Talk:Pleomorphism (microbiology)

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 articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Viruses High‑importance

	Viruses portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Viruses, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of viruses 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.VirusesWikipedia:WikiProject VirusesTemplate:WikiProject Virusesvirus articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

°

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 27 August 2019 and 21 December 2019. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Samamiller.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 02:26, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Zkyqpx.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 06:47, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Isn't the correct name pleiomorphism, with an "i"???

It's the same root as pleiotropy —Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.83.70.41 (talk) 11:56, 1 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This article has nothing to with physics...

It also cannot be strictly correct. Both bacteria and fungi may display pleomorphic forms; for example in the case of bacteria who jettison their cell wall to shift to a new antigenic or pathological form. regford 20:27, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed project. AlmostReadytoFly (talk) 15:39, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This article in its' current form is plain wrong. First oft all, the historic debate about Pleomorphism included the theory that
a) bacteria, viruses and other microorganisms would be able to change into one another
b) bacteria could dramatically change shape
c) bacteria would be able to survive certain circumctances (immune system, heat/cold, extreme pH) more likely in certain "abnormal" shapes

While a) proved wrong, b) and c) are now well known phenomena: bacteria can dramatically change shape (treponema pallidum, borrelia burgdorferi, Mycobacterium avium, to name a few) and in certain shapes can survive better in hazardous environments. A well known example is pasteurization and Mycobacterium avium, which can survive temperatures used for pasteurizing milk while taking a special form.
I would soon like to change the article to reflect all this - of course sources for all facts included. —Preceding unsigned comment added by String42 (talk) 10:19, 19 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Does this article really belong in "Obsolete scientific theories"? It has never been disproven, and is alive and well in the research of Naessens, Robert Young and others. --58.175.83.103 (talk) 03:15, 22 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Pleomorphism was not proved wrong—it was proved correct

It has been accepted for decades, actually over a century, in pure microbiology that bacteria indeed exhibit extreme pleomorphism. It is in medical microbiology, which still uses the pure culture methods developed by Robert Koch and his avowed followers, whereby bacteria exhibit monomorphism. Soon I will drastically revise this article with a review of the relevant history, findings, and publications. Kusername (talk) 05:35, 10 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please discuss your "drastic revisions" here first, considering the reception of your edits on other articles. Please read WP:FRINGE, WP:OR. WP:NPOV, and WP:RS properly. Wikipedia is not here to serve as an advocacy platform. Fences&Windows 19:47, 14 December 2011 (

You're right, Wikipedia is a pharmaceutical plattform... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.197.224.39 (talk) 02:31, 6 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Why has Royal Raymond Rifes name not been mentioned??? he was only the greatest microbiolioligist in the world and proved the theory first.

That's why his lab was seized and destroyed. Never mess with the mafia, bro' --178.197.224.39 (talk) 02:38, 6 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Missing work of Emmy Nobel and Lida Mattman

Some scientists that proved pleomorphism correct were Emmy Klieneberger-Nobel and Lida Holmes Mattman. Also have a look at L-form bacteria, please. 178.197.224.39 (talk) 02:51, 6 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]