only and merge some of the text for necrotoxin into cytotoxin? Aecur (talk) 15:37, 26 December 2021 (UTC)

I would put it this way:

• Cytotoxins, which are toxic to cells may cause necrosis (i.e., death) in the cells they encounter.[4] The venom of most viper species contains phospholipase and trypsin-like serine proteases. The apitoxin of honey bees and the venom of black widow spiders also belong to this group.[10][11]

• Neurotoxins, which primarily affect the nervous systems of animals.[5] These include ion channel toxins that disrupt ion channel conductance. Black widow spider, scorpion, box jellyfish, cone snail, centipede and blue-ringed octopus venoms (among many others) function in this way.

• Myotoxins, which damage muscles by binding to a receptor, are small, basic peptides found in snake (such as rattlesnake) and lizard venoms.[6][7][8][9]

Aecur (talk) 18:11, 5 January 2022 (UTC)