Talk:Mikhail Tsvet

Date of birth

There is no consistency on the date of birth, there are 2 mentioned dates

Untitled

His last name hints that his father could have been baptized Jew, but I cannot find any info. Mikkalai 04:38, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)

plant described

There is any such taxon?--Penarc (talk) 03:02, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Tsvet is NOT the inventor of chromatography

I stumbled upon an article which states that Tsvet is not the inventor of chromatography: Click here JefVG (talk) 09:48, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

A more accurate surname translation

'Tsviet'(Цвет) is the Russian for 'colour' and 'blossom', also may be sometimes 'flowering', 'florescence'. But the 'flower' in Russian is 'tsvietok'(цветок, may be roughly translated as 'little blossom', but never 'tsviet'. I've edited this. However, what a funny coincidence of his surname and his discoveries=) Also, on the first comment (of 2004). I've never heard of such Jewish surnames in Russia. The typical Russian surname suffixes "ov/-iev" and "-in" are common only in Central and Northern Russia, but in all other regions surnames have other suffixes or do not have them at all, it's usual for example in Belarus and Ukraine. And his father, Semen Nikolaevich, is from Chernigov (Northern Ukraine), as article in Russian says. "Tsvet" is the ordinary slavic word, so he can hardly be a Jew.~~Sindar~~

Russian

Since he was born in Italy to an italian woman he should be considered italian/russian or russian/italian. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.32.56.195 (talk) 17:08, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

Date of discovery of chromatography?

At present, the article states:

Mikhail Tsvet invented chromatography in 1903 during his research on plant pigments. He used liquid-adsorption column chromatography with calcium carbonate as adsorbent and petrol ether/ethanol mixtures as eluent to separate chlorophylls and carotenoids. The method was described on 30 December 1901 at the XI Congress of Naturalists and Physicians (XI съезд естествоиспытателей и врачей) in St. Petersburg. The first printed description was in 1905, in the Proceedings of the Warsaw Society of Naturalists, biology section.

So, Tsvet invented chromatography in 1903 -- after describing the method at a meeting in 1901?

Cwkmail (talk) 23:10, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

• The method was not invented in 1 day. We have facts:
  • On 21 September 1901, Tswett published his magister dissertation (Kazan university) where he writes that different chlorofilles give different rings on paper and other thin layers. But he did not describe the effect as a method.
  • After the magistracy, Tsvett gets position in Warsaw university, on 26 November. Before starting this position, he came to Petersburg and describes a new method on 30 December 1901 at the XI Congress of Naturalists and Physicians.
  • Then he finished the study in Warsaw. The first printed description was in 1905, in the Proceedings of the Warsaw Society of Naturalists.
  • Thus, we can write that the method was developed in 1901-1905 in universities of Kazan and Warsaw.--TY-214 (talk) 09:02, 29 November 2024 (UTC)

Willstätter's failure to reproduce Tsvet's results

At present, the article states: "Richard Willstätter and Arthur Stoll tried to repeat Tsvet's experiments, but because they used an overly aggressive adsorbent (destroying the chlorophyll), were not able to do so."

Many other sources repeat this claim. However, I've read the relevant papers by Willstätter and Tsvet, and I've noticed that both investigators used calcium carbonate in their chromatographic analyses of chlorophyll. So the difference in outcomes could not be due to "an overly aggressive adsorbent" which destroyed the chlorophyll. Although in his 1912 paper[1] Willstätter attributed the difference in outcomes to Tsvet's supposed use of "alcohol" (ethanol) during his analyses of chlorophyll — Willstätter had found in 1911 that ethanol degraded chlorophyll — it seems more likely that Willstätter and Stoll's chromatographic analyses of chlorophyll produced results that differed from Tsvet's results because of the presence of water.

In their paper of 1912, Willstätter and Stoll stated that chlorophyll samples turned brown when they came into contact with the calcium carbonate of their chromatographic columns, whereas Tsvet made no such observations regarding his chromatographic analyses of chlorophyll. In his papers of 1906, Tsvet mentions that the calcium carbonate must be dried in an oven. And in his paper of 1910 — M. Tswett (1910) "Das sogenannte "krystallisierte Chlorophyll" — ein Gemisch" (The so-called "crystallized chlorophyll" — a mixture), Berichte der deutschen chemischen Gesellschaft, 43 : 3139–3141. — Tsvet used non-polar solvents to elute his columns. So Tsvet was aware that the presence of water might cause calcium carbonate to degrade a sample.

In summary, in their paper of 1912 (and in subsequent publications) Willstätter and Stoll used the same adsorbent (calcium carbonate) as Tsvet had used in his chromatographic analyses of chlorophyll. Although Willstätter and Stoll accused Tsvet of having exposed his chlorophyll samples to ethanol (which would have degraded them), it's more likely that Willstätter and Stoll's materials had been contaminated by water, whereas Tsvet's materials hadn't — which would explain why Willstätter and Stoll's chlorophyll samples turned brown when they came in contact with the calcium carbonate adsorbent, whereas Tsvet's samples didn't change color.

I would therefore suggest that the sentence be rewritten as: "Richard Willstätter and Arthur Stoll tried to repeat Tsvet's experiments, but were not able to do so."

[1] Willstätter, Richard and Stoll, Arthur (1912) "Untersuchungen über Chlorophyll: XIX. Über die Chlorophyllide" (Investigations of chlorophyll: 19. On chlorophyllide), Annalen der Chemie, 387 : 317–386.

VexorAbVikipædia (talk) 16:08, 30 September 2016 (UTC)