Talk:Implantation (embryology)

Implantation

I think it should be made clear that the information contained here applies to humans, and may be inaccurate for many other species. Not to nitpick, but food animal reproduction (for example) is a pretty big industry, and I can imagine someone interested in animal pregnancy searching for "implanation" on Wikipedia.

I agree, this is a human only article. It should be named something else. 64.229.101.119 (talk) 20:03, 5 February 2011 (UTC)

It also isn't written for humans. This article is filled to the brim with medical babble. --70.68.166.112 (talk) 19:58, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

The name has now been changed, but that leaves the issue of where implantation in other species should be described. Given that it's mostly the same, it seems it would be a rather trivial content fork to create such an article. Anaxial (talk) 10:01, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

Yea this needs somer serious re-writing for it to be accurate. The first bit in particular is complete crap. For example in marsupials, implantation (if it can still be called that) happens on the last day or so of pregnancy. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.132.173.239 (talk) 20:25, 22 June 2016 (UTC)

nidation

why am I redirected to this page when searching for "nidation"???? is it the same thing?????? there's no explanation?????? was is nidation plz??? 85.127.94.181 (talk) 13:51, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

Yes, it's the same thing. Anaxial (talk) 09:58, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

mistake in section "implantation window"

it is stated that if something is wrong implantion won't occur and there will be miscarriage. well, how can there be miscarriage if there was no implantation? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.199.0.114 (talk) 20:18, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: page moved. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 13:28, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

---

Implantation → Implantation (embryo) — Neither of the primary two senses (surgical/embryological) can be called the primary topic, so we should go to a disambiguation page instead Mesoderm (talk) 17:04, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

• Implantation (disambiguation) → Implantation
  • Support; I don't see an obvious primary topic. Powers ^T 01:35, 29 January 2011 (UTC)
• semi support I agree the disambiguation page should be moved, but I think this should be renamed to Implantation (human embryo) per the first section of this talk page, as this is a human-only article, not a general live-birth article. 64.229.101.119 (talk) 20:05, 5 February 2011 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Proposed addition

I propose that we add additional content to this page, to discuss the evolutionary origin of implantation in humans. I wrote the content below for this section, but it was subsequently removed by expert user Jytdog. It was removed on the grounds that it refers to primary literature (even though it also refers to review articles), and that it includes self citations. If any other users agree that this content is useful, please feel free to add it to the article page.

Evolutionary Origin of implantation

Implantation is a process unique to eutherian (formerly known as placental) mammals. In this group, all species studied have an implantation reaction that involves the apposition of the embryo and maternal tissue, the attachment of the embryo to the uterine surface, and invasion of the embryo into the uterine mucosa. In some species, including ruminants, this invasion is suppressed by the endometrium. However, there is strong evidence that the ancestral implantation process for eutherians was invasive.

To understand the evolutionary origin of this implantation process, researchers have looked to the closest relatives of eutherian mammals, the marsupials. Marsupial pregnancy is short and does not have maternal-fetal interaction until the last few days of gestation. However, on the last few days of pregnancy a placenta forms following the apposition of the trophoblast with the uterine wall. The formation of the placenta results in significant changes to the morphology and gene expression in the uterus. At a transcriptome wide level, there is significant overlap with this period of placenta formation and implantation in eutherian mammals.

The similarities between the opossum attachment reaction and eutherian implantation also include the expression of human markers of uterine receptivity (MUC1, SPP1, and HBEGF), expression of pro-inflammatory cytokines (IL6, TNF, and IL8), and consistent morphological changes to the uterine luminal epithelium. Together these similarities suggest that implantation is a modified form of the maternal fetal attachment reaction that is still present in marsupials today.

--— Preceding unsigned comment added by OliGriffith (talk • contribs) 17:46, 15 August 2017UTC) (UTC) Jytdog (talk) 18:08, 15 August 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for posting at talk.

This content is what we call synthesis, building up review-like content in Wikipedia from primary sources. This is not acceptable in Wikipedia. "Synthesis" is a form of original research, and "no original research" is one of the key content policies.

Writing here in Wikipedia is not like writing a review paper - the genre here is "encyclopedia" and the mission here is to summarize accepted knowledge. Our epistemology is that we find "accepted knowledge" in already-published literature.

If the synthetic content above is already published somewhere else, please cite that source. if it not published somewhere else, it doesn't belong in Wikipedia - it is your own synthesis. I acknowledge that this may seem preposterous to you. Many working scientists have a hard time getting grounded on what we do here and how we do it. Some find it repulsive even. Jytdog (talk) 18:12, 15 August 2017 (UTC)

The content is not original, which is why I included the citations. This includes citations to review articles, I apologise for also referencing primary literature. I have since deleted the citations to primary literature and replaced them with citations to the publication in which they are reviewed. However, I think this resource is weaker for it. OliGriffith (talk) 19:51, 15 August 2017 (UTC)

-- Note - this is a revision of the content above, made in this dif. I reverted and copied the new version below, per convention Jytdog (talk) 06:01, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

Evolutionary Origin of implantation

Implantation is a process unique to eutherian (formerly known as placental) mammals. In this group, all species studied have an implantation reaction that involves the apposition of the embryo and maternal tissue, the attachment of the embryo to the uterine surface, and invasion of the embryo into the uterine mucosa. In some species, including ruminants, this invasion is suppressed by the endometrium. However, there is strong evidence that the ancestral implantation process for eutherians was invasive.

To understand the evolutionary origin of this implantation process, researchers have looked to the closest relatives of eutherian mammals, the marsupials. Marsupial pregnancy is short and does not have maternal-fetal interaction until the last few days of gestation. However, on the last few days of pregnancy a placenta forms following the apposition of the trophoblast with the uterine wall. The formation of the placenta results in significant changes to the morphology and gene expression in the uterus. At a transcriptome wide level, there is significant overlap with this period of placenta formation and implantation in eutherian mammals.

The similarities between the opossum attachment reaction and eutherian implantation also include the expression of human markers of uterine receptivity (MUC1, SPP1, and HBEGF), expression of pro-inflammatory cytokines (IL6, TNF, and IL8), and consistent morphological changes to the uterine luminal epithelium. Together these similarities suggest that implantation is a modified form of the maternal fetal attachment reaction that is still present in marsupials today.

--OliGriffith (talk) 19:51, 15 August 2017 (UTC)

OK, some notes.

1) First, please never change content on a talk page, once somebody else has responded to it. Doing that renders what the other person wrote into nonsense. You can WP:REDACT a comment that someone has responded to, or you can just do as I did here, and post another version.

2) It would be really helpful if you followed the instructions for formatting refs as described in WP:MEDHOW -- there is an automated tool that enables you to format refs very, very quickly, if you start with the pmid or the like. Also instead of repeating citations, we use a markup called "ref name" to cite things multiple times.

3) I was going to show that to you and present another version below, and went looking for the first ref. It has not published yet as far as I can see. search result is null). Am I missing something? Jytdog (talk) 06:12, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

Requested move 15 June 2022

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: moved to Implantation (embryology). (closed by non-admin page mover) Vpab15 (talk) 09:45, 22 June 2022 (UTC)

---

Implantation (human embryo) → Implantation (embryo) – Stage not specific to humans Iztwoz (talk) 07:17, 14 June 2022 (UTC)

This is a contested technical request (permalink). GeoffreyT2000 (talk) 14:20, 15 June 2022 (UTC)

• I don't object, but it was moved back in 2011 the other direction so may warrant discussion. See https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Implantation_(embryo)&oldid=412908209 -Kj cheetham (talk) 09:48, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
• I agree that the concept is not specific to humans, and neither is the article, so the proposed title would be an improvement. However, move to Embryo implantation per WP:NATURAL instead. No such user (talk) 06:48, 16 June 2022 (UTC)

Would agree that's a better page name.--Iztwoz (talk) 10:45, 16 June 2022 (UTC)

• Move to Implantation (embryology). I am generally not crazy about natural disambiguations that are not their actual common name. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 15:53, 17 June 2022 (UTC)

That probably is a better fit - in line with others such as Cavitation (embryology).--Iztwoz (talk) 16:01, 17 June 2022 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Proposed merge of Implantation failure into Implantation (embryology)

Is already covered on target page where it is better presented - as a stub it had been redirected there but has been replaced with content copied from target page. Iztwoz (talk) 21:55, 23 April 2023 (UTC)

• Oppose I have also added other information beyond the two sentences taken from the general implantation page. There is much academic work out there done on the topic and there is no reason to merge instead of expanding the article.★Trekker (talk) 22:00, 23 April 2023 (UTC)

The more usual course is to expand on the target page and split to its own article if sufficiently expanded.--Iztwoz (talk) 22:11, 23 April 2023 (UTC)

While that may be the more usual course there is no rule that says it has to be done that way. Implantation is an incredibly important subject and there is more than enough material to expand the implantation article as well as the implantation failure article to large sizes.★Trekker (talk) 22:20, 23 April 2023 (UTC)

@Iztwoz: I do not appreciate your removal of some of the information I have added, it was properly sourced and completely relevant.★Trekker (talk) 23:15, 23 April 2023 (UTC)

I have replied to your comment that you posted on implantation failure page. Also why not follow the normal course of expansion first on target page? And when you reverted my redirect, this redirect has been longstanding since 2011 I simply updated the redirect section. --Iztwoz (talk) 08:59, 24 April 2023 (UTC)

I don't see any need to do it that way, I enjoy working this way. If a subject is notable I don't have a problem with something starting out as a small article that is built over time.★Trekker (talk) 10:06, 24 April 2023 (UTC)

• Withdraw Withdraw merge proposal since there is nothing to merge. The first definition is incorrect as must be the source. The rest has just been copied from page without attribution. The only new additions are irrelevant see also items - referring to death and loss. Loss is not the same as failure. Needs to stand as a redirect page.--Iztwoz (talk) 06:37, 26 April 2023 (UTC)

@Iztwoz: There clearly was attribution.★Trekker (talk) 10:16, 26 April 2023 (UTC)