 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Genetics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Genetics 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. |
|
 C |
This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale. |
| Low |
This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. |
|
|
|
|
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Chemistry, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of chemistry 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. |
|
| C |
This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale. |
| Low |
This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. |
|
|
|
|
[edit] Removed a sentence I couldn't understand
I couldn't figure out what was meant by "Currently available libraries of synthetic genes undergone gene synthesis process consists of dozens of thouthands elements." I removed it, but the article definitely lost some information in the process. Iknowyourider (t c) 07:54, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
- It is OK to remove that. Sorry for being unclear. I was actually referring to libraries like this one: http://www.dna20.com/planetgene.php BTW, thanx for clean up! TestPilot 18:20, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Requested move
[edit] To synthetic DNA
- 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 not moved, but see discussion below. Regards, Arbitrarily0 (talk) 15:45, 30 May 2010 (UTC)
Gene synthesis → Synthetic DNA — The topic of this article isn't necessarily about entire genes, but always about DNA. Gene synthesis doesn't distinguish from natural DNA replication. Furthermore, synthetic DNA expands the scope beyond the synthesis itself (basically already described in oligonucleotide synthesis), potentially including applications of the product as well. Mikael Häggström (talk) 05:52, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
-
- Not sure. Synthetic DNA sounds too similar to oligonucleotide synthesis. We should see what is the preferred name in the literature for this kind of technology (I don't know: I am a protein biophysics guy :) ). If there is none, perhaps Artificial gene synthesis could clarify that we exclude natural processes? --Cyclopiatalk 13:49, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
-
-
- I agree with Cyclopia's suggestions. Mikael, you mentioned at MCB talk you want to make some changes, and I think the nature of those changes is relevant to any proposed rename. The current article does seem to focus on the synthesis of genes specifically (or genomes), as opposed to merely discussing the technical aspects of constructing DNA, but I don't oppose expanding the scope and renaming accordingly. Adrian J. Hunter(talk•contribs) 15:13, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
-
-
-
- I oppose the move. I agree with Cyclopia that the title "Synthetic DNA" would include oligonucleotide synthesis in its scope as well, whereas the current article does not, except as a summary section. I don't think that "Gene synthesis" could be mistaken to be about natural DNA replication, but if so I think a hatnote would solve that. Antony-22 (talk) 17:07, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
- Well, perhaps artificial gene synthesis would also work, but it would still not be the article title for where one really expects to find facts about synthetic entire genomes or applications of the products. Synthetic DNA could be an umbrella article that introduces Oligonucleotide synthesis as well. Mikael Häggström (talk) 04:38, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
-
- If we want to talk about artificial genome synthesis, we can have a separate article. Or we can have a redirect to a section in "artificial gene synthesis". Either way, I see no real problem. --Cyclopiatalk 23:11, 27 May 2010 (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.
[edit] To artificial gene synthesis
- The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. 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.
Page moved'. Vegaswikian (talk) 07:04, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
Gene synthesis → artificial gene synthesis — All right, a move to artificial gene synthesis would be fair enough. Applications of the product may still be located in this article.Mikael Häggström (talk) 07:15, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
- Support per discussion above. --Cyclopiatalk 13:06, 30 May 2010 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. 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.
[edit] amino acid designated 'U'
"The letter V was used since there is no amino acid designated by letter U"
There is an amino-acid designated U: Selenocysteine. It is included in proteins in a template-directed manner, but there additional structural conditions for requirement.
Speculation as to why this wasn't used by the Venter institute would of course be original research, but could we update the article to reflect this? At the moment it's in error.Loris (talk) 17:10, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
- Well spotted – a subtle point that was overlooked by the source (Wired). I've tweaked the text to avoid the error. Feel free to be bold and edit as you see fit. Adrian J. Hunter(talk•contribs) 12:22, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
