Talk:His-tag

Untitled
Original text: dekay 11:13, 18 Aug 2004 (UTC)==Generic name== I've revised this to say "polyhistidine-tag", which is apparently the correct generic name, rather than "his-tag", which EMD Biosciences are claiming is a trademark. This isn't a topic I know much about, so please let me know on my talk page if there is any problem with this change. Angela. 21:42, 15 October 2005 (UTC)
 * A his-tag is a technique used in biochemistry to purify proteins. The protein to purify is expressed as a fusion protein, carrrying a series of histidine residues at either the amino or the carboxyl end. The name-giving histidine residues will stick to a nickel surface, and can be eluted from there via imidazol. His-tagged proteins can also be identified on a Western blot via α-his-antibodies.

Generic name?

 * User Angela moved the his tag article to polyhistidine tag, because of a trademark issue. I have written several parts of the original article and I don't agree that a his-tag is the same as the poly histidine tag. The purification and detection methods that described in this article work for the his tag, but I am not whether everything can transferred to the poly histidine tag. The copy paste edit from Angela did not improve this article, but made it rather confusing by mixing things up.
 * The term his-tag is the most frequently used term in scientific literature and the term poly histidine tag is used less frequent.


 * The trademark name for the His tag is 6xHis tag (Qiagen, which holds an exclusive licence for parts of the technology)

JOK 11:38, 25 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Poly histidine tag is a copy cat approach of the his tag and is a possible infringment of the original intelectual property owned by Roche.
 * his tag or better the 6xhis tag is not well discribed by the term poly histidine tag becausethe latin prefix poly leterally means many which is not the case for six histitdines the appropriate word might be oligo his tag (but that is not currently used in scientific literature)


 * Please fix whatever factual issues there are here and explain whatever minor differences there may be between the generic and non-generic versions. Here is the email that the foundation just got from EMD:

The "Polyhistidine-tag" entry provided by your link below is fine, however I note that "His Tag" (without a hyphen) is still listed as an entry in your encyclopedia. Furthermore, after discussing this issue internally, we are now agreeable to have Wikipedia refer to our trademark (His-Tag®), as  long as Wikipedia makes it clear that this trademark is owned by EMD Biosciences. Therefore I would like to ask that you remove the His Tag entry from your encyclopedia and transfer any pertinent information to the Polyhistidine-tag entry, making sure that any remaining reference to His-Tag clearly indicate that this registered trademark belongs to EMD Biosciences. I look forward to your reply and resolving this issue to mutual satisfaction. Regards, Marie Marie Azzaria, Ph.D. Manager, Intellectual Property


 * The way things are now is fine. I don't want to deal with this issue again. Recreating the separate article at the registered trademark name may put the foundation in needless legal jeopardy. So please don't do that. --mav 03:39, 29 October 2005 (UTC)


 * Does this article really need a list a of manufacturers? I can see why it mentions the labs that first developed it, but this is an encyclopaedia, not a trade directory :s Abergabe (talk) 08:35, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

pure protein from bacterial lysate running just a Ni-Column?
Prokaryotes have a ton of histidine rich proteins that also stick to Ni-Columns. I don't think it's fair to imply that you can do a one step prep (from E.Coli for instance) using just a His Tag. I'm happy to be corrected, but it's going to take a citation of some sort to convince me. Or at the very least a nice looking gel. I(q) = User(q)·Talk(q) 12:10, 1 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Oops, just noticed the section a few paragraphs down on well known contaminants. Guess that sufficiently addresses my concerns. I(q) = User(q)·Talk(q) 12:14, 1 September 2011 (UTC)
 * I wont claim that I ever did a one-step purification but by excess washing with buffers containing ~10-20 mM imidazole and excess of target protein you can end up with pure protein (no detectable contaminants on Coomassie stained PAGE). --09:18, 22 April 2013 (UTC)  — Preceding unsigned comment added by JayPP (talk • contribs)

Requested move 28 June 2023

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: moved to His-tag. This discussion resulted in consensus that the term "His-tag" is the WP:COMMONNAME, and that "tag" should be spelled with a lowercase t. (closed by non-admin page mover) ModernDayTrilobite (talk • contribs) 15:06, 7 July 2023 (UTC)

Polyhistidine-tag → His-Tag – His-Tag is definitely the WP:COMMONNAME. Looking to the discussion above, it seems this product is very similiar to Frisbee (i.e. a trademarked name is the WP:COMMONNAME). I see that EMD may have objected a long time back to use of "His-Tag", but, with benefit of hindsight, I don't think we usually take that into consideration. Anyways, since there was or is an objection from the Trademark holder, I didn't want to make this move unilaterally. NickCT (talk) 18:50, 28 June 2023 (UTC)


 * I think WP:TITLETM may be the relevant policy? NickCT (talk) 18:54, 28 June 2023 (UTC)


 * Keep as is. The article is about the recombinant protein labeling technique not the branded/patented product, which is a specific case of a polyhistidine-tag I'm guessing. WP:MOSTM and WP:TITLETM look like they apply to articles on trademarked products. Ultimately, I do not think EMD's opinion on article titles matters more than anyone else's. If it ever comes up the WMF can handle it.
 * Moreover, while it is true that most people refer to these as His-tags its just some jargon a very small number of people know relative to the larger population. Titling this article with a piece of jargon makes it less accessible and less informative for laypeople or people starting to learn what these techniques are. Pointing to Frisbee emphasizes this point. Frisbees are super common in peoples' lives (at least where I live), and if you were to refer to them as "flying discs" there's a non-zero chance you'll get back a blank stare and a laugh, since they're already familiar with what you're talking about. That is both my personal opinion and what seems to be documented at the Frisbee talk page. Go to the same person and ask if they know what a His-tag or polyhistidine-tag is, there's a great chance you'll get blank stares both times. Ask a lab worker in the field the same thing and they'll understand both. Let's stick with the more general and informative title that is also serviced by appropriate variations of His-tag as redirects.
 * Side note, the T in tag should not be capitalized if the move goes through. &#8213; Synpath 00:34, 3 July 2023 (UTC)
 * I'm a lab worker. If you said "polyhistidine-tag" to me, I'd probably ask you if you meant "his-tag". I agree w/ your point about "His-tag" being jargon. I'm not sure I follow your logic about us disregarding WP:COMMONNAME if a common name is jargon. NickCT (talk) 13:46, 5 July 2023 (UTC)
 * With both His-tag and polyhistidine-tag being equally understandable to specialists lets opt for the title that is more informative to non-specialists. If it really becomes a sticking point we can do some title searching of articles to see which is more prevalent in the literature and use that. &#8213; Synpath 15:48, 5 July 2023 (UTC)
 * I mean, you seemed to concede already that "His-Tag" is the commonname. In fact, this very article seems to identify "His-Tag" as the commonname in the lead. I'm not sure what we'd be looking for "in the literature". And I don't know where you're getting "equally understandable" from. Have you polled all specialists? Again, my personal POV on this is that "His-Tag" is more understandable. NickCT (talk) 17:27, 5 July 2023 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
 * Support move to the common and more recognisable name His-Tag. This appears to be a genericised trademark. Andrewa (talk) 10:42, 6 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Support as His-tag with upper-case H and lower-case t. Google Ngrams 1 and 2. (Plus, the current title definitely should not have a hyphen.) &#123;&#123;replyto&#124; SilverLocust &#125;&#125; (talk) 04:19, 7 July 2023 (UTC)