Talk:Copy number variation

message: I cite: Like other types of genetic variation, some CNVs have been associated with susceptibility or resistance to disease. Gene copy number can be elevated in cancer cells. For instance, the EGFR copy number can be higher than normal in non-small cell lung cancer. [7
- Why the clause about cancer comes after the phrase about susceptibility? As I understand, the tumour is usually the place where mutations are rife, so CNVs in the tumour cells are likely not the CNVs that the organism inherited or has been having since conception. If I'm right, the two sentences about cancer should be separated into another paragraph. --CopperKettle (talk) 20:42, 19 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  An example out of place? 

message: I think the intro paragraph could be more helpful. It currently defines "copy-number variation" in terms of "copy-number differences", which is essentially the same thing. I would also question whether it's correct to say CNVs are "segments of DNA." It seems to me that CNVs affect segments of DNA.  --Krokicki (talk) 21:34, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Introductory paragraph 

message: Q: Just curiosity on my part, but you seem to use terminology other than CNV in the paper: things like unbalanced micro-rearrangements. Is that just a preference of nomenclature or is there some theoretical thing embedded in that? </br>
EE: Actually, that stems from complaints from the cytogenetics community. There are well-established professors in cytogenetics that have criticized the use of CNV to refer to something that is pathogenic. And that’s because implied in copy number variant, at least until probably last year, was the idea that variant equals benign. Microdeletion and microduplication to cytogeneticists typically means that you have something pathogenic, but there was actually a move among a few cytogeneticists to write a white paper or a piece that would help clarify this. But I would have to say that in the last year there’s been so much interchange between the use of CNV and microdeletion and microduplication, I think it’s a foregone conclusion now that it's almost impossible to stem that tide and change the usage back to the way that cytogeneticists viewed it originally. --CopperKettle (talk) 00:30, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  A [http://www.schizophreniaforum.org/new/detail.asp?id=1475 quote] 

message: This article talks about "copy number" as if it were a specifically genetic phenomenon, which leads me to believe that it isn't simply the "number of copies" of a gene, but is rather some other thing -- an internal count of the number of times a gene has been copied, perhaps? That seems strange to me, but it's the only obvious way to make sense of this article. I think there needs to be a definition of "copy number" before it's clear what a "copy number variation" is. 24.238.113.249 (talk) 15:34, 15 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  What is a Copy Number? 

message: . Reliable sources vary in their use, but the hypenated version seems to be strictly correct. Fences&Windows 22:21, 1 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move 

message: I propose changing the name of this article from "Gene copy number" to "Copy number variation". Comments? --Fat Cigar 14:33, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm in favour. There is already a redirect from 'Copy number variant' to 'Gene copy number'. T0mpr1c3 (talk) 15:08, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposal to change the name of this article 

message: Currently the second sentence of the article says
CNVs correspond to relatively large regions of the genome that have been deleted (fewer than the normal number) or duplicated (more than the normal number) on certain chromosomes
The sentence doesn't make clear what is being deleted or duplicated. Is it the nucleotide sequence itself, including enhancers and other factors? Also is this on an population level or organism level? I don't know anything about CNVs so I cannot disambiguate, but I hope someone with expertise can. Paulish (talk) 19:43, 10 September 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ambiguous sentence 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Copy-number variation. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131115092219/http://bioinfo.mc.vanderbilt.edu/CNVannotator/ to http://bioinfo.mc.vanderbilt.edu/CNVannotator/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:54, 13 August 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified