Talk:Cold seep

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject Oceans (Rated B-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Oceans, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of oceans, seas, and bays 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.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Geology (Rated B-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon Cold seep is part of WikiProject Geology, an attempt at creating a standardized, informative, comprehensive and easy-to-use geology resource. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit this article, or visit the project page for more information.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Marine life (Rated B-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is part of WikiProject Marine life, an attempt at creating a standardized, informative, comprehensive and easy-to-use resource on marine life. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit this article, or visit the project page where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. This project is an offshoot of the WikiProject Tree of Life.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
 


abiotic or photosynthetic?[edit]

If the cold-seep biomes are independent of photosynthesis, that would imply the methane and other hydrocarbons are abiotic, does it not? Or do we mean not currently dependent on photosynthesis? I know there's been debate over how much of our hydrocarbon deposits may be abiotic, but I thought the agreement was relatively little—or am I just out of date? kwami (talk) 09:00, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Longest lived invertebrate?[edit]

Ming is the nickname given to a specimen of an ocean quahog clam, Arctica islandica, family Veneridae, and is the oldest living animal ever discovered. Judging by the annual growth rings on the clam's shell, Ming was believed to be in the region of 405-410 years old when the clam was caught off the coast of Iceland in October 2007. The claim was made by researchers at Bangor University. The researchers are uncertain how long the clam, which died during the assessment process, might have lived had it been left on the ocean floor. The clam was named after the Ming Dynasty due to its age. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.189.2.146 (talk) 21:52, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

"hydrocarbonate"[edit]

The section on "Comparison with other communities" refers to "reduced chemical compounds (H2S and hydrocarbonates)". In this sentence, "hydrocarbonates" should be "hydrocarbons", which are reduced chemical compounds found at some cold seeps, whereas "hydrocarbonate" is a little-used expression for bicarbonate, which is a fully oxidized compound. 128.192.40.124 (talk) 19:28, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

Origin of the Term Cold Seep?[edit]

The first section of the article includes the sentence "Cold" does not mean that the temperature of the seepage is lower than that of the surrounding sea water. Yet there is no further explanation. This incomplete explanation is akin to a dictionary entry that contains only half a definition. If you're going to go through the trouble of stating that, contrary to the name, cold vents aren't physically cold, then common sense dictates that you at least give some elucidation as to the reasoning for the inclusion of the adjective cold in the term.

Most people, excepting perhaps marine biologists and ecologists, will read this section and wonder why there is so incomplete a statement of the entries etymology. I know this because I was curious as to the author's reasoning. Please don't misunderstand me. I see no necessity to include a detailed etymological derivation of each term in an article. I'm merely stating that if you want to include such explanation, you should make it complete.

Anyway, just an opinion, but I believe a valid one.

2602:306:CE20:9900:6CC3:DEE9:E0F3:2D7A (talk) 01:19, 21 December 2015 (UTC)