Talk:DNA

Section "Evolution" says

:In February 2021, scientists reported, for the first time, the sequencing of DNA from animal remains, a mammoth in this instance over a million years old, the oldest DNA sequenced to date.

Haven't scientists have been sequencing DNA from animal remains for quite a while before 2021?

Should this say something like "scientists reported, for the first time, the sequencing of DNA from subfossil animal remains" or "the sequencing of DNA from the remains of an extinct animal" or something along those lines?

- 189.60.49.251 (talk) 04:57, 8 November 2023 (UTC)

:Presumably this should refer to the fact that DNA has been recovered from ancient organisms on a timescale where evolutionary change can be observed. At present it reads like random clickbait for the referenced studies. Would suggest changing:

:" In February 2021, scientists reported, for the first time, the sequencing of DNA from animal remains, a mammoth in this instance over a million years old, the oldest DNA sequenced to date. "

:to

:" Ancient DNA has been recovered from ancient organisms at a timescale where genome evolution can be directly observed, including from extinct organisms up to millions of years old, such as the woolly mammoth{{cite journal | vauthors = Callaway E | title = Million-year-old mammoth genomes shatter record for oldest ancient DNA – Permafrost-preserved teeth, up to 1.6 million years old, identify a new kind of mammoth in Siberia. |date=17 February 2021 |journal=Nature |volume=590 |issue=7847 |pages=537–538 |doi=10.1038/d41586-021-00436-x |issn=0028-0836 |pmid=33597786 | bibcode = 2021Natur.590..537C |doi-access=free }}. "

:ping User:Rebestalic as the last editor of this article at the time of writing (given the other IP has not been answered for some time) 130.226.236.6 (talk) 17:45, 28 May 2024 (UTC)

::There are also issues with first paragraph of the section (which relies on very outdated references for DNA degradation) but will see if any action happens with the above before taking more time to suggest re-drafts for this. 130.226.236.6 (talk) 17:47, 28 May 2024 (UTC)

::Support that, sounds like a good idea! Rebestalic^{[leave a message....]} 22:56, 28 May 2024 (UTC)

A review by scientist Denis Noble of a new book entitled "How Life Works: A User’s Guide to the New Biology" (2023) by Philip Ball (editor of the journal Nature) may be worth considering?{{cite journal |last=Noble |first=Denis |authorlink=Denis Noble |title=Book Review of "How Life Works: A User’s Guide to the New Biology" by Philip Ball, Pan Macmillan (2023) - It’s time to admit that genes are not the blueprint for life - The view of biology often presented to the public is oversimplified and out of date. Scientists must set the record straight, argues a new book. |url=https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-024-00327-x |date=5 February 2024 |journal=Nature |volume=626 |pages=254-255 |doi=10.1038/d41586-024-00327-x |url-status=live |archiveurl=https://archive.ph/QNFax |archivedate=5 February 2024 |accessdate=5 February 2024 }} - iac - Stay Safe and Healthy !! - Drbogdan (talk) 04:40, 6 February 2024 (UTC)

{{reflist-talk}}

Does anyone have information about the recent news that DNA is in a compressed form and that the "junk" is actually part of the decompression mechanics? (kind of like a zip file) That would be an important addition to this article. Actually, it makes sense that the genome would be in the most compressed state to make reproduction efficient.

:How does that make more sense than about everything else?--–ꟼsyc^ho ㄈhi¢ken 😭 (talk) 05:37, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

:“Sense” may need ist own disambiguation-page, before we discuss this further. –ꟼsyc^ho ㄈhi¢ken 😭 (talk) 05:38, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

Keeping it simple: Thoughts on a hatnote along the lines of "Not to be confused with the related RNA molecule"? Being extra scrupulous and seeking input first given it's an FA. Would advise usage of {{t|hatnote group}} to omit the newline. Thanks in advance for input. --Slowking Man (talk) 02:39, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

{{edit semi-protected|DNA|answered=yes}}

Want to add the link [https://proteopedia.org/w/Forms_of_DNA Forms of DNA] to the section that states: "Alternative DNA structures

Further information: Molecular Structure of Nucleic Acids: A Structure for Deoxyribose Nucleic Acid, Molecular models of DNA, and DNA structure" Jaime Prilusky (talk) 16:02, 11 January 2025 (UTC)

:{{not done}}: We don't add links in article body text, per WP:EL. It is already in the External links section, which is where such a link should go. LizardJr8 (talk) 22:08, 11 January 2025 (UTC)