Talk:H19 (gene)

	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
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Genetics task force (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by the Molecular and Cell Biology task force (assessed as Low-importance).

Untitled

Why is there a part titled genome instability if it is not known whether or not this gene has a relation with it. It seems unnecessary. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.131.215.138 (talk) 09:28, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

suggested addition Hello you dear people who watch the non-translated RNA pages -- I was at the Sanger visit for the ABSW and heard of the interest in annotating these pages. Here's a reference for you that extends interest in H19 and its microRNA / IncRNA to osteoarthritis: J Mol Med (Berl). 2012 Apr 21. [Epub ahead of print] Regulation of H19 and its encoded microRNA-675 in osteoarthritis and under anabolic and catabolic in vitro conditions. PMID: 22527881 Cheers!Celia Kozlowski (talk) 22:14, 30 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A short question: How can one make a statement of the amino acid level, if it's claimed, that there's no product of translation ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.113.31.3 (talk) 17:48, 5 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Seems reasonable to me. The full quote is "Although the RNA sequence was highly conserved evolutionarily, at the amino acid level, there was a complete absence of conservation", the section is on evidence why researchers think this is a ncRNA and not a protein-coding gene. So if you take the H19 gene from many different species and translate the sequence (probably in all 3 frames) and compare these sequences you see none that show any significant level of evolutionary constraint. --Paul (talk) 21:01, 5 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on H19 (gene). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://archive.is/20030912055635/http://ajp.amjpathol.org/cgi/content/abstract/153/5/1597 to http://ajp.amjpathol.org/cgi/content/abstract/153/5/1597

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:23, 27 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Reference 18

Dear all,

As landmark as reference 18 is, it seems to have been used rather generously for statements the original paper wouldn't actually support, for example, that reference 18 has anything to do with DNMT-null mice as mentioned in the IGF-2 section. I just thought I'd put this here as I'm not sure how many of the references here are actually correct.

Maybe the original author or someone with further knowledge can identify what the correct reference is for some of these statements (that I'm sure are correct, just inaccurately referenced) — Preceding unsigned comment added by TobyBrann (talk • contribs) 12:18, 31 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]