Talk:Eutely

Problem with article?

"Development proceeds by cell division until maturity;" If this is the case, then there should be more cells at maturity than at the beginning. Doesn't this contradict the rest of the article?

WriterHound (talk) 03:15, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

No, this doesn't contradict the article. As the article states, eutely is defined as having a fixed number of cells at maturity. —Lowellian (reply) 01:49, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

what's the word for not-eutelic?

It's not polytely but I can't remember what it is. Is there a word for it? A link would improve this stub... -- 152.19.81.180 (talk) 18:59, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

Dying cells

How do these organisms deal with dying cells? They remain, but stay dead? They are replaced? If it's the latter, do they probably have periods of momentary variation then? --uKER (talk) 14:29, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: BIOL 4610H_6610 Cell Biology

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 13 January 2022 and 6 May 2022. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Nkdunn01 (article contribs).

Vertebrate subphylum?

The Examples section mentions "vertebrate subphylum, Tunicata." Shouldn't this be "chordate subphylum, Tunicata"? Cousin Ricky (talk) 22:23, 11 July 2022 (UTC)

Get it together

Not a great article but since the subject is flawed, maybe it's the best possible. That said, I linked to this article from WP:Cell lineage. THIS article claims the adult male C. elegans has 1033 cells, THAT article claims it is 1031. Last I heard, 1031 ≠ 1033. Also, I have zero idea what is meant by "relative constancy". Does that mean that the cell-type count (in adult/mature organisms) differs by less than X%? If so, what is X??? (Clearly the difference of 2 in C. elegans puts X at 0.194%, but there's no reason to believe X isn't 1% or 5%, as far as I can see. And then there's the obvious question of whether different species have "relative constancies" that follow different population statistics... There's also a good comment about dying cells. What is a "mature" organism? Typically, cell growth is limited by either/both resource limitations or upon cessation of (mitotic) division (with the implication of no meiotic divisions) due to "genetic programming" (i.e. intrinsic factors). This may be a useful paradigm even with its obvious flawed nature. Obviously (?), if it IS useful, those uses should be mentioned here.~2026-92463-4 (talk) 23:48, 1 March 2026 (UTC)

Close

"In the most primitive Protozoa species, close to where animals differentiated from plants...". How awful. Animals and plants diverged about 1.5 billion years ago (it is thought). Which protozoa, specifically has been shown to have NOT evolved during the last 1.5 billion years? Citation please! (I'll leave for another time the fact that "plants" (as we typically understand the term) didn't even EXIST till ~450 million years ago...). "Close to where" ??? Rubbish (unless we actually can show that the youngest common ancestor's DNA closely matches an extant species? Since afaik, DNA doesn't last a billion years, I won't hold my breath.) Are there terms "primitive" and "close" accepted as good *scientific descriptors now days? If so, then, for example, which subspecies of homo sapiens is the more primitive? The term harks back to the good old days where it was believed that "higher" (advanced) progressed from "lower" (primitive) organisms, and that there was a hierarchy of species with us God-touched at the top. But I rant.~2026-92463-4 (talk) 00:10, 2 March 2026 (UTC)