HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: richter@gpu.utcs.utoronto.ca (C. Richter)
Subject: Re: Cocaine: Coca vs. Cocoa?
Organization: UTCS Public Access
Distribution: bionet
Date: Sat, 26 Dec 1992 15:57:22 GMT

In article <9212251903.AA21193@net.bio.net> preissj@CLVAX1.CL.MSU.EDU ("J Preiss--Seq Anal") writes:
>And now for something completely different;  Cocaine!
>
>	I don't work in this area, so I figured a note to the net would be the
>easiest way to get an easy answer on this question raised by  recent
>discussions with a friend who is begrudgingly recovering from cocaine 
>adiction.
>
>What species is cocaine made from and what is the relationship of this plant
>to the plant that chocolate is made from?

Cocaine comes from coca (Erythroxylon coca) and chocolate comes from cacao
(Theobroma cacao).
-- 
Conrad Richter                     richter@gpu.utcs.utoronto.ca
Richters Herbs                     71550.3411@compuserve.com
Goodwood, ON L0C 1AO Canada        Tel 416-640-6677 / Fax 416-640-6641
Newsgroups: bionet.plants
From: dr@ducvax.auburn.edu
Subject: Re: A big hello
Organization: Auburn University, AL
Distribution: bionet
Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1992 21:17:16 GMT

In article <1992Dec16.232652.12115@gserv1.dl.ac.uk>, ajt@rri.sari.ac.uk (Tony Travis) writes:
> In article <921216125757.MIN-LNDAa16551.bionet-news@uk.ac.daresbury> you wrote:
> : [...]
> : I'd be interested in such a discussion; my current interest would be
> : taxonomic in nature.  'Fraid I can't make any contribution to such a
> : discussion at this time, for convoluted reasons, best alluded to by my 
> : post, "Request: Recruiting/Luring Biologists to the Nets", in sci.bio 
> : and bionet.general.  That same post would also serve as a belated way 
> : to introduce myself [...]
> [...] 
> The essence of Usenet, for me, is the informal contact we make with
> each other by posting to a group such as this.  I began the discussions
> on bionet.plants by asking people to introduce themselves and describe
> their area of interest.
> 
> So, tell us something about your interest in heavy metals and taxonomy?

This past term, I had the good fortune to participate in the Advanced
Systematic Botany course (the other student-participants are pursuing
advanced degrees; I am classified as "staff" and am not currently 
pursuing a degree).  This is a directed readings course; each participant
was responsible for presenting approximately 3 classic systematic papers 
per week (ie. Duke Method).

A term paper was also required; my topic was "Chemotaxonomy of Astragalus".
As the completion of this paper did not impact the students, this became 
one of the jettisoned projects when other commitments arose.  The topic
is still of interest on its own merits (and it would not harm me to prove
to myself that I can [still] write a term paper), as are most issues of 
taxonomy.  My botanical interests tend to be focused in terms of ecology 
and evolution, as per Dobzhansky's oft-quoted observation.

I am also interested in the mathematical modeling of biological systems,
altho my decade-long hiatus (aka work) means that I am a *very* long way 
from understanding that again (what notebooks I have left are barely 
legible in an all-too-familiar handwriting, and mostly consist of copious 
incomprehensible notes occasionally peppered with a meant-to-be-helpful 
elucidation/comment:  "Yes, Obviously!  See also <**indecipherable**>.").

"I am happy and perplexed as a cat in a clam bucket."  - John Steinbeck

	D.R.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
David Roller  |    Bitnet = dr@auducvax            |  "Because we're all
Auburn Univ.  |  Internet = dr@ducvax.auburn.edu   |   in this together."
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: ajt@rri.sari.ac.uk (Tony Travis)
Newsgroups: bionet.plants
Subject: Re: Plant communication/sensing references
Date: 23 Dec 92 10:27:36 GMT
Reply-To: ajt@rri.sari.ac.uk
Distribution: bionet
Organization: Rowett Research Institute
Original-To: plantbio@uk.ac.daresbury

In article <921222211740.MIN-LNBAa00330.bionet-news@uk.ac.daresbury> you wrote:
:
: [... discussion about action potentials ...]
:
: >So far there are several classes of channels that have been
: >characterised.  The main one is the inward rectifying potassium channel. 
: >If I remeber right, it has a small sodium conductance, but that is
: >irrelevant given the very low sodium concentrations.  

I agree about low Na+ concentrations.  Active K+/Na+ 'antiport' in
animal cells involves the exchange of K+ and Na+ ions across the
membrane at the same site.  In plants, the active process is H+
extrusion by membrane bound ATPases and the K+ (or other) influx is
moderated by ion-conducting channels elsewhere in the membrane.

As others have pointed out on this thread, the amount of Na+ normally
present in plants is low compared to the levels in animal cells and K+
is the major cation present in the majority of plant cells.  Active K+
transport into plant cells is one of the mechanisms controlling cell
turgor and the availability of K+ in the apoplast is therefore an
important factor in determining the K+ influx into the cell.

It seems a reasonable proposition to me that the signal propagated from
cell to cell in the responses of mimosa may be associated with a 'wave'
of fluctuations in the concentrations of K+ ions in the apoplast. 
This, I accept, may be conceptually similar to the action potential
observed in transmission of nerve impulses, but does not require K+/Na+
antiport to occur.

There has also been considerable debate in the literature about the
role of Cl- in plants and, in stomatal guard cells, Schnabl
demonstrated that Cl- reduced the amount of malate accumulation
associated with K+ influx into guard cells during stomatal opening. It
seems that plants will use Cl- if it is available, but will synthesise
organic anions such as malate when no other anion is avaialble.

This topic has been discussed in the plant biology literature for many
years, and I think the 'age' of the literature references cited is
relevant if subsequent work contradicts it, but simply to dismiss work
on the grounds that "it was published in 1976" is absurd.  Equally, it
is absurd to dismiss the important work done on active ion transport in
animal cells when discussing ion transport in plants but the mechanisms
are NOT the same and that needs to be taken into account.

	Tony.

ps. I did some of my work on this topic in 1976 ;-)
--
Dr. A.J.Travis,                       |  Tony Travis
Rowett Research Institute,            |  JANET: <ajt@uk.ac.sari.rri>
Greenburn Road, Bucksburn,            |  other: <ajt@rri.sari.ac.uk>
Aberdeen, AB2 9SB. UK.                |  phone: 0224-712751
Newsgroups: bionet.plants
From: aphrk@Msu.oscs.montana.edu
Subject: Re: Chia Pet
Reply-To: aphrk@Msu.oscs.montana.edu
Organization: Montana State University
Distribution: NA
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1992 19:45:56 GMT

In article <6#X=NW+@engin.umich.edu>, hajel@engin.umich.edu (john hajel) writes:
>
>
>I have a Chia Pet and I have run out of Chia.  Could someone
>give me the name/address/phone number of the Chia Pet
>people so I can order some more Chia.
>
>
Just go to your local herb store or food coop and ask for chia seed.  It
is pretty inexpensive.  

Robyn Klein
From: bj368@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Mike E. Romano)
Newsgroups: bionet.plants
Subject: Leaf Protein
Date: 27 Dec 1992 10:38:22 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio (USA)
NNTP-Posting-Host: hela.ins.cwru.edu



I am interested in finding current studies on the subject
of leaf protein and its extraction.
This is for use as food for humans not a protein merely
for research purposes.
Various works by Pirie in England have discussed this but
I cannot find much in the last two or three years.
I am wondering if research is continuing in this area.
This has application as a food supplement for developing
countries and perhaps as health food supplement here.


-- 
Capt. Kirk: let's head for that planet, third from the sun, it
            looks promising.... |-)
From: barkdoll@cattell.psych.upenn.edu (Edwin Barkdoll)
Newsgroups: bionet.plants
Subject: Re: Plant communication/sensing references
Date: 22 Dec 92 20:22:26 GMT
Organization: University of Pennsylvania

In article <1992Dec22.172603.15056@mail.cornell.edu> Thomas_Bjorkman@cornell.edu (Thomas Bjorkman) writes:
>In article <BzIJq7.6JH@world.std.com> Edwin Barkdoll, eb3@world.std.com
>writes:
>>	There is no work on action potentials in plants which
>>approaches the depth of that in animals but there is some evidence
>>that the primary ions are K+ and Cl- not K+ and Na+.  Don't have a
>>reference handy but you might look for a review by Simmons (?) in _The
>>New Phytologist_ I think the year is 1982.  There is probably much
>>more recent work that I know nothing about.


>Considering that the patch clamp (mostly used since 1982) is the tool
>that has yielded most of the information about ion channels, this seems
>an exceptionally dated reference.

	Well, the first paper on patch clamping was in 1976 (5?), and
between that paper and the publication of Sakmann and Neher's _Single
Channel Recording in 1983, there were quite a few papers on the
technique.  Nevertheless single channel recording did not start with
patch clamping rather it was predated by the use of black lipid
membranes which was used to characterize properties of the gramicidin
channel, for example.  The _concept_ of a channel (pore) predates both
of these by about half a century.

	The _New Phytologist_ paper is no doubt dated -- even by
standards of technology available at the time I don't recall that it
was particularly strong.  Nevertheless the discussion had not really
reached the level of "channelology", nor is it necessarily relevant.
So far we had simply discussed what ions are involved -- e.g. Na+ and
K+ vs K+ and Cl- -- this is classic biophysics from the 1950's.  The
use of patch clamping, while it has permmitted amazing things, has not
led to a significant revision of the belief of which ions are involved
in the action potential and _that_ is the issue (or part of the issue)
which started the discussion: in certain plants like mimosa is "signal
an action potential, just like in animal neurons"?  Do you know of any
quantitative papers on the ions underlying the plant action potential?

>  The patch clamp has been used very
>heavily on plants: Hedrich and Neher put it to work on plant cells right
>away.  

	Yes, but did they put it to work on plant cells which generate
action potentials as part of their normal behavior?

>So far there are several classes of channels that have been
>characterised.  The main one is the inward rectifying potassium channel. 
>If I remeber right, it has a small sodium conductance, but that is
>irrelevant given the very low sodium concentrations.  

	The discussion has been about action potentials in plants.
Are these data recorded from AP producing plant membranes?

Edwin Barkdoll
barkdoll@cattell.psych.upenn.edu
eb3@world.std.com
From: AMRSH@EGFRCUVX.EARN
Newsgroups: bionet.plants
Subject: Protein help
Date: 19 Dec 92 15:20:00 GMT
              from EGFRCUVX.BITNET (AMRSH) by UKACRL.BITNET (Mailer R2.07) with
               BSMTP id 5460; Mon, 21 Dec 92 07: 43:58 GMT
Distribution: bionet
X-Envelope-To: plantbio@daresbury.ac.uk
Original-To: plantbio@UK.AC.DARESBURY
X-Vms-To: IN%"plantbio@daresbury.ac.uk"

Hi netters,
Could any one kindly inform me a suitable extraction method for protein from
plant tissues, where I'm facing a problem in the gel I fond smear in the wells
I'm using ext buffer include Tris,EDTA and 2-m.eth.
Thanks in advance,
Amr Shaban  res. assis. and M.Sc.student at the Mol.MANIP.and Gene Transfer lab
Giza, Egypt.
reply me at AmrSh@EGFRCUVX  IF YOU PLEASE.
THANKS A LOT.
From: barkdoll@cattell.psych.upenn.edu (Edwin Barkdoll)
Newsgroups: bionet.plants
Subject: Re: Action potentials (was: Plant communication/sensing re)
Date: 23 Dec 92 22:28:38 GMT
Organization: University of Pennsylvania

In article <1992Dec23.191118.7933@mail.cornell.edu> Thomas_Bjorkman@cornell.edu (Thomas Bjorkman) writes:
[...]

>I brought up channels because the ion specificity of the channels that
>generate the action potential pretty much determines which ions are
>involved.

	Well, no.  The Goldman-Hodgkin-Katz constant field equation
explicitly include permeability (related to the channel conductance)
and concentration of the ion.  If one were to go simply by ion
specificity determined by patch clamp experiments, one would have to
assume that Li+ is an equal contributor in the squid axon action
potential and contributes more than sodium in the vertebrate
photoreceptor dark current, both of which are false.

>The patch clamp is the tool that answers that question most
>directly.

	Again I disagree.  The voltage clamp techniques developed by
Cole, Curtis, Hodgkin... proved equally direct information about
membrane currents.  The currents may be macroscopic but they can
equally direct measurements of ionic contribution.

>  Dainty, Hope and Walker had a pretty good picture of action
>potentials in Chara by the early 1960's.

	Actually I think Gaffey and Mullins made that comparison in
1958.

>Bruce Scott makes an explicit
>comparison between Chara and squid axons in his ca.1962 Scientific
>Ameican article.  The abstact begins "Electrical disturbances similar to
>the nerve impule are associated with a number of plant life processes." 
>Did I miss a posting where someone actually suggested that Na was involed
>in plant action potentials?  

	I think so -- that is the issue which started this thread:

In article <1992Dec18.145440.19868@pixel.kodak.com> young@serum.kodak.com writes:

>  Clearly, there is a fundamental difference of opinion regarding the action
>  of Na+ and K+ in this area...either that, or my ignorance is showing, which
>  is entirely possible.  :-)

>  This is interesting...apparently there is some disagreement in this area?
>  I lifted the following from a different newsgroup written by Bill Williams
>  of St. Mary's College of Maryland in message <13812@umd5.umd.edu> in
>  reference to mimosa pudica:
>
>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>Sensing of environment:  I'm not too sure what the actual sensing mechanism is,
>but the signal is an action potential, just like in an animal's
> neurons.
> A
>charge separation propagates along the cells, causing sodium and potassium
>channels in their membranes to open and close, which alters the membrane
>potential and thus passes the signal along to the next patch of membrane. 
>Plant action potentials are usually much, much slower to propagate than animal
>action potentials.

	Bill quite explicitly refers Na and K channels
without mention of Cl or other channels.


Edwin Barkdoll
barkdoll@cattell.psych.upenn.edu
eb3@world.std.com
Newsgroups: bionet.plants
From: hajel@engin.umich.edu (john hajel)
Subject: Chia Pet
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 92 16:13:17 EST
Organization: University of Michigan Engineering, Ann Arbor
Distribution: NA



I have a Chia Pet and I have run out of Chia.  Could someone
give me the name/address/phone number of the Chia Pet
people so I can order some more Chia.

Thanks,
JMH


hajel@quip.eecs.umich.edu
Newsgroups: bionet.plants
From: london@sunSITE.unc.edu (Larry London)
Subject: Re: Leaf Protein
Organization: University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill
Date: Sun, 27 Dec 1992 21:59:48 GMT

In article <1hk12uINNkha@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu> bj368@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Mike E. Romano) writes:
>
>
>I am interested in finding current studies on the subject
>of leaf protein and its extraction.
>This is for use as food for humans not a protein merely
>for research purposes.
>Various works by Pirie in England have discussed this but
>I cannot find much in the last two or three years.
>I am wondering if research is continuing in this area.
>This has application as a food supplement for developing
>countries and perhaps as health food supplement here.
>-- 
>Capt. Kirk: let's head for that planet, third from the sun, it
>            looks promising.... |-)
From: mj@toano.win.net (Mary Jo Warsinsky)
Newsgroups: bionet.plants
Subject: (none)
Date: 1 Jan 93 10:43:11 GMT
Reply-To: mj@toano.win.net (Mary Jo Warsinsky)
Distribution: bionet

INDEX PLANT-SCI
From: tyersome@toxic (Randall Tyers)
Newsgroups: bionet.plants
Subject: Re: Heavy metals
Date: 22 Dec 1992 04:00:13 GMT
Organization: Plant Biology
NNTP-Posting-Host: toxic.berkeley.edu

In article <1992Dec14.131324.10744@vax.oxford.ac.uk> donachie@vax.oxford.ac.uk writes:
> On the subject of hyperaccumulators, work in this lab is investigating the
>nature of the complexes formed in these plants with organic acids, in order to
>determine whether these provide a possible mechanism of tolerance for the
>plant.  
>[...]                                       ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~       
>  I think that the act of hyperaccumulation is related to the site at which the
>plant can be found.  We are working on Alyssum spp here, and these can be, and
>are regularly grown in gardens in Europe.  We have plants which are known to be
>hyperaccumulators, and as control plants we are using garden seeds bought from
>a commercial supplier.  We think that they won't hyperaccumulate, if they do
>then....
>  Just some interesting info to pass on over the dinner table ( :-) )

Speaking of the dinner table, a plant physiologist here (Russell Jones)
has told me that spinach is an excellent Cd accumulator.  The good news
is that this is apparently only a problem in high Cd soils.  The bad
news is that the central valley of CA, where a good portion of the
agricultural production consumed in western North America comes from,
has very high levels of Cd in the soil.  I believe that Cd is
supposed to be a cumulative toxin.  Thus, for NAns if your spinach says
CA you might wan't to grow your own if you can't do with out.
Enjoy ;-)

Randall Tyers             tyersome@insect.berkeley.edu

Newsgroups: bionet.plants
From: Thomas Bjorkman <Thomas_Bjorkman@cornell.edu>
Subject: Re: Plant communication/sensing references
X-Xxdate: Tue, 22 Dec 92 12: 29:42 GMT
Nntp-Posting-User: tnb1@cornell.edu
Organization: Cornell University
X-Useragent: Nuntius v1.1.1d7
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1992 17:26:03 GMT

In article <BzIJq7.6JH@world.std.com> Edwin Barkdoll, eb3@world.std.com
writes:
>	There is no work on action potentials in plants which
>approaches the depth of that in animals but there is some evidence
>that the primary ions are K+ and Cl- not K+ and Na+.  Don't have a
>reference handy but you might look for a review by Simmons (?) in _The
>New Phytologist_ I think the year is 1982.  There is probably much
>more recent work that I know nothing about.

Considering that the patch clamp (mostly used since 1982) is the tool
that has yielded most of the information about ion channels, this seems
an exceptionally dated reference.  The patch clamp has been used very
heavily on plants: Hedrich and Neher put it to work on plant cells right
away.  

So far there are several classes of channels that have been
characterised.  The main one is the inward rectifying potassium channel. 
If I remeber right, it has a small sodium conductance, but that is
irrelevant given the very low sodium concentrations.  Check out recent
publications by Sarah (Sally) Assmann for an example of some nice work in
regard to signalling.  Julian Schroeder was part of the original patch
clamp team and has contributed a lot to characterizing the various
channels.  There are quite a few more, but these are more appropriate
authors to look for.
From: kristoff@net.bio.net (David Kristofferson)
Newsgroups: bionet.plants
Subject: Re: (none)
Date: 2 Jan 93 03:22:45 GMT
Distribution: bionet
Organization: BIOSCI International Newsgroups for Biology

mj@toano.win.net (Mary Jo Warsinsky) writes:

>INDEX PLANT-SCI

I will send you the BIOSCI FAQ privately which covers archive use.

				 Sincerely,

				 Dave Kristofferson
				 BIOSCI/bionet Manager

				 kristoff@net.bio.net


----------------------------------------------------------------------
New users of BIOSCI/bionet may want to read the "Frequently Asked
Questions" or "FAQ" sheets for BIOSCI.  There are two FAQ sheets for
the newsgroup system.  FAQ I describes the general purpose and uses of
the BIOSCI/bionet newsgroups.  FAQ II provides details on how to
participate in these forums.  Both of these FAQs are available for
anonymous FTP from net.bio.net [134.172.2.69] in
pub/BIOSCI/biosci1.FAQ and pub/BIOSCI/biosci2.FAQ.  They may also be
requested by sending e-mail to biosci@net.bio.net (use plain English
for your request).  The FAQs are also posted on the first of each
month to the newsgroup BIONEWS/bionet.announce immediately following
the posting of the BIOSCI information sheet.

				Sincerely,

				Dave Kristofferson
				BIOSCI/bionet Manager

				kristoff@net.bio.net
Newsgroups: bionet.women-in-bio
From: darrenp@cs.monash.edu.au (Daz)
Subject: Re: % women computer users
Organization: Monash University, Melb., Australia.
Distribution: bionet
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1992 02:19:03 GMT

>Actually, there has been some academic discussion about why women don't
>appear very often on the net. I just recently sat on our University's
>Task Force on Appropriate Use of Information Technology (an ad hoc
>set up to determine whether the UBC President's banning of the alt.sex.*
>hierarchy was justified or not), and we spent some time discussing the
>idea that if the net were more representational of society as a whole
>(more women, more Arts and Humanities people, etc.) many of the
>problems with sexist language etc. would vanish.
>      :=:=> Derek K. Miller                 dkmiller@unixg.ubc.ca
>      Researcher, Alma Mater Society        thegrodd@tz.ucs.sfu.ca
>      University of British Columbia, Canada

Interesting point - we have had our usenet feed emasculated (pardon the
gender specific language - but there is something much more graphic about
... any way) - with a negative amount of discussion (we were virtually told
what we should think).

We also have a student run machine here - which is very male dominated in
terms of its gender distribution of users - and simply having a female
user code is enough to leave you with 3-4 unsolicited talk requests per
hour - not to mention unwanted email (we actually did an experiment with
a ficticious user to verify the stories we were hearing).

I like to think that the net is populated with people of above average
education - and hence would be above the sexist behaviour we have around
us. Your final paragraph seems to imply that the problems on the net are
due to a lack of the civilising influence of other parts of society - which
I don't really agree with. Having more women on the net would probably mean
that the mean incidence rate per woman would drop. On yoyo (the student run
machine) - the low number of women means that they are harassed regularly.

Neither can you (IMVHO) 'fix' things by banning/stopping/making illegal,
legislating ... - until we make people desire equality you won't get it
properly.

Daz.
--
Darren Platt, Department of Computer Science
darrenp@dibbler.cs.monash.edu.au
Monash University, Clayton Melbourne, Victoria, Australia