Talk:Mitochondrion

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Good article Mitochondrion has been listed as one of the Natural sciences good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
WikiProject Physiology (Rated GA-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Physiology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Physiology 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.
 GA  This article has been rated as GA-Class on the quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article has been classified as relating to the physiology of the respiratory system.
 
WikiProject Molecular and Cellular Biology (Rated GA-class, Top-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Molecular and Cellular Biology. To participate, visit the WikiProject for more information.
 GA  This article has been rated as GA-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Top  This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
Wikipedia Version 1.0 Editorial Team / v0.7
WikiProject icon This article has been reviewed by the Version 1.0 Editorial Team.
Taskforce icon
This article has been selected for Version 0.7 and subsequent release versions of Wikipedia.
 
 GA  This article has been rated as GA-Class on the quality scale.

Untitled[edit]

Why make Wikipedia useless?[edit]

Can someone create a simple version for people who want to understand mitochondria but aren't already extremely knowledgeable on the topic?

108.41.27.248 (talk) 23:21, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

Perhaps you would find the Simple English version more understandable. (There is a link to it in the lefthand column of the article page.) -R. S. Shaw (talk) 04:30, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

orsk vandalism[edit]

the article is full of orsk, which is a non word--- orsk biology? come on A71.163.238.230 (talk) 01:44, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

Popular Culture[edit]

Should the Book/Movie/Game Parasite Eve be mentioned anywhere here? I mean, I dont know the original japanese story, but the video game version basically has mitochondria as rapidly evolving antagonists who were waiting for technological defenselessness (in the form of immune suppressing drugs) to "take over." The most prominent example of which is causing people to catch on fire through massive, commanded heat release.

The story is silly and clearly not scientifically accurate, but never the less, it is a cultural reference to mitochondria. Considering the sillyness however, I figured it was a good idea to get community input before posting much more about it. The big reason I see to include it is because it is basically the only well known example of science fiction directly using mitochondria as an antagonist. Which is weird but unique. Parasite Eve 2 goes so far overboard and is about a much different set of things, so neednt be included (it wouldnt help anyone understand anything that wasnt in the game.)74.132.249.206 (talk) 07:16, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

I see that the Wikipedia page discussing midi-chlorians is linked to the mitochondrion page as is A Wind in the Door. --IONTRANSP (talk) 16:48, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

The Mitochondrion article needs a picture of a network of mitochondria[edit]

Have a look at ,say, an RK-13 cell at www.microscopyu.com brought to you by Nikon. See the network of mitochondria? Totally different picture from what we've got here in Wikipedia, with that stupid graphic of an isolated fooball-shaped or pill-shaped thing that you see after fixing and staining for the electron microscope. We've had these in vivo pictures of mitochondria available for at least twenty years now!Richard8081 (talk) 17:33, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Is this paragraph correct?[edit]

Regulation of Pyruvate Dehydrogenase

"The decreased intra-mitochondrial calcium concentration increases dehydrogenase activation and ATP synthesis. So in addition to lower ATP synthesis due to fatty acid oxidation, ATP synthesis is impaired by poor calcium signaling as well, causing cardiac problems for diabetics."

First, it is said that the ATP synthesis is increased, but then it is said that it is impaired. Will increased dehydrogenase activity increase or decrease ATP synthesis? - Bob Collowân (talk) 18:05, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

I think it should say "decreases dehydrogenase activation".
The cited article says: "Importantly, mitochondrial Ca2+ concentrations in diabetic hearts were in the range where modulation of dehydrogenase activation occurs, suggesting that decreased flux through Ca2+-sensitive dehydrogenases may indeed contribute to impaired ATP generation in these hearts."
I'm not sure that the mitochondrion page should discuss results from the article "Mitochondria in the diabetic heart". The article "Mitochondria in the diabetic heart" is not even cited at Mitochondrial disease. It might be best to simply link from this page to diabetic cardiomyopathy and make a page section there about the role of mitochondria. --IONTRANSP (talk) 18:59, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

Mitochondria in "most" eukaryotes[edit]

Is there an example of an eukaryote that does not have mitochondria? If not, the word most can be removed from the lede. Plantsurfer (talk) 16:14, 1 December 2012 (UTC)

Diplomonads as a group lack mitochondria (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14614504). Microsporidia also lack mitochondria (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9615449) and these have recently been shown to be fungi. There are few other amitochondrial protists. However, in all cases I am aware of, it has been shown that these are secondary loses of mitochondria, and not a primitive lack.Michaplot (talk) 20:58, 1 December 2012 (UTC)

All eukaryotes, even diplomonads etc., have mitochondria, at least as long as you define mitochondria as double membrane bounded organelles of bacterial descent. Only some "mitochondria" have completely lost their DNA (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20124346). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:620:400:9:0:0:0:55 (talk) 14:08, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

Merger proposal: Mitochondrial fission and Mitochondrial fusion[edit]

I propose that Mitochondrial fission and Mitochondrial fusion be merged into Mitochondria, maybe into a new section titled Fission and fusion. The fusion article is just a three-sentence stub, and the fission article is not much bigger and relies on primary sources exclusively. So there would be only little content to integrate into the main article. I am not sure on where to best place the information, though. As a subsection to Structure, or rather under Replication and Inheritance?--Biologos (talk) 15:15, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

Great ! How about adding a sub-section in Replication and Inheritance as fusion and fission both contribute to the respective section ? Ghorpaapi (talk) 08:48, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

Pronunciation of mitochondria[edit]

Evidently a user and an IP disagree with me on how to pronounce the word "mitochondrion". I think it's pronounced /ˌmaɪtoʊˈkɒndʒɹi.ɪn/ (with a "j" sound where "dri" is, apparently they think its pronounced /ˌmaɪtoʊˈkɒndɹi.ɪn/ with just a 'da' and 're' sound (/dɹ/). Second thoughts on this issue would be appreciated.—Love, Kelvinsong talk 20:50, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

Error in Mitochondrion mini.svg[edit]

In Point 3.12 it says "Cristal Membrane" but it is supposed to be cristae membrane. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.76.0.211 (talk) 13:53, 11 March 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for pointing this out. I removed the figure for the time being. I am not sure whether it should be re-added after correction, since we have enough other diagrams of mitochondria in the article.--Biologos (talk) 09:09, 14 March 2014 (UTC)
Sorry, "cristal" seems to be used as the adjective for "cristae", it is quite widespread in the literature. I will undo my change.--Biologos (talk) 09:09, 14 March 2014 (UTC)

Why is this so very dry?[edit]

I wonder if this page might do a little more to explain the pivotal role Mitochondria played in the evolution of life? Perhaps a short paragraph including a link to Mitochondrial Eve might do it. I think this might satisfy our friend who made this comment https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Mitochondrion#Why_make_Wikipedia_useless.3F

(Please excuse the bad link, I rarely participate, hopefully some robot will tidy that up for me) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Terryfw (talkcontribs) 21:27, 9 October 2014 (UTC)

No mention of mitochondrial decay[edit]

Mitochondrial decay redirects to this article, which however does not define or even mention the term. Could someone familiar with the concept please either say a word or two about it here, or change the redirect to an article in its own right? Vaughan Pratt (talk) 16:08, 31 October 2014 (UTC)