Talk:Prometaphase

	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
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Molecular and Cell Biology task force (assessed as Mid-importance).

Untitled

I was originally taught that the phases of mitosis were prophase, metaphase, anaphase, and telophase. I assume from this and from the name of prometaphase that it was commonly accepted as a distinct phase after the other four had been. So, what I’m wondering is how this part of mitosis was previously classified. Did people start distinguishing between the beginning and end of prophase, calling the second part prometaphase? Did a group of scientists decide that the end of prophase and the beginning of metaphase should be a distinct phase? Did a single scientist coin the term prometaphase, consisting of the second half of prophase and the first third or so of metaphase? Basically I’m asking 1) which parts of or how much of the former prophase and metaphase became prometaphase, and 2) (less importantly) how did this change occur? Twilight Realm 23:20, 3 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes that is how I was originally taught, and it is shown in my brand new BSCS biology textbook as still only a 4 step proccess. That means that this is very recent. Jds10912 02:50, 19 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

i am a bio major and taking genetics now, i guess the thing about prometaphase (as my prof was explaining it) is it is definetly a stage of mitosis, but depending on who you talk to. geneticists more likely do not like to consider this as a stage as opposed to cell biologists who do; at any rate we have to learn it for our exam so it seems like it definetly is a stage.

My textbook teaches that this is a part of prophase. 5.241.87.89 (talk) 14:15, 2 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The thing to remember is that the phases of mitosis are not some objective thing, they are subjective labels that humans use to break the continuous process of mitosis into smaller portions for easier comprehension. --Khajidha (talk) 11:30, 23 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

What about closed mitosis when the nuclear membrane does not break down

The summary at mitosis#Prometaphase mentions closed mitosis (as in fungi) when the nuclear membrane does not break down, but it not mentioned here. Should it be ? - Rod57 (talk) 16:14, 20 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

figure not from prometaphase fibroblast but G0

this is incorrect DOI: 10.1371/journal.pbio.0030157 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.5.11.5 (talk) 08:35, 13 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]