Jump to content

Talk:Sea cucumber/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1

Hong Kong

can i take this to hong kong —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 61.17.179.107 (talk • contribs) . 10:33, 24 August 2005 (UTC)

No tildes

somebody didn't add their tildes...

"Sea cucumber as an aphrodesiac for provascic monkeys 

and medicine" does not even mention anything related to medicine.

172.192.158.224 07:48, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

Breathing through Bottom

I have added a link to http://www.fegi.ru/prim/sea/golot.htm - a page on Holothurians. The fact itself is as interesting as isn't sounds due to the radial symmetry of a Holothurian along the mouth-anus and the positioning of the opening of their "water lungs".Liam Mason 03:07, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

Pets?

I love these fascinating animals! Can you keep them as pets?? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.52.60.61 (talk • contribs) . 16:33, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Yes, first, you need a 20 gallon or larger saltwater aquarium. Second, you find a local saltwater fish store or order one online (search "Sea cucumber for sale" on google). Third, you buy it. I personaly have one as a pet in my 30 gallon aquarium. Species unknown. IaAmSomeone (talk) 10:49, 29 August 2016 (UTC)

Neutral POV

The Food and Medicine section began with "Sea cucumber is one of the strangest foodstuffs in Chinese cuisine." I'm going to say that this doesn't adhere to a neutral point of view. I've removed it. --justing magpie 18:08, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

...I think that the entire Food and Medicine section needs to be redone. I'm going to attempt to locate sources for those facts and maybe streamline the whole thing. Feel free to assist... --justing magpie 18:14, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
I agree, especially because the section sounds like an advertisement from some sea cucumber distributor: "Some varieties of sea cucumber (...) are said to have excellent healing properties" (reference-lacking hearsay, non-neutral opinion); "The effectiveness of sea cucumber extract in tissue repair has been the subject of serious study" (this kind of wording is telltale, and although there is a reference, the link is dead; moreover, *one* study is not necessarily indicative of mainstream-accepted scientific validity). I don't feel qualified to do this rewriting, but I feel it is necessary (see also my comments under "Taste"). --UrsoBR (talk) 07:51, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

Free-swimming forms

Could really use some of the free-swimming forms. I'll grab a picture of that old German diageram they have at my Uni. Adam Cuerden talk 06:26, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

Update: Can't ascertain the copyright, curse it. Adam Cuerden talk 15:09, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

From former "Bêche-de-mer" article

For reference and addition to this article:

Bêche-de-mer is a kind of large sea cucumber (genus Holothuria) that is eaten in China, Japan, and Indonesia. It is dried for preservation purposes and has to be rehydrated by boiling and soaking in water for several days for the sea cucumber to absorb the liquid back. It is mainly used as an ingredient in soup or stew. In Malaysia, it is called trepang (Malay trīpang) , in Chinese it is "hai sum", the Japanese call it "namako" and in the Philippines it is called "balatan". The trade in Trepang, between Macassans seafarers and the aborigines of Arnhem Land, to supply the markets of Southern China is the first recorded example of trade between the inhabitants of the Australian continent and their Asian neighbours.
Holothuroidea is a class of marine animals. The largest American species is Holothuria floridana, which abounds just below low-water mark on the Florida reefs.

···日本穣? · Talk to Nihonjoe 06:00, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

Farmed or wild caught?

Are sea cucumbers farmed? If so, how, and on what scale? Kent Wang 15:57, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

Taste

"...but may be unappetising on its own", sea cucumbers are very flavorful on its own. If you never had one, I suggest you try some at a local Chinese restraunt. Lightblade 22:06, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

Well, some tastes awful too, and can even be poisonous. The poison can sometimes have hallucinogenic properties. Rhynchosaur 03:13, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
With high vanadium levels in their blood, Rhynchosaur's remark above, the irritants they expel when disturbed, and the alleged release of toxins when injured, as claimed in the "Sea Cumbers in Captivity" section (in spite of its lack of references), aren't sea cucumbers too toxic? Or are there edible and non-edible species, as with mushrooms? In addition to the vanadium, what about mercury, another heavy metal and a common problem with most seafood?
Even though I have seen sea cucumbers on the menu of some Chinese restaurants, I'm not personally worried because I don't like any kind of seafood and wouldn't eat them anyway, but this is of high interest to users who do eat seafood, and specifically bêche de mer (the French name seems to be more usual in restaurant menus). Their popularity in Asia means that a very large population might be at risk if sea cucumbers are really poisonous. I believe this information is important and should be clearly explained. --UrsoBR (talk) 07:40, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

"Citation needed"

Here are the links and quotes for those who are not aware of the facts or able to find sources;

"Ossicles in the body wall are few or absent in larger animals (Rat-tailed sea cucumber)". Link: http://www.answers.com/topic/rat-tailed-sea-cucumber?cat=technology (By the way, I have read elsewere as well that some sea cucumber lacks ossicles, so it shouldn't be impossoble to find more links for those who are really interested)

Ossicles = The numerous small plates that constitute the echinoderm skelton. These ossicles are composed of a form of calcium carbonate known as calcite. Link: http://www.palaeos.com/Invertebrates/Echinoderms/Echinodermata.Glossary.html

About biomass in deep sea:

"In some deep ocean trenches sea cucumbers (abyssal holothuroids) are so prevalent that they make up around 90% of the total biomass for that trench." Link: http://jrscience.wcp.muohio.edu/fieldcourses05/PapersMarineEcologyArticles/SeaCucumbers.html

"These depths consist of geologically less stable and inclined substrata in oceanic trenches that extend to 36,000 ft (10,970 m). Nevertheless, in these regions holothuroids dominate the benthic fauna in terms of weight of living organisms." Link: http://www.answers.com/topic/holothuroidea-sea-cucumbers-biological-family?cat=technology (again, I'm sure more links supporting this can be found)

From the same link:

Holothuroids appear to have evolved perhaps 480 mya from a poorly known group of extinct burrowing echinoderms called ophiocystioids, which resembled spineless sea urchins with a reduced number of large, plated tube feet. The oldest described body fossil is of Palaeocucumaria hunsrueckiana from the Lower Devonian Period 395 mya. This species is unique among known holothuroids in having plated tentacles, a feature that suggests in part a link to the ophiocystioids. Holothuroids continued to diversify during the Paleozoic Era, when members assigned to the orders Apodida, Elasipodida, Dendrochirotida, and Dacytlochirotida first appeared.

Holothuroids are either deposit feeders or suspension feeders. Approximately 33 percent of species are suspension feeders, nearly all of them within Dendrochirotida.

APODIDA. Footless sea cucumbers. The order contains approximately 269 species in 32 genera and three families. Tentacles are digitate, pinnate, or, in some small species, simple. Respiratory trees are absent. Tube feet are completely absent. The calcareous ring is low and bandlike, without posterior projections. The body wall is very thin and often transparent. These sea cucumber are found in both shallow and deep water.

ELASIPODIDA. Deep-sea sea cucumbers. The order contains approximately 141 species in 24 genera and five families. Tentacles are shield shaped and used in shoveling sediment. Respiratory trees are present. The calcareous ring is without posterior projections. With the exception of one family, Deimatidae, the body wall is soft to gelatinous. All forms live in deep water.

ASPIDOCHIROTIDA. Shield-tentacle sea cucumbers. There are approximately 340 species in 35 genera and three families in this order. Tentacles are shield shaped, that is, flattened and pad-like. Respiratory trees are present. The calcareous ring is without posterior projections. The body wall is generally soft and pliant. Most forms live in shallow water, although one family is restricted to the deep sea.

MOLPADIIDA. Rat-tailed sea cucumbers. Approximately 95 species compose 11 genera and four families in this order. Tentacles are digitate to simple. Respiratory trees are present. The calcareous ring may have short posterior projections. The body wall is generally soft and pliant. Most forms live in relatively shallow water, although one family is restricted to the deep sea.

DENDROCHIROTIDA. Suspension-feeding sea cucumbers. The order contains approximately 550 species in 90 genera and seven families. Tentacles are highly branched. Respiratory trees are present. Some members have a calcareous ring composed of numerous small pieces or have long posterior extensions. These animals have muscles for retracting the oral introvert. In a few species, the body is hardened from enlarged plate-like ossicles and is U shaped. These sea cucumbers live either attached to hard bottoms or burrow in soft sediment. Most species live in shallow water.

DACTYLOCHIROTIDA. U-shaped sea cucumbers. The order contains approximately 35 species in seven genera and three families. Tentacles are simple or have a few small digits. Respiratory trees are present. The calcareous ring is without posterior projections. These sea cucumbers have muscles for retracting the oral introvert. All members have a rigid body encased in enlarged flattened ossicles. The body usually is U shaped. All members live burrowed in soft sediment. Most live in deep water.


Bendzh said "it doesn't even mention endoskeletons on that page, the burden of evidence is on you."

Well, what's the idea with a reference then, if people are not able to find the information the damn links are supposed to support?

English is not my mother language, and I have never lived in an English speaking country. I know it well enough to use it in so-called "plain English", but users manuals in another language are a little more compliacated, I even have problems in my own language. So I don't know how to make references, even if I have tried a couple of times, so I do the next best think, I put out links. So for those who know how to do it, it really shouldn't take long time to fix. I assumed those who were hanging aorund here were actually interested in the subject, but maybe I was wrong. 193.217.195.253 06:42, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

That still doesn't support the claim that "endoskeletons are absent in some species" as the page states "microscopic phosphatic bodies [...] replace the calcareous ossicles as the animal ages." So the endoskeleton is very much present in younger individuals of this species. You may change the text to say they are "absent in older individuals of at least one species". And I'll even fix the link, but if you want to be taken seriously, register as a user. Right now you're just an anonymous number, which is why you must excuse my lack of patience. Bendž|Ť 09:29, 15 July 2007 (UTC)
I would add that the policy at Wikipedia:Verifiability#Burden of evidence means that you must provide citations of sources that directly support any material that you want to add or keep in an article. Your comments such as, "it shouldn't be impossoble[sic] to find more links for those who are really interested" and "I'm sure more links supporting this can be found" are not compatible with the policy. Another point (the one that Bendzh is making) is that, while you must not copy from sources, but put the material into your own words, you cannot add material that is not directly supported by the cited sources. -- Donald Albury 10:50, 15 July 2007 (UTC)


Bendzh: Well, the problem is that the internet is far from perfect, no matter what words I'm using in the search engines, it is the same sources that comes up over and over again. I often find sentences like "Since most echinoderms possess some form of calcareous skeleton, we have a very good fossil record of the evolution of this group, although many aspects of their evolution are far from clear". It says MOST echinoderms, in other words not all. But why do they never mention these exeptions? Another quote; "The species usually have an exterior calcareous skeleton, or shell, made of many pieces, and often covered with spines, to which the name." They USUALLY have a skeleton, which mean they don't ALWAYS have it.

Then we have the deep sea holothurians, which often have very gelatinous bodies. Because of the carbonate chemistry of the deep sea, calcium carbonate, which among other things makes up the skeleton of sea cucumber, will start to dissolve if you go deep enough. If this also goes for the calcium carbonate still inside living organisms, I don't know. But jelly like bodies, which often are transperant, can't have much of a skeleton to speak of.

Donald Albury: I didn't used "it shouldn't be impossoble.." as an argument, just as a comment for those interested that it is probably some material out there waiting to be found if they are able to find it, instead of saying there is nothing more out there except from what I have already mentioned. Not only on the internet, but in good old books as well. And I always use my own words as much as possible when adding something to an article, but when simply quoting in a forum where I posts the links as well, I can't see what harm it could do. In this case, I included something extra when the source first was mentioned, so that others may change the article if they wish, since it looks like I have to wait till I have learned a little more before continuing. 193.217.195.77 03:37, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
Listen, the truth is I don't know twiddley twat about these sea vegetables and I'm not interested in engaging in speculation with you. On the other hand I'm not opposed to the idea of entirely non-calcareous holothurians, but please read WP:OR to see what we do here. Bendž|Ť 09:55, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
The Internet is not the best place to look for reliable sources about anything. Printed sources are, in general, more reliable, more thorough, and certainly more permanent than web sources. I suspect you will need to consult text books and/or appropriate journals to find references for holothurians lacking skeletons. -- Donald Albury 11:52, 16 July 2007 (UTC)


They can be found in great numbers on the deep sea floor, where they make up a considerable part of the animal biomass.[citation needed] The body of deep water holothurians is made of a gelatinous tissue whith unique properties that makes the animals able to control their own buoyancy, making it possible for them to both living on the ocean floor or floating over it to move to new locations with a minimum of energy.

Buoyancy

If someone are interested in the link about the buoyancy of deep water sea cucumbers, here it is: http://www.oceanexplorer.noaa.gov/explorations/07mexico/logs/june18/june18.html "Deep holothurians have very gelatinous bodies. Freshly collected by the JASON, the bodies are quite stiff and strong. An amazing property of these holothuroid gels is that the animal seems able to adjust its buoyancy at will. Sometimes they float off bottom; sometimes they sink." Rhynchosaur 03:13, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

More Biological Info

I think this article should include more information about the biological facts on the sea cucumber. Currently, it is about how it is used in food etc. I will try and add to this but I think others should too. ----

Care information for captive cucumbers

My link on care information for cucumbers was deleted by Donald. Until I've had a chance to talk with him, I'll link it here, as I can see some people have asked about it. David Hinkle (talk) 15:39, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Please read Wikipedia:External links. What you have been doing is regarded on Wikipedia as spamming. -- Donald Albury 16:51, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
Did you look at the article I linked? Or just reflexively delete the link? Frugalreef is a project dedicated to collecting information on the captive care of marine organisms. The content is relevant to this article, and the information has even been asked for earlier on this discussion page. The information contained at frugalreef is under the FDL, but usually is not suitable for direct inclusion in the wikipedia because most of it is gathered from the experience of dedicated reef keepers and there is usually no scientific literature to reference.
For example, The article discusses the 2 main reasons cucumbers in captivity perish. They consume the substrate of the aquarium, digest off the biofilm, then excrete the substrate. However, they can only do this for substrates within a certain size range. It discusses how to tell if your cucumber isn't feeding well enough (It grows smaller instead of larger). It also suggests recommended stocking levels. Some of this information is rules of thumb, etc that would not fit into a wikipedia page. Also, on frugalreef, an interested person can find information on cucumber toxicity and how to protect their other aquarium inhabitants.
Most of these animals are harvested from living reefs, as is is not commercially viable to breed them in captivity. The vast majority of them die because of simple lack of available information on how to care for them. David Hinkle (talk) 18:31, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
I have asked that someone from Wikipedia:WikiProject Spam review my actions here. -- Donald Albury 18:22, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
Allright, I hope it is decided that the link can go in the article. If not, maybe you can help me understand if some of the information itself can go into the article. I can see you're very strict about citation etc. David Hinkle (talk) 18:33, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
Consider making improvements to Wikipedia's article rather than adding the external links. The links you've added are a violation of WP:ELNO (#12), WP:NOT#REPOSITORY, and WP:COI. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 18:36, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
After reading through the spam sections I can see that I went about the link all wrong, I should have opened a discussion for it on the discussion page instead. I have added the relevant information from the frugalreef wiki to this article. If it's decided that it's not acceptable to the article due to lack of citation, or because it discusses the hobby of reefkeeping as opposed to the cucumbers natural state in the wild, I hope the link will be reconsidered. David Hinkle (talk) 18:57, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
I don't see any place for your links in Wikipedia. If we did not have, and enforce, guidelines about what can be linked to from Wikipedia, the encyclopedic content of Wikipedia would be completely overwhelmed by eternal links. -- Donald Albury 19:42, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
I'm sorry you feel that way, I felt the information in the article I linked was very helpful, and that nobody even looked at it before deciding it should be removed. Wikipedia often links to other wiki's that serve niche areas outside of it's own editorial scope. I feel the link was removed only because I'm not a longstanding editor, and that I have a connection to the website, and not because it wasn't constructive. David Hinkle (talk) 20:24, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
I think the main issue here is WP:ELNO, which mentions "Links normally to be avoided" ... "12. Links to open wikis, except those with a substantial history of stability and a substantial number of editors." I took a look at Statistics for frugalreef.com, at (currently) 169 articles and only 12 registered users - it clearly fails this criteria. The combination of the WP:ELNO issue, plus the WP:NOT#REPOSITORY combine to make it unlikely that the link belongs on Wikipedia. Add into it the conflict of interest issue related to User:Hinkle being the only Sysop or Bureaucrat on that wiki, and the issues become magnified. Wikipedia is not the place for self-promotion of a wiki with which you have personal connections. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 20:39, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
Thankyou for taking the time to discuss the issue with me thoroughly. I apreciate the time you're taking to help me understand. What do you feel would qualify as a substantial history of stability and a substantial number of editors for a niche wiki? David Hinkle (talk) 20:57, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
I've been reading through the citation requirements in relation to the citation needed tag to better understand them. As I assumed, for the most part print citations are required for any information to remain directly in the wiki. That's one of the major differences in editorial position that allows the frugalreef wiki to be what it is. It may surprise you to learn that almost no research has ever been done on the captive requirements of most creatures kept in the marine reef aquarium hobby. What little there is is only available because it directly relates to the husbandry of commercially viable species such as tridacna clams, for example, which are eaten in Asia. I'm unable to provide citations for the care information I provided for the article, as most of it has been collected from the first hand experience of amateurs. As a link back to the content on my website was unacceptable, and as I assume the care section I added will be shortly deleted, I am left to understand that there is no place for this information on the wikipedia. This is unfortunate, because a great many of the animals which are wild harvested from reefs around the world die only because of the lack of basic care information. David Hinkle (talk) 21:37, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
The policy in Wikipedia is that all material has to be verifiable from reliable published sources. In general, if information has not been published in reliable sources, then it doesn't belong in Wikipedia. Wikipedia is not a publisher of first instance. Books tend to be more reliable than on-line sources. Not all books are accepted as reliable sources, and some on-line sources are accepted. The standards for acceptance as a reliable source vary across subjects (articles covering academic subjects have a higher standard than popular culture subjects) and standards may be relaxed in certain specified cases (such as using non-controversial biographical information from a person's own web page). Also note that Wikipedia policy is that Wikipedia is not a manual, guidebook, or textbook. This means, among other things, that we do not provide advice or instructions on how to take care of plants and animals. -- Donald Albury 23:41, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

What size are sea cucumbers?

Judging from the dried specimens in the Chinese pharmacy jar picture, and the other one showing a sea cucumber on gravel, apparently they are much smaller than real (vegetable) cucumbers, even the miniature variety, but exactly how large or small are they? What is the range of variation? Isn't that information important? --UrsoBR (talk) 08:00, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Food and drink Tagging

This article talk page was automatically added with {{WikiProject Food and drink}} banner as it falls under Category:Food or one of its subcategories. If you find this addition an error, Kindly undo the changes and update the inappropriate categories if needed. The bot was instructed to tagg these articles upon consenus from WikiProject Food and drink. You can find the related request for tagging here . If you have concerns , please inform on the project talk page -- TinucherianBot (talk) 12:32, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

This article needs a cleanup

Specifically the Captivity section, which reads like a Letters to the Editor column in the Sea Slug Weekly. Good information that just needs a bit of re-wording to read like an encyclopaedia article. IMHO, of course. Sardaukar86 (talk) 11:45, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

Fixed a slight mistake

The box with picture saying "Dried sea cucumbers in a Chinese pharmacy. It's actually a Japanese pharmacy, as I can read the text on the jar. -Edwin- (talk) 07:20, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Uncited contribution

[moved from Sea cucumber]

Physiology Sea cucumbers are cucumber shaped with no arms. Habitat The holothurians or sea cucumbers live in sandy and muddy areas. Symbiotic relationships Some sea cucumbers have a commensal fish known as the pearl fish (Carpus sp.) which lives inside their anus during the day and emerges at night to feed. When morning comes, it simply waits for the anus to open as the sea cucumber breathes, and swims back inside. Pearlfish are highly modified eel-like fishes which lack scales and pelvic fins. Most live in the body cavities of sea cucumbers, giant clams and pearl oysters during the day, leaving at night to feed on small fishes and shrimp. Pearlfish enter the body cavities of sea cucumbers through their anus. When it tries to enter the body cavities of the sea cucumber it closes its anus, but as sea cucumbers breathe through their anus it must eventually open and in swims the pearlfish. Juvenile pearlfish are parasitic, feeding upon the gonads of sea cucumbers.


Feeding Most sea cucumbers feed on detritus (dead plant and animal material) in the sand. The sand is taken in through the mouth, the detritus digested and the clean sand expelled through the anus. Others, like the beach-ball sea cucumber, use feather-like arms to filter food from the surrounding seawater. Threats The holothurians were once the basis for an important international fishery. Macassans from the island now called Sulawesi, used to come to northern Australia to collect them. After processing, they would be sold as béche-de-mer. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cygnis insignis (talk • contribs) 06:20, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: move Graeme Bartlett (talk) 07:03, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

{{movereq|Sea cucumber}}

Holothuroidea → Sea cucumber — per Wikipedia:Naming conventions (common names). —Epipelagic (talk) 08:31, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

Paracucucmaria tricolor is a species of sea apple
  • Oppose: they are two different things. One is a Class (biology) and the other is an ambiguous term for some species and the commercial product; the latter is a loose term and has many other valid synonyms, the former is a unique name of a precise concept given in reliable sources. cygnis insignis 11:13, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
Comment – that's simply not true. The term sea cucumber is the common term used for "any of the 1,200 species of marine invertebrates constituting the class Holothuroidea" – Britannica. It is a telling point that the talk page for the article (above) uses Holothuroidea just twice, but uses sea cucumber 45 times. An even more telling point is that Google Scholar gives 4450 hits for Holothuroidea and 9910 for sea cucumber. So sea cucumber is the preferred term even in scholarly publications. The terms trepang, bêche-de-mer and balate are not alternative terms. They are the terms you mentioned in your oppose that refer to the commercial product, and can be defined as "harvested sea cucumbers". Please either provide sources that back your contention, or withdraw your oppose. --Epipelagic (talk) 02:53, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Aquaculture of sea cucumber

To the dynamic IP who added the (generally excellent) section on the aquaculture of sea cucumber: would you please either respond here on this talk page, or get an account so you can be contacted on your own talk page. Because you keep changing your IP address, it is very difficult trying to determine whether you are editing or a vandal has appeared. Particularly since you seem to add sections and citations, and then subsequent IP edits remove some of them. Thanks. --Epipelagic (talk) 06:46, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

Reply from sea cucumber aquaculture

Hi Epipelagic, I am so sorry! My edits come from this IP and the University of Auckland (I am doing the Aquaculture course that this is an assignment for). My last and final edit version was a bit before 4pm (NZ) 30/9/11.

Even though I was checking in the preview as I was creating it seemed everytime I read the page there was another mistake I would find!

Once again I am sorry for causing any confusion, please let me know if there is anything I can do to help you maintain this awesome resource. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.72.179.71 (talk) 09:35, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for that. Congratulations on doing such a good job. I've moved your contribution to an article of its own, Aquaculture of sea cucumber. If you look in the "View history" you will be able to follow a bit of tidying I did. It would be good if you create a Wikipedia account of your own, and let me know what it is. Then you will have a stable talk page where other editors can communicate with you. You can keep track of your article by puting it on your watchlist. I will submit your article for a DYK, which means a fact from the article will appear on Wikipedia's front page, and you will get credit for it on your talk page. If you want to discuss anything further, which is not specifically to do with this article on sea cucumber, then you can do it on my talk page or on your talk page. --Epipelagic (talk) 11:38, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

Hey Thanks! It's nice to know I got it right. I (sea cucmber person) have created an account. Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dhobby (talk • contribs) 01:04, 1 October 2011 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Sea cucumber. 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) 23:50, 21 May 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Sea cucumber. 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) 09:16, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

Hey just wanted to note that the link for "Sphaerothuria" and "Myriotrochus bruuni" is missing or broken on this page. Loved the information here! Thanks 71.236.142.99 (talk) 02:52, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

The articles in question, Sphaerothuria and Myriotrochus bruuni, are redlinked because they don't currently exist, but they are considered potential topics for new articles. A genus and species are generally considered topics that would be considered notable (WP:N) according to WP:SPECIESOUTCOMES and could or should have articles. The redlink flags these topics so potential editors see there is a need. —  Jts1882 | talk  06:27, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

medicinal use

A Western dismissal of Asian medicine? seems a bit biased. not just Chinese but Ayurveda as well --142.163.195.103 (talk) 03:32, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

Can you point to some sources on the use of sea cucumbers in Chinese traditional medicine or Ayurvedic medicine that meet the requirements of the content guideline at Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources (medicine)? - Donald Albury 19:23, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Sea_cucumber/Archive_1&oldid=1176967738"