Science desk
< October 29	<< Sep \| October \| Nov >>	Current desk >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Science Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is a transcluded archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

October 30[edit]

Influenza vaccine[edit]

Supposedly each year's influenza vaccine consists of three strains which the CDC(?) has decided are the biggest threats for that year. Some years a strain(s) from the previous year is included again. My question is, should there be Wikipedia mentions, perhaps in a list article, for these strains? Here is the list for 2018. Abductive (reasoning) 19:10, 30 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

They are chosen by WHO, not by CDC. We already have Historical_annual_reformulations_of_the_influenza_vaccine, which is linked from the main article. Ruslik_Zero 20:34, 30 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"Doesn't believe in evolution. Gets a new flu shot every year." I'm just saying. --Guy Macon (talk) 16:23, 3 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Doesn't believe in climate forecasts, believes weather forecasts. Might also think evolution is bullshit but might believe that part of science. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 02:48, 4 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Access request to scientific databases to enable research into the productivity of photosynthesis in low CO2 contexts such as at the last glacial maximum..[edit]

I would like to expand and perhaps modify the text at Carbon dioxide in Earth's atmosphere#Effects of increased CO2 on plants and crops so as to incorporate information on the effects of lower levels of CO2 on plants.

Most scientific research, in its natural bent to follow the money, has been conducted in the effects of increased CO2 on crops yet, when I contacted one professor who had worked on a related topic, she said that she had somewhere seen results from projects in the effects of lower levels of CO2.

I think that this is an important area of research as it will help to provide a wider understanding of the context in which our ancestors developed.

Basically the CO2 content in the atmosphere at around the last glacial maximum was around 180 ppm (parts per million).
In the pre-Industrial context it had reached about 280 ppm.
In our industrial times it's reached 400 ppm and much is made of the effects of the various productivities of plants.

I read somewhere that CO2 contents at the end of the Carboniferous period had sunk to around 100 ppm.

I'd appreciate help in gaining access to relevant scientific papers.

My current plan would be to start with a google scholar search such as: photosynthesis "carbon dioxide" ppm (glacial OR "ice age") and see how things progressed from there.

Greg Kaye 20:02, 30 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I suspect that the topic of the effect of carbon dioxide levels on the growth, physiology or existence of plants is a notable topic itself, and so could have a separate article. Anyway, once you find a specific item you want, you can ask at the specific page for this sort of thing at Wikipedia:WikiProject Resource Exchange/Resource Request. It would be a good idea to find a text book or review article that covers this to make sure that only considered information is included rather than wild ideas. On the other side of the situation I like the Azolla event, where plants modified the global CO₂ level. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 21:41, 30 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Choice of good search terms is often extremely important. I tried low co2 plant biochemistry and found Physiological Significance of Low Atmospheric CO2 for Plant–Climate Interactions on the first page. --Kharon (talk) 03:50, 31 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

That's very true. I accessed another set of results by finding a notable article and going through the list of other articles that had cited it.[1]. However most of articles I've found so far, by any route, have focused on research into fossilised carbon. I've found a number of those one of which is open access. When I have time I'll go back to look for studies into growth characteristics of contemporary plant stocks when in low carbon contexts. I appreciate that, since the last glacial maximum, carbon synthesising organisations have had many thousands of years to evolve in ways that may have adjusted their suitability to take advantage of higher carbon concentrations. However I'd hope that many and perhaps all test results would be informative. Greg Kaye 10:44, 1 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]