Wikipedia talk:USEP/Courses/JHU MolBio Ogg FA13/Group 81G

Picking an Article

Hi guys, I 'claimed' the Extrachromosomal DNA article for our group 81D. I noticed this was on your assessment list - so please let me know if you were really set on it and Jason and I can discuss changing or switching the article. Thanks! Rebeccachappel (talk) 22:58, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for letting us know AjoneWiki (talk) 14:47, 12 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Kevin,I looked through the articles this morning: Extrachromosomal DNA has been claimed as well as Neutral Mutations. Do you have a preference? We will need to work on the article through out the remainder of the class, so it should be interesting and allow for lots of edits, I think. I would be fine with either the article on Complementary (1st) or Histone Octamer(2nd). AjoneWiki (talk) 15:06, 12 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Kevin, we will need to decide on an article soon as part of the assignment is to write up a paragraph on why we choose the article. Hope to hear from you soon! AjoneWiki (talk) 17:42, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm good with doing the Complementary article. The histone octamer one is far more of a stub than what we'd be starting with for the other article. A few things that could be improved upon from the start is the illustrations showing off the DNA and how it matches up. Maybe show some basic figures of the bases and the hydrogen binding across them. I've done a few things with 3D working with real proteins as a side project. Antibody in Flight was done using a structure file from PDB and Lightwave. KevinBrownJHU (talk) 06:06, 15 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Fantastic. I saw you already claimed the article last night. I think the complementary article will give us plenty of room for expansions. Looking forward to working with you on the article!AjoneWiki (talk) 00:12, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I forgot to mention that I am editing the initial picking an article rational - now that we decided on one.AjoneWiki (talk) 00:18, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

That's good. My writing skills can be a bit rusty as I tend to just do a stream of consciousness style of writing to work things out. Makes the structure kind of go where ever. I do try and come back later to put things together better later, heheh. KevinBrownJHU (talk) 02:48, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Article selection rationale

Complementarity is a good choice as the current information is barely past the level of a stub article. A lot of new information and organization will be needed as the article as it currently exists seems to contain information already present in the base pair section. Some possible expansions include self-complementary sequences (like the folding of RNA strands into functional units of tRNA). While the current article limits itself to just touching on DNA complementarity, amino acids also show a form of complementarity which leads to how a protein folds or how they bind to each other.^[1] KevinBrownJHU (talk) 17:42, 15 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Key Points

DNA bases

Matches
Geometry

DNA structure

Weak chemical bonds
Hydrogen bonds

Double helix

Anti-parallel strands
Complimentary base pairing stabilizes the strands

Re-annealing

Denatured DNA can re-associate with complimentary DNA

Hybridization

RNA and DNA strands

DNA repair mechanisms

Mismatch repair

Regulation

Antisense transcripts
Kissing hairpins

cDNA Libraries

Complementary DNA synthesized from RNA

Biomakers

Genetic testing based on complementary

Discussion

Entered initial key points AjoneWiki (talk) 10:35, 22 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I am moving above key points into my sandbox as a preliminary outline for the article, hope that's alright with you.Feel free to edit.AjoneWiki (talk) 23:59, 22 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Those look like the points I thought of. The only one I would argue against is the cDNA sections as those were spun off into their own article previously. Hmm, biomarkers. I wonder if some of the work done at my last lab might be useful here. They were looking for disease markers in bloodstream, but instead of looking for specific sequences were looking at changes in binding signals on a large-scale array. KevinBrownJHU (talk) 03:23, 23 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

^ Siemion, IZ (2004 Dec). "The problem of amino acid complementarity and antisense peptides". Current protein & peptide science. 5 (6): 507–27. PMID 15581420. Retrieved 13 October 2013. {{cite journal}}: Check date values in: |date= (help); Unknown parameter |coauthors= ignored (|author= suggested) (help); Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)CS1 maint: date and year (link)

[Siemion-1] Siemion, IZ (2004 Dec). "The problem of amino acid complementarity and antisense peptides". Current protein & peptide science. 5 (6): 507–27. PMID 15581420. Retrieved 13 October 2013. {{cite journal}}: Check date values in: |date= (help); Unknown parameter |coauthors= ignored (|author= suggested) (help); Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)CS1 maint: date and year (link)

[1]