Jump to content

Talk:Exome sequencing

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Speedyboy (talk | contribs) at 20:40, 16 March 2016 (→‎"Sequencing" section should be deleted). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Template:WikiProject Computational Biology


Old reference is mis-quoted

A claim is made that the protein coding regions of the human genome constitute about 85% of the disease-causing mutations, referencing Choi et al 2005. This needs to be corrected for 2 reasons. First, the article mis-attributes and mis-quotes, Choi et al (2005), the authors refer to Cooper et al (1995) who state "Among the approximately 2,600 Mendelian diseases that have been solved, the overwhelming majority are caused by rare mutations that affect the function of individual proteins; at individual Mendelian loci, approximately 85% of the disease-causing mutations can typically be found in the coding region or in canonical splice sites". Mendelian diseases are a subset of human diseases. Note that genome wide association studies have identified few hits in protein coding regions for common diseases. Surely we could find a more recent reference that was at least written in a post genome wide association study era? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ovenn (talkcontribs) 19:05, 15 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Article need rewritting

Many phrase are directly recopied, they should be rephrased to comply. -RobertMel (talk) 03:15, 4 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Excuse me sir can you please indicate instances in the article that are plagiarized? Every effort was used to paraphrase points and referencing was done accordingly. If we infringed on your research please indicate where and we will make the necessary adjustments. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.225.16.164 (talk) 03:35, 4 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, the above description I made is not accurate (where was my mind?), I added the tags not exactly for copyright, but copyright of content. The same sources are extensively used in the article. For example, Sarah B Ng et al. is used 12 times, and the attribution is absent in the body of the article and those info's are presented as facts, they're Scientific papers, you should consult secondary sources, it's OK to use primary sources intro's, when they do a review on the subject, but it should at least be backed by secondary sources for the rest. Let me see if I can find a more proper tag. -RobertMel (talk) 05:17, 4 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]


Also known as WXS

although WES is a more used acronym, WXS appears on many places and is worth mentioning 132.66.95.80 (talk) 08:47, 10 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

== "Sequencing" section should be deleted == Speedyboy (talk) 20:39, 16 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The Sequencing section (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exome_sequencing#Sequencing) should be deleted. It reference sequencing technology that is many years old (GAII!). And the actual sequencing technology is not relevant.