Talk:Ricinus

Plants High‑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 articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Africa Low‑importance

	Africa portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Africa, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Africa 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.AfricaWikipedia:WikiProject AfricaTemplate:WikiProject AfricaAfrica articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Annual production

Why does this page tell me that the world production of castor seeds is one million tons per year and the article about ricin tells me that 100 million tons are processed each year?

Klaus

100 million tons seems to be an error; see talk:Ricin. This has been corrected in the article. Elphion (talk) 13:46, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Article name

Why is this article titled "Castor bean"? That refers to the seed. The name of the plant (according to Merriam-Webster's dictionary), is the "Castor-oil plant". Since when is a plant called a bean anyway? Rt66lt 17:41, 16 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

most poisonous plant

Guiness World Records (published editions) record the Castor <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/archive/oil">Oil</a> Plant to be the world's most "deadly" plant. "A particle from the Castor leaf the size of a grain of sand can kill a 160-pound adult". Why isnt that in the article!!!? See this website http://library.thinkquest.org/C007974/1_3cas.htm AJ24

Because you haven't added it yet? :) dougmc 22:30, 9 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Also, it's not true (talk:Ricin). Elphion (talk) 13:46, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The most toxic substances by amount are

1. Plutonium

2. Botulism toxin

3. Ricin poison.

I could go on but the point is that could be the most toxic plant. Also, Elphion, this list is talking about toxicity of the POISON to humans, toxicity to other life forms obviously varies hugely with it being completely benign to some plants, as well as the fact that the levels of the POISON in each PLANT vary wildly. 216.249.58.67 (talk) 17:12, 7 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I would believe that it's use in suicide is uncommon as ricin poisoning takes a few days to kill a person, but will still be fatal with a smaller dose of any other plant. But I do have a hard time believing Ricin is the third most toxic substances, I was just reading about Abrin, which has a LD50 of >300ng, far less then ricin. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.62.194.227 (talk) 15:07, 11 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Second that on abrin. See abrin article. I think Guiness Book of World Records is not a scholarly source. 71.139.178.219 (talk) 22:35, 11 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ricin-Killing of Gorgi Markov thru KGB in London

and what about the umbrella killing of bulgarian journalist Gorgi Markov, in London, due to 10 microgramm of Ricin? In contrast to other killing agents, ricin provoces a leucocytosis, with fever. Ricin can be prepared easily in the kitchen by stirring the seed with an ionic exchanger and eluting from the filter with mannose-sugar. There is a lot of to tell about the medical problems regarding ricinus communis, e.g. the allergic reaction to the proein content. There should be a link to "ricin" of wikipedia.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Kaltenbrunner (talk • contribs)

There is a link to ricin. The other data you provide, you can add it to the article. --Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} 19:57, 15 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Las Vegas incident

I removed the section on 3/2008 Las Vegas incident. According to the provided source no information on the manufacture was known. The man did not die, but is in critical condition. Add it back without inferences. 71.217.210.55 (talk) 03:47, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Whoever has been editing the article did not restore information about this incident. I have added a neutral notice about it. Elphion (talk) 22:48, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Castor Beans plant as companion plant in gardens.

Castor Bean plants are also known as "mole kills" in the south. They are planted in gardens or landscapes because the roots are poisonous to burrowing animals. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.243.142.178 (talk) 13:12, 17 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Animal interactions question

There seems to be a paradox in the section about animal interactions. The point is made that it is a favorite food of the Tambourine dove, and then the next statement points out the toxicity of its seed. When you follow the link to the Tambourine dove's page, it says the dove feeds on the seeds rather than on the foliage, but makes no explanation of how the dove handles the toxin. Wonder how the Tambourine dove consumes the seeds without suffering the consequences??? I did not find much after searching the Internet, although I see the fact--the dove eats the bean--repeated a lot. Seems like this apparent paradox should be resolved with additional information if available, but I sure didn't find anything. I did see where parrots handle toxins by eating clay and removing the seed coat of some seeds. I did add the statement about ducks being more tolerant to ricin than mammals. [[[User:Pinethicket|Pinethicket]] (talk) 23:30, 15 June 2009 (UTC)][reply]

Questionable claim in Toxicity section

We see this: "In fact, ricin has been investigated for its potential use as an insecticide. It is also the source for undecylenic acid, a natural fungicide."

At the link to undecylenic acid, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Undecylenic_acid, it says "Undecylenic acid is produced by cracking of castor oil under pressure." Cracking castor oil under pressure does not involve ricin, so which is correct? EdwardEditor (talk) 21:46, 21 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

lethal ingested amount problem

according to this page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ricin#Overdosage the lethal amount is 5-20 seeds and on this page its 4-8 which is it i personally think 5-20 is more accurate as according to nhs ricin poorly absorption. also this part (If ingested, symptoms may be delayed by up to 36 hours but commonly begin within 2–4 hours) there is no mention of it on reference 6 were did this statement come from?. Sparkler99 (talk) 09:52, 4 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Useage of the pressed seeds after removal of oil

Does anyone know if the pressed, de-oiled material is used for anything. Most other oil plants produce an edible material which can be added to animal feed, but what happens to the de-oiled material? Could the ricin content be removed by enzymes or something like citric acid? This could create a resource. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Colchemy (talk • contribs) 15:10, 11 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Absolutely Horrifying

"In most cases, on ingestion of the broken seeds, drinking a teaspoon of cold-pressed castor oil will prevent any poisoning" A little quick search on google showed several sites using this info citing wikipedia as a source. Which is quite horrifying seeing as this is a very sensetive piece of information that could potensially be the difference between life or death for "home medicators" and wiki still needs citation for this! This should really be taken of the page until proven or at least citated!!!--Hodeken (talk) 18:02, 5 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Orange Seed Pods

I have seen a variety with orange seed pods, is this the same species as this plant or a different type? 92.23.165.77 (talk) 23:13, 23 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Ricinus. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 05:39, 2 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Ricinus. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20150906230329/http://faostat.fao.org/site/567/DesktopDefault.aspx?PageID=567 to http://faostat.fao.org/site/567/DesktopDefault.aspx?PageID=567#ancor

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:38, 21 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Red or Green

The material on the intricacies of the color variants seems to suggest 3 forms, red, green, and red-to-green. Checking the ref, the link is dead, and the site is under construction. Also the text of the footnote: e.g. http://database.prota.org/publishedspeciesEn.htm (dead link). Why start a citation with "for example", unless this material is found all over the Web? If so, a better source should be cited; otherwise, "Individual plants may be either green or a dark reddish-brown." can cover the subject of pigmentation, provided some source for the info is found.--Quisqualis (talk) 05:00, 23 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Ricinus. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.bsbi.org.uk/BSBIList2007.xls
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110203042939/http://www.billcasselman.com/cwod_archive/beaver_castor_two.htm to http://www.billcasselman.com/cwod_archive/beaver_castor_two.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:20, 5 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified (January 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Ricinus. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:25, 22 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Benefits of castor oil is wrongly projected as toxicity

actual it has toxicity and protein disintegration effect on carcinogenic cells and not on normal body cells. It's impact is based on terrain and atmospheric conditions and has zero adverse effects in tropical climate. 136.185.7.79 (talk) 12:17, 21 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

multiple unsourced statements there - please provide your sources.Plantsurfer 12:33, 21 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]