Talk:Mutant

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Genetics  
WikiProject icon 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.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's quality scale.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Molecular and Cellular Biology (Rated Start-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Molecular and Cellular Biology. To participate, visit the WikiProject for more information.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
 

This article has comments here.

Etymology[edit]

Shouldn't the etymology section have some history on the origin of the word...? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.103.124.38 (talk) 21:49, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

Marvel mutants?[edit]

Resolved

An encylopedia should probably have more about biological mutants than Marvel Comics' mutants. -- The Anome

I agree. The Marvel Universe stuff really should be forked off to a new article.

I will begin doing this tonight, with luck. ClockworkTroll 02:46, 21 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Done: moved the comic book mutant info to Mutant (fictional). ClockworkTroll 03:15, 21 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Name[edit]

Whose decision was it to rename the article and make "wildtype" the opening description? I propose reverting the name and making Wildtype a footnote, or at least not the main thrust of the article. --- Noclevername 23:29, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

agreed. Wildtype is only a minor mention in the article. Also, Wildtype vs. Mutation is a missleading title. Immedate change recommended. --Eldarone 00:44, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
I've moved the page, per the request listed at WP:RM, and the discussion here. I agree that the previous title was unintuitive and misleading. I've added a dablink in case anybody finds their way here when looking for The Mutants or The Mutants (San Francisco). -GTBacchus(talk) 03:44, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Sport[edit]

Can anybody explain to me the wikilinking of the word "Sport"?

Agreed, it merely links to the athletic definition of sport, with a link back to mutant. I'm unlinking it. Noclevername 10:20, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

References[edit]

Link #3 has died.

Human Mutation[edit]

Isn't body hair or an extended tail an atavism, not a full mutation?

It's both; In the cases you mentioned, the characteristic gets superceded by another gene which blocks the expression of the original genes. Absence of the blocking gene allows the earlier version to be expressed. (I'm an amateur, if someone with a background in genetics can explain it better it would be appreciated). Noclevername 23:50, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Ordinary Mutants[edit]

Isn't every living thing subject to (admittedly mostly imperceivable) mutations and may thus be termed a mutant? If so, could we have it mentioned in the article? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.44.237.208 (talk) 20:08, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Mutant or developmental abnormality[edit]

Yesterday I came across some 'double' daisy, and I uploaded a picture of it onto Commons, calling it a mutant. But reading this article, I'm not so sure about that anymore. Do such strange forms always indicate a developmental abnormality rather than a mutation? Apdency (talk) 10:47, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

To my way of thinking (fruitfly genetics background) it would depend if it's heritable or not. I'd call it a mutant (in the genetic sense) if its offspring (either F1 or F2, depending if dominant or recessive) are also doubled. Otherwise, it might just be indicative of a developmental abnormality. -- Flyguy649 talk 18:20, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
I agree with Flyguy. My intuition is that it's more likely to be a developmental abnormality, but crossing this with a regular daisy and intercrossing the offspring would be the way to tell. It might be a good idea to rename the file to indicate that it's not known for certain that it's a mutant. Adrian J. Hunter(talkcontribs) 10:19, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
Thank you. The only thing I can say is that such a form occurs elsewhere too. Some examples: 1, 2, 3, 4, and what about these amazing caterpillar-like creatures: 5, 6, and finally Mr. Sunny Smile 7. Does that make any sense for finding out? Apdency (talk) 19:27, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
Cute pictures! Seeing how common this is actually makes me think it's even more likely to be a developmental abnormality, because if it was genetic someone would have made a novelty line of daisies that always grow like that. Adrian J. Hunter(talkcontribs) 07:23, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

I've seen very similar growth forms before in dandelions and in a euphorbia. I asked a lecturer of mine and they informed me it was most likely caused by a small dose of herbicide affecting the plant's development. I notice that you said you took the photograph at a nature reserve though so that seems unlikely. It's not impossible to see how the genes involved in flowering (see ABC model of flower development) could be disrupted so that it gained a linear form as well as being circular. You could of course test if it where genetic by gathering the seeds from the flower and growing them. 131.111.30.21 (talk) 14:46, 26 April 2010 (UTC)