Talk:Ribosome

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Ribosome article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1

Molecular Biology: Genetics / MCB Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Molecular Biology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Molecular Biology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Molecular BiologyWikipedia:WikiProject Molecular BiologyTemplate:WikiProject Molecular BiologyMolecular Biology articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Genetics task force (assessed as Top-importance).
	This article is supported by the Molecular and Cell Biology task force (assessed as Top-importance).

Biophysics (inactive)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biophysics, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.BiophysicsWikipedia:WikiProject BiophysicsTemplate:WikiProject BiophysicsBiophysics articles

Ribosome was one of the Natural sciences good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
December 23, 2005	Good article nominee	Listed
January 25, 2006	Good article reassessment	Delisted

Current status: Delisted good article

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment[edit]

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 27 August 2018 and 7 December 2018. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Nas10103.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 08:09, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

dead link[edit]

The first external link seems to be broken. Please remove the following: 70S Ribosome Architecture Animation of a working ribosome. Requires the Chime browser plugin from this site (where registration is required). Iakov Davydov (talk) 08:47, 4 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for spotting this. I have removed the link. Graham Colm (talk) 11:06, 4 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ribosome structure[edit]

I suggest to move the whole section on structure to a new page. There is plenty of more information to be incorporated, so this will eventually become unwieldy. Peteruetz (talk) 14:52, 9 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ribosome: structure and function, molecular device/machine[edit]

I just found a good review about these aspects of ribosome: ^[1] Kazkaskazkasako (talk) 18:19, 19 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion[edit]

This non sequitur at the end of the structure section has been deleted for lack of context or explanation and weasel wording.

"It should be noted that the production of the component parts of the ribosome from a messenger RNA molecule is rather strongly isomorphic with the self-replication model of von Neumann."

173.25.54.191 (talk) 22:26, 6 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with you. It's also tantamount to gibberish. Graham Beards (talk) 22:53, 6 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Introduction[edit]

Shouldn't "intercellular" in "Ribosomes are often embedded in the intercellular membranes that make up the rough endoplasmic reticulum" be replaced by "intracellular"? --Seadogburger (talk) 11:46, 31 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, thank you for pointing this out. Graham Beards (talk) 17:15, 1 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

References[edit]

^ Moore, Peter B. (2012). "How Should We Think About the Ribosome?". Annual Review of Biophysics. 41 (1): 1–19. doi:10.1146/annurev-biophys-050511-102314. PMID 22577819. Retrieved 2014-09-19.

Assessment comment[edit]

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Ribosome/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

The first sentence should not say "...in all cells." Mature reb blood cells (erythrocytes) have no nucleus and no DNA and, hence, no RNA or ribosomes. 150.148.0.27 (talk) 18:44, 9 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Last edited at 18:44, 9 July 2009 (UTC). Substituted at 04:17, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

Self-cloning ribosome as the pro-LUCA origin of life[edit]

It's a theory. It's structure may not have all the same components. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:2149:827F:6E00:549E:A65E:49A0:F52F (talk) 21:23, 22 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I do not understand. They cannot be self-cloning, because they produce proteins, not ribozymes that they actually are (the most important active center that is). So it is just a wrong theory and is against RNA world. Valery Zapolodov (talk) 00:24, 26 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

My recent edit and the term "prokaryote"[edit]

It's outdated to talk about prokaryotes, as bacteria and archaea are as different from each other as bacteria and eukaryotes or archaea and eukaryotes. There should be a separate section on archaeal ribosomes. Also, I found it strange to talk about properties of prokaryotic (or even just bacterial) ribosomes based only on numbers of one species (E. coli). Other bacteria will certainly have rRNAs of different sizes, and I would expect also different numbers of proteins. In the meantime, I've edited the sentences so they more directly relate to E. coli, as an example.

Zashaw (talk) 06:16, 17 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

so like they have protein — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.111.175.204 (talk) 16:59, 22 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Figure 6 caption[edit]

I believe that the caption in Fig. 6 would be improved greatly by adding to it a part of the caption to the identical figure in the “Elongation” section of the “Eukaryotic translation” page, which reads (slightly altered): “The ribosome is green and yellow, the tRNAs are dark blue, and some other proteins involved are light blue.”

I do not know how to carry this out; I'm just leaving this here in case someone wants to carry on... HHHEB3 (talk) 13:19, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

[Ribosome_macromolecular_device_2012_REVIEW-1] Moore, Peter B. (2012). "How Should We Think About the Ribosome?". Annual Review of Biophysics. 41 (1): 1–19. doi:10.1146/annurev-biophys-050511-102314. PMID 22577819. Retrieved 2014-09-19.

[1]