Talk:Tissue (biology)

message: Animal tissues 105.232.126.43 (talk) 03:06, 22 November 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Biology 

message: The page begins with the following definition: A tissue is an ensemble of similar cells and their extracellular matrix from the same origin that together carry out a specific function. I am aware that this is a traditional elementary school textbook definition. However, when I read, for example, the Connective tissue page, it says: The cells of connective tissue include fibroblasts, adipocytes, macrophages, mast cells and leucocytes. I see two issues here:
* The textbook definition typically is more accurate, it includes cells of similar size, shape, metabolic and biochemical characteristics, here we say similar cells ... carry out a specific function, but overall, many animal tissues consist of distinct lineages of differentiation, even if these share the same origin. E.g. enterocytes and Paneth cells, or neurons and glia, are different cell types, but part of the same tissue.
* Most vertebrate tissues contain cells which come from very different origin, most commonly, infiltrating immune cells. In common understanding these definitely belong to the tissue, hence the same origin in the definition is problematic. Osteoblasts and osteoclasts are also part of the same tissue, but are of different origin. Or just think about how many different cell types come together in the stroma of the ovary. Tissue has changed as people work out (Fortnite).
These should be clarified especially that tissue is most often used as a category between organ and cell type. Also, the definition has no references, would be great to cite a few reliable sources. I will try to improve on these points, but also wondering about other's opinions.
--Aubergine11 (talk) 12:04, 16 February 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Acting on your request, but reverse the changes I've made if you don't find them an improvement. Just small tweaks to the wording along with a couple of references. Science is not as black and white as many people believe. A tissue is as much a conceptual as a biological entity so is very difficult to define in purely physical terms and the "function" of a tissue is often not fully understood. Leonardo da Vince did beautiful work describing what he dissected, noting different tissues, but didn't understand that the blood circulated through the body. And where does a heart structure that pumps it around start or stop? They are like the borders of a country, imposed on the land rather than structure that are part of it. A tissue is often what people see when they (delicately) cut and tear an animal or plant apart after its cells have replicated and intimately combined to form an animal. Any apparent separation demonstrated by teased apart "tissues" often has structural, functional or developmental significance but for highly complex reasons that will be different for every tissue. Trying to characterize all those reasons in a one liner or even a book of definitions is nigh impossible in my opinion. A generalized limited definition will help the reader, perhaps just say its not intended to be perfect? It doesn't have to be perfect does it? Tgru001 (talk) 03:52, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Logical controversy in main definition 

message: U 2409:4071:4D96:418D:0:0:4748:B60F (talk) 17:52, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  ದೀರ್ಘಕಾಲದ ಮಲಬದ್ಧತೆಯ ಚಿಕಿತ್ಸೆಯಲ್ಲಿ ಲ್ಯಾಕ್ಟಿಟಾಲ್ ಅಥವಾ ಲ್ಯಾಕ್ಟುಲೋಸ್: ವ್ಯವಸ್ಥಿತ ಫಲಿತಾಂಶ.