View source for Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Science/2013 September 5

<noinclude><!-- From archive header-->
{{#ifeq:{{PAGENAME}}|Special:Undelete| |{{#if:|<div style="display:none;">}} {{#ifeq:{{NAMESPACE}}|Wikipedia|{{#switch:{{NAMESPACE}}|= |<div style="display:none;">}}|{{error:not substituted|Archive header}}<div style="display:none;">}}}} {{#if:|</div></div>}}{| width = "100%"
|-
! colspan="3" align="center" | [[Wikipedia:Reference desk/Science|Science desk]]
|-
! width="20%" align="left"  | &lt; [[Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Science/2013 September 4|September 4]]
! width="25%" align="center"|&lt;&lt; [[Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Science/August 2013|Aug]] | [[Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Science/September 2013|September]] | [[Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Science/October 2013|Oct]] &gt;&gt;
! width="20%" align="right" |{{#ifexist:Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Science/2013 September 6|[[Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Science/2013 September 6|September 6]]|[[Wikipedia:Reference desk/Science|Current desk]]}} &gt;
|}
{| align=center width=95% style="background: #FFFFFF; border: 1px solid #003EBA;" cellpadding="8" cellspacing="0"
|-
! style="background: #5D7CBA; text-align: center; font-family:Arial; color:#FFFFFF;" | '''Welcome to the Wikipedia Science Reference Desk Archives'''
|-
| The page you are currently viewing is {{#ifexist:Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Science/2013 September 15|an archive page|a [[Wikipedia:Transclusion|transcluded]] archive page}}. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the [[Wikipedia:Reference desk|current reference desk]] pages.
|}


__TOC__
</noinclude>
= September 5 =

== CTE ==

Have any studies been done on people other than sports participants or veterans to determine if they have had head trauma that it is CTE?  <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:S0berpete|S0berpete]] ([[User talk:S0berpete|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/S0berpete|contribs]]) 00:02, 5 September 2013 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

:[[Chronic_traumatic_encephalopathy#Epidemiology]] also describes that people with a history of chronic seizures and domestic abuse victims are at a heightened risk of developing CTE. The reason that CTE research is so focused on combat veterans and athletes is that they are far ''far'' more likely to develop CTE - the first patient diagnosed was a boxer, for instance. [http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10442557 This] is a case study of five patients with CTE (back when it was called dementia pugilistica, or Boxer's Dementia). The patients included three athletes, a mentally disabled man with a history of banging his head against things, and an epilepsy patient with a history of smacking his head while falling during a seizure. [[User:Someguy1221|Someguy1221]] ([[User talk:Someguy1221|talk]]) 00:53, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

== Telescopes on the Moon ==

The [[Chang'e-3]] is scheduled to launch in late 2013 and allegedly will [http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/china/2013-09/04/content_16944718.htm carry a telescope for astral observations from the Moon]. Will the Chinese be the first to attempt this or has another nation already done it? How does observation quality from the surface of the Moon compare to orbital platforms? Are there downsides? I couldn't find an article regarding telescopes on the Moon... [[User:DrewHeath|DrewHeath]] ([[User talk:DrewHeath|talk]]) 02:01, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

:''The Times of India'' thinks the first telescope on the Moon will be a private venture in 2016.[http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2013-07-22/science/40726462_1_moon-express-iloa-south-pole] The ''MIT Technology Review'' has an article about using lunar dust to build a mirror.[http://www.technologyreview.com/news/410253/a-moon-based-telescope/] There's also a proposal for a liquid mirror telescope.[http://science1.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/2008/09oct_liquidmirror/] [[User:Clarityfiend|Clarityfiend]] ([[User talk:Clarityfiend|talk]]) 02:48, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

== Gastrobiology of obesity==

Last month i believe there came a paper which suggests that
Gut Flora play a role in the development of Obesity. Could you guys please elaborate 
In the simple and summerized way possible, why would
Such a connection exists, and it's core principles in short?

Many many thanks for you kind help and illumination. [[Special:Contributions/95.35.51.159|95.35.51.159]] ([[User talk:95.35.51.159|talk]]) 02:28, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

:This is a concept some have called [[Infectobesity]]. In summary, the idea is such: The bacteria in your gut play a huge role in the digestion and absorption of food that you have eaten. The obese have different gut flora than the thin. In particular, the gut flora often found in the obese allows their bodies to absorb a greater proportion of the energy from their meals than thin bodies are able to. The gut-flora differences do not apply to everyone: There are likely thin people with obesity-associated flora, and obese people with thinness-associated flora. It is unknown how broad this finding applies (i.e. does it vary with age, race geographic location, medical conditions, etc.). It is unknown whether having these gut flora makes you fat, or being fat causes your body to retain such flora. A paper came out earlier this year showing that you could cause mice to lose weight by altering their gut flora: [http://www.nature.com/news/gut-microbe-swap-helps-mice-shed-weight-1.12688]. [[User:Someguy1221|Someguy1221]] ([[User talk:Someguy1221|talk]]) 03:06, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

== Difference between [[char]] and [[charcoal]]? ==

Is there a difference between [[char]] and [[charcoal]]? The articles aren't clear, but they seem to define them in the same way. The [[biochar]] article seems to regard biochar as a specific type or application of charcoal. 

So... they seem the same (so a merge might be needed) but I haven't found a definite answer from a reliable source. 

(I see I'm [[Talk:Char#The diff between char and charcoal --|not the first to ask]].) --[[User:Chriswaterguy|Chriswaterguy]] <small>[[User talk:Chriswaterguy|talk]]</small> 02:44, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

[http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2649247/ One source] about biochar and charcoal:
<blockquote>Christoph Steiner, a research scientist at the University of Georgia, says the difference between charcoal and biochar lies primarily in the end use. “Charcoal is a fuel, and biochar has a nonfuel use that makes carbon sequestration feasible,” he explains. “Otherwise there is no difference between charcoal carbon and biochar carbon.”</blockquote>
--[[User:Chriswaterguy|Chriswaterguy]] <small>[[User talk:Chriswaterguy|talk]]</small> 02:57, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

:Wouldn't char contain a higher proportion of impurities such as phosphate and other minerals? [[User:Plasmic Physics|Plasmic Physics]] ([[User talk:Plasmic Physics|talk]]) 02:59, 6 September 2013 (UTC)

::Why do you say that? --[[User:Chriswaterguy|Chriswaterguy]] <small>[[User talk:Chriswaterguy|talk]]</small> 16:13, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

== Why when the plane fly above the earth, are not affected by the movement of the Earth's rotation on its axis in other words, why not lengthen or shorten the distance between one country and another when it fly? ==

Why when the plane fly above the earth, are not affected by the movement of the Earth's rotation on its axis in other words, why not lengthen or shorten the distance between one country and another when it fly?
why it's not affected it?  <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/37.238.50.113|37.238.50.113]] ([[User talk:37.238.50.113|talk]]) 07:37, 5 September 2013 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

:Because it's flying in air, and the air moves with the Earth.  — [[User:Kwamikagami|kwami]] ([[User talk:Kwamikagami|talk]]) 08:31, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

::In a sense, we do. Airflow ("wind" ;-) over the Earth is affected by [[Coriolis force]], and modern air routes are very much designed to take prevailing wind patterns into account. Indeed, if you check [[North Atlantic Tracks]], you will see that the optimal route configuration is determined every day, based on current meteorological information. --[[User:Stephan Schulz|Stephan Schulz]] ([[User talk:Stephan Schulz|talk]]) 09:44, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

:::But the direct answer to the question is that the plane is affected.  However, what is affected is the steering, not how far it must travel.  As Kwami said, the atmosphere moves with the Earth, and the distance the plane must fly is relative to the atmosphere.  But as for steering, the airplane feels a force perpendicular to the Earth's axis &mdash; that is, partly horizontal and partly vertical.  The horizontal component is called the [[Coriolis effect]] or Coriolis force, and the vertical component is called the [[Eötvös effect]].  But the Earth rotates ''very slowly'' &mdash; it takes a whole day to rotate a single turn &mdash; and the result is that the Coriolis and Eötvös effects are very small.  A plane must be constantly steered in flight to overcome the effects of any crosswinds and up and down drafts; the Coriolis and Eötvös effects can easily be overcome the same way.  And since they are not only small but almost constant during the flight, the pilot would not even notice them.  --[[Special:Contributions/50.100.188.72|50.100.188.72]] ([[User talk:50.100.188.72|talk]]) 10:11, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

::::Earth's rotation is however a significant factor in space launches. [[Escape velocity]] says: "as the Earth's rotational velocity is 465&nbsp;m/s at the equator, a rocket launched tangentially from the Earth's equator to the east requires an initial velocity of about 10.735&nbsp;km/s ''relative to Earth'' to escape whereas a rocket launched tangentially from the Earth's equator to the west requires an initial velocity of about 11.665&nbsp;km/s ''relative to Earth''". This has strongly influenced the chosen sites (to the south on the Northern Hemisphere) and direction (east) for most space launches. [[User:PrimeHunter|PrimeHunter]] ([[User talk:PrimeHunter|talk]]) 10:36, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

:::::Yes, even if planes could fly above the rotating atmosphere, they would still take of with a speed (<small>relative to an inertial frame fixed at the centre of the earth but not rotating with the earth</small>) of the take-off ground-speed plus the instantaneous tangential speed of the airstrip.  In the absence of air, and some (currently impossible) mechanism to counteract just gravity, the plane would continue at constant speed on a tangent to the curvature of the Earth.  If you jump in the air, you tend to land again on the same spot, because the Earth has rotated under you , but you have (almost exactly) retained the tangential velocity of the spot you jumped from.  In practice, it is usually simpler (for jumping, balloons, planes etc, but not for space launches) to ignore the rotation of the Earth and just to take into account winds and Coriolis forces.  [[User:Dbfirs|''<span style="font-family:verdana;"><span style="color:blue;">D</span><span style="color:#00ccff;">b</span><span style="color:#44ffcc;">f</span><span style="color:#66ff66;">i</span><span style="color:#44ee44;">r</span><span style="color:#44aa44;">s</span></span>'']] 13:03, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

== Three leaves in a dicot plant. Is this a mutation? ==
[[File:Monocot vs dicot crop Pengo.jpg|thumb|150px|Comparison of a monocot and dicot sprouting. Note that the visible part of the monocot plant (left) is actually the first true leaf produced from the [[meristem]]; the cotyledon itself remains within the seed.  (Image is from our [[cotyledon]] article.)]]

I observed a plant of leguminase family that has three first leavs. I could see the two cotyldons, but the first leavs appared are in numbr three. I planted five seeds. All other four seeds produced two leaves each but this one seems very odd with 3 leaves. --[[User:G.Kiruthikan|G.Kiruthikan]] ([[User talk:G.Kiruthikan|talk]]) 10:53, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

:Do you have a photo? [[User:Sfan00 IMG|Sfan00 IMG]] ([[User talk:Sfan00 IMG|talk]]) 13:45, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

::It seems like a developmental anomaly, but probably not a mutation, although it could be.  Identical twins in humans are also a developmental anomaly but not a result of a mutation. [[User:Looie496|Looie496]] ([[User talk:Looie496|talk]]) 14:14, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

:::Do you mean [[conjoined twins]] ? [[User:StuRat|StuRat]] ([[User talk:StuRat|talk]]) 01:09, 6 September 2013 (UTC)

::::Without a photo there is no way to opine on this topic.  We don't know what is meant by the leaves come in threes.  Cannabis has leaves with an odd number of leaves--that doesn't disqualify it as a dicot.  We need an image. [[User:Medeis|μηδείς]] ([[User talk:Medeis|talk]]) 01:31, 6 September 2013 (UTC)

:::::The question makes perfect sense, but you have to know some basic plant biology to understand it.  The great majority of flowering plants are either [[monocot]]s or [[dicot]]s.  The defining feature of the two groups is that in monocots, when the seed sprouts, the stalk that comes up gives rise to a single tiny leaf; in dicots it splits into two tiny leaves.  This is the defining feature, but there are many others that go along with it -- basically monocots are grasses and grasslike things, dicots are almost all the remaining flowering plants.  The OP is saying that he saw a plant in the dicot group where the sprout produced three tiny leaves instead of the usual two. [[User:Looie496|Looie496]] ([[User talk:Looie496|talk]]) 01:52, 6 September 2013 (UTC)

:::::: No tricots? Hmm [[User:Sfan00 IMG|Sfan00 IMG]] ([[User talk:Sfan00 IMG|talk]]) 18:05, 6 September 2013 (UTC)

:::::::The OP's "I could see the two cotyldons, but the first leavs appared are in numbr three" seems to imply that he is talking about the first proper leaves, not the dicotyledons, Looie. [[User:Medeis|μηδείς]] ([[User talk:Medeis|talk]]) 00:51, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

[[File:Three leaved bean.jpg|thumb|150px|This is the phot takaen by phone and retaken by webcam]]  <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:G.Kiruthikan|G.Kiruthikan]] ([[User talk:G.Kiruthikan|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/G.Kiruthikan|contribs]]) 12:54, 8 September 2013 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

See this photo and decide whether it is a mutation or any other thing please.  <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:G.Kiruthikan|G.Kiruthikan]] ([[User talk:G.Kiruthikan|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/G.Kiruthikan|contribs]]) 13:09, 8 September 2013 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

== Eating shellfish during a red tide ==

Dinoflagellates of the genus ''Gonyaulax'' produce a toxin called "saxitoxin", which is concentrated in clams, mussels, and other shellfish that feed on these marine protozoa. During a red tide, they bloom, and eating shellfish during these times can be fatal due to unusually high concentration of the toxin. Now, is the fact that eating shellfish during a red tide is deadly ever related to the fact that Jews can't eat shellfish? Is there an anthropological basis for this dietary restriction? [[Special:Contributions/164.107.102.52|164.107.102.52]] ([[User talk:164.107.102.52|talk]]) 15:25, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

:It's hard to know what's behind a two-thousand-year-old arbitrary religious rule - however, I'd guess that living in a hot climate, far from the ocean, in an era before refrigeration, would make not eating shellfish be an excellent rule...religious or not! [[User:SteveBaker|SteveBaker]] ([[User talk:SteveBaker|talk]]) 16:08, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

::SteveBaker, you do realize that the restriction is written out in [http://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/1452611/jewish/Why-Do-Jews-Not-Eat-Pork-or-Crab.htm Deuteronomy], right? According to [http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/5132-deuteronomy#anchor13 this source], some people think that Deuteronomy is written in approximately 600 BC. Under this dating, that would place it six hundred years more or less before Christ. From today, that's 2600 years. [[Special:Contributions/164.107.102.52|164.107.102.52]] ([[User talk:164.107.102.52|talk]]) 16:22, 5 September 2013 (UTC)
:::The way I always heard it, ''bottom feeders'' are considered "unclean", which is why not just shellfish, but also hogs and catfish are on the list. ←[[User:Baseball Bugs|Baseball Bugs]] <sup>''[[User talk:Baseball Bugs|What's up, Doc?]]''</sup> [[Special:Contributions/Baseball_Bugs|carrots]]→ 16:49, 5 September 2013 (UTC)
::::There's a rough hypothesis to be made that the ancient Israelites, living as a community in Egypt (which many historians will claim never happened) were in some way able to understand that a dangerous red tide was underway and created the first Passover as a way of ensuring everyone ate something other than shellfish.  It's purely speculation.  There might be something in [http://www.academia.dk/MedHist/Sygdomme/PDF/Encyclopedia_of_Pestilence_Pandemics_and_Plagues.pdf this] to that effect but only Google's secret index knows (I could drag out my crummy command line pdf2djvu and eventually get searchability but I can't be bothered right now) [[User:Wnt|Wnt]] ([[User talk:Wnt|talk]]) 18:12, 5 September 2013 (UTC)
:::::Far as I know, Egyptian hieroglyphs make it reasonably clear that the Hebrews were there, except their spin on it was that they drove the Hebrews out. ←[[User:Baseball Bugs|Baseball Bugs]] <sup>''[[User talk:Baseball Bugs|What's up, Doc?]]''</sup> [[Special:Contributions/Baseball_Bugs|carrots]]→ 21:45, 5 September 2013 (UTC)
::::::I took this one on in [[Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Archives/Humanities/2013_June_23#Where_did_Jews_come_from_before_the_Exodus.3F]], left less than satisfied. [[User:Wnt|Wnt]] ([[User talk:Wnt|talk]]) 08:02, 6 September 2013 (UTC)

== Makeshift electromagnet advice ==
{{rd-deleted}}
Sorry guys, but this is way over the line of what constitutes medical advice&mdash;whether the original poster insists that he won't hold us liable or not, encouraging him to build powerful magnets for use as a medical device will end badly for all involved.  [[User:TenOfAllTrades|TenOfAllTrades]]([[User_talk:TenOfAllTrades|talk]]) 13:09, 6 September 2013 (UTC)
{{hat|Deleted means deleted [[User:Tevildo|Tevildo]] ([[User talk:Tevildo|talk]]) 22:31, 6 September 2013 (UTC)}}
:Bullshit. My friend removed a splinter with a magnet from inside a hard drive. You jobsworths make me sick. --[[Special:Contributions/129.215.47.59|129.215.47.59]] ([[User talk:129.215.47.59|talk]]) 14:45, 6 September 2013 (UTC)
{{hab}}

== What is the meaning of A1C? ==

I don't ask about the hemoglobin A1C (because I read about in our article on Wiki) but only about the meaning of the sign "A1C".what's the meaning? probably it's initials of something[[Special:Contributions/95.35.210.39|95.35.210.39]] ([[User talk:95.35.210.39|talk]]) 19:30, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

:According to our disambiguation page [[A1C]], this probably refers to [[Glycated hemoglobin]]...but that page doesn't say what it means either. [[User:SteveBaker|SteveBaker]] ([[User talk:SteveBaker|talk]]) 19:55, 5 September 2013 (UTC)
::If you look down the page, at some point it's written HbA<sub>1c</sub>.  So I suspect the answer is that it's a form of [[hemoglobin A]], probably further subdivided into subtype 1 and sub-sub-type c. --[[User:Trovatore|Trovatore]] ([[User talk:Trovatore|talk]]) 19:59, 5 September 2013 (UTC)
:::There is an article on: [[Hemoglobin, alpha 1]] (Hemoglobin A1). so, now we looking for the meaning of letter C. [[Special:Contributions/95.35.210.39|95.35.210.39]] ([[User talk:95.35.210.39|talk]]) 20:54, 5 September 2013 (UTC)
::::Why do you think there's a "meaning"?  Is there any reason to think it's not just the next one classified after HbA<sub>1a</sub> and HbA<sub>1b</sub>?  --[[User:Trovatore|Trovatore]] ([[User talk:Trovatore|talk]]) 20:56, 5 September 2013 (UTC)
:::::I have not knew about HbA<sub>1a</sub> and HbA<sub>1b</sub>. It's not written on our article of [[hemoglobin]], but the other are written there. I thought maybe it's a shortening of a any word. [[Special:Contributions/95.35.210.39|95.35.210.39]] ([[User talk:95.35.210.39|talk]]) 21:09, 5 September 2013 (UTC)
::::::I don't know of them either; whether there's any such thing as  HbA<sub>1a</sub> or HbA<sub>1b</sub> I couldn't tell you.  It ''could'' be short for a word (HbF seems to be [[fetal hemoglobin]]; I don't know whether the F stands for "fetal" or whether it's just a coincidence).  I just don't see any immediate reason to think it's ''likely'' that it stands for anything.  But who knows; maybe someone will pop up and tell us. --[[User:Trovatore|Trovatore]] ([[User talk:Trovatore|talk]]) 21:13, 5 September 2013 (UTC)
:It's possible that it once had an actual meaning - but has since become "what it's called".  There are lots of things like that out there.  Everyone knows what a "laser" is - nearly everyone has forgotten that it was once written "L.A.S.E.R: and stood for " Light Amplification by Stimulated Emission of Radiation" - even though that's no longer how all lasers work.  In the end, it may not matter what A1C stands for - so long as everyone in the business of dealing with it agrees on what it is. [[User:SteveBaker|SteveBaker]] ([[User talk:SteveBaker|talk]]) 21:56, 5 September 2013 (UTC)
::::Wait, what?  There are lasers that don't work by stimulated emission?  Which ones, and how do they work then? --[[User:Trovatore|Trovatore]] ([[User talk:Trovatore|talk]]) 23:20, 5 September 2013 (UTC)
::This is trackable, but if you want the answer it may take some work.  For some idiotic reason I cannot begin to comprehend, even now NCBI's journal abstract indexes go back little further than they did 20 years ago.  As far as I'm concerned they ought to be back to Hippocrates by now.  The reference given in the article is one of the very earliest you get when you search hemoglobin a1c there and sort by date.  You can follow authors on the study further - for example, to one amazingly quixotic but truly valiant attempt in 1950 to determine the point mutation in sickle cell hemoglobin, before the idea was understood, which alas came up with four amino acids possibly altered, but actually found less valine in what we now know is a E->V point mutation [http://www.jbc.org/cgi/pmidlookup?view=long&pmid=14794707] hmmm but I digress.  Anyway, it appears sometime between 1950 and 1964 the term was invented.  If you want to find it for sure, I'd guess you should hoof down to the library and either (a) pull out those big nasty tomes of Biological Abstracts or (b) read some of the publications of WA Schroeder that NCBI indexes (but without abstracts) from the early 1960s.  One of these available online [https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14078980] says HbA was named because it was "alkali labile".  Some others such as [https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14148841] [https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14140704] might review it.  Oh, anyway, my ''guess'' is that it is a variant seen with [[electrophoresis]] or perhaps [[column chromatography]].  [[User:Wnt|Wnt]] ([[User talk:Wnt|talk]]) 22:41, 5 September 2013 (UTC)
:::As Wnt correctly guessed, the terminology derives from ion-exchange chromatography. Kunkel and Wellenius, studying normal adult hemoglobin (hemoglobin A) in 1955, noted that there were "minor components" present that varied from the parent hemoglobin. Further study (Allen et al.) distinguished between five subfractions (hemoglobin A1a, hemoglobin A1b, hemoglobin A1c, hemoglobin A1d, and hemoglobin A1e), named in order of elution (all of these preceded hemoglobin A0, the main form of hemoglobin). They therefore called A1a, A1b, A1c, A1d, and A1e the "fast hemoglobins". Rahbar et al. demonstrated in 1969 that hemoglobin A1c was elevated in the RBCs of diabetics.  In 1971, Trivelli et al. suggested that there was a relationship between hemoglobin A1c levels and long term complications in diabetics.  More recently, the Committee on Nomenclature, Properties, and Units of the IFCC proposed a new term for HbA1c, namely Haemoglobin beta chain(Blood-N-(1-deoxyfructos-1-yl)haemoglobin beta chain; substance fraction), but as this is impractical in clinical use, "permits" the continuing use of the trivial name "HbA<sub>1c</sub>". 
::::(Kunkel HG, Wallenius G. New hemoglobins in normal adult blood. Science. 1955;122(3163):288) 
::::(Allen DW, Schroeder WA, Balog J. Observations on the chromatographic heterogeneity of normal adult and fetal hemogloba study of the effects of crystallization and chromatography in the heterogeneity and isoleucine content. J Am Chem Soc. 1958;80(7):1628–1634.) 
::::(Rahbar S, Blumenfeld O, Ranney HM. Studies of an unusual hemoglobin in patients with diabetes mellitus. Biochem Biophys Res Commun. 1969;36(5):838–843.)
::::(Trivelli LA, Ranney HM, Lai HT. Hemoglobin components in patients with diabetes mellitus. N Eng J Med. 1971;284(7):353–357.) - <span style="font-family: cursive">[[User:Nunh-huh|Nunh-huh]]</span> 09:36, 6 September 2013 (UTC)

== what is the meaning of "beta" on hormones  ==

I saw some hormones with prefix "beta". now I remember only one "beta hcg", but I know that there are more. anyway, what is the meaning of this word ("beta") when it comes as prefix before an hormone name? [[Special:Contributions/95.35.210.39|95.35.210.39]] ([[User talk:95.35.210.39|talk]]) 19:36, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

:See [[Protein subunit]]. [[User:Tevildo|Tevildo]] ([[User talk:Tevildo|talk]]) 19:59, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

:In the case of [[Human Chorionic Gonadotropin]], Tevildo's link explains the general concept, but you might also like to read the article about the hormone, which is a [[heterodimer]] composed of an alpha chain and a beta chain. The beta chain can also circulate as a [[monomer]] or a [[homodimer]] (see {{PMID|15192308}}). In other cases that come to mind (which are [[cytokine]]s, but the boundary between cytokines and hormones is a bit fuzzy), a name was given to a chemical mediator thought to be a single substance, which later turned out to be a class of substances. Greek letters were added to differentiate between the different substances. See [[interferon]]. In the case of the interferons, the greek letter is sometimes written first ("gamma interferon"), but more often last ("interferon gamma"). In other cases ([[Transforming growth factor]], [[Tumor necrosis factor]], TNF), the Greek letter last-convention predominates. Interestingly, according to our article, TFNα has been renamed simply to TNF, and TNFβ to [[lymphotoxin alpha]]. Lymphotoxin alpha exists as a [[homotrimer]], but may also form [[heterotrimer]]s with yet another membrane-bound protein called lymphotoxin beta. So in this case, the greek letter does double duty, it differentiaties between completely different molecules, TNFα and TFNβ, and between different chains of the same molecule (lymphotoxin alpha and lymphotoxin beta when the protein is a hereotrimer).
:A third and completely unrelated usage of greek letters preceding proteins, indicates the "band" a protein will migrate to in a [[serum protein electrophoresis]]. Examples: [[α1-antitrypsin]], [[α2-macroglobulin]]. --[[User:NorwegianBlue|NorwegianBlue]]<sup>[[User_talk:NorwegianBlue|&nbsp;<u>talk</u>]]</sup> 22:19, 5 September 2013 (UTC)