This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Mycoplasma genitalium article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find medical sources: Source guidelines · PubMed · Cochrane · DOAJ · Gale · OpenMD · ScienceDirect · Springer · Trip · Wiley · TWL |
This page is not a forum for general discussion about Mycoplasma genitalium. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about Mycoplasma genitalium at the Reference desk. |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
It is requested that an image or photograph of Mycoplasma genitalium be
included in this article to
improve its quality. Please replace this template with a more specific
media request template where possible.
The Free Image Search Tool or Openverse Creative Commons Search may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites. |
Ideal sources for Wikipedia's health content are defined in the guideline
Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources (medicine) and are typically
review articles. Here are links to possibly useful sources of information about Mycoplasma genitalium.
|
Daily pageviews of this article
A graph should have been displayed here but
graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at
pageviews.wmcloud.org |
This article refers to a taxon that doesn't have its type locality listed. If you can, please provide it. |
Why is there a redirect from Mycoplasma to Mycoplasma genitalium? Is Mycoplasma Pneumoniae neglectable, maybe? -- Ruhrjung 04:56 May 2, 2003 (UTC)
is this an STD, if its found in people with NGU only, then is it? Qrc2006 10:23, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
...is currently identified as Carsonella ruddii. This article should be updated to reflect this. - Gavin 13:23, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
The image currently portrayed will make no sense to the majority of readers of this article. It should either be given a caption as to what exactly is represented, or an alternative picture should be used. Lilac Soul 09:54, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
Agreed. I'd prefer a short explanation, maybe with a link to another article that explains it more in-depth (if such a page exists). d20 06:32, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
If M. genitalium is a parasite, then isn't the descriptor of "free-living" contradictory?-- Mr Fink ( talk) 18:50, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
Can we get some figure here please? -- Iustinus ( talk) 15:25, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
The article states that Mycoplasma genitalium has the smallest known genome that can constitute a cell, yet at the same time it concedes that Nanoarchaeum equitans, which is a cellular organism, has an even smaller genome. -- Lambiam 08:03, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
Hi, I’m not sure the Mb is correct. Can somebody tell me if this is really bits, or misspelled bytes… or even base pairs, which cannot be written as “b” at all, since that’s already reserved for bits. — 89.0.229.188 ( talk) 21:01, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
http://www.cdc.gov/std/treatment/2006/urethritis-and-cervicitis.htm#uc2
Goes to Page Not Found. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.150.102.237 ( talk) 08:36, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
While clarifying a statement in the article's Introduction so as to show that "smallest genome" is a function of the number of base-pairs (and not the number of genes), I added what I thought was the correct number of genes for M.genitalium. It was based on a table in the article Mycoplasma laboratorium (which stated it as 475). However, the section below gives it as 482. After further reading of the M.genitalium article, I realized that it already gave a figure of 575. So which of the three is the correct one? Titus III ( talk) 19:31, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
The correct gene count, 525, is mentioned in the "Genome" section but we still have the wrong number in the intro at footnote 4. Also, Footnote 4 does not even seem to support the gene count it is next to. Also, the illustration still has the wrong "b" ,"bp" marking. Zipzip50 ( talk) 02:04, 30 March 2016 (UTC) Zipzip50 ( talk) 02:21, 30 March 2016 (UTC)
Science Magazine March 25, 2016 covers the creation of a new stripped down synthetic microbe that has the fewest genes, 473. It looks like a new hot topic, as more researchers will be using the new cell for important gene work. This may be a good reason to re-open The Minimal Genome Project as a proper page on its own. [1] Zipzip50 ( talk) 04:30, 31 March 2016 (UTC) Zipzip50 ( talk) 05:37, 31 March 2016 (UTC)
The correct count M. genitalium is 525, but the wrong number appears in so many places it takes a lot of time to get to them all. As to the value of this new cell, for one thing, it reproduces very rapidly, and that makes it very useful in research work. Zipzip50 ( talk) 08:03, 31 March 2016 (UTC)
The new official name for this is Mycoplasmoides genitalium, see https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/taxonomy. I suggest renaming this — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:4040:2CAF:9300:112B:CF52:A3CF:CD6F ( talk) 14:55, 15 December 2022 (UTC)
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 18 August 2023 and 30 November 2023. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Ilovemilo12, CoffeeShopFantasy, Reejisoo, Atnjjk7, Microscopicpizza ( article contribs). Peer reviewers: Ae38798, Dentbassist.
— Assignment last updated by Dentbassist ( talk) 13:41, 5 October 2023 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Mycoplasma genitalium article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find medical sources: Source guidelines · PubMed · Cochrane · DOAJ · Gale · OpenMD · ScienceDirect · Springer · Trip · Wiley · TWL |
This page is not a forum for general discussion about Mycoplasma genitalium. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about Mycoplasma genitalium at the Reference desk. |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
It is requested that an image or photograph of Mycoplasma genitalium be
included in this article to
improve its quality. Please replace this template with a more specific
media request template where possible.
The Free Image Search Tool or Openverse Creative Commons Search may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites. |
Ideal sources for Wikipedia's health content are defined in the guideline
Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources (medicine) and are typically
review articles. Here are links to possibly useful sources of information about Mycoplasma genitalium.
|
Daily pageviews of this article
A graph should have been displayed here but
graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at
pageviews.wmcloud.org |
This article refers to a taxon that doesn't have its type locality listed. If you can, please provide it. |
Why is there a redirect from Mycoplasma to Mycoplasma genitalium? Is Mycoplasma Pneumoniae neglectable, maybe? -- Ruhrjung 04:56 May 2, 2003 (UTC)
is this an STD, if its found in people with NGU only, then is it? Qrc2006 10:23, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
...is currently identified as Carsonella ruddii. This article should be updated to reflect this. - Gavin 13:23, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
The image currently portrayed will make no sense to the majority of readers of this article. It should either be given a caption as to what exactly is represented, or an alternative picture should be used. Lilac Soul 09:54, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
Agreed. I'd prefer a short explanation, maybe with a link to another article that explains it more in-depth (if such a page exists). d20 06:32, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
If M. genitalium is a parasite, then isn't the descriptor of "free-living" contradictory?-- Mr Fink ( talk) 18:50, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
Can we get some figure here please? -- Iustinus ( talk) 15:25, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
The article states that Mycoplasma genitalium has the smallest known genome that can constitute a cell, yet at the same time it concedes that Nanoarchaeum equitans, which is a cellular organism, has an even smaller genome. -- Lambiam 08:03, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
Hi, I’m not sure the Mb is correct. Can somebody tell me if this is really bits, or misspelled bytes… or even base pairs, which cannot be written as “b” at all, since that’s already reserved for bits. — 89.0.229.188 ( talk) 21:01, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
http://www.cdc.gov/std/treatment/2006/urethritis-and-cervicitis.htm#uc2
Goes to Page Not Found. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.150.102.237 ( talk) 08:36, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
While clarifying a statement in the article's Introduction so as to show that "smallest genome" is a function of the number of base-pairs (and not the number of genes), I added what I thought was the correct number of genes for M.genitalium. It was based on a table in the article Mycoplasma laboratorium (which stated it as 475). However, the section below gives it as 482. After further reading of the M.genitalium article, I realized that it already gave a figure of 575. So which of the three is the correct one? Titus III ( talk) 19:31, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
The correct gene count, 525, is mentioned in the "Genome" section but we still have the wrong number in the intro at footnote 4. Also, Footnote 4 does not even seem to support the gene count it is next to. Also, the illustration still has the wrong "b" ,"bp" marking. Zipzip50 ( talk) 02:04, 30 March 2016 (UTC) Zipzip50 ( talk) 02:21, 30 March 2016 (UTC)
Science Magazine March 25, 2016 covers the creation of a new stripped down synthetic microbe that has the fewest genes, 473. It looks like a new hot topic, as more researchers will be using the new cell for important gene work. This may be a good reason to re-open The Minimal Genome Project as a proper page on its own. [1] Zipzip50 ( talk) 04:30, 31 March 2016 (UTC) Zipzip50 ( talk) 05:37, 31 March 2016 (UTC)
The correct count M. genitalium is 525, but the wrong number appears in so many places it takes a lot of time to get to them all. As to the value of this new cell, for one thing, it reproduces very rapidly, and that makes it very useful in research work. Zipzip50 ( talk) 08:03, 31 March 2016 (UTC)
The new official name for this is Mycoplasmoides genitalium, see https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/taxonomy. I suggest renaming this — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:4040:2CAF:9300:112B:CF52:A3CF:CD6F ( talk) 14:55, 15 December 2022 (UTC)
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 18 August 2023 and 30 November 2023. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Ilovemilo12, CoffeeShopFantasy, Reejisoo, Atnjjk7, Microscopicpizza ( article contribs). Peer reviewers: Ae38798, Dentbassist.
— Assignment last updated by Dentbassist ( talk) 13:41, 5 October 2023 (UTC)