Jump to content

Talk:Maize: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Line 70: Line 70:


Is there any real reason why [[corn]] couldn't be a straight redirect here? We already have a top-of-the-page notice (semi-disambiguation) here on this article that implies that it is. --[[User:Joy|Joy [shallot]]] ([[User talk:Joy|talk]]) 13:52, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
Is there any real reason why [[corn]] couldn't be a straight redirect here? We already have a top-of-the-page notice (semi-disambiguation) here on this article that implies that it is. --[[User:Joy|Joy [shallot]]] ([[User talk:Joy|talk]]) 13:52, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
:Maize is the proper name of this item. Corn is the common term in the USA, but not necessarily throughout the English-speaking world, as my British and other European colleagues always remind me. It needs to stay "maize". Speaking of "common names", check what turns up when you put in the common name [[edelweiss]]. :) ←[[User:Baseball Bugs|Baseball Bugs]] <sup>''[[User talk:Baseball Bugs|What's up, Doc?]]''</sup> [[Special:Contributions/Baseball_Bugs|carrots]]→ 13:57, 23 July 2010 (UTC)


== Dent corn ==
== Dent corn ==

Revision as of 13:57, 23 July 2010

Template:Food portal selected

The Nutrients Table does not add up

It's more than 100g —Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.103.201.200 (talk) 03:10, 6 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You're right it adds up to 108.561

69.136.72.16 (talk) 22:48, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Detail was removed

The following very detailed material was removed from the genetics section. Certainly it was out of place there. Perhaps it belongs somewhere else, or perhaps it is related to how inheritance in maize is studied? It seems a pity to just dump it.

In the maize kernel pericarp, the red pigments called phlobaphenes are synthesized in the flavonoids synthetic pathway[1] from polymerisation of flavan-4-ols[2] by the expression of maize pericarp color1 (p1) gene[3] which encodes an R2R3 myb-like transcriptional activator[4] while another gene (Suppressor of Pericarp Pigmentation 1 or SPP1) acts as a suppressor[5].

Nadiatalent (talk) 13:13, 24 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

GMO Monsanto

Over 80% of the corn produced in USA is GMO by Monsanto. GMO corn has been shown in lab studies to cause internal organ failure (liver etc) and has been linked to Morgellons' disease. GMO corn is found in derivatives such as HFCS (high fructose corn syrup), fructose, vitamin C (aka ascorbic acid), flour, maltodextrin and a host of other products. Currently no labeling is required for GMOs. Mention ought to be made. Please don't reply asking me for a source. You can google that for yourself. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.88.149.101 (talk) 06:45, 28 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't reply asking me for a source. Sorry, that's not the way things work around here. Short Brigade Harvester Boris (talk) 06:49, 28 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Conspiracy theories run rampant where GMO corn and soybeans are concerned. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots06:56, 28 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
For your reading pleasure: A Comparison of the Effects of Three GM Corn Varieties on Mammalian Health -Atmoz (talk) 07:00, 28 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I'm puzzled by the reference to glyphosate residue. Glyphosate is a herbicide. It's not part of the plant. Maybe they didn't clean the grain very well? ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots07:10, 28 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, I didn't actually read it. I just assumed that's what the IP was talking about since it's being passed around the Internet like a $2 whore. Plus, I wouldn't be able to evaluate a medical study if I wanted. Plus, aren't like 50% of all medical studies wrong? -Atmoz (talk) 07:27, 28 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Clean the grain? Any suggestions? Of the three, one is specifically intended to be used with Roundup (glyphosate-based). Since it's Roundup tolerant, what tends to happen is farmers add overly-heavy doses of the herbicide, seeing as it has no effect on the maize. It's not possible to clean this residue, or at least, in practice it isn't. The other two produce insecticides as part of the grain. Greenman (talk) 09:58, 28 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Well, they could always abandon GMO's and go back to using Atrazine. I note the study was done in connection with France or some other European country. Europe does not like GMO's. China has no such concerns. Not that China is exactly a sterling example in the area of consumer safety. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots14:11, 28 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Many people who search for "Corn" will never find this page

This is not an attempt to dredge up the old Corn vs Maize debate. I have read the archives, and both sides have made good points. However, the fact remains that a large percentage of native English speakers, especially in the US and Canada, have never heard of the word maize. If a ten-year-old child (or even an adult) types in the word "Corn", he will hit a disambiguation page containing a couple dozen links related to the word or name "Corn." The first section refers to cereals and grains such as wheat and barley, a usage of corn that will be confusing and unfamiliar to a large percentage of readers. In addition, the child might not realize corn is a cereal or grain, and even if he did, maize would very likely not even register as a word he has heard of, much less the common food he calls corn. To him, maize is probably an exotic grain used in other parts of the world. At this point, a large portion of people would give up and assume Wikipedia did not have an article on what they think of as corn. Are we being so pedantic in the corn vs maize debate that it has made Wikipedia unusable for many? Ironically, if that child ever did make it to the maize page, it does a pretty good job of explaining usage of the terms maize and corn around the world. --97.113.71.49 (talk) 19:49, 7 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Someone adjusted the entry at Corn since this was written. Rmhermen (talk) 22:04, 11 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Corn is much more commonly used than maize so I don't see how this article is named Maize. Gune (talk) 21:57, 7 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Because that's what it is. And the first item on the disambig page Corn is Maize. If you want to get into "common names", check the Edelweiss link. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots21:59, 7 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Except for the fact that Maize isn't the scientific name. It's the second most common name for it. Gune (talk) 00:39, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • Why isn't this the first page that "corn" goes to, with a sentence link at the top that goes to the disambiguation page for other meanings of corn? Because, most likely, if someone types in corn, they are looking for this article, so it should probably be immediately linked. SilverserenC 00:57, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Redirecting the search word "corn" to send readers to this article is America-centric? How? SilverserenC 03:59, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Because outside of America, corn means other grains. See the Corn page. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots04:42, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to play that game then Maize is too European-centric. Actually maize is not the "proper" name just because you are from Europe. Gune (talk) 09:54, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm American, and I recognize that maize is the proper term. "Corn" is short for "Indian corn". As I said, this debate has occurred before. Check the archives. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots10:00, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thats why WP:COMMONNAME plays an important role. The name in American English name may be one thing, but generally speaking the name used world-wide by the English-speaking community seems to be Maize. That said, if there is much disagreement, perhaps the article should be placed under its latin name, like has been done at Epazote. --nsaum75¡שיחת! 14:56, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
but generally speaking the name used world-wide by the English-speaking community seems to be Maize. This is the whole argument, as US, Can, AUs, NZ etc. readers see it the other way.

Your "proper" term is actually the wrong one. I don't have to check the archives to know when somebody is wrong. Gune (talk) 23:46, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I live in Australia, and we call it corn.110.33.11.19 (talk) 05:17, 6 July 2010 (UTC) If you look in the dictionary its called corn in every freakin english language variant. This article is ridiculous. Someone move it to the correct name, what a joke!--Львівське (talk) 23:47, 15 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This frustration is quite widespread. I am not currently convinced we have the article at the proper title. But as a compromise, I have changed the dab page Corn to look like this. HuskyHuskie (talk) 18:27, 17 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree with how it's worded on the disambiguation page but for now that's good. I say a move to corn is best but if not then scientific name is the way to go. Gune (talk) 04:53, 23 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

We need to present a "worldwide" view, and corn has different meanings in different places. However, the first sentence after you search for Corn says "Corn is the name used in the United States, Canada, and Australia for the grain maize." That seems sufficiently clear. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots09:34, 23 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Is there any real reason why corn couldn't be a straight redirect here? We already have a top-of-the-page notice (semi-disambiguation) here on this article that implies that it is. --Joy [shallot] (talk) 13:52, 23 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Maize is the proper name of this item. Corn is the common term in the USA, but not necessarily throughout the English-speaking world, as my British and other European colleagues always remind me. It needs to stay "maize". Speaking of "common names", check what turns up when you put in the common name edelweiss. :) ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots13:57, 23 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Dent corn

What is Dent Corn? The link in the article redirects to this article. Other types of corn such as waxy have their own pages. 78.151.245.89 (talk) 22:12, 16 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Typical hybrid field corn is a cross between the subspecies of corn (i.e. maize) called "flint" and "dent". The "flint" type is so called because it has a hard surface. It also tends to have a rounded seed. Popcorn is a type of flint corn. Flint corn generates a lot of pollen, which is why the pollinator or pollen parent ("male") in a hybrid cross is typically a flint inbred; and is also why popcorn fields are kept a long distance from field corn production fields, to prevent contamination. The "dent" type is so called because it has a noticeable dent in its top surface once it has dried. The seed parent ("female") in a hybrid cross is typically a dent inbred. The kernels used to plant field corn and also sweet corn are typically of the "dent" type. If a specific type such as "waxy" has its own page, as do Flint corn and Popcorn, one would think Dent corn would also - although the flint corn article suggests where dent's name comes from. At the very least, dent should probably redirect to flint, rather than to maize. And in fact I have done that, as a temporary measure. Maize#Genetics is one place where dent is referred to and previously took you right back to the Maize article (this one). Note the Latin Zea mays indentada. "Dent" as a word has to do with "tooth", i.e. something that's "indented" appears to have tooth marks. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots00:52, 17 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Wow, BB, I'm impressed with the depth of your cornstincts. HuskyHuskie (talk) 00:16, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I am nothing if not corny. :) ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots09:20, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Purple Corn

why is purple corn linked to here? this article really states nothing about the purple corn. Darksorce (talk)

Production Table Accuracy

The United States Department of Agriculture National Agricultural Statistics Service (http://www.nass.usda.gov) is an excellent resource for such data. For production year 2008, the NASS indicates 338,566,144 tons of corn were produced.

The United Nations' FAOSTAT service (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations) - which this table references - indicates for the 2008 production year 307,383,552 tons were produced in the United States - a difference of 31,182,592 tons.

That is a significant difference.

Is anyone else concerned about this discrepancy? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mink Butler Davenport (talkcontribs) 01:29, 19 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I am not sure of the reason for this discrepancy but the FAO is our only source which allows comparison of production of various countries. So it is important we stay with that single source which is expected to have consistent treatment of the data. Rmhermen (talk) 02:17, 19 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Other uses

I recently noticed ground cobs as a cat litter substitute. (sold in the USA at Petco) Not sure how to reference this? has anyone else seen this or know how to add to the main page? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.223.109.251 (talk) 01:05, 26 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]