Talk:DNA laddering

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
Hello im faiza mohamud a master's student in molecular biology and genetics at uskudar university in istanbul, turkiye as part of a class assignment of the course names Recent Development in biotechnology i will be contributing as a fellow wikipedia articles

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Pji2013. Peer reviewers: Pji2013.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 18:57, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

Merging
Yes, they should be merged. When I created DNA Laddering, there was an existing DNA Ladder but it was a redirect to DNA electrophoresis. I changed it to a redirect to here. Somebody undid that redirect and started adding adding the information there.

I don't really care at which place the info lives. But there can't be any significant difference between them. David.Throop 00:07, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

I disagree: the use of DNA ladders is common in all areas of molecular biology, but DNA laddering is largely specific only to research into apoptosis. It would not make sense: the names happen to be similar, but that is where the identity stops. It's probably better to put DNA ladders in with gel electrophoresis: having separate articles is unnecessary. Apollo Crua 12:48, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

I too think these two articles should NOT be merged. DNA Ladder is a molecular biology and/or biochemistry reagent whereas DNA Laddering is a phenomenon observed when cells undergo apoptosis (and in some specific experiments). --Kayvee 21:58, 18 November 2007 (UTC)


 * OK, I'm convinced&mdash;there's good reason not to merge. Instead, each article should at least briefly mention the other and explain the difference.David.Throop (talk) 13:17, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Do not merge as they are different subjects as mentioned above. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 143.53.145.153 (talk) 11:29, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

I also think they should be kept separate. Laddering (re: apoptosis) seems to be the result on a gel of a natural phenomenon, namely cleavage of the dna of an apoptotic cell into small fragments whereas a ladder is totally artificial- it's just a solution of several DNA strands of known length to be used as a standard in order to approximate lengths of unknown fragments run in a different lane. I'm not familiar with apoptosis that well, but I am familiar with laddering that occurs when DNA is digested in the lab for too long (among other reasons) resulting in loads of small DNA fragments of varying lengths. Perhaps that should be mentioned in the laddering page. Regardless of why it occurs, laddering is definitely a distinct phenomenon. Alberrosidus (talk) 21:34, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Do not merge. DNA ladders and DNA laddering are two different things. A DNA ladder is a tool in molecular biology. And DNA laddering is a phenomena seen during apoptosis. Saying that the articles on the two subjects should be merged would be the same as saying vegetables and vegetarian are the same thing. --Perneseblue (talk) 23:44, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Given that there seems to be consensus that these two articles should not be merged (though the jury is still out on gel phosphoresis), is it appropriate to take off the merge tag now? Somewildthingsgo (talk) 10:30, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Alright I take it it's only still there because no one's been watching this page that often. I'm going to remove it. Somewildthingsgo (talk) 19:11, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Category
Suggest that DNA Laddering be removed from the lab technique category as it is not a technique but rather the result of one. Alberrosidus (talk) 21:37, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Well, the assay used to create the laddering is known to me as the "DNA ladder" assay, but there is already another article by this name. So although the laddering is technically only a result of a technique, I think the category should be kept, as the article is not only about the result, but also about the technique itself. -- Shinryuu (talk) 11:29, 10 August 2010 (UTC)