Jump to content

Talk:Lonicera japonica

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

[edit]

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 27 August 2019 and 5 December 2019. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Ak828815.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 02:49, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Need tone

[edit]

Need tone for first character in Chinese name (jin). Badagnani 04:56, 8 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]


What is this?

[edit]

"The Japanese Honeysuckle flower is of high medicinal value in traditional Chinese medicine, where it is called rěn dōng téng (忍冬藤) or jīn yín huā (金銀花; lit. "gold silver flower"). It has antibacterial and anti-inflammatory properties, and is used to dispel heat and remove toxins, including carbuncles, fevers, influenza and ulcers. It is, however, of cold and yin nature, and should not be taken by anyone with weak and "cold" digestive system. In Korean, it is called geumeunhwa. The dried leaves are also used in traditional Chinese medicine."

That sentence hardly sounds like medical advice, and it leads me to doubt the accuracy of the rest of the paragraph. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.126.75.39 (talk • contribs) 14:23, 19 November 2006 (UTC).[reply]

Scientists Discover First ‘Virological Penicillin’ Oct 15, 2014 by Natali Anderson « PREVIOUS | Chinese researchers have discovered what they say is the first ‘virological penicillin’ – MIR2911, a molecule found naturally in a Chinese herb called honeysuckle.

Leaves and flowers of the honeysuckle (Lonicera japonica) are used in Traditional Chinese Medicine; G6PD deficient patients should avoid consuming this plant. Image credit: Mokkie / CC BY-SA 3.0. Leaves and flowers of the honeysuckle (Lonicera japonica) are used in Traditional Chinese Medicine; G6PD deficient patients should avoid consuming this plant. Image credit: Mokkie / CC BY-SA 3.0. Honeysuckle (Lonicera japonica) is a well-known Chinese herb. In Traditional Chinese Medicine, it has been used to effectively treat influenza infection for centuries.

Several previous studies have confirmed that the herb, usually consumed in the form of a tea, can suppress the replication of influenza virus.

However, the active anti-viral components and the mechanism by which they block viral replication have remained unclear.

Now, a team of researchers headed by Dr Chen-Yu Zhang of Nanjing University in China has identified MIR2911 (honeysuckle-encoded atypical microRNA2911) as the first active component directly targeting various influenza viruses, including the swine flu H1N1, highly pathogenic avian H5N1 and H7N9 infections.

MIR2911 represses influenza viruses by targeting PB2 and NS1, two genes that are known to be required for influenza viral replication.

MIR2911 directly binds to some types of influenza A viruses and inhibits H1N1 virus-encoded PB2 and NS1 protein expression. Image credit: Zhen Zhou et al. MIR2911 directly binds to some types of influenza A viruses and inhibits H1N1 virus-encoded PB2 and NS1 protein expression. Image credit: Zhen Zhou et al. With its broad-spectrum, anti-viral activity against influenza viruses, MIR2911 and MIR2911-containing honeysuckle tea may represent a new effective therapeutic strategy that can be used to subdue deadly infections.

“It is important to note that since Alexander Fleming discovered penicillin nearly a century ago, antibiotics have been developed to target various bacterial infections and have saved the lives of millions of people,” the scientists wrote in a paper published in the journal Cell Research.

“Unfortunately, no natural product that is effective against viral infection has been identified thus far.”

“We suggest that as the first natural product to directly target influenza A viruses, MIR2911 is the ‘virological penicillin’ that serves as a novel therapeutic and preventive agent against not only influenza A, but potentially also other types of viruses.”

http://www.sci-news.com/medicine/science-virological-penicillin-honeysuckle-02206.html _____ Zhen Zhou et al. Honeysuckle-encoded atypical microRNA2911 directly targets influenza A viruses. Cell Research, published online October 07, 2014; doi: 10.1038/cr.2014.130 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.133.179.17 (talk) 22:49, 15 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It's even worse now--the last sentence of the Chemistry section specifically says it has efficacy against the corona virus that causes Covid-19.208.163.133.252 (talk) 14:29, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Awkward but perhaps correct

[edit]

I agree that the statement, "It is, however, of cold and yin nature, and should not be taken by anyone with weak and 'cold' digestive system" is awkward.

Having been a licensed acupuncturist for twenty years, I do , however, understand what the writer was trying to communicate. The writer is attempting to communicate that the temperature properties (a Chinese Medicine (CM) concept) of Jin Yin Hua are cooling (another theoretical CM concept) and that therefore Jin Yin Hua should be used with other warming herbs if dealing with a diagnosis of cold in the Spleen and Stomach (another CM concept). The difficulty in making that statement is that it assumes the reader is familiar with CM theoretical constructs. The statement is technically correct but not for the layperson unless the underlying concepts are explained.

Perhaps a better wording may be: In Chinese medicine, Jin Yin Hua is classfied with a temperature property of cold. The cold designation specifically refers to, in this case, to Jin Yin Hua's anti-toxin, anti-bacterial, anti-pyretic, and anti-inflammatory properties. Also, according to traditional Chinese medicine, Jin Yin Hua is contraindicated for patients with medical conditions that are diagnosed as deficient and cold in nature unless combined with other herbs to balance the temperature nature of Jin Yin Hua. In layperson terms, Jin Yin Hua is used in Chinese medicine to address what are called excess heat conditions such as fevers, skin rashes, and sore throat. Excess heat conditions are essentially inflammatory processes involving heat, redness, pain, and swelling often due to external pathogenic factors such as bacteria and viruses. The cold nature of Jin Yin Hua is considered to cool the heat nature of the heat related conditions. For example, Jin Yin Hua's antibacterial properties can help to cool a fever. In this case, the cold herb treats the heat condition. However, should a patient present with what is termed as a cold condition such as aversion to cold with cold limbs, cold and pain in the abdomen, and abdominal pain relieved by warmth, then Jin Yin Hua's cold nature is said to exacerbate the pre-existing cold condition. Should an herbalist choose to use Jin Yin Hua in an herbal formula for a patient with a cold condition, he/she would then choose to balance the temperature of Jin Yin Hua with another herb that is warming in nature. --Onediscdrive (talk) 04:20, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The plants mentioned in this article.....

[edit]

--58.38.41.201 (talk) 05:37, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

--58.38.41.201 (talk) 05:38, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you onediscdrive

[edit]

Yes, that is beautiful wording, and it appears that someone has included it in the actual article. The article says that the neutrality is disputed, but I came to the talk page specifically for the purpose of crediting whoever wrote the explanation of "cold" in Chinese medicine for this article. It is one of the most well-worded descriptions of this concept I have come across. 106.56.132.69 (talk) 16:07, 9 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"Privacy and harborage"

[edit]

I'm moving the following material here since it seems unduly opinionated and lacks references. Who exactly is making the argument that people are 'unlikely' to be discouraged, or that the plant is 'undoubtedly better' than no wildlife habitat, and in whose estimation would 'empirical reasoning suggest', etc etc.?

In densely populated urban settings, its quick dense growth, drought tolerance, disease immunity, early leafing and late leaf loss make it appreciated as a privacy screen. It is unlikely that the general public could be discouraged from valuing these benefits in spite of it being an invasive species. As well, in such urban or suburban settings, the effect on development of next-generation hardwoods is less than in an open forest of any acreage. In urban environments, it is also valued by laypeople as wildlife habitat. While Japanese honeysuckle is undoubtedly better for flora and fauna than no habitat, there is no evidence that it is better than native habitat and empirical reasoning would suggest that it is inherently not as a result of its well documented interference with normal succession cycles-especially of flora (plants).

—Sangdeboeuf (talk) 11:38, 8 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I live in Southwestern Ohio on the Indiana border and I can tell you that it's not an effective privacy screen when its foliage isn't there. Even when it is it's not as dense and as effective as some other plants. It is EXTREMELY EXTREMELY invasive. It totally displaces almost everything, leaving the remaining land to the extremely invasive garlic mustard, the invasive wild parsnip, dandelions, etc. Nothing can top this honeysuckle for invasiveness, even garlic mustard. In our environment it is the most invasive plant possible. Our ecology is a complete mess and even the farmland is being turned into housing constantly. So, the small sections of woods left to block wind on farms are also being taken away so everyone can have a big property or a new suburb. I don't think deer like it very much (if at all), despite what the article said so I'd like to see a source for that. They like to eat my fruit trees and ignore all the honeysuckle. It's basically impossible to stop the spread of this plant because the US government won't allow us to import the plant's pests. The seeding rate from bird droppings far outpaces any ability to really combat this in a more rural environment in particular. Many have given up and tried to turn it into a landscape plant and there isn't enough labor to get it out of what's left of our forests. Even if people were to try they'd trample all the native plants in the process, compact the soil, spread garlic mustard seeds, etc. We need pests to feed on the plant or kill it. Why is it that we get to have our plants destroyed by alien pests (e.g. ash borer) but we can't have an alien pest or two destroy this horrible invasive plant that is completely disrupting the ecology? Mullein, for instance, could be more controlled with the introduction of the mullein moth. That isn't going to become a crop-killer. But mullein is nothing when compared with this honeysuckle. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.233.133.218 (talk) 04:49, 25 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I forgot to mention that Russian olive is the only other shrub that competes at all with this honeysuckle. It's also non-native. It's clearly invasive and displaces native plants but it's nothing when compared with this honeysuckle. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.233.133.218 (talk) 05:01, 25 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Plant removal

[edit]

I'm also moving the following unreferenced material from the article here – in addition to stating various opinions without any attribution to their source, it's written essentially as a how-to guide for landscapers, horticulturalists, etc. Why should the average reader of this article be interested in the arm reach on track excavators compared with the grinding head on a track loader, for instance?

While manual removal is impractical on a large scale basis, mechanized removal using grinding heads on track loaders and particularly on track excavators is worth considering. The arm reach of 10-30'feet from a single position of a track excavator allows a much higher ratio of cleared area to disturbed ground when compared to use of a grinding head on a track loader. The ratio of ground disturbance between using grinding head on track loader verse excavator could be as high as 1:10. Some of the concerns about use of such large equipment also removing developing native species is likely to be further limited by use of a track loader due to its much more precise method of movement. In this regard, selection of an operator who is familiar with native species and has a good understanding of the holistic objective is likely to do far less damage to desirable natives than an operator who sees the job only as a selective land clearing initiative. Further and lastly, the track excavator compared to the track loader has the ability to reach into swales and onto embankments without physically entering the slope.

—Sangdeboeuf (talk) 11:54, 8 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The only thing that can ever be expected to control this plant is a native pest or two, something from Asia that controls it there. It is impossible, flatly impossible, to deal with this plant in a forest setting in particular. You'll trample the native plants, compact the soil, spread garlic mustard seeds, etc. Putting more tons of RoundUp everywhere is not the answer, although Monsanto would love us to think it is. Birds spread this seed far and wide. It is extremely invasive. The word extremely is an understatement. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.233.133.218 (talk) 04:56, 25 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Lonicera japonica. 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) 00:14, 6 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"As an invasive species"

[edit]

I noticed this section is missing a lot of citations and contains a few weird tangents. I'm planning on rewriting the majority of this section, except for the first paragraph. I'm trying to keep the same general types of information (description of invasion, control methods, etc.), but actually providing sources for all of it. If anyone has any concerns, let me know- this is my first time editing a Wikipedia article and I'm still learning the ropes. Ak828815 (talk) 17:05, 20 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Forgot to mention, in addition I'm planning on moving some of the information from the introduction to create a new "Description" section, and fleshing out the introduction so that it accurately reflects the actual content of the article. Ak828815 (talk) 13:48, 24 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I added another image to the article, to illustrate how Lonicera japonica behaves as an invasive species. Ak828815 (talk) 14:31, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Lonicera_japonica&oldid=1195530937"