This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Artman40 (talk | contribs) at 18:08, 30 December 2006. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 18:08, 30 December 2006 by Artman40 (talk | contribs)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)Image of Translation
http://en.wikipedia.org/Image:Translation-genetics.png is really quite inaccurate in terms of scale and sites. Where is the E, P, and A sites of the ribosome? Three tRNAs are supposed to fit inside the ribosome, not just one. I'll try to find one. If anyone else could also look for one that would be great. --G3pro 13:52, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)
There's another, IMO more serious, problem with it: it makes it look like the peptide is attached to the 5' rather than the 3' end of the tRNA. Josh Cherry 23:57, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC) bjb
Proposed move
- The following is a closed discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the proposal was move article. After 56 days and zero objections to this proposal, I think the article can be safely moved. --Kralizec! (talk) 12:07, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
Translation (genetics) → Translation (biology)
Since Genetics is defined as:
- the science of genes, heredity, and the variation of organisms.
I don't see why the large and broad field of Translation should be classified as genetics. Sure translation involves genes, but that's because it's central to all biology.--vossman 16:16, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
My eyes were browsing for Translation (biology) on the Translation (disambiguation) page, and it stroke me as odd that this has been put under genetics. Sure, there are genetic aspects to translation, but that's just a part of it. There is also the molecular machinery that carries out the task. The term biology covers genetics and molecular biology. So I vote for the move. --Olli. Monday, August 28, 2006
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.
Who copied who?
This article is almost identical to this one. If the wiki article is a copy of that article, at least that source should be mentioned in my opinion. Happy Puppy 18:36, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
translation, cap-dependent/cap-independent.
it is not correct that the initiation in eukaryotes are specialy cap-dependent/cap-independent. catabolite repression is abserved widely in unicelluler organisms sush as e coli and b subtilis. In case of catabolite-repressible enzymes, binding of RNA polymerase to the DNA that encodes them occurs only if another protein called the catabolite activator protein (CAP), has bound first. CAP is a allosteric protein.
Translation by hand?
This is supposed to be an encyclopedia article, not a guide to doing homework. The sentence "Note that T becomes U" grates my nerves even more. Thymine and Uracil are completely different molecules; they do not simple "become" one another.
If anyone doesn't object, I'd like to pull out that section completely. --Michael 03:48, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
- I agree, no one in their right mind does this except on homework assignments, which is probably where that section came from. I'd suggest removing it and cleaning up the computer section along the way. It's important to make sure that the triplet codon -> one amino acid idea is retained, though. Opabinia regalis 05:24, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
No stop codon?
What will happen if RNA sequence under translation does not contain a stop codon? When does the translation stop then? --Artman40 18:08, 30 December 2006 (UTC)