Talk:Transduction (genetics)

message: The first sentance of the second paragraph has a subject confusion. To the uniformed reader, it may seem as though the "small peices of bacterial DNA" are supposed to be packaged into the bacteriophage genome. Anyone with a prior knowledge of the subject would clearly not make this mistake, as such an event is nonsensical. However to approach the subject from a naieve standpoint such as a good encyclopedia should, the sentence should be less ambigious. I propose a rearrangement of the current sentance:
"However, the packaging of bacteriophage DNA is not fool-proof and at some low frequency, small pieces of bacterial DNA will be packaged into a bacteriophage virion instead of the bacteriophage genome. "
into a paranthetical statement to read :
"However, the packaging of bacteriophage DNA is not fool-proof and at some low frequencey, small pieces of bacterial DNA, rather than the bacteriophage genome, will be packaged into the bacteriophage genome."
Just wanted to mention that this page doesn't at all discuss transduction in the context of placing foreign genetic material into cells via viruses for research or gene therapy purposes.130.113.67.105 01:28, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  1 

message: I have deleted the previous insertion (which was also totally ungrammatical btw) about "transduction only takes place through the lytic pathway". It was a pseudo-science argument and definitely not what cell biologists universally accept. 
Dsokus 22:19, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lytic & lysogenic pathways 

message: To call different types of transduction mistakes is questionable. From an evolutionary perspective such events are favorable, which most likely explains their persistence. Snellios (talk) 17:19, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Favourable for "whom"? They aren't favourable for the virus, and that's the only way they would get preserved if persistence relied on them increasing fitness. It seems more likely that they remain simply because evolution doesn't create perfect organisms (or whatever you want to call a virus). It is probably impossible to create a virus that never gets the "wrong" genes inside its capsid every now and then. Richard001 (talk) 09:15, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Packaging host DNA could be beneficial for the virus if it is beneficial for its next host.  Packaging an extra gene needed for utilizing an abundant carbon source for example will help the host cell grow and divide more quickly spreading the virus among its progeny before it induces cell lysis.Atesbo (talk) 19:08, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  'Mistakes' 

message: "Transduction is the process by which bacterial DNA is moved from one bacterium to another by a virus." To call the recombined material 'bacterial DNA' suggests an origin which may or not be the case.
This is a dubious definition. A more fitting one would be 'Transduction is the process by which genetic material is transferred from one bacterium to another by a virus'. 
:Snellios (talk) 17:29, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Introductory sentence 

message: "It is worth asking whether generalized transduction can occur by lysogenic phages. Two possible scenarios might be imagined to cause generalized transduction though literature references have not been found to confirm or dispute them:
1. A lysogenic phage whose site of integration is randomly chosen, which occasionally brings along adjacent DNA because of an erroneous excision process.
2. A lysogenic phage that goes into its lytic phase and randomly incorporates cell DNA."
The fact that it's unreferenced and the wording makes it seem like it is either speculative in nature or the result of independent thought/research.
::*Snellios (talk) 17:34, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Original research? 

message: This article has been revised as part of a large-scale clean-up project of multiple article copyright infringement. (See the investigation subpage) Earlier text must not be restored, unless it can be verified to be free of infringement. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions must be deleted. Contributors may use sources as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences or phrases. Accordingly, the material may be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously. Moonriddengirl (talk) 00:03, 17 November 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Possible copyright problem