Talk:Vector (biology)

	This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Molecular Biology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Molecular Biology 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.Molecular BiologyWikipedia:WikiProject Molecular BiologyTemplate:WikiProject Molecular BiologyMolecular Biology articles
	This redirect is supported by the Molecular and Cell Biology task force (assessed as High-importance).

Untitled

Being ignorant of biology, I wonder if this should be moved to "Vector (biology)" for the same reason the stupidly named article "Mathematical group" was moved to "Group (mathematics)" a few eons ago? Michael Hardy 23:15 Apr 29, 2003 (UTC)

I think this should be moved to "vector (biology)" too. If nobody objects, I'll do it myself soon; and fix any links, of course. -- Hadal 12:42, 21 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Split into two?

Apart from both being in the field of biological science, there doesn't seem to be much in common between the vector of disease spreading and the use of vectors in genetics. Should the page be split into two new pages? 203.34.41.43 00:06, 20 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I very much agree with this proposal. Both meanings are quite distinct and would deserve own articles. The same was done in :de - see de:Vektor (Biologie) and de:Vektor (Gentechnik). --Yerpo (talk) 14:47, 12 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with the proposal, the terms are different and not related. An article (Vector (molecular biology) already exists, and vectors of disease can be termed Vector (epidemiology). --Abanima (talk) 20:41, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There is already an article called Vector (disease) which contains material to what you propose for Vector (epidemiology). It may be better to rename this or just leave the name as it is and add the material that would have gone in Vector (epidemiology). WaysToEscape (talk) 01:46, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for this info. I believe, the current article can now be safely changed to disambig because these two articles (i.e. Vector (disease) and Vector (molecular biology) already contain the information mentioned here. I'll wait for possible objections for a few days. --Abanima (talk) 14:13, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In the meanwhile, I added a link to main article, Vector (disease) and tried to disentagle interwiki in languages where I thought I understood the subject of the article. --Abanima (talk) 14:34, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I removed the {{Split}} template. --Abanima (talk) 20:27, 24 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

a joke

Question: What is common between a mathematical vector and a biological vector?

Ans: They could both mulitply.

-wshun 03:55, 11 June 2006 (UTC) (write this joke after reading the term "vector" in a mathematical biology paper)[reply]

Mosquito

From CDC glossary -

Vector: An organism (e.g., Anopheles mosquitoes) that transmits an infectious agent (e.g. malaria parasites) from one host to the other (e.g., humans)

Does anyone disagree with this?

Petecarney 21:58, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User 199.172.228.206, where do you get the idea that 'A common misconception is that the anopheles mosquito is a vector for malaria'?

I have added references from CDC and WHO. Do you have any references to support your argument?, or is it original research?

Petecarney 09:00, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

i learned in my microbiology class, i have the text book, it in Pheonix Arizona, but im currently studying medicine in the Caymen islands, so i cant refrence the book for at least the next few months (and even then i have to go threw all my books) but im positive im right, the Doctor that taught me microbiology in the states beat it in to us, the only time you ever hear it the other way around is when you are talking about control or prevention of malaria (which is all i seem to find on the net) you never hear about the study of malaria as an organism (its genetic change and its life cycle). what most people dont understand is that malaria cant change its genetic code in humans, it does divide, but thats just clones of the same virus, to change its genetic code a human with malaria has to get bitten by a mosquito with a different type of malaria, the two diffrent strains of malaria can now change there genetic code or "have sex" and you get a new different strain of malaria

btw had the true diffinition of malaria been to spread a disease without actually causing it, (regardless of change in genetic code) then humans would still be a vector of malaria (alongside the mosquito) since if an uninfected moquito bit a human with late stage malaria, the misquito would then get malaria

im gonna revert it one more time, if you change it back, i dont care, i just wanted it to be right, but its not worth all this hassel, also this is a school IP so im not responsible for every change done by this address

Definitive host and intermediate host of plasmodium

Firstly, a few definitions. Malaria is not an organism, it is a disease of humans caused by a parasite called plasmodium which is a protist (or protozoa), not a virus. Mosquitos are a host to plasmodium but they are not known to suffer any ill effects from it.

A microbiologist, would say that plasmodium has a definitive host (mosquito) , where it reproduces sexually, and an intermediate host (human), where it reproduces aesexually.

An epidemiologist would say that the mosquito is a vector for the disease malaria because it infect the human with plasmodium which is the cause of the disease.

There is no contradiction between these two statements.

Epidemiology is inherently human-centered. It contains the greek word 'demos' meaning people - which is also the root of the word 'democracy'.

Check out these two links:

http://www.mansfield.ohio-state.edu/~sabedon/black11.htm#biological_vector

http://www.mansfield.ohio-state.edu/~sabedon/biol3055.htm#vector

They are the work of Stephen T. Abedon, Associate Professor, Department of Microbiology; The Ohio State University

Quotes from the first link:

(9) Definitive host

(a) Parasites that go through their sexual stage associated with a given host, that host is called the definitive host

(b) For example, the malaria parasite's definitive host is the mosquito; this mosquito additionally (simultaneously) serves as the biological vector for the malaria parasite

(10) Intermediate host

(a) The intermediate host is one that harbors the parasite but associated with which the parasite does not undergo sexual reproduction

(b) For example, the malaria parasite's intermediate host is humans (though for anthropocentric reasons we don’t typically consider humans to be vectors for the transmission of malaria to mosquitoes; besides, the malaria parasite does not make the mosquito sick)

(14) Parasitic protists (parasites)

(e) Malaria

(i) Plasmodium spp.

(ii) vector = mosquitoes = definitive host

I hope we are now in agreement.

Petecarney 19:14, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

sorry your right, it is a protozoa, but a protozoa is and organism, as for the vector this is listed as the biological definition (on the wiki link) so i guess what we really need is two different pages for it (one for the epidemiological and the other for the microbiological definitions) either way, im done, you can do what you want

68.84.18.247 (talk)Hello, just wondering how do we know malaria is harmless to the mosquito (host)? KJM68.84.18.247 (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 22:14, 29 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Zoonosis

This page should link somewhere to Zoonosis. I added a line to the end of the introduction, but it could probably be segued better. --96.42.42.75 (talk) 19:18, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Merge disambiguation pages

I suspect that this page is a mistake, and it should be merged with Vector. Checking the history of this page shows that it was once an article related to its title, but was then converted to a dab, possibly without realizing that the Vector dab already existed. I failed to get any discussion on this at Talk:Pollination#Vector which is one article using this page (presumably that made sense with it was than an article, but it is not helpful now).

The following look like pages that would need to be fixed if this dab is merged (this is an extract from What links here (500):

I have moved the following recent additions to this page to here because I think they should be reworded and included in Vector.

Pollinator, the biotic agent (vector) that moves pollen from the male anthers of a flower to the female stigma of a flower to accomplish fertilization
In pharmacology a vector is the drug delivery vehicle (e.g. saline)

Any comments? Johnuniq (talk) 02:25, 19 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In my view, the term vector has many meanings in several unrelated fields. In that dab there is a link to a more detailed dab Vector (mathematics and physics), which is justifiable, given the large size of the latter dab. I would keep the Vector (biology) dab and allow it to grow, and add a {{Main}} template to Vector dab, similar to Vector (mathematics and physics). --Abanima (talk) 12:27, 19 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I see what you mean about Vector (mathematics and physics), however what about the "In biology" section in the Vector dab? I suppose that all that section could be moved to this dab, with a "Further information" as is done for "In math and physics" in Vector. The matter needs some serious thought and I think it would be good to wait a few days and see if we can get some discussion.

Another issue is what I raised at Talk:Pollination#Vector, namely that Pollination has a link to this dab page, and it is not helpful. Johnuniq (talk) 12:43, 19 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I fixed the pollination issue. I agree it would be better to wait for possible further discussion here, it's not a problem: Wikipedia has no deadline. --Abanima (talk) 16:43, 19 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Abanima has moved the "In biology" section from Vector to here (leaving a link to here), and I had a quick look through "What links here" for Vector and found only one biology related article referring to Vector (which I fixed to link to the correct target). That's a good resolution, and I would say the two dab pages do not need to be merged. Johnuniq (talk) 23:28, 20 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

For what it's worth, the reason there were so few links to this disambiguation page, and so few links intended for the biological meaning from the plain Vector page, is that about 250 of them were fixed this month through Wikipedia:Disambiguation pages with links. Dekimasuよ! 06:45, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]