Talk:GC-content

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

WikiProject Genetics This article is part of WikiProject Genetics, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to genetics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit this page, or visit the project page to join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale.
??? This article has not yet received an importance rating.
Molecular and Cellular Biology WikiProject
MCB Portal
This article is within the scope of the Molecular and Cellular Biology WikiProject. To participate, visit the WikiProject for more information. The WikiProject's current monthly collaboration is focused on improving Restriction enzyme.

Article Grading: The article has not been rated for quality and/or importance yet. Please rate the article and then leave comments here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article. Click here for an overview of how to rate this article.
WikiProject Biology
Biology Portal

GC-content is part of the WikiProject Biology, an effort to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to biology on Wikipedia.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.

I have merged this article with Guanine-cytosine content. Hopefully I managed to do it properly. --Chino 10:34, 7 Mar 2005 (UTC)

[edit] GC content and temperature

The last part of the last sentence of the first paragraph: "[...], and thus GC-content tends to be greater in hyperthermophiles." is not supported by data (see Galtier and Lobry, 1997). I would suggest something like "One may think that having a high G+C content is selectivley advatageous for hyperthermophiles, but this is not the case (Galtier and Lobry, 1997)."

  • Galtier, N. and Lobry, J.R. (1997). "Relationships between genomic G+C content, RNA secondary structure, and optimal growth temperature in prokaryotes". Journal of Molecular Evolution 44: 632-636. 

[edit] Genome is asymmetric

The last sentence of the third paragraph states that "In many prokaryotic organisms the genome is asymmetric: the composition of the strand being continuously replicated (leading strand) and its complementary (lagging strand) show different GC-contents.". This is not true, the GC-content is always the same in the two DNA strands. I think there is a confusion here with the GC-skew and the AT-skew (see Lobry 1996). I think that this sentence should be deleted from the "GC-content" article.

86.216.213.183 16:24, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

I was reading the article and was confused by this sentence, since the article is about paired GCs. The ext link given in the sentence wasn't too helpful, but the (G-C)/(G+C) formula there made it clear the subject was something else. This link I found is a bit more enlightening, and makes it clear the subject is not the same as GC-content. I've removed the sentence. It would be good to have a separate article about GC-skew. -R. S. Shaw 04:17, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] AT/GC ratio

I created an entry on G+C ratio yesterday but it was not till this morning did I realise that a GC content entry exists here. But although GC content and AT/GC ratio are similar, I think they are not the same, since GC content is expressed in % values but AT/GC is a ratio. I would like to know if these two entries can stay independent or should be merged. Thanks ώЇЌĩ Ѕαи Яоzε †αLҝ 11:52, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

It looks like a nice article you started, but I'm pretty sure they should be merged. Debivort 17:58, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
Thanks Debivort! Yes I will merge the entries. I just need some advice on the same.
  1. I'm I right in saying that the G+C ratio is not the same as GC-content, ie, values of GC-content will be different to G+C ratio (which is A+T/G+C). In that case should I make it as one of the sub under GC content?
  1. Which picture stays? I personally feel that one in G+C ratio now fits into the topic. But I may carry a bias since I made it (LOLZ). In case we are staying with current double strant picture, I can delete the earlier.

Thanks! ώЇЌĩ Ѕαи Яоzε †αLҝ 19:13, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

yeah ... I'd say use your image, which is more specifically related, and move ratio-specific text into a section of this article. I guess then G+C ratio should redirect here. Probably all sorts of other article names too, like GC ratio G/C ratio GC content G+C content G/C content, dontcha think? Let me know if you want help with the transfer. Debivort 19:21, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
Cheers Debivort! I would try to copy edit the entry through the week, but before that we should agree on the sections that are to be under GC content, since that would make it easier for the copy edit process. Any suggestions? Since I got a thesis to write too (poor me!!), I would appreciate any help from you. :-) ώЇЌĩ Ѕαи Яоzε †αLҝ 19:31, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
How about:
  • GC content intro
  • measures of GC content (ratio)
  • genome wide GC conent
  • ecological impact
  • thermophiles
  • coding sequence-level variation in GC content
  • experimental determination of GC content
Thesis eh? I have one of those to write too. Defending in September, theoretically. Debivort 20:14, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks! Makes sense. Mine probably in September too. Who knows anyways!!! ώЇЌĩ Ѕαи Яоzε †αLҝ 21:45, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

Merge looks good Wikiality - nicely done. Debivort 20:48, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks Debivort! ώЇЌĩ Ѕαи Яоzε †αLҝ 21:32, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

In spite of the higher thermostability conferred to the genetic material, it is envisaged that cells with high GC DNA undergo autolysis, thereby reducing the longitivity of the cell per se.

Could someone please clarify this? To say the cells are envisaged to undergo autolysis introduces ambiguity (are they observed to undergo autolysis? or merely thought to?). And what exactly happens to these cells? And why?

Thankyou! Asd28 08:45, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Autolysis is observed in Pseudomonas species, and hence thought that it may be true with other cells too. Cheers ώiki Ѕαи Яоzε †αLҝ 08:50, 11 October 2007 (UTC)