Talk:DNA

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the DNA article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15: 21 days

DNA is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.

This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on February 13, 2007.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
January 19, 2004	Refreshing brilliant prose	Kept
February 18, 2004	Featured article review	Demoted
March 15, 2006	Good article nominee	Listed
December 24, 2006	Peer review	Reviewed
January 9, 2007	Featured article candidate	Promoted
April 25, 2007	Featured article review	Kept
Facts from this article were featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on April 25, 2004, and April 25, 2005.
Current status: Featured article

This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects.

Template:Vital article

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Molecular Biology: Genetics / MCB FA‑class Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Molecular Biology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Molecular Biology 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.Molecular BiologyWikipedia:WikiProject Molecular BiologyTemplate:WikiProject Molecular BiologyMolecular Biology articles
FA	This article has been rated as FA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Genetics task force (assessed as Top-importance).
	This article is supported by the Molecular and Cell Biology task force (assessed as Top-importance).

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Biology FA‑class Top‑importance

	Biology portal DNA is part of the WikiProject Biology, an effort to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to biology on Wikipedia. Leave messages on the WikiProject talk page.BiologyWikipedia:WikiProject BiologyTemplate:WikiProject BiologyBiology articles
FA	This article has been rated as FA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

Compressed Representation

Does anyone have information about the recent news that DNA is in a compressed form and that the "junk" is actually part of the decompression mechanics? (kind of like a zip file) That would be an important addition to this article. Actually, it makes sense that the genome would be in the most compressed state to make reproduction efficient.

Semi-protected edit request on 16 November 2022

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Under "Base Pairing"

add: (or "Watson–Crick–Franklin") to "Watson-Crick base pair", to match current terminology in DNA science. Vecchionis (talk) 18:17, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Actualcpscm (talk) 23:09, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewers laud authors for updating the terminology of the base pair to "Watson-Crick-Franklin" in the ACS journal "Biochemistry".

https://twitter.com/chembioBryan/status/1116340311817629696

https://pubs.acs.org/doi/full/10.1021/acs.biochem.7b01101 Kerri9494 (talk) 19:55, 31 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Rosalind Franklin

Can we give Rosalinda Franklin a more prominent place in this article?

I think she may be mentioned in the first paragraph.

Kind regards, SeemGyro1 SeemGyro1 (talk) 09:30, 17 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Not done This is an overarching article on DNA, the history of discovery of it is therefore a small part in such a fundamental and large topic, so it would give undue weight to include mention of those credited for the discovery in the lead of the article.|→ Spaully ^~talk~ 10:03, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

She is mentioned alright in the History section.--–ꟼsyc^ho ㄈhi¢ken 😭 (talk) 14:40, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I suppose you understand how to write articles better than me. I'm quite new here. SeemGyro1 (talk) 10:14, 28 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

For the record, I'm inclined to think the amount of technical detail currently in the lead is excessive, and saying nothing in the lead about the history of our knowledge about DNA is a lack of balance.--Nø (talk) 17:01, 28 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I beckon this.

The author was an expert. That is the curse of our time. –ꟼsyc^ho ㄈhi¢ken 😭 (talk) 08:20, 4 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Non Canonical Bases – derived from Adenosine

Concerns this section: DNA#Listing of non-canonical bases found in DNA.

If Adenosine is a building block for RNA and Adenine only one of its components (the other being some ribose), can you please clarify why it is listed here alongside the other bases? Frankly, I believe that this is a mistake and it should be Adenine, but I cannot really know. TIA anyway. –ꟼsyc^ho ㄈhi¢ken 😭 (talk) 14:47, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Adenine is the base. Adenosine is the base with the ribose sugar attached. Adenosine is in RNA. Deoxyadenosine is in DNA.

Is this supposed to explain why alongside the other bases, Adenosine is named instead of Adenine? I do not understand. The problem here is not Chemistry but language and the lack of. --–ꟼsyc^ho ㄈhi¢ken 😭 (talk) 20:56, 30 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Lacking a conclusion, I followed logic and looked up the topic elsewhere.

I cannot see the reason for the exception that is made for Adenine and – thus – modified the article accordingly.

You can still react and teach me something. No generalities, though. –ꟼsyc^ho ㄈhi¢ken 😭 (talk) 08:17, 4 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Editing.

Hey. Can I edit this page. Because I want to make it simpler. 129.126.35.127 (talk) 00:54, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

"first sequencing of DNA from animal remains": seems to be wrong as stated.

Section "Evolution" says

In February 2021, scientists reported, for the first time, the sequencing of DNA from animal remains, a mammoth in this instance over a million years old, the oldest DNA sequenced to date.

Haven't scientists have been sequencing DNA from animal remains for quite a while before 2021?

Should this say something like "scientists reported, for the first time, the sequencing of DNA from subfossil animal remains" or "the sequencing of DNA from the remains of an extinct animal" or something along those lines?

- 189.60.49.251 (talk) 04:57, 8 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]