Talk:Serotonin

message: Questions the efficacy of regulating Serotonin to treat depression and proposes an alternate theory to its behavior with  no citations, and the last paragraph of the section reads like a series of non-sequiteurs. I don't know enough to correct it, but know sketchy writing when I see it.
January 31, 2010  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.133.41.176 (talk) 20:36, 31 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: You'll have to be more specific. The entire paragraph has references, except the last sentence: "This provides evidence for the theory that serotonin is most likely used to regulate the extent or intensity of moods". --Mark PEA (talk) 20:29, 2 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Antidepressants" 

message: I see a problem with the way the "functions" section is written, and it seems to occur in many of the subsections.  The "Effects of food content" section applies only to humans and states this explicitly, the "In the digestive tract" section implicitly applies only to humans, and then it's followed by the "Gauge of social situation" section which starts talking about lobster and crayfish, but then finishes up with a sentence about humans.  Then "Effects on growth and reproduction" talks exclusively about roundworms and fruitflies.
I think that we need to think carefully about the degree to which we should integrate material on human and non-human animals, especially invertebrates.  How similar are serotonin's functions in these animals?  For the functions that are similar, I think we should state (with citing a reliable source) that the functions are similar, and give examples from different animals.
For functions that only apply in humans, or only in mammals, I think we should carefully separate this out.  I think it might make sense to have a major section just for serotonin in humans, and then have separate sections to discuss other animals (and plants).  The article as is is so muddled...it's talking about humans, often implicitly, in one sentence or section and then jumps to talking about invertebrates, then back to humans.  Cazort (talk) 17:48, 11 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Functions section: are we talking about humans?  or all animals?  or what? 

message: Some things I think would be worth working on, especially with the bounty in mind ;) I'll try and make progress on these soon:
* History should be expanded. I'm sure there's more to it.
* End of the section on deficiency. How does "intense spiritual experiences" only get one sentence without any explanation? Why does it then jump to OCD in particular? This stuff should probably be rephrased.
* If there's deficiency, then there's excess; what happens with excessive serotonin? Should have a section for this as well.
* Maybe brief explanations about what each of the receptors do.
* Drugs section might do with a mention of St. John's Wort and people taking 5HTP supplements and such.
* I assume most people reading the article are interested in the effects on mood in humans, so to just toss the mention of Tianeptine lowering serotonin in without much discussion is a bad choice IMO.
* The article doesn't really discuss interplay with other neurotransmitters very well.
* I think that the article should devote considerably more space to mental effects in humans.
Persephone12 (talk) 21:27, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ideas 

message: I just reverted two edits by  that added statements about bone loss to the lead.  I did so because no sources were added, and the sources that are given for those sentences don't say anything about this as far as I can tell.  There does seem to be literature connecting serotonin to bone formation, including literature that is acceptable under WP:MEDRS, but it is very recent and would have to be cited specifically.  So I am not necessarily objecting to the statements, just to the way that they were added without sources, giving an appearance that they were referenced to sources that don't actually have any relevance. Looie496 (talk) 01:31, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Explanation of reverts 

message: According to calculations at Wolfram Alpha, bananas actually have a lower ratio of tryptophan to leucine and phenylalanine (7.7%) than the ratio in rye bread (9.8%). I confirmed these ratios using nutritional data at http://www.nal.usda.gov/fnic/foodcomp/search/. The formula I used is tryptophan/(leucine + phenylalanine). I read the cited source, which defines bread as a “low-SPF” food -- under 10% -- but a banana (using usda nutrition data) would fall under that category as well, despite the source’s claim that it’s a “happy food” which improves serotonin production. I don’t know enough to edit the info correctly, but sufficed to say I’m more confused now since the claim made here at Wikipedia (rye bread vs. banana) appears to contradict its own math. Maybe a better example than a banana is in order? BTW, papaya does work out to 32%, so that one makes sense. But dates (5.4%) do not. Sadly, the citation imbues a credibility that the claim, as stated, doesn’t seem to deserve. Mentioning beneficial foods can be construed as nutritional advice, so I think this is relatively important to get correct.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Blinkozo (talk • contribs) 07:06, 2 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Effects of Food Content" doesn’t jibe. 

message: Serotonin does act as a hormone in the gut.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16378174
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20408856  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.16.251.157 (talk) 19:14, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Not a hormone? 

message: In the section: Behavior, Sexual Preference should be replaced with sexual orientation. If there is hormones in the mice, it's not his choice to be with male mice. In my opinion, it doesn't make scene. http://www.apa.org/topics/sexuality/orientation.aspx
Should we change it to sexual orientation? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Spyrokid77666 (talk • contribs) 03:51, 19 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sexual Perference? 

message: The following is confused/confusing and needs elaboration: "Approximately 90% of the human body's total serotonin is located in the enterochromaffin cells in the gut, where it is used to regulate intestinal movements.[2][3] The remainder is synthesized ..."
The first is talking about storage (presumably - is it in fact synthesiszed there?) while the second is talking about synthesis. These two things are not comparable. This needs to be clarified - what are the sources - where is it created/stored/destroyed - how regulated, etc)  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.67.249.169 (talk) 00:40, 4 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Locations/Synthesis 

message: The link No Fair! My Serotonin Level Is Low says that "Serotonin is a chemical messenger thought to modulate depression, anger, sleep, sexuality...even vomiting." which is missing from the article as far as I can see. I think it is important to write functional sentences to constitute the "comprehension infrastructure", and that "X is an Y doing Z and T" is a good pattern for describing what a thing is and does. Rursus dixit. (mbork3!) 10:48, 17 June 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Modulating what?

message: The molecule rotating is not quite the same molecule as in the systematic and ball and stick models, because in the rotating molecule one of the nitrogens is not in the aromatic ring, as it should be. Captain Gamma (talk) 21:35, 21 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rotating Molecular Depiction 

message: "Effects of food content
In humans, serotonin levels are affected by diet. An increase in the ratio of tryptophan to phenylalanine and leucine will increase serotonin levels. Fruits with a good ratio include dates, papayas and bananas. Research also suggests eating a diet rich in carbohydrates and low in protein will increase serotonin by secreting insulin, which helps in amino acid competition.[18]"
Reference 18 only applies to the last sentence. The three previous sentences do not have any citation. 92.23.38.77 (talk) 08:08, 31 August 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Not enough sources 

message: Unlike its precursors, 5-HTP and tryptophan, serotonin does not cross the blood–brain barrier, which means ingesting serotonin in the diet has no effect on brain serotonin levels.
First, this assertion needs at least one citation to support it. Second, although it may well constitute currently received pharmacological wisdom that serotonin cannot usually cross the normal, healthy, human blood-brain barrier, it's less clear that that is the case for other animals. See for example Nakatani, Yasushi, et al. "Augmented brain 5‐HT crosses the blood–brain barrier through the 5‐HT transporter in rat." European Journal of Neuroscience 27.9 (2008): 2466-2472. (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18445233 [full text at http://www.serotonin-dojo.jp/pdf/articles_004.pdf])
124.186.104.184 (talk) 01:52, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Blood-brain barrier 

message: "When the platelets bind to a clot, they release serotonin, where it serves as a vasoconstrictor and helps to regulate hemostasis and blood clotting. Serotonin also is a growth factor for some types of cells, which may give it a role in wound healing."
Presumably the higher or lower than normal volume of platelets would affect the greater or lesser ability to clot, to heal, perchance to digest, or to affect one's mood - does anyone have any thoughts or links.184.147.109.37 (talk) 20:10, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Clots et al. 

message: I removed this diagram: its claims are uncited, and there is no caption to explain what the relevance is.  If anyone here feels that it is useful, please re-add it, but I would suggest adding a caption explaining the relevance, with references to support the content. --Slashme (talk) 15:22, 8 April 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removed mood diagram: uncited, no caption. 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Serotonin. 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/20120627200919/http://www.tga.gov.au/adr/aadrb/aadr0408.htm to http://www.tga.gov.au/adr/aadrb/aadr0408.htm
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 16:37, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I agree with User:Sbharris that both the neurotransmitter infobox and the chemistry infobox should be present in this article, in addition to the "navigational" Template:Neurotransmitters at the bottom of the article.  It is an organic chemical compound of biological (neurotransmitter) importance.  H Padleckas (talk) 22:27, 5 October 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: A much better idea would be to simply add a "Chemistry" or "Physical and chemical properties" section (depending on which project MOS's section title is used) and simply cover the chemical data in the prose.  The chembox doesn't actually contain much chemical data to begin with, so it would be fairly simple to cover it in the text.  Every project MOS for this page (even WP:WikiProject Autism, which defers to MOS:MED) indicates the addition of a chem section anyway. Seppi333 (Insert 2¢) 22:51, 5 October 2015 (UTC)
replies: text:  Trying to avoid covering physical properties like molar mass, solubility, aciditiy, melting point, etc., in prose, is the reason why we have chemboxes in the first place. This one may not have all the properties of the better characterized organic compounds on WP, but it has many, and there is no earthly reason why it should have all of them, eventually. Pretend it's NOT a neurotransmitter. I see that somebody has done the same thing to norepinephrine, and so the physical properties of the substance (which you see in epinephrine) are now simply now missing from norepinephrine! This information deletion is close to vandalism. You can think of all that stuff as a redlink waiting to be filled in.  If you can think of a way to include physical data in a single side box, so that it's ALL in a single box, fine, but that's going to be a very tricky task, and not one that is standardized. SBHarris 00:27, 6 October 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: All that stuff is in the PubChem entry, isn't it?  I doubt that there is anybody in the entire universe who cares about the melting point of serotonin, but if there is, surely such a person would know enough to look it up on PubChem.  It wouldn't be impossible to expand the infobox to contain more information, but I'm averse to cluttering our articles with information that doesn't matter to anybody.  All of the information in the neurotransmitter infobox has major importance. Looie496 (talk) 11:14, 6 October 2015 (UTC)
replies: text:  To you, serotonin may be a neurotransmitter. To a chemist, it's a chemical. If you buy a bottle from Sigma you may care very much what the melting point is, as that gives you an index of purity. Sigma may have made a mistake, or last week they may have changed their source to another fly-by-night supplier in China. If so, they will hardly tell YOU (Sigma's sourcing is the most closely guarded secret they have). The MSDS doesn't have that manufacturer info. The QC sheet may have claims, but SIGMA only puts in what their supplier tells them, and (again) they aren't going to tell you their supplier. Sigma doesn't sell chemicals really-- they are an information broker and chemicals is how you get the information. Sigma is a middleman retailer between you and hundreds of supplier/jobbers and manufacturers who you'd deal with directly-- if you knew who they were-- and cut Sigma out of the loop. If you are making a derivative of serotonin, you also want to know the M.P. of the first crystals you get back, to see if you merely got your starting reagent. Your other comment mystifies me. Why would anybody look up the mass of the proton on Wikipedia when they can go to CODATA? If Wikipedia deleted all info you could look up someplace else, there would be little left of Wikipedia. SBHarris 00:09, 8 October 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: But would a chemist who wanted to do something like that really look at Wikipedia for the information? Looie496 (talk) 12:04, 8 October 2015 (UTC)
replies: text:  Maybe. If you Google it, you get Wikipedia. On the other hand PubChem actually does not have serotonin's melting point, as best I can tell: . So this is looking very bad indeed for your argument. SBHarris 01:43, 14 October 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: It would look bad if I actually believed that anybody would actually use the information.  I don't find that hypothetical usage case plausible. Looie496 (talk) 12:16, 14 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  both Infoboxes needed 

message: Hello everyone. Should not the nomenclature of this molecule be 3-(2-aminoethyl)indol-6-ol? If it's a mistake, it should be corrected so high school students won't get low marks on their assignments. ;) If it isn't, tell me!  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 37.29.217.249 (talk) 17:42, 6 November 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: In IUPAC nomenclature, the numbering is assigned as depicted in :File:Indole numbered.svg. The hydroxy group is on the 5-position, not the 6-position.  -- Ed (Edgar181) 18:50, 6 November 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nomenclature 

message: Substituted at 05:48, 30 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Assessment comment

message: I intend to add this section to the nervous system section as the separate stub article does not entirlely seem necessary.
 Serotonergic cell groups 
Serotonergic cell groups refer to collections of neurons in the central nervous system that have been demonstrated by histochemical fluorescence to contain the neurotransmitter serotonin (5-hydroxytryptamine). Since they are for the most part localized to classical brainstem nuclei, particularly the raphe nuclei, they are more often referred to by the names of those nuclei than by the B1-9 nomenclature. These cells appear to be common across most mammals and has two main regions in which they develop; one forms in the mesencephlon and the rostral pons (find articles/links) and the other in the medulla oblongata and the caudal pons.R. Nieuwenhuys, J. Voogd, C. Van Huijzen, The human central nervous system: a synopsis and atlas (Springer Science & Business Media, , 2007).
Nine serotonergic cell groups have been identified.
 B1 cell group 
Cell group B1 occupies the midline nucleus raphes pallidus and adjacent structures in the caudal medulla oblongata of the rodent and the primate.
 B2 cell group 
Cell group B2 occupies the midline nucleus raphes obscurus and adjacent structures in the caudal medulla oblongata of the rodent and the primate.
 B3 cell group 
Cell group B3 occupies the midline nucleus raphes magnus and adjacent structures in the caudal medulla oblongata of the rodent and the primate. Its boundary with the serotonergic group B1 is indistinct.
 B4 cell group 
Cell group B4 is located in the floor of the fourth ventricle, in the vicinity of the vestibular nuclei and abducens nucleus in the rat and in the caudal interstitial nucleus of the medial longitudinal fasciculus of the mouse. A comprehensive study of monoaminergic cell groups in the macaque and the squirrel monkey did not identify a B4 cell group distinct from other groups in the region.
 B5 cell group 
Cell group B5 is located in the midline pontine raphe nucleus and adjacent areas in the rodent and the primate.
 B6 cell group 
Cell group B6 is located in the floor of the fourth ventricle dorsal to, and between, the right and left medial longitudinal fasciculus of the pons in the primate and the rodent. and forms the caudal portion of the dorsal raphe nucleus.
 B7 cell group 
Cell group B7 is a group of cells located in the central gray of the pons, the dorsal raphe nucleus and adjacent structures in the primate and the rodent.
 B8 cell group 
Cell group B8 is located in the dorsal part of the median raphe nucleus (superior central nucleus) and adjacent structures of the pontine reticular formation of the rodent and the primate.
 B9 cell group 
Cell group B9 is a group of cells located in the pontine tegmentum, ventral to serotonergic group B8. In the nonhuman primate they are found in the ventral part of the superior central nucleus and adjacent structures. In the rodent they have a more lateral location within the medial lemniscus of the pons and dorsal and medial to it.,
EIhannifin (talk) 18:37, 1 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Addition of Serotonergic Cell Groups to Nervous System Section 

message: Dr. Marazziti and his researchers at the University of Pisa in Italy found that depletion of serotonin also occurs in people who have recently fallen in love. This leads to the obsessive component associated with early stages of love.
Should this statement and source be trusted?  It doesn't sound right.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Petergstrom (talk • contribs) 19:58, 22 November 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Couldn't even find the source. So I removed the info.--VeniVidiVicipedia (talk) 20:56, 22 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dubious claims? 

message: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Oxidation-chemistry-and-biochemistry-of-Goyal-Kumar/af2fd2a1ddab4fd669a02b5eb0a5e64d83c5c5cc
https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-1-4613-0381-7_47
Serotonin core structure is a para aminophenol which undergoes oxidation readily. Used as a reductant and antioxidant. Oxidation productbof Adrenalin is Adrenochrome and in Wikipedia.
The oxidation of Serotonin is not even mentioned. TaylorLeem (talk) 19:14, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Oxidation to quinone derivatives 

message: Where is there any mention of the role of sunlight in stimulating the brain to produce serotonin? Isn't this a critical omission from the article? Stevenmitchell (talk) 02:57, 19 June 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Where's Sunlight Mentioned in the Article?