Talk:Copy-number variation

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

An example out of place?[edit]

I cite:

Like other types of genetic variation, some CNVs have been associated with susceptibility or resistance to disease. Gene copy number can be elevated in cancer cells. For instance, the EGFR copy number can be higher than normal in non-small cell lung cancer. [7

- Why the clause about cancer comes after the phrase about susceptibility? As I understand, the tumour is usually the place where mutations are rife, so CNVs in the tumour cells are likely not the CNVs that the organism inherited or has been having since conception. If I'm right, the two sentences about cancer should be separated into another paragraph. --CopperKettle (talk) 20:42, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

Introductory paragraph[edit]

I think the intro paragraph could be more helpful. It currently defines "copy-number variation" in terms of "copy-number differences", which is essentially the same thing. I would also question whether it's correct to say CNVs are "segments of DNA." It seems to me that CNVs affect segments of DNA. --Krokicki (talk) 21:34, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

A quote[edit]

Q: Just curiosity on my part, but you seem to use terminology other than CNV in the paper: things like unbalanced micro-rearrangements. Is that just a preference of nomenclature or is there some theoretical thing embedded in that?
EE: Actually, that stems from complaints from the cytogenetics community. There are well-established professors in cytogenetics that have criticized the use of CNV to refer to something that is pathogenic. And that’s because implied in copy number variant, at least until probably last year, was the idea that variant equals benign. Microdeletion and microduplication to cytogeneticists typically means that you have something pathogenic, but there was actually a move among a few cytogeneticists to write a white paper or a piece that would help clarify this. But I would have to say that in the last year there’s been so much interchange between the use of CNV and microdeletion and microduplication, I think it’s a foregone conclusion now that it's almost impossible to stem that tide and change the usage back to the way that cytogeneticists viewed it originally.

--CopperKettle (talk) 00:30, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

What is a Copy Number?[edit]

This article talks about "copy number" as if it were a specifically genetic phenomenon, which leads me to believe that it isn't simply the "number of copies" of a gene, but is rather some other thing -- an internal count of the number of times a gene has been copied, perhaps? That seems strange to me, but it's the only obvious way to make sense of this article. I think there needs to be a definition of "copy number" before it's clear what a "copy number variation" is. (talk) 15:34, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

You don't really explain why that's the only obvious way to make sense of the article. Your first belief is correct, simply the number of copies of a genetic region (not gene per say). —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 16:58, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

Requested move[edit]

Yes check.svg Done. Reliable sources vary in their use, but the hypenated version seems to be strictly correct. Fences&Windows 22:21, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

Copy number variationCopy-number variation — Copy-number is a compound modifier of variation and therefore should be hyphenated. -Cwenger (talk) 15:27, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

Proposal to change the name of this article[edit]

I propose changing the name of this article from "Gene copy number" to "Copy number variation". Comments? --Fat Cigar 14:33, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

I'm in favour. There is already a redirect from 'Copy number variant' to 'Gene copy number'. T0mpr1c3 (talk) 15:08, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

I'd like to change the title to Copy Number Variant —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 16:55, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

Ambiguous sentence[edit]

Currently the second sentence of the article says

CNVs correspond to relatively large regions of the genome that have been deleted (fewer than the normal number) or duplicated (more than the normal number) on certain chromosomes

The sentence doesn't make clear what is being deleted or duplicated. Is it the nucleotide sequence itself, including enhancers and other factors? Also is this on an population level or organism level? I don't know anything about CNVs so I cannot disambiguate, but I hope someone with expertise can. Paulish (talk) 19:43, 10 September 2012 (UTC)