Talk:Basal lamina

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Molecular and Cell Biology (Rated Start-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Molecular and Cell Biology. To participate, visit the WikiProject for more information.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
 

Basal Lamina vs. Basement Membrane[edit]

This article begins by asserting that the term "basement memberane" is an erroneous label. However the anatomical picture exactly to the right of first paragraph is labeled using the supposedly erroneous term "basement membrane". Seems like an inconsistency that needs to be sorted out. --Paul, 10 June 2006

Agreed; hopefully the caption I added clarifies this point. --David Iberri (talk) 21:07, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

The histology book I have (Michael H. Ross et al 2003) says on page 107, "The terms basement membrane and basal lamina are used inconsistently in the literature. Some authors use basement membrane when referring to both light and electron microscopic images. Others dispense with the term basement membrane altogether and use basal lamina in both light and electron microscopy. Because the term basement membrane originated with light microscopy it is used in this book only in the context of light microscopic descriptions and only in relation to epithelia. The electron microscopic term basal lamina is reserved for the ultrastructural content to denote the layer present at the interface of connective tissue with epithelial cells. The term external lamina is used to identify this same layer when it forms a peripheral cellular investment as in muscle cells and peripheral supporting cells."--dsws 14:12, 13 July 2005 (UTC)

I tried to clarify this issue in the article. I felt the "basement membrane is an erroneous label" beginning gave the wrong impression, especially since I arrived at this article via a redirect from basement membrane. I tried to tone it down a bit, making clear that it's not a question of one term versus the other but that they're two distinct terms that are often confused. Because there are no articles on lamina propria, lamina densa, etc. I'm tempted to create a basement membrane article and incorporate the EM-visible elements sections of that article. Thoughts? Robotsintrouble 21:14, 15 October 2006 (UTC)
Yes, I think it would make more sense to have a basement membrane article, and then explain all its parts in that article. All the terms redirecting to that article should have simple definitions in the intro paragraphs, so that the intro can stand on its own. Also, the article should mention the considerable non-uniformity in the literature with respect to these terms; see also Dorlands Dictionary entry. For some authors, "basal lamina" and "basement membrane" are synonymous, for others "basal lamina" and "lamina densa" are synonymous. We can't call these choices of terminology "mistaken"; we have to explain them and then pick one and stick with it. AxelBoldt 16:30, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

In molecular biology of the cell, Albert et. al 5th edition the basal lamina and the basement memnrabe is the same: "basal lamina (also refered to as the basement membrane") pp. 1164. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.143.235.187 (talk) 12:00, 14 June 2008 (UTC)


lamina lucida vs lamina densa[edit]

These are different structures, and I can cite dermatologic sources stating so (see *James, William; Berger, Timothy; Elston, Dirk (2005) Andrews' Diseases of the Skin: Clinical Dermatology (10th ed.). Saunders. ISBN 0721629210.); therefore, perhaps we could change up the redirection of these terms to this article? Kilbad (talk) 01:40, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

Plagiarised text from Junquiera's Basic Histology[edit]

Copying text, word for word, from Junquiera's Basic Histology and referencing the sentence as being paraphrased is unacceptable. I removed the plagiarized text from the article. --Jelly Bean MD (talk) 14:06, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

This page is purely improperly cited material and thereby poses an important copyright issue. --Jelly Bean MD (talk) 03:18, 23 September 2014 (UTC)