Talk:Bacillus subtilis

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Bacillus subtilis article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed Article policies Neutral point of view No original research Verifiability

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

This  level-5 vital article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Microbiology High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Microbiology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Microbiology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MicrobiologyWikipedia:WikiProject MicrobiologyTemplate:WikiProject MicrobiologyMicrobiology High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 3 September 2021 and 16 December 2021. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Paytonreiner.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 15:11, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I understand the name was recently changed to Bacillus Atropheus as part of a standardizing process. Perhaps someone with more knowledge of wikipedia could rename or redirect or whatever.

Actually, two reference strains that had been classified as B. subtilis were re-classified based on DNA homology testing as a new species, B. atrophaeus (Nakamura 1989). In other words, just a couple of B. subtilis strains were affected. (see original citation). MarcoTolo 21:07, 11 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

what's the common name of Bacillus subtilis?

That I'm aware of, Bacillus subtilis doesn't have a "common name". -- MarcoTolo 00:08, 26 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Under Pathogenesis, what is "ropiness" caused in bread?? 202.36.179.66 23:11, 25 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Ropiness" occurs when bacterial contamination leads to mucus-like, sticky, and stringy dough - i.e. like lots of little ropes. The condition is caused by the production of long chain polysaccharides by the bacteria. -- MarcoTolo 00:08, 26 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bacteria in nature are commonly colonial living and dependent on each others excreation of reagents essential for energy production. Only a few bacteria species can without hazzle be grown in laboratory because of the required colonial symbiosis. The Polysaccharide excreted creates a web like structure of very sticky goo(No material has yet been found where this goo will not stick) which create the habitat of bacteria colonies. Lord Metroid 20:30, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to see some discussion of the use of bacillus subtilis in a number of probiotic products including Primal Defense and ThreeLac (also FiveLac from the same company). The maker of a competing probiotic product is distributing literature claiming that bacillus subtilis can be harmful according to some studies. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.198.221.25 (talk) 02:10, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Certain strains B subtilis have been found to produce a toxin that has been linked to food poisoning. Other strains are classified safe for use in food products. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikashai (talk • contribs) 11:27, 22 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Is it worth mentioning at the top that it is amylase and lipase positive as these are some simple tests that can be done to differentiate between common bacterial species. TheTrojanHought (talk) 19:28, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I was hoping to find some more about supposed "severe hepatotoxicity" that is mentioned in the abstract of this publication: Severe hepatotoxicity following ingestion of Herbalife® nutritional supplements contaminated with Bacillus subtilis. Unfortunately I do not have access to the full publication.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.95.60.206 (talk • contribs) 19:23, 3 December 2008

See reply here -- MarcoTolo (talk) 19:44, 3 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

the syntax of the sentence beginning 'recombinants', under 'uses' is so fouled up that no one can correct it except the original author. no on else can tell what it's supposed to mean.Toyokuni3 (talk) 22:33, 22 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The sentence at the end of the opening paragraph does not make sense to me. It says:

Unlike several other well-known species, B. subtilis has historically been classified as an obligate aerobe, though recent research has demonstrated that this is not strictly correct.

I think this means that several Bacillus species have not historically been classified as obligate aerobe, and, while B. subtilis historically has been so classified, recent research demonstrates that to be false.

This seems like a very fine point to put in the opening. Would it be acceptable to move this into its own section? If it is really important information, perhaps it could be changed to something like: Recent research demonstrates that B. subtilis will grow with or without oxygen although historically it was classified as an obligate aerobe. Chimodori (talk) 02:44, 21 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

What is the natto strain now called? There is a sentence that says:

A strain of B. subtilis formerly known as Bacillus natto is used in the commercial production of the Japanese food natto, as well as the similar Korean food cheonggukjang.

The natto article uses Bacillus subtilis, Bacillus natto and Bacillus subtilis natto. According to the Japanese page for the natto bacterium JA:納豆菌, it is called Bacillus subtilis var. natto. Chimodori (talk) 02:52, 21 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've seen it claimed that this was used in World War II to fight dysentery, and that it was found in camel dung. Is there any evidence that this is actually the case? The history section is a little light on details. Example: http://www.rense.com/general4/bac.htm71.211.145.197 (talk) 04:49, 17 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Bacillus subtilis. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080921224505/http://www.lanl.gov/news/releases/archive/99-101.shtml to http://www.lanl.gov/news/releases/archive/99-101.shtml

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 10:32, 8 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Bacillus subtilis. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081214223550/http://www.bacterio.cict.fr/b/bacillus.html to http://www.bacterio.cict.fr/b/bacillus.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150221192452/http://mcm.fhpr.osd.mil/cb_exposures/project112_shad/shad.aspx to http://mcm.fhpr.osd.mil/cb_exposures/project112_shad/shad.aspx

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:43, 13 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Bacillus subtilis. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130828202453/http://www.biopharma.novozymes.com/en/hyaluronic-acid/Frequently-asked-questions/Pages/default.aspx to http://www.biopharma.novozymes.com/en/hyaluronic-acid/Frequently-asked-questions/Pages/default.aspx

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:40, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I am very new at editing Wiki pages and have never used the talk page. This is my attempt to see how it works. Do you think that it is correct to describe "natural bacterial transformation" as the transfer of DNA from one bacterium to another through the surrounding medium. Should we define it as uptake of exogenous DNA and keep the concept of donor bacterium for conjugation? --Bbbmar (talk) 16:51, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The globally popular medications neosporin and polysporin both contain the medication Bacitracin, which is produced by the "Tracy I" variant of this bacteria. Surely that deserves a mention somewhere? Or is it already there (or on another page) where I can't find it?

Riventree (talk) 10:52, 1 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 30 January 2023 and 20 May 2023. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): YahKaeru (article contribs).

— Assignment last updated by Bubbstar (talk) 20:11, 15 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]