Talk:Phototroph

message: Fungi are unlikely to be phototrophs. All of the types I can think of obtain their energy by breaking down other organic material. That would make them chemoorganoheterotrophs.
fungi are heterotrophs that feed by absorption
(campbell & reece, 2005) Kelkhara 17:02, 9 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Currently this article deals with photosynthetic organisms but there's already one dedicated to photosynthesis. This article should be merged with photoheterotroph for a better treatment of the different biological methods of harvesting solar energy, i.e. photosynthesis and bacteriorhodopsins. Bendž|Ť 13:59, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No, what this article needs is language that describes what's common between photoautotrophy and photoheterotrophy. Each of those deserves its own article, and phototrophy is not synonymous with either. The problem with this article now is that, yes, it replicates content in both auto ands hetero articles, without showing what's different and what's the same between those two. A merge is not the solution: the solution is to write a whole new phototrophy article that is actually about phototrophy in the aggregate. 76.200.150.238 18:15, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge 

message: Phototrophy is obtaining cellular/metabolic energy from light.  Photosynthesis is creating hydrocarbons from either atmospheric CO2 or dissolved bicarbonate - i.e. engage in carbon fixation.
Trophy = obtaining energy
Synthesis = make something
All known photosynthesizers are phototrophs.  Not all phototrophs are photosynthesizers (e.g. Archaea which can use bacteriorhodopsin to capture light and use the energy to establish a proton gradient, which in turn allows them to move.  They however are not known to "fix" carbon).
Additionally growth toward or away from sunlight is not called "trophy".  That's being phototactic
I'll make changes to the article shortly...
Pagelm (talk) 21:18, 5 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  gah 

message: it's getting to the point where this article should maybe be scrapped and started again from scratch. In any case, it may be helpful to define or clarify more terms.
For example, most heterotrophs are chemoorganoheterotrophs. But yes, there are photoorganoheterotrophs and photomixotrophs [can grow either a) autotrophically or b) "eating" and incorporating small organic molecules from their outside environment].
Further complicating matters is the phototrophs can be divided into the chlorophototrophs and opsin(?)phototrophs (which as mentioned are not autotrophic).  Some of the chlorophototrophs are hetero or mixos, as stated above.  As I'm not feeling particularly literate at the moment, I won't edit the article itself at this time.
Pagelm (talk) 04:09, 15 February 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  expanded terms 

message: Substituted at 02:54, 30 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Assessment comment

message: Came here randomly. The lede reads:
It is not clear what the difference is (neither was a simple search). Any expansion would be appreciated that highlights clearly the difference. Thanks. zmm (talk) 18:29, 26 May 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  phototrophs vs photosynthetic 

message: Voice 41.223.116.243 (talk) 21:42, 15 December 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nutrition 

message: Voice 41.223.116.243 (talk) 21:43, 15 December 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  biology 

message: Both articles mentioninig Retinalophototroph (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phototroph and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Retinalophototroph) are incorrect.
The way Retinalophototrophs (this is not even a nutrition class or microorganism group) are explained is a mess and seems like it resulted through "independent" work.
The so-called retinalophototrophs are NOT autotrophs, but heterotrophs in the photoheterotrophy. References 1 to 4 in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Retinalophototroph do not mention these are autotrophic organisms, while 6 clearly states they are HETEROtrophs (https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/sciadv.aaw8855), while in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phototroph there is no source for the info. -Paul- (talk) 22:24, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Incorrect information about the so-called Retinalophototrophs or Retinalophototrophy