Talk:Bombyx mori

message: The artical says nothing about eating the silkworms.  All I know about it is its distinct flavor(you either love it or hate it) and its full of protien. Is there anyone out there who knows enough about the nutrients of eating the silkworm?
:Who actually eats it? I've beening living in northern China for more than two decades and never heard of anyone eating the silkworms. I'm sure there are people who do this, but that's very rare. It's like adding eating the dragonflies or simply flies to their respective pages.--Wooddoo-eng 06:12, 18 July 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: The Koreans sure do, you see vendors all over the place and I just tried one at dinner.  But they eat only silkworm larvae/pupae, not the worms per se. Jpatokal 12:04, 15 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Blogger story about eating Korean canned silkworm pupae. Cy Guy 07:12, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Silkworm pupae are important as food in parts of southeast Asia and tribal regions of India.  They are eaten as a significant source of protein in parts of Korea, Laos, Thailand, etc.  http://www.wormspit.com/wormfoods.htm Canned or frozen silkworms are often available at Oriental grocery stores. Oakenking 14:24, 28 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Old talk 

message: bombyx mori has no subspecies. silkworm is not a scientific name.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.242.105.47 (talk) 06:46, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Taxonomy 

message: All the articles I have read while researching silk worms on the internet say they are found in mulberry trees. Do they survive on other trees? I had a landscaper come by to discuss planting of some shade trees and he said that the "nests" in my pecan tree were from silk worms. We have a small wooded area along two sides of our property and I don't see any of these "nests" in them, only in our pecan trees. Are they harmful to my pecan tree? After reading this article and their rate of reproduction I would suspect the answer to be yes. Is there anything that can be done to discourage they growth, other than, of course, distroying the nests?
:I would expect they are more likely some variety of tent caterpiller.  Call your local cooperative extension service office to find out what they think. Cy Guy 07:12, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  silk worm in pecan tree 

message: Silkworm Disease( Virus, Bacteria, fungus, Nosema...).You and your friend can help me to write and expanding it ? i need infomation but i is not good English !--203.160.1.43 11:00, 4 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: The silkworm, Bombyx mori, is fully domesticated.  It has been raised in nearly every part of the world which will support its food plants.  Oakenking 14:29, 28 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Silkworm Disease 

message: The article is about the domestic silkworm, Bombyx mori, but the image on the side is an entirely different species, Callosamia promethea.  I don't know how to change the image, but would be happy to donate one of my photographs from http://www.wormspit.com.  Oakenking 14:27, 28 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Changing the image?

message: I took out the reference to occurrence in Persia/Iran, because I could not find confirmation. THe likely natural range (before domestivcation)  was that of B. mandarina and ended at northern India. Satyrium 02:27, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Range

message: This article presents information from a very utilitarian point of view and does not address the biology of the organism in good detail. It lacks information about the physiological and behavioral aspects of the adult moth. 
Shreenidhipm (talk) 01:39, 14 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Biology

message: In the section "Silkworm disease" occurs the line:
:But it is easy to confuse young, tiny silkworms with ants, as they look somewhat alike
This doesn't seem right to me. Pictures I've seen of silkworms (for example on http://www.wormspit.com) look like caterpillars, not ants. Is there a species of silkworm that does look like an ant? Tocharianne 14:57, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Do silkworms really look like ants?

message: This article is about an insect that most English speakers would only know of as the "Silkworm."
The title of this article should be "Silkworm" or "Silkworm (insect)."
Here is the relevant Wikipedia policy:
"Generally, article naming should prefer to what the majority of English speakers would most easily recognize, with a reasonable minimum of ambiguity, while at the same time making linking to those articles easy and second nature.
"This is justified by the following principle: Names of Wikipedia articles should be optimized for readers over editors; and for a general audience over specialists. 
-anon —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 67.70.91.59 (talk) 00:34, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  The title of this article should be Silkworm 

message: This article uses parenthetical citations instead of footnotes. Rugz 18:54, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  wrong citations? 

message: I notice the size of silkworms isn't mentioned anywhere. Could someone provide this? --Wafulz 15:15, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Size

message: Some of the article is converted in metric units.  could someone convert the remainder?
Goldfinger820 08:31, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Units

message: MORE STUFF ON SILKWORM PLEASE!
Lol o fat bat (talk) 20:12, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: MORE

message: Perhaps the last part of this line is a bit specious "no longer occurs in the wild if it ever did so". Wouldn’t silkworms have existed in the wild at least at some point in their evolutionary history? Not an expert on this, so I didn’t change it. God, I love being a pedantic insomniac.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Le Gibbon (talk • contribs) 04:16, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: yep i agree - sounds dogdy  Goldfinger820 04:54, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Agenda Pushing? 

message: This article talk page was automatically added with  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 . Maximum and careful attention was done to avoid any wrongly tagging any categories , but mistakes may happen... If you have concerns , please inform on the project talk page -- TinucherianBot (talk) 02:17, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: [[WP:FOOD|WikiProject Food and drink]] Tagging

message: I'm not an expert on silkworms, so I haven't made any changes, but here are a few issues.  The introduction has some statements that are not cited and have the feel of someone pushing a research agenda: the sentence beginning " Molecular clock studies suggesting an age of many millions of years[citation needed] cannot be taken seriously" and the beginning of the next paragraph, "This is not correct however due to the domestication process having accelerated the pace of evolution."  At the very least, these statements need citations, but would be much better with a more neutral tone: "although molecular clock studies have estimated the time of divergence at XXX, the accuracy of these studies is unknown because they assume that both species have evolved at a constant rate, an assumption which has been subject to frequent criticism."  Citations to the literature are then needed.  More fundamentally, I'm not sure why these sections are included in the introduction.  They're relatively specific, and could be confined to a subsection of the document.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.245.223.242 (talk) 21:24, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tone of introduction 

message: First paragraph in the lead says:
:It is entirely dependent on humans for its reproduction and no longer occurs naturally in the wild
Second one says:
:The domesticated and wild species can still breed and so hybridize together.
This is beyond my knowledge, so I can't edit, but I don't see how a domesticated species can breed with one that doesn't occur in the wild.
--- OtherDave (talk) 14:10, 4 December 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: OtherDave, it is B. mandarina that is the (still widespread) wild species, and B. mori that is a domesticated species, which no longer occurs in the wild. The two can hybridise. I have reworded the paragraph. I hope this clarifies it. MFdeS (talk) 07:18, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wild hybrids 

message: The first paragraph states that "A silkworm's preferred food is white mulberry leaves, but it may also eat the leaves of the Osage Orange or the Tree of Heaven", with "Tree of Heaven" linking to Ailanthus altissima. 
I think this is a case of mistaken identity. The larva of the Samia cynthia silkmoth does indeed feed on Tree of Heaven, but not Bombix mori, which is the subject of this article.
Unless somebody can come up with a reference for B. mori eating Ailanthus, this should be deleted.
MFdeS (talk) 07:13, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I have removed the reference to Ailanthus. MFdeS (talk) 13:45, 27 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Foodstuffs: ''B. mori'' does not feed on ''Ailanthus''. 

message: In the article, domestication is listed as happening in the Han Dynasty some 2000 years ago.  Domestication of the silk worm takes place much earlier, during the Shang Dynasty approximately 3500 years ago.  It was during the Han Dynasty that Chinese silk made its way to the West.
Source:  East Asia: A Cultural, Social and Political History.  Ebrey, Walthall, Palais.  2009.  Page 52.
I'm new to this wikipedia thing.  Not sure how to proceed.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Palebluemote (talk • contribs) 06:02, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Domestication 

message: Aren't the first and last diseases listed the same thing? If you go to the pebrine page, it lists the same exact description.--Dramartistic (talk) 21:36, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Diseases

message: The following sentence seems wrong: "It is entirely dependent on humans for its reproduction and does not occur naturally in the wild" Pass a Method talk 18:16, 28 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Entirely 

message: I believe the first couple lines in the introduction to this paper say that he isolated it from over 500,000 worms and 20 years. 
Butenandt, Adolf, and E. Hecker. "Synthese des Bombykols, des Sexual‐Lockstoffes des Seidenspinners, und seiner geometrischen Isomeren." Angewandte Chemie 73.11 (1961): 349-353.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.207.92.30 (talk) 20:28, 1 April 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Citation Needed on Butenandt (500,000 worms sentence in Research heading) 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Bombyx mori. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20120314044223/http://www.silkwormeggs.net/resources/Silkworm-School-Science-Project-Instruction.pdf to http://www.silkwormeggs.net/resources/Silkworm-School-Science-Project-Instruction.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 22:49, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Substituted at 10:00, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Assessment comment

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Bombyx mori. 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:
*Added  tag to http://picasaweb.google.com/srither240255/CycleOfSilkworm#
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120314044223/http://www.silkwormeggs.net/resources/Silkworm-School-Science-Project-Instruction.pdf to http://www.silkwormeggs.net/resources/Silkworm-School-Science-Project-Instruction.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:52, 5 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Since "silkworm" redirects to this page, there could be potential confusion because several other species including the muga silkworm (Antheraea assamensis) are used in commercial silk production, and the family Saturniidae are known as giant silk moths. Also, the disambiguation page does not refer to these other "silkworms". Can an editor who is knowledgeable about site formatting policies please clarify this mess? 71.93.220.235 (talk) 02:23, 9 March 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Confusion 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Bombyx mori. 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:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120507085636/http://www.senature.com/research/publications/cocoon-silk-a-natural-architecture to http://www.senature.com/research/publications/cocoon-silk-a-natural-architecture
*Added  tag to http://www.actionagainstpoisoning.com/NEWSACTIONREQUEST/page233/NewssilkMothsflyfree.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061130094613/http://www.peta.org/mc/factsheet_display.asp?ID=121 to http://www.peta.org/mc/factsheet_display.asp?ID=121
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120507085636/http://www.senature.com/research/publications/cocoon-silk-a-natural-architecture to http://www.senature.com/research/publications/cocoon-silk-a-natural-architecture
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:12, 23 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: While this article is well written and fairly comprehensive, I think that much could be gained from a discussion of various behaviors that are largely ignored in this article. Discussions on the patterns of social organization or interactions, mating, kin structures, host plant, competitor and collaborator species if any would make for a much more robust page. Many Lepidoptera pages include these sorts of discussions and I think they should be extended to this species as well given its high importance.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Moid.ali (talk • contribs) 03:05, 14 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Silk worm behavior? 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Bombyx mori. 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:
*Added  tag to http://life.cqu.edu.cn/zezhang/silkwormDomest_Sci09-10-16.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110225234236/http://news.sciencemag.org/sciencenow/2009/01/13-02.html to http://news.sciencemag.org/sciencenow/2009/01/13-02.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060412215344/http://www.wormspit.com/index.htm to http://www.wormspit.com/index.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:01, 6 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Mori is the Latin for "dead" or "death", so why is it that the English translation of "Bombyx Mori" would be, in this instance, "Silkworm of the Mulberry Tree"?
This would actually translate to "Bombyx Argos Muraeius", "Bombyx Pirorum" or even "Bombyx Morus". (I know that "mori" is the genitive case, declensionally-speaking, of "morus" but still... It's tough to grok why such nomenclature was originally chosen).
Interestingly, "morus" can also mean "stupid" - from the same etymological roots (moron<>mulberry? "Oh you silly Mulberry..! :D ) zarathustra (talk) 00:44, 15 March 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Definition (& Usage) of Mori 

message: I have removed the section on the moon.  The Chinese space program originally announced that it was going to send silk worm eggs to the moon onboard Chang'e-4, but ultimately it sent fruit fly eggs.  To the best of my ability, it seems like lots of news sites misreported this detail about the biological experiment on Chang'e-4.  I have looked through many articles that discusses the outcome of the experiments and none mention silk worms being onboard.
Here are two links that support my removal of the lunar section from the article...
https://qz.com/1523661/cotton-seeds-china-carried-to-the-moon-has-sprouted/
https://www.guancha.cn/industry-science/2018_12_10_482783.shtml
Equant (talk) 19:13, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lunar Silkworm eggs 

message: To add to this article: the fact that this species does not exist in nature (outside of human communities). 173.88.246.138 (talk) 01:03, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: THis information was already in the article, just not properly emphasized, so I fixed that. Dyanega (talk) 01:16, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: To add to article

message: Antennae:
The antennae of the male Bombyx mori are "...pectinate (comb-like) antennae [that] can detect as few as 3,000 molecules of female pheromone per millilitre of air..."
 Xyxyzyz (talk) 05:05, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Antennae 

message: This is an article about a species of animal. Wikipedia articles use the common name of the animal, not the technical name. This should be moved to silkworm. Tysto (talk) 20:45, 21 November 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Use common name 

message: This is not correct, the cited article also clearly calls this transgenic and not crossbreeding. There is no chance to crossbreed a spider and an insect.https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3271896/. The source describes that they used a Vector (piggyBAC) to introduce the genetic material from the spider. 90.77.114.141 (talk) 11:32, 7 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Silkworm breeding - Crossbreeding to include silk production proteins from spiders 

message: The redirect Conservation status of Bombyx mori has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at  until a consensus is reached.  Steel1943 (talk) 16:08, 21 June 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  "[[:Conservation status of Bombyx mori]]" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]] 

message: 1 pound requires 2000-3000 cocoons
The world produces 70 million pounds of silk yearly
70,000,000 × 2000 = 140,000,000,000
70,000,000 × 3000 = 210,000,000,000
140-210 billion cocoons. ===> This is the correct number assuming 2000-3000cocoons/pound is correct. The article says world yearly production requires 10 billion cocoons!احمد الليبي (talk) 19:18, 12 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  The numbers don't add up (# of cocoons needed to produce 1 pound of silk) 

message: The redirect Silk moth has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at  until a consensus is reached.   Jay 💬 06:02, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  "[[:Silk moth]]" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]]