Talk:GC-content

message: I have merged this article with Guanine-cytosine content. Hopefully I managed to do it properly. --Chino 10:34, 7 Mar 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: The last sentence of the third paragraph states that "In many prokaryotic organisms the genome is asymmetric: the composition of the strand being continuously replicated (leading strand) and its complementary (lagging strand) show different GC-contents.". This is not true, the GC-content is always the same in the two DNA strands. I think there is a confusion here with the GC-skew and the AT-skew (see Lobry 1996). I think that this sentence should be deleted from the "GC-content" article.
* 
86.216.213.183 16:24, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I was reading the article and was confused by this sentence, since the article is about paired GCs.  The ext link  given in the sentence wasn't too helpful, but the (G-C)/(G+C) formula there made it clear the subject was something else. This link I found is a bit more enlightening, and makes it clear the subject is not the same as GC-content.  I've removed the sentence.  It would be good to have a separate article about GC-skew. -R. S. Shaw 04:17, 30 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Genome is asymmetric

message: Hey all.  I don't have time to incorporate this right this second, but this could be of interest: . Darkfrog24 (talk) 18:18, 24 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Effect on mutation rate

message: "GC ratios and coding sequence
Within a long region of genomic sequence, genes are often characterised by having a higher GC-content in contrast to the background GC-content for the entire genome. Evidence of GC ratio with that of length of the coding region of a gene has shown that the length of the coding sequence is directly proportional to higher G+C content.[13] This has been pointed to the fact that the stop codon has a bias towards A and T nucleotides and thus the shorter the sequence the higher the AT bias.[14]"''
Apart from the whole paragraph being rather confusingly worded, it seems unlikely that compulsory A+T-biased stop codons (and while we're at it, the Start codon ATG has the same bias), would be the sole cause of a measurable length/GC relationship on anything over a few tens of codons.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.110.180.117 (talk) 09:39, 11 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Does this follow?

message: High GC stretches within a genome not only influence primer annealing temperatures; high-GC also leads to the formation of stable secondary structures, 
which makes e.g. sequencing of such regions quite difficult. Even modern high-throughput sequencing technologies include a PCR amplification step, and
GC-rich DNA results in lower amplification efficiencies. For gene expression studies (RNA-Seq, based on sequencing of mRNA) or metagenomics, this might
result in additional biases. See e.g.  for a publication describing this effect (in this case, a
metagenome dataset).  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.61.157.104 (talk) 23:04, 31 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Influence of GC content on PCR experiments 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on GC-content. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20110809040326/http://esper.lab.nig.ac.jp:80/study/genome/?page=genome_composition_database_species_list to http://esper.lab.nig.ac.jp/study/genome/?page=genome_composition_database_species_list
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 14:15, 11 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I think that GC skew should probably be merged into GC-content, since one is a subset of the other. There's quite a bit of duplicate content, and a lot of GC skew would make more sense in the context of the GC-content article. Any other opinions? T.Shafee(Evo&Evo)talk 02:20, 3 June 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: These are orthogonal notions from a mathematical point of view, I disagree with the assertion stating that GC skew is a subset of GC-content, this is pure nonsense 90.14.59.170 (talk) 21:01, 9 August 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Although I agree that content and skew are mathematically disctinct concepts, From what I know of the field, the only reason that people are interested in GC-content is to detect GC-skew. T.Shafee(Evo&Evo)talk 04:01, 1 October 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Please no, GC content was used about 50 years before GC skew was discovered, and is still an usefull notion.90.53.34.81 (talk) 19:28, 4 November 2017 (UTC)

text: Though I appreciate the statement that GC skew is very closely related with GC content, I do not think that I see so much overlap between them that they should be merged. In particular, I disagree that people are interested in GC content only because they want to detect GC skew. There are many people who study GC content for other purposes. Additionally, GC skew is likely affected by the biases caused by the difference in the use of DNA replication system, whereas there are many more factors that could influence GC content of genome.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Genomebuffalo (talk • contribs) 05:48, 17 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge suggestion