Talk:Cre-Lox recombination

	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 Genetics task force (assessed as Mid-importance).
	This article is supported by the Molecular and Cell Biology task force (assessed as Low-importance).

WikiProject Recent Developments in Biotechnology[edit]

Hi my name is Cemre Can INCI, I'm a molecular biology master student and I am editing the page was given to me as an assignment for Recent Development in Biotechnology (MLC501) in Üsküdar University https://outreachdashboard.wmflabs.org/courses/Uskudar_University,_Istanbul,_Turkiye/MLC501_Recent_Developments_in_Biotechnology_2022-2023_Fall_(2022-2023)/articles/assigned — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cemree.can (talk • contribs) 15:53, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Cemre.can and Flower of Truth: Thanks for letting us know. Please note that all text you add must be in your own words; you cannot copy in material from elsewhere on the web, as that violates our policy on copyright. Feel free to ask me any questions, either here on on my talk page. Thanks and happy editing! Crow^Caw 16:02, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Untitled[edit]

The original article was deleted and replaced with a cut and paste from the following article. http://bioteach.ubc.ca/MolecularBiology/TargetingYourDNAWithTheCreloxSystem/

Not only is this article not very well written it is plagarism. I vote we revert back to the previous article. While that also had many flaws it was not that bad and certainly no worse than this current one. David D. (Talk) 22:33, 2 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK i reverted back to original. Yes it needs work, but it appears not to be plagarism. David D. (Talk) 22:42, 2 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Anyone want to reference this? Dr Aaron 13:24, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This article is not plagiarised[edit]

The language in the original article was not plagiarised. Thank you David, I admit I had consulted the website provided above, but i also consulted various undergrad level molecular biology/biochemistry text books. I have presented a seminar on this topic and i am open to any criticism regarding the factual correctness of the article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by M murty (talk • contribs)

Hi Murty, welcome back. The plagiarism comment was not directed at your version, and in fact it was your version i reverted back to. The plagiarism edit was from Ladeer (talk · contribs). If you look in the history you will find this edit is a direct copy and paste from the article cited above. David D. (Talk) 15:34, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

References needed[edit]

I think some references for this article would be appropriate. I found a brief paragraph in Molecular Cell Biology by Alberts (2002) in Chapter 8, in the section titled "Studying Gene Expression and Function". Unfortunately I was using the NIH online version of the book which has no page numbers available, so if someone owns a copy of the book perhaps they could add that reference on.Thoimis 06:56, 21 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

i apologise for the misunderstanding. thx for reverting back to the original. M murty 09:48, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Site-specific recombination: a suggestion[edit]

There's an overview of site-specific recombination in this article. Obviously it's fine to gloss what SSR is briefly, but wouldn't it make better sense to reference the existing article on this topic rather than duplicate that information here? I don't want to molest the article myself, as clearly a lot of careful work has gone into it! SamTheCentipede 22:41, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Article isnt bad, but isnt great either[edit]

Imo this article includes too much useless / pseudoinformation ("Tt is a quick an efficient process."), whilst glossing over the main point of the cre/loxp system in a couple of unclear sentences. The 8p spacer sequence has been mentioned to either cause inversions or deletions depending on its orientation, but this needs to be explained in more detail ideally. The whole point of the system is that the 8bp spacers orientation are dependant on the orientation of another loxp site : if the sequences run the same way, it will create a deletion, if they run opposite in reference to another one, it will create an inversion.

Its good that the article mentioned this point to begin with, as most sources skip this out all together. But with relevance to cre-lox recombination, its one of the most important features, and deserves more than a sentance or two. Pherhaps some diagrams? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.88.91.224 (talk) 12:45, 11 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. Additionally I'm a little confused as to why much of the article is devoted to descriptions of homologous and site-specific recombination. These already have their own articles, so only a very brief description should be necessary. I don't know whether any more technical stuff would be useful to the article regarding the reaction mechanism itself and the topology of reaction products... it may go a bit beyond the scope of an encyclopedia article. Let me know if I can help. Blackmetalbaz (talk) 11:33, 10 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Mechanism section[edit]

The last sentence from this paragraph from the mechanism section reads oddly:

Initiation of Site-Specific Recombination begins with the binding of Recombination Proteins to their respective DNA targets. A separate Recombinase recognizes and binds to each of two recombination sites on two different DNA molecules or within the same DNA. At the given specific site on the DNA, the hydroxl group of the tyrosine attacks a phosphate group in the DNA using a direct transesterification mechanism linking the Recombinase protein to the DNA via a phospho-tyrosine linkage. This conserves the energy of the phosphodiester bond allowing the reaction to be reversed without the involvement of a high energy cofactor. (If you apply this chemistry to the rest of the reaction described here you will have an accurate description.)

The parenthetical sentence appears to be a note to contributors, as if it really belongs here in e talk page. I'm removing it for now. If someone feels strongly that it needs to be in the article, maybe they can explain why. Agathman (talk) 16:45, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Figures[edit]

OK, first off, I hadn't realized that I should post here before editing pages, so I made a few changes yesterday without first posting here. From now on I'll follow protocol.

I made a couple of figures for this article, based on my understanding of this process, but it would be great if someone could review them.

Ethical Considerations[edit]

Given the role of this technique within the nascent-but-burgeoning field of genetic engineering, I am surprised to see no mention of ethical considerations in this article. Perhaps a new section on the ethics of bio-engineering would be prudent in the Cre-Lox Recombination article and in others of similar subject matter. 75.160.130.1 (talk) 10:38, 25 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

Cre Lox71-66 Recombination Method.png

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 18:36, 8 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]