Talk:Tissue (biology)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Molecular and Cell Biology (Rated C-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Molecular and Cell Biology. To participate, visit the WikiProject for more information.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Anatomy (Rated C-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Anatomy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Anatomy 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.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article has been classified as relating to gross anatomy.
 
WikiProject Animal anatomy (Rated Start-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is part of WikiProject Animal anatomy, an attempt to organise a detailed guide to all topics related to animal anatomy apart from human anatomy. To participate, you can edit the attached article, or contribute further at WikiProject Animal anatomy. This project is an offshoot of WikiProject Animals
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
 


Comments[edit]

I wonder over the distinction "animal tissue" and "plant tissue". Does "animal" here actually mean mammal, or do all animals including insects etc. have these four types of tissues? / Habj 00:52, 26 October 2005 (UTC)

  • Generally speaking, yes. -Dcfleck 23:59, 27 October 2005 (UTC)
    • ...? / Habj 01:22, 28 October 2005 (UTC)
  • In general, all kinds of animals have these four basic types of tissue, including animals as simple as jellyfish and corals. And these kinds of tissues are different in plants, where tissues evolved independently from unicellular ancestors. -- EncycloPetey 04:44, 29 October 2005 (UTC)

Why aren't parenchyma/secretory tissues mentioned?

  • Parenchyma is generalized (unspecialized) tissue. In both animals and plants, it can occur in a wide array of more specific tissue types. In plants, for example, parenchyma occurs in the xylem, in the phloem, in the epidermis, in the cortex. The way this article is currently structured, it covers the major tissue types, and not all of the specific subtypes. If you're amenable to the idea (and have the requisite knowledge), I'd say that you should expand the parenchyma article. If that article were a full and proper length, it probably would be more prominently featured.

What's the deal with the last sentence of the "Connective Tissue" section? Who is that, what's the source, and why is it in the 1st person? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Luwolf (talkcontribs) 20:01, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

types of animal tissue[edit]

A picky point perhaps. The text says there are four basic types of tissue in the body of all animals, but 5 are listed: Epithelium, Connective tissue, Muscle tissue, Nervous tissue, and Areolar connective tissue. Am I forgetting something?

I'd say areolar tissue is a kind of Connective Tissue, and I think most text books will agree. That's certainly where we always put it when we teach the subject. Cladist (talk) 00:07, 7 October 2015 (UTC)

Can anybody explain why Mineralized Tissue merits its own heading? Should it not be a subset of Connective Tissue? Cladist (talk) 00:07, 7 October 2015 (UTC)

Prevelance[edit]

Can anyone tell me which 2 or 3 specific tissues are the most prevalent by volume in rats? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Deathgecko (talkcontribs) 01:11, 4 November 2008 (UTC) ij —Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.60.209.68 (talk) 06:03, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Note re copy-paste tag[edit]

I'm removing the "copy-paste" tag from the top of the article. The indicated web link appears to be a verbatrim copy of the Wikipedia article, specifically this version. Compare the contents of the apical and intercalary meristem sub-sub-sections in the weblink, copied version, current version, and for example this and this earlier version. The text was originated at this site (as was the typo "gth,a" which got blindly copied too, which made the searching easier :). Franamax (talk) 23:45, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 12 January 2013[edit]

The sentence "A tissue is an ensemble of similar cells and from the same origin, that together carry out a specific function." appears to have an error in my eyes. The "...similar cells and from the same origin..." part seems to be a poor example of integrating information into an article. I would suggest something along the lines of "A tissue is an ensemble of similar cells from the same origin that together carry out a specific function." ConfusedKev (talk) 02:31, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

Done. Thanks for that suggestion, it's a definite improvement. --Anthonyhcole (talk) 07:50, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

What about fungal tissues?[edit]

Why only animal and plant tissues? What about fungal tissues? The third kingdom? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.233.96.29 (talk) 11:49, 13 December 2014 (UTC)

Underwater diving[edit]

At the bottom of the page there is a link to the Underwater diving portal, a navigation box for Diving medicine, physiology, physics and environment as well a link to the Underwater diving physiology category. I believe these will not be relevant to most visitors of this page and should therefore be removed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.125.171.175 (talk) 14:23, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

Requested move 3 February 2016[edit]

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: no consensus. Number 57 21:38, 25 February 2016 (UTC)


– There are only two clear meanings to this word: tissue (biology) and tissue paper. I think readers are much more likely to look up biological tissues in an encyclopedia than tissue paper, and therefore it makes sense for tissue to point to tissue (biology), with an {{about}}-based hatnote on tissue paper. The word "tissue" is associated with biological tissues on both Britannica.com, reference.com and the third definition on Merriam-Webster. Gaurav (talk) 01:01, 3 February 2016 (UTC)

  • Support. Clear primary topic in terms of historical and encyclopedic importance. bd2412 T 02:43, 4 February 2016 (UTC)
  • Oppose the primary and most common use of "tissue" in the real world is tissue paper, so the disambiguation page should remain where it is -- 70.51.200.135 (talk) 05:19, 4 February 2016 (UTC)
  • Comment "Tissue (biology)" is a poor name, since Tissue (moth) is also a biology topic. Biological tissue would be the WP:NATURALDAB form for this page's toopic -- 70.51.200.135 (talk) 05:28, 4 February 2016 (UTC)
  • Oppose - what the rationale above fails to note is that the primary and secondary definitions of tissue in M-W refer to fabric or paper. There is no single definition that is "most likely" to be intended. Rather, the meaning will depend upon context. --EncycloPetey (talk) 16:03, 4 February 2016 (UTC)
  • Support. While this is not a pure case of WP:TWODABS, only 'cell groups' and 'paper' really compete for the primary meaning, and the setup proposed by Gaurav nicely addresses both navigation and titling issues. Biological tissue is of much higher encyclopedic importance, and it can be argued that paper tissue is a WP:PTM. In my opinion, we should avoid dab pages whenever there is a viable alternative. Britannica and reference.com approaches are persuasive. Bilogical tissue is an interesting alternative, but I much prefer the proposed move. No such user (talk) 10:06, 5 February 2016 (UTC)
    Ummm... Britannica uses Tissue (biology), just like Wikipedia does currently. Their article doesn't display it in the title because the target is in the /Science subdomain of the site. --EncycloPetey (talk) 06:11, 16 February 2016 (UTC)
    • It is clearly not a 2DAB, there are more than two topics called "tissue", so we should not consider 2DAB issues -- 70.51.200.135 (talk) 05:49, 18 February 2016 (UTC)
  • Support. Clear primary topic over both tissue paper and all other potentially ambiguous articles.--Cúchullain t/c 16:39, 15 February 2016 (UTC)
  • Support. Someone searching for "tissue" and not "tissue paper" is likely looking at the biology topic. sst(conjugate) 04:28, 20 February 2016 (UTC)
    • When speaking of Kleenex type tissues, most people do not call it "tissue paper", they call it "tissue" (and not facial tissues); indeed "tissue paper" is usually the type found in use by artists, or for packing things; while "bathroom tissue" is frequently not carrying "paper" either. -- 70.51.46.39 (talk) 06:59, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
  • Oppose - absolutely clear case of no primary topic. At least in the UK, "tissue" predominantly means a sheet of tissue paper used for blowing one's nose. In other words the topic at facial tissue. The biological term is also important of course, but remember we are an encyclopedia, not a scientific journal. The existing disambiguation page is fine, and a change would not benefit readers.  — Amakuru (talk) 16:04, 24 February 2016 (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 or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Assessment comment[edit]

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Tissue (biology)/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

Have you ever thought of adding some explination to the types of tissue, and formating it in the regular Wikipedia style?

Last edited at 22:08, 27 September 2007 (UTC). Substituted at 08:53, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

Etymology of the word[edit]

I added the etymology, because I think it helps to understand, and etymologies in science are always interesting. Here it helps to understand how a tissue to clean the nose, is the same that an anatomic "tissue", so it could be important.

Etymology: from the French "tissue", from "tisser", meaning something that is woven, refering to the fact this organ is made of layers of cells.

But I'm not sure I put it at the right place in the text, so feel free to put in the right place and correct the grammar mistakes.