Talk:Recombinant DNA

what are your views on recombinant DNA technology? is it a good thing or a bad thing?

good/bad thing

I think it is a very good thing. It helps the worlds food supply, helps some people live (if you don't think so, then I will leave it at helps some people to live better or easier), and vaccinates us against diseases. There really is not a strong arguement against it, but someone might believe it is morally wrong, but there really is not a good scientific arguement against it except the possibility of using Recombinant DNA in malpractice. --toaster 02:26, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

I don't think so far anything bad has happened due to the application of this technology. However, one must be careful to not over-use this technique to the extent of major modifications in the genomes of organisms in which it is used as it may lead to some kind of cumulative mutation which may harm the existance of the organism.

its a very good thing inmy opinion --- Mohtasim --Swati

On Swati's comment: have you stopped to consider that maybe the cumulative mutation may not harm the organism, but rather force a response that changes the orgsanism in a way as to make it further harmful to human beings? --Alpineflame

I think it's helpful technique for next generation due to solve food problem and prevantion of harmful disease

---Mahendra Kumar

The first link posted on this page is broken. Perhaps the item it is referring to has been moved?? RPIfireman 00:39, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Different organisms?

While this is generally true, I don't think it's necessary that the DNA came from different organisms. For example, you could put replace the promoter region of a gene with a constitutive promoter also native to that organism (but naturally found on a different gene). I understand defining "recombinant DNA" to be "unnatural" or "artificial", but I disagree with the definition that it is "different organisms". -Madeleine 21:43, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Also while the main interest and focus of this article and term is on human engineered genetic modification...perhaps some mention should be made about natural viral genome exchanges and how many modern technique harness or originate in viral pathology. Making it more clear to the layman that in fact most human genetic engineering is still really just domestication of viral processes and select "breeding" of certain virus with certain target cells...not really something impossible in nature just extremely unlikely. Thus the engineering aspect of GMO is the selection aspect similar to animal husbandry more often than creating from scratch. 70.114.133.167 (talk) 06:37, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

Really short -- needs definite expansion

This is one of the major fields of biochemistry and biology and absolutely requires expansion; it's vital! ♥♥ ΜÏΠЄSΓRΘΠ€ ♥♥ ^{slurp me!} 08:29, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

There was quite a lot of political upheaval about DNA recombination in the late 1970s. Donald S. Fredrickson, then director of the NIH, was quite involved in this. We should make at least passing mention of the political/social/religious implications of DNA recombination. JFW | T@lk 15:40, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

Sure! Just allow me to finish off the rest of the article.. i've been complacent in the past few days due to the presence of a shiny Playstation 3 in the office. ♥♥ ΜÏΠЄSΓRΘΠ€ ♥♥ ^{slurp me!} 18:05, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

Have added a ref that might be of some use and will follow-up as time permits.Ernstblumberg (talk) 06:38, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Needs explanation of recombinant protein

"Recombinant protein" redirects here, but the term is never actually defined anywhere in the article. If a recombinant protein is a protein produced using recombinant DNA (and I don't know if that is true), it should be stated explicitly in the article using the term "recombinant protein". 98.220.250.3 (talk) 04:29, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

• Yes. A recombinant protein is just the protein produced from recombinant DNA. (see: The Recombinant Protein Handbook for details.) Thorwald (talk) 03:00, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
• I've added a short paragraph on recombinant proteins in the introductory section of the article. Hope this is satisfactory. John Mackenzie Burke (talk) 08:45, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

Translation into Chinese Wikipedia

The 02:26, 10 February 2009 Arakunem version of this article is translated into Chinese Wikipedia.--Wing (talk) 12:57, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

Recombinant DNA in popular culture

I wonder if someone would like to start a section about rDNA in popular culture. There's a lot out there... the movies Jurassic Park and the movie Gattaca come immediately to mind, John Mackenzie Burke (talk) 08:43, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

I would advise against it. In popular culture sections tend to get overblown with somewhat random and obscure references. Maybe add Genetic engineering in fiction under the see also section. AIRcorn (talk) 14:06, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

"Sticky and Blunt Ends" are only relevant to one of many types of recombinant DNA assembly

It seems that this article focuses on restriction cloning (i.e. sticky and blunt ends) as the only way to produce recombinant DNA when in fact there are a variety of different cloning methods:

• Gibson assembly
• USER
• Gateway Cloning

... etc... This article needs a pretty big fix to rectify this. The problem also exists with the Molecular Cloning page...