Talk:MecA

Molecular Biology: Genetics / MCB Mid‑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
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Genetics task force (assessed as Mid-importance).
	This article is supported by the Molecular and Cell Biology task force (assessed as Mid-importance).

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 03:42, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Inappropriate antibiotic

I removed tetracycline from the list of antibiotics that this gene confers resistance to. Tetracycline isn't a penicillin-like antibiotic, and its site of action isn't penicillin binding proteins. Rather, tetracycline is a protein synthesis inhibitor, and binds to the 30S ribosome. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Havensfire (talk • contribs) 12:47, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

By the same token Erythromycin (a macrolide) is inappropriate as it too is not a beta-lactam. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.176.105.136 (talk) 15:23, 31 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The presence of mecA in Strep. pneumoniae is not usual. Is there a reference for this? 194.176.105.136 (talk) 15:29, 31 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Addition of new material

Hello, I am a student uploading quite a bit of information on the mecA gene. I created relevant sections, and tried to be as concise as possible. I will also be making slight changes to the existing material that may make it a better suited introductory section. D.Wojtaszek (talk) 03:21, 30 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewing Article for BIO3595

Overall, this article looks well-written with the proper tone and is detailed and thorough. Each point is also well supported by a reference(s). All it seems you need to do now is fix the formatting and grammar. There are random extra spaces in a few sections and some sentences need a comma and/or a period. mecA is italicized sometimes and not others. Finally, S.Aureus under "Detection" needs to be S.aureus. Good work! BrawlAngry (talk) 21:39, 30 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]