Talk:Chaperone (protein)

message: I could not find this ref. on Pubmed: 
Terasawa, et al, J Biochemistry (Tokyo), 137(4): 443-447, 2005
Will whoever added it supply more info.... Kjaergaard 05:33, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ref 

message: What is this nomenclature based on ?
----
:The approximate molecular weight of each of the proteins/protein families, in kilodaltons (kDa). TenOfAllTrades(talk) 13:01, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why 60 90 100 etc? 

message: I added a few internal Wikipedia references to "in vivo" and "in vitro" and to the subsection Quaternary_structure#Nomenclature_of_quaternary_structures so as to try to give some reference to those. The article is very technical and jargon-rich, but I would think those would help.  Is there a better way to do it?
Matt 23:32, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  How to explain "tetradecameric" and such?

message: Although this is a big topic in biology, is the word chaparone more likely to be used in everyday use as a person who supervises young people. Should the other meaning be the primary topic? Should this page have another name, such as, "Chaperone protein", "Chaperone (protein)" or "Chaperone (biology)"? Snowman (talk) 11:48, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: See above. Page moved. Other chaperone proteins were named "name (protein)", so I have followed that pattern. Snowman (talk) 17:44, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Name of page 

message: It seems like this introduction is so bent on debunking the notion that chaperones fold proteins that it doesn't lay out what they DO do in the first place.  The second sentence of the article is no place for sentences like this, "The common perception that chaperones are primarily concerned with protein folding is incorrect."  Similarly, the first sentence in the second paragraph is problematic, "Chaperones do not necessarily convey steric information required for proteins to fold: thus statements of the form `chaperones fold proteins` can be misleading."  I come to this article knowing very little about chaperones, and thus I never had the notions that chaperones fold proteins.  The article assumes the reader has these notions, that the reader has the "common perception."  A far better introduction would simply lay out exactly what they do.  If it is absolutely necessary to say what they DON'T do in order to better convey what they DO do, then it should be done in a way that doesn't try to disprove something to its readers in the second paragraph.  As I've said, I do not know enough about chaperones to really make these two paragraphs better.  I only know that they were unhelpful for a reader who is well versed in chemistry but a newcomer to this particular subject.  I hope someone who is well versed might be able to tinker with it and fix it.Stever Augustus (talk) 22:04, 12 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Intro paragraphs 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Chaperone (protein). 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/20120523130904/http://ultr23.vub.ac.be/ultr/pub/pdfs/290.pdf to http://ultr23.vub.ac.be/ultr/pub/pdfs/290.pdf
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) 22:52, 2 August 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Chaperones can also work as disaggregases, i.e. they can interact with aberrant protein assemblies and revent them to monomers.[7] 
What does 'revent' mean?
I looked up the source article and couldn't even find the word. 
2600:1700:4CA1:3C80:C8BE:2AD7:A992:6C2 (talk) 23:36, 21 June 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Revent?