Javascript Disabled Detected

You currently have javascript disabled. Several functions may not work. Please re-enable javascript to access full functionality.

lyok

Member Since 23 Apr 2009
Offline Last Active May 15 2013 09:20 AM

Find content

Community Stats

Group Active Members
Active Posts 143
Profile Views 6,295
Member Title Veteran
Age Age Unknown
Birthday Birthday Unknown
Gender
Not Telling

Contact Information

2 Neutral

Friends

lyok hasn't added any friends yet.

Latest Visitors

hobglobin
07 Mar 2013 - 10:49
Peniel
07 Mar 2013 - 02:31
pito
17 Jan 2013 - 09:10
2xzwei
28 Sep 2012 - 01:42
ascacioc
12 Aug 2012 - 14:35

Posts I've Made

In Topic: 16S ribosomal RNA sequences (Bacteria and Archaea)

14 May 2013 - 11:22 PM

phage434, on 14 May 2013 - 01:10 PM, said:

You never actually sequence RNA (well, very rarely, and with great difficulty). You sequence either the DNA which will make the RNA, or you sequence DNA made from the RNA. There are no "real" RNA databases (well, perhaps modified tRNA databases). There are databases of transcripts (created by sequencing DNA made from transcribed RNA). As far as I am aware, no 16S "RNA" databases are made this way. They are all sequences of genomic DNA which will be transcribed into ribosomal RNA. There isn't much difference. It would be great if we really had RNA databases which included the base modifications of the RNA, but that is very difficult.

Ok thanks.

In Topic: 16S ribosomal RNA sequences (Bacteria and Archaea)

14 May 2013 - 11:58 AM

phage434, on 14 May 2013 - 11:31 AM, said:

Correct. Those are strictly speaking sequences of genes coding for 16S ribosomal RNA.

Ok thanks

Than why do they call it "16S ribosomal RNA sequences", its very confusing and (in my opinion) not correct.

Or are there no RNA databases in general and it is some sort of "unsproken law" that even RNA databases just contain the DNA ?
(for example: Reference RNA sequences (refseq_rna), I am supposing this is also DNA?)

In Topic: non redundant DNA

14 May 2013 - 09:44 AM

I see.

However, I am not really familiar with this.
So a copy is the same gene right? For example gene 1 that is present in cromosome 1 and the same gene 1 that is also present in chromosom 7 ?

Or are we talking about genes that have a mutation in their sequence?
Or sequence results that are +- the same but not 100% due to sequencing problems or?

In Topic: non redundant DNA

13 May 2013 - 12:38 PM

Ok thanks.

Could you explain the part about the mouse and humans?
Do you mean that a sequence that is the same in mouse and humans will be "merged" as one ? or?

In Topic: CFU measurments

08 May 2013 - 08:27 AM

Phil Geis, on 08 May 2013 - 06:39 AM, said:

Right.

Ok I see what you mean!
Thanks

Google Sign in options