Talk:Extremophile

message: Is methanophile a term in current usage?  I've more often (only?) heard methanotrope used.  I'll google it sometime to check, but would welcome some other commentary.
Also, to what extent does extremophile refer to single-cell organisms?  Are halophytes, (which, if I recall correctly, are plants that tolerate salty conditions) extremophiles?  Is being tolerant of extreme conditions (for some definition of extreme) sufficient, or must an organism thrive or require extreme conditions?
There was a picture in this month's National Geographic (my in-laws buy it for me, because I tend to read it when I'm at my in-laws :-) of an algal mat growing in a volcanically active region of the Kamchatka Peninsula--I was wondering if the algae pictured qualified as an extremophile
-- dja 
: I agree with you about methanogens.  Many are mesophilic.  The same is true of endoliths.  I'm going to remove these two.  
: With regards to your question about single celled organisms.  The term is is not limited to unicellular life, but the vast majority of examples are single celled.  Along these lines, I added a link to antarctic krill and made the existing link to some extrempophilic insects more prominent.  Jmeppley 01:41, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Old discussions

message: This text was written by User:Lmchalwell and moved here by User:Fram. Fram 11:15, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: End of remoced text

message: Lithoautotrophy, chemolithoautotrophy, and oligotrophy describe how an organism obtains its carbon/energy. This is different from the other categories of extremophiles, which are based on the physical parameters of locales where extremophiles thrive. Oligotrophy in specific is a bit jarring in the list of extremophiles since many microbes can survive oligotrophic conditions. My exposure to the field as a researcher gives me the impression that the modes of carbon requisition is generally not considered as a form of extreme survival trait like the ability to withstand and thrive in waters at 100oC is. 
--Qifeng 00:55, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lithoautotrophy 

message: I created a template for extremophiles.  Please fee free to edit it and make it better. Remember 16:10, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: New template

message: I removed "It is estimated that these microbes comprise anywhere from 1/3 to over 1/2 the living biomass on the planet (D’Hondt, Ridge 2000), and the populations extend more than 730 meters below the seafloor." as the cited reference was not given in the ref section and I don't find such a paper with a quick search. Vsmith (talk) 12:21, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Incomplete reference

message: Are endoliths extremophiles per se? --Antorjal (talk) 13:44, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Endoliths 

message: GFAJ-1 is not that special it can life in A nutritionally limited environment and is therfore a Oligotroph. I suggest to remove it from the list. --Stone (talk) 18:30, 4 December 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree that it should be removed, if only on the basis that it is not a "type" of extremophile, but an example of an extremophile. -- leuce (talk) 11:52, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  GFAJ-1 

message: The polyextremophile article should be merged here.  After several years, there is nothing but a definition and a few examples, showing that polyextremophiles have more than a single extrmeophile charatceristic, but there is nothing beyond that.  A merger would result in an extra sentence or two. --EncycloPetey (talk) 18:16, 26 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed. Danger (talk) 21:42, 26 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge [[Polyextremophile]] here 

message: "Thermophiles, a type of extremophile, produce some of the bright colors of Grand Prismatic Spring, Yellowstone National Park"
The image is so unworldly it was unclear that it was not an image of the organism itself until I viewed the article of the Spring.  Can we switch that around and mention the name of the spring first followed by "receives its color from ..." to make this more clear?  Drakcap (talk) 21:35, 13 October 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. . --Sm8900 (talk) 20:19, 11 September 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Image Caption - Unclear if the Organism or Spring is pictured. 

message: The example species are in the wrong rows. e.g Clostridium paradoxum being placed in the acidic row when on the page for it it says "Clostridium paradoxum is a moderately thermophilic anaerobic alkaliphile bacteria." -  Li, Y.; Mandelco, L.; Wiegel, J. (1993). "Isolation and Characterization of a Moderately Thermophilic Anaerobic Alkaliphile, Clostridium paradoxum sp. nov". International Journal of Systematic Bacteriology. 43 (3): 450–460. doi:10.1099/00207713-43-3-450. ISSN 0020-7713.
It all seemed a bit jumbled, not sure which others are wrong  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thomas Hasson (talk • contribs) 10:39, 4 February 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  The table - The limits of known life on Earth, is wrong 

message: Synechococcus lividus is listed as a cold-loving extremophile in the table, but it is not mentioned in the reference given, and another article I found describes it at an obligate thermophile . The reference includes a table where  Arthrobacter arilaitensis (-26.0±0.8°C), Corynebacterium variabile (-25.6±0.6°C) and Chlamydomonas nivalis (-24.2±0.8°C) are the most cold-tolerant entries. I propose replacing lividus with these. Any objections? Amaurea (talk) 16:35, 8 February 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Synechococcus lividus in wrong category? 

message: I suggest that we focus our efforts on the topic of extramophiles in the following direction. Let's publish locations in the world where one type of bacterium is isolated only in this particular location. Petrov Russia (talk) 09:36, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Specific extramophiles 

message: Where the hell is this coming from? Earliest forms of life is linked as a "see also". "Dating back to more than 40 million years ago" can't be right, because more than 40 million should be also more than a billion.
Also in the Characteristics section the same 40 million is specified for viable spores, which goes against this. 40 million years is nothing. Archaea exist for billions of years.
I guess this is better removed until something more credible can be added.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dqeswn (talk • contribs) 14:00, 23 April 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dating back "40 million years"??? 

message: I think the article confuses (uses sources that confuse) the difference between a habitable environment and a survivable environment. Most definitions of 'life' require both the existence of metabolism and reproduction. Inhabiting an environment requires both. Surviving in that environment requires neither. If the definition is going to define an extremophile as inhabiting OR surviving in environments which are considered 'extreme', then that should be made clear. I don't think that using survival to define the term is wise or logically consistent. Any references to spores should be deleted, imho.174.130.71.156 (talk) 20:39, 27 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Definition