Talk:Reaction–diffusion system

message: Reaction-diffusion systems, reaction-diffusion models, and the reaction-diffusion equation are very important concepts. We definitely need a good article about these. For now, I redirected reaction-diffusion system and reaction-diffusion equation to reaction-diffusion, as I think this article can explain them all. Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 00:34, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: This is an important concept which needs work

message: I am a molecular biologist so I may be wrong but in the intro the diagonal matrix is underlined and I was under the impression when you write on paper and pen you underline as making the character bold would require a thicker pen, which is instead done when typed. --Squidonius (talk) 17:09, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I think it refers to a tensor but then it should have a double line. I will try changing it. --kupirijo (talk) 16:44, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Underline or bold?

message: There has been a long-term error on a reference in the Experiments section. There are two ref tags in a row, and I am wondering if a reference got lost. It's actually been like this ever since Huboedeker's edit of 2007-07-06 when this section was introduced, and has never been fixed.  I left a message on Huboedeker's user page, but that user hasn't logged in in 2008.--Larrybob (talk) 22:26, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I closed the ref tag, because I'm pretty confident that that is what Huboedeker meant. The reference (FitzHugh 1961) is to one of the papers introducing the FitzHugh–Nagumo model, which makes perfect sense at that location. -- Jitse Niesen (talk) 10:42, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

text: Thank you very much for closing the tag, I should have realized earlier. I would have done it myself, but was a bit busy recently. Dr. Hendrik U. Boedeker (talk) 13:03, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reference issue in Experiments section 

message: This is all very interesting information, but the article contains no information whatsoever about how to _solve_ reaction-diffusion systems which is frustrating for people who go here to find that information rather than information about bifurcations and stability. I'm here to find information about solutions, as I'm sure many others are interested in, so it would be super-great if someone with know-how could add that!  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.157.203.57 (talk) 11:18, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Solutions? 

message: The figure axes are labelled "coordinate x" and "coordinate y", but there is no "coordinate y" in the equations. What are the independent (axis label) variables and what is the dependent variable (quantity that is colour-mapped) in these figures? 60.234.248.40 (talk) 10:13, 13 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  x and y coordinates? 

message: In the example there is a parameter which is written first kappa and then kappa_3 (in the analysis of the linear stability region)
94.7.155.115 (talk) 11:56, 12 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  typo on a parameter 

message: Mathematical Reaction–Diffusion systems are frequently used as a model to explain morphogenesis in biology (seed head geometry (see also Fibonacci Phyllotaxis), giraffe, leopard, and zebra skin patterns, butterfly wing coloration patterns, etc.). These examples were and are a primary inspiration in studying R-D systems.
Yet none of the articles on this topic I found, including this WP article and The Chemical Basis of Morphogenesis, explore whether the model actually is the one used, that is, whether there are actual chemicals and biological mechanisms that implement the R-D mathematics in e.g. generating the colorful skin patterns of giraffe.
This should be stated in the article. It is an important limitation of the practical effects of the R-D theory and may indicate that some other mathematics are at work. I am adding this note here so that someone with expertise in this area can add citations showing that R-D systems have or have not been found in the biological systems that inspired them.
Note that Reaction-Diffusion mathematics, as well as Automata Theory, are apparently the actual mechanism of the pattern-forming chemical reactions known as Belousov–Zhabotinsky reactions. The question raised here is whether or not the same applicability obtains in biology. It seems a natural question that an encyclopedic article should address. David Spector (talk) 18:35, 26 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  But does the model actually apply to biology? 

message: I don't work in academia but I do read papers from time to time. The two referenced below seem to indicate (and other things I have read seem to make it quite concrete) that RD is a good model for some biological phenomena, including giraffes/fish and phyllotaxis/fibbonacci spirals (the PennyBacker link). I suspect that in fact this class of simulations can go far deeper than that as well, check out the quantum-mechanics sims in Ready under Patterns/Schrodinger1926!).
The BZ-reaction is only one point of evidence towards the idea that diffusing molecular reactions can behave in a way that can be modelled by an RD-like simulation. Take the wave-equation for example though, no-one argues that that is not a good model for how waves propagate (example in Ready/Patterns/wave_equation.vti).
I think that this article should be expanded to include some indication of now fairly well recognized links between RD-like simulations (including automata and abstract/graph-automata ie neural architectures) and our tissues (esp. brains) and the universe.
*  
* 
* 
Edit: forgot to sign. Added another relevant link.
Danwills (talk) 13:03, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Yes, Reaction-diffusion is now recognized as applying to biology