Talk:Chimeric gene

Medicine Low‑importance

	Medicine portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine, which recommends that medicine-related articles follow the Manual of Style for medicine-related articles and that biomedical information in any article use high-quality medical sources. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine.MedicineWikipedia:WikiProject MedicineTemplate:WikiProject Medicinemedicine articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

I have started the article on chimeric genes, in part to make the distinction between chimeric genes and

Fusion proteins

. Citations are currently lacking, but can be added later. The article can also be expanded significantly.

Merge with fusion gene

The article on Fusion genes seems to deal with the same issue as this one. I suggest to merge the two. Peteruetz (talk) 04:09, 16 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Is the BCR/ABL1 gene in Philadelphia chromosome a fusion gene or a chimeric gene? Apparently they are the same. If so, both pages should be merged.--Miguelferig (talk) 22:20, 21 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Merge with Chimera (Molecular Biology)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

To improve or expand the articles rather than to merge. Klbrain (talk) 10:27, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I propose merging

Fusion genes, as originally proposed above. Curran919 (talk) 19:23, 6 September 2022 (UTC)[reply

]

Thanks for pointing this out. Actually these two things are different phenomena. The molecular biology one is chimeras that form when nucleotide sequences are manipulated in the lab, the chimeric gene page discusses natural formations of chimeras between genes. I think the titles of both pages can be changed to emphasize this difference Ppresh.ant (talk) 07:48, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Ppresh.ant even if there is a distinction, it seems to be two sides of the same coin? The distinction can still be made on a combined page. I guess it just depends on how much overlap in content the two ideas would have. Curran919 (talk) 08:05, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Actually I would be more inclined to merge the chimeric genes to the fusion gene article since they are minor variations of the same process that occurs naturally within organisms. is involved with either diseases or evolution of new functions.

I'm not an expert on the minutiae of this terminology but here's a line for a paper I found on chimeric genes, which seems to encompass the definition from the first line in the fusion genes wiki page :

"Chimeric genes are produced from the fusion of two or more parent genes [1] through chromosomal rearrangements, transcriptional read-through of adjacent genes, trans-splicing, and other mechanisms." - https://wjso.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12957-021-02248-9

For any subtle differences between them that are lab-made there is also a more elaborate Wiki page on "Fusion proteins" covering the same ground

And the Chimera (molecular biology) is mostly talking about artifacts that occur during DNA sequencing - so I will go ahead and edit the introduction to remove the duplicate references to chimeric genes and throw in an image for now. But this page can definitely be expanded more from other references such as drive5/chimeras once we decide on the merge status Ppresh.ant (talk) 02:05, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Strong oppose. Further muddying the waters between "chimera" as a natural phenomenon and "chimera" as a laboratory artifact would be a disservice to readers. A stronger disambiguation hat emphasising the difference would be warranted. Sennalen (talk) 15:47, 27 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.