Talk:Mitochondrial DNA

message: The line: "Mitochondrial DNA can be regarded as the smallest chromosome coding for only 37 genes and containing only 16,500 base pairs." is cited to reference three, which does not contain this information.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.19.62.158 (talk) 23:09, 9 December 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Bad Reference

message: I think this article needs a rewrite. At the moment it has very little to say about what Mitochondrial DNA is and how it differs ballsin tracing inheritance. -- Solipsist 09:12, 24 Aug 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks. That looks a lot better. Is the information on the number of rings & genes assuming human/mamillian cells? -- Solipsist 14:12, 24 Aug 2004 (UTC)
replies: text:  It comes from human but I don't know how much mitacondria differ between speciesGeni 14:15, 24 Aug 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Cleanup

message: The link provided by User:Magnus Manske goes to a page requiring authentication. Can he post the extract instead? -- Sundar 12:20, Sep 22, 2004 (UTC)
: The link was apparently removed by someone long ago without identifying the work, making the text mention of "Vilà et al" meaningless. I have fixed this by providing a full citation of the implied Science article, "Multiple and Ancient Origins of the Domestic Dog". I am not aware of any free-access link for this article, but that doesn't mean we should delete any reference to it. The important thing is to unambiguously identify the work, whether or not it's available on the web. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 15:34, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I have added the PDF of the Vilà's article (found at consevol.org). Alexcalamaro (talk) 21:24, 3 October 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Link to vila's work 

message: Nothing is said about what traits mitochondrial DNA may affect - surprising, after 10 years now.  I found a reference to "Skuder, P., Plomin R., McClearn, G., Smith, D., Vignetti, S., Chorney, M., Chorney, K., Kasarda, S., Thompson, L., Detterman, D., Petrill, S., Daniels J., Owen, M., & McGuffin P. (1995). A polymorphism in mitochondrial DNA associated with IQ? Intelligence, 21, pages 1-12" but was unable to Google other results or traits.  (See  )
Such traits could have far-reaching consequences.  For example, if higher intelligence were linked to mitochondrial DNA, then the plight of women in male-dominated societies would be improved because the way to determine a woman's intelligence is to educate her.  (It wouldn't result in one woman being educated and then her sisters being turned into baby mills because regular DNA undoubtedly also plays a role in intelligence.)  Simesa 05:12, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Traits and Consequences 

message: It looks like this article hasn't been touched lately.  It definately needs some work.  Was this really a featured article at one point?  I would say that it should NOT be merged with mitochondrial genetics, but some of the info on that article should be here and not there.  Hichris 23:36, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I just checked and it looks like this article was mentioned in a Featured article, but doesn't look like it was one itself.  If no one objects in the next few days I'll remove the tags. Hichris 23:39, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  More Cleanup 

message: I think it would be wise not to merge the articles as mitochondrial genetics is already long, and because so far both articles are limited to human mitochondria and that mitochondrion are much more diverse than that. keeping them separate could alow for an overview of the diversity of mitochondria genomes among species.(specially plants...)
AlvarezL 15 Dec 2005
:There's a lot of duplicacy and irrelevant material in both. Would you like to help? JFW | T@lk 13:33, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article not to be merged w/ mitochondrial genetics! 

message: I think all references should be made into  --Brazucs 00:07, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  References 

message: The original sentance in the opening read, "Virtually 100% of the mtDNA contribution to a conceptus is inherited from the mother."  I changed conceptus to zygote, but I was wondering if anyone knew about the origin of the term.  Is the word used to try and anthropomorphize a zygote, making it a being instead of a collection of cells for pro-life purposes?  Leave me a message if you know; I'm curious if that is the goal. Terry 01:55, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Conceptus

message: Any reason not to merge from Mitochondrial genome? — coelacan — 21:12, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  merge from [[Mitochondrial genome]]? 

message: Should "consisting of 16,569 base pairs with 37 genes, 13 proteins (polypeptides), 22 transfer RNA (tRNAs) and two ribosomal RNAs (rRNAs)" actually read "consisting of 16,569 base pairs with 37 genes. Those genes code for 13 proteins (polypeptides), 22 transfer RNA (tRNAs) and two ribosomal RNAs (rRNAs)."? Cirbryn 22:39, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Probably -- certainly mtDNA can't consist of proteins etc.--Michael C. Price talk 22:58, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: 37 genes

message: Is anything known about the effects of differences in mitochondrial DNA on organisms?  Clearly it isn't going to affect skin color or anything of that sort, but it could conceivably have metabolic effects.  Perhaps there is so little variation in mitochondrial DNA that its effects are unknown?
Andrew 05:44, Apr 9, 2004 (UTC)
Some one should add something about what mitochondrial DNA codes for.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Templemd (talk • contribs) 01:22, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Mitochondrial DNA coding

message: From the title "Mitochondrial DNA" one would reasonably expect to read a general exposition of properties of plant, animal and fungal mtDNAs, and at least a mention of protist mtDNAs (e.g., lots of data on the kinetoplastidae).  However, as of this writing the Wikipedia topic is so biased toward animal mtDNA that it should be retitled "Animal Mitochondrial DNA" -- or even "Mammalian Mitochondrial DNA."  In writing this I am not advocating such a title change, but urging that information about mtDNAs other than mammalian mtDNA be added.  There is plenty of information available on the mtDNAs found in non-vertebrate metazoan groups and in plants, fungi and protists.
The strong bias in this article reflects the equally strong bias that has existed in the mtDNA research community for decades.  That bias is understandable - the major source of funding for mtDNA research is and has been medically-oriented granting agencies (e.g., NIH in the USA).  However, the topic "Mitochondrial DNA" is inclusive of all organisms that have mitochondria and the information in Wikipedia should be guided by that, and not by research economics.  Many of the paradigms and generalizations about animal mtDNA are, in fact, derived solely from studies of vertebrates (primarily mammals) and wholly ignore the large body of data available from studies of other organisms.  Mitochondrial genome size, gene content, gene order and obvious inferences about mechanisms of mitochondrial gene expression vary widely, even amongst the metazoa, but this fact is overlooked, ignored or simply unknown to many otherwise very sophisticated investigators.  Although I doubt that many who are presently active in mtDNA research will bother to read the mtDNA section in Wikipedia, it is possible that younger students who will become active in mtDNA research in the future might, and it would be good, in my opinion, to give them the realization that many of the dogmatic generalizations about mtDNA, while perhaps true for one organismal group, aren't true for all (or even most).  Paleogene 19:57, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Organismal Bias

message: The sentence "Human mtDNA can be used to identify individuals" seems to contradict a later passage which states that "unlike nuclear DNA mtDNA is not specific to one individual". If mtDNA is not specific to one individual, how can an individual be identified using mtDNA? --128.139.104.49 (talk) 09:45, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Identification 

message: i can find no information about teh standard mdna deviation in animals in wikipedia, we know enough about human mdna for scientific polemics yet apparently this basic fact is nowhere mentioned. it is very relevant for the species topic in the neanderthal discussion, with an average  1 million year life span of a species of higher animal, it could reward promising informations. there must be an average number of mdna sequences in a million year worth specific life. what is it? 15? 24.132.170.97 (talk) 13:42, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  animal mdna 

message: formed by development from ubiquinone --> semiquinone --> ubiquinol Qh2...
releases and forms other ROS  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Avkrules (talk • contribs) 03:50, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reactive Oxygen Species 

message: Article states that the paternal mDNA inheritance discovered in a human male was "linked to infertility", but the source does not mention this. It discusses exercise intolerance, not infertility, and states that the cause is a 2-base pair deletion after inheritance, not the paternal transmission itself. 
So I've inflicted a 3-base word deletion on the quoted phrase  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.170.53.17 (talk) 01:33, 1 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  paternal mDNA inheritance 

message: Article states "Nuclear and mitochondrial DNA are thought to be of separate evolutionary origin, with the mtDNA being derived from the circular genomes of the bacteria that were engulfed by the early ancestors of today's eukaryotic cells." Isn't this an assumption that it was bacteria and not archaea that was captured to form the proto-mitochondria organelle?69.237.157.127 (talk) 21:22, 12 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Archaea and eukaryotes are more closely related to each other than to bacteria, based on nuclear DNA.  So it's probably based on evidence. -- cheers, Michael C. Price talk 21:35, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

text: Extending the point of M. Price, above... there is extensive evidence based on genomic DNA sequences that mitochondrial DNA is most closely related to a specific family of bacteria, the alphaproteobacteria. Interestingly, these include some of the most invasive bacteria, which might make sense for establishing a stable endosymbiotic relationship. John Mackenzie Burke (talk) 19:42, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Archaea]]? 

message: The article states that mtDNA is inherited from the mother. This is certainly true in organisms that use the XY sex-determination system, such as humans. Logically, it would also hold true in the X0 and haplodiploid systems.
However, what about the ZW system? In that system, the heterogametic sex is the male instead of the female. If mtDNA is inherited in the same way it is in other organisms, the only way mtDNA could possibly be transmitted would seem to be through the male line. In ZW organisms, females can pass either a Z or W chromosome to their offspring, while males can only pass a Z chromosome.
Is there something I'm missing? — Dale Arnett (talk) 15:30, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Never mind. Looks like there is something I'm missing... namely that the chromosomes have nothing to do with it, right? — Dale Arnett (talk) 15:35, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: As I understand it, the precise nature of the sex-determination system doesn't matter as much as having motile (or, in the case of X0, absent!) sperm and a sessile ovum. The sperm's mitochondria are jettisoned at the moment of fusion. DS (talk) 04:52, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Inheritance in ZW sex-determination system 

message: While I admit it may seem that way, but I'm sure it's only been proven in a handful of species, and most of them were probably mammals if not vertebrates.
"In most species, including humans, mtDNA is inherited solely from the mother."
They are inherited from the father in honeybees and fruit flies. It seems likely that all hymenopterans and dipterans inherit from the father which between the two consist of over 1/8th of all described species inside themselves.  It also may be that all/most insects inherit from the father which alone would change the statement to "In most species, including humans, mtDNA is inherited solely from the father."
I REALIZE this is original research, BUT so is stating that most inherit from the mother.  I propose that either the article be changed to reflect this explanation or at least explain that it is only known in the taxa it has been proven it.--FUNKAMATIC   ~talk 06:58, 5 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  inherited by mother in most species??! 

message: The article states—
"Mitochondrial DNA can be regarded as the smallest chromosome coding for only 37 genes and containing only 16,569 base pairs."
"16,569" seems excessively precise, and does not state the species. I am sure that the basepair count varies among organisms, and even a bit among individuals in the same species. 
In fact, this sentence contradicts a later sentence—
"Some plant species have enormous mtDNAs (as many as 2,500,000 base pairs per mtDNA molecule)"
I also changed this sentence—
"Most other DNA present in eukaryotic organisms is found in the cell nucleus."
Not true—in plants, up to 10 percent of the DNA in them consists of chloroplast DNA. Last time I checked, plants are eukaryotes. In addition, multicellular organisms host a myriad of prokaryotic residents, (90% of the cells in the human body are bacterial in fact)—and their DNA is not being counted either.
—Kelvinsong (talk) 23:11, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Explaining my edit

message: I think that this article should state what the probability is of the mitochondrial DNA of two unrelated people, of the same race, or of different races, being identical.  Neutrino1200 (talk) 10:29, 1 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Odds of mitochondrial DNA match in unrelated people 

message: Talk:MDNA (album) to MDNA In ictu oculi (talk) 14:01, 9 February 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Related move proposal

message: The question I could not get a clear answer to actually involves a couple of corpses (Egyptian mummies) whose family relationships were being analyzed based on the mitochondrial DNA. I'm pretty sure, but was hoping this article would help me confirm that a match on the mDNA only indicates that the mothers were closely related, NOT that the mother was the same woman. I'm almost sure that's how it works, but I could not find where the article made that clear. In other words, a significant difference in the mDNA would ONLY prove the mothers were NOT the same woman. Shanen (talk) 21:35, 20 January 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: You are right. Two mummies with IDENTICAL mtDNA sequences would share a very recent ancestor along the maternal lineage (this can be the same mother, grandmother, great-grandmother ...). If the mtDNA is significantly DIFFERENT, then the two individuals belonged to different mitochondrial lineages and did not have the same mother. And the greater the differences between the two mtDNA sequences, the older their most recent common ancestor. Manudouz (talk) 09:07, 21 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mother = Daughter? What is the significance of an mDNA match? 

message: — Assignment last updated by Musicalkeer (talk) 15:25, 4 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education assignment: Molecular Genetics