Talk:Nuclear lamina

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

A few corrections...[edit]

This article needed expansion to cover all cellular aspects in which the nuclear lamina is involved. I've tried make it as complete as possible, any recommendations will be greatly appreciated. VUBio Hugo (talk) 13:54, 29 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've made a few clarifications/corrections to the article:

  • Lamins are present in animals only, but are not present in plants or fungi (though plants may have a lamina-like structure made up of other proteins). I'll search for a good reference to add this information to the article.
  • Laminin is a protein of the basal lamina, not the nuclear lamina - corrected to lamin.
  • ZMPSTE24 is a zinc metalloprotease, not a lamin - replaced with actual lamin genes (LMNA, LMNB1). (ZMPSTE24 is involved in processing prelamin A into mature lamin, so its mutation causes defects in the lamina, but that is a different mechanism from a mutated lamin gene.)
  • Since the article on Laminopathies contains a more complete set of references on associated diseases, I took out the two references here as they didn't represent the full picture but only two examples.

- tameeria 01:36, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Importance[edit]

I've changed the importance rating on this article from low to mid. The reason for this is that within the last five+ years, a lot of research work has been done on the nuclear lamina, spurred by medical interest in the wake of the discovery of laminopathies including Emery-Dreifuss muscular dystrophy and Hutchinson-Gilford progeria syndrome. - tameeria 02:13, 10 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nuclear matrix[edit]

Is nuclear lamina related to the nuclear matrix? If not I think the article should mention their differences and possible relationship. -- Rend 05:05, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Images[edit]

These new images might be a good addition to the article. Maybe somebody wants to incorporate them. --Dietzel65 (talk) 22:13, 17 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Assessment comment[edit]

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Nuclear lamina/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

I've changed the importance rating on this article from low to mid based on a lot of research done on the nuclear lamina within the last few years spurred by medical interest in the wake of the discovery of laminopathies. - tameeria 02:15, 10 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Last edited at 02:15, 10 February 2007 (UTC). Substituted at 01:35, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

Possible spelling error[edit]

Is it on purpouse it says "phosphoacceptor" instead of "phosphoracceptor"? I am not sure enough in the subject to edit the article. If it's a mistake, feel free to fix it.

It's the correct spelling.--Iztwoz (talk) 13:41, 16 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]