Talk:NF-κB
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is part of WikiProject Genetics, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to genetics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit this page, or visit the project page to join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. |
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale. |
| ??? | This article has not yet received an importance rating. |
 |
This article is part of WikiProject Cell Signaling, an attempt to better organise information in articles related to cell signaling and signal transduction. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the Cell Signaling WikiProject project, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. |
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale. |
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale. |
 |
This article is within the scope of the Molecular and Cellular Biology WikiProject. To participate, visit the WikiProject for more information. The WikiProject's current monthly collaboration is focused on improving Restriction enzyme. |
||
| B | This article has been rated as B-Class on the assessment scale. |
||
| Mid | This article is on a subject of mid-importance within molecular and cellular biology. | ||
|
Article Grading: The article has been rated for quality and/or importance but has no comments yet. If appropriate, please review the article and then leave comments here to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article and what work it will need. |
|||
Contents |
[edit] NF-kB
This article is about NF-kB yet there is no information on the MW, the amino acid sequence, the topology of the protein, if it is a functional homodimer. I think articles about proteins should address these.
- I agree with you that topology/structure should be included therefore I have added a new schematic figure which I hope addresses this need. Also I agree that information about whether these proteins function as homo- or heterodimers should be included. I am not an expert on NF-kB, but from what I have read, it appears that both are biologically relevant. Concerning the MW, the p50, p52, etc. protein names denote their MW in kDa (50 and 52 kDa respectively). However given the amount of post translational modification and between individual variation in sequence, exact MWs of proteins this size in my opinion are not that relevant. Finally, links to the protein sequences may be found to the right in the protein boxes. Including sequence directly in the article, especially in an article about a family of proteins is again, in my opinion, not that useful. The links should be adequate. Cheers. Boghog2 21:36, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Question
Question - Is there a tumor with NF-KB and Ubiquitin affected?
I'm not sure what you mean, can you be more specific? By "Ubiquitin" do you mean the protein or the pathway?
Also, in your section on NF-kB and cancer, you state, "When NF-κB becomes mutated such that the cell proliferation pathway is constitutively activated, the cells in which NF-κB is mutated may readily spiral down into uncontrolled proliferation, a hallmark of tumors." While it's possible this happens in some cases (though I'm not aware of any), the typical case is that NF-kB family members are amplified or rearranged; while one could think of these as mutations, we typically don't, we think of them as amplification and rearrangement. NF-kB signaling can also be upregulated by oncogenes, the classic case being Ras and Raf (though I can't recall the reference). Another well-known oncogene is Her2/Neu, a significant player in breast cancer, which activates Akt, leading to activation of NF-kB-dependent gene expression. There may also be a role for IkB inhibition in the upregulation of NF-kB in cancer, but nothing specific comes to mind.
All that said, this is a tough article to write, and you've done a great job--much better than I could have done. :) ~Doc~ EquationDoc 04:05, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Unspecific references
I moved the following refereneces, that doesn't seem to be cited in the main text. Please reintroduce them if appropriate...:
[1] Shehata M, Rel/Nuclear factor-kappaB apoptosis pathways in human cervical cancer cells, Cancer Cell International 2005, 5; 10.
[2] Lindström MT, Bennet R Philip, The role of nuclear factor kappaB in human labor. Reproduction (2005) 130: 569-581.
[3] Buss H, Dörrie A, Schmitz M, Lienhard M, Hoffman E, Resh K, Constitutive and Interleukin-1-inducible Phosphoryltion of p65 NF-κB at Serine 536 Is Mediated by Multiple Protein Kinases Including IκB Kinase (IKK)-α ,IKKβ, IKKЄ, TRAF Family Member-associated (TANK)-binding Kinase 1 (TBK1), and an Unknown Kinase and Couples p65 to TATA-binding Protein-associated Factor II31-mediated Interleukin-8 Transcription. Journal of Biological Chemistry 2000; 279 (53): 55633-55643.
[4] Barnes, Peter J., Karin, Michael. Nuclear Factor-κB -- A Pivotal Transcription Factor in Chronic Inflammatory Diseases. New England Journal of Medicine 1997; 336: 1066-1071
[5] Gilmore, Thomas D. (editor). NF-κB: From Basic Research to Human Disease. Oncogene Oct 2006; 25 (51): 6679 - 6899
Kjaergaard 09:35, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Layout
I have moved the mechanism and structure figures back to the top of the page for the following reasons:
- In the Safari web browser for some browser window widths, the [previous] graphic placement resulted in some of the text being hidden behind the graphic. In Firefox, unless the browser window width was set very wide, the previous placement caused the references section to be compressed to a very narrow and almost unreadable column width.
- In the [previous] version, the structure figure was displayed next to the references. In the [current] version, the structure graphic (depending on the width of the web browser window) is displayed next to or very near the structure section.
- I understood the logic for placing the graphics in the "Activation of NF-κB" section in the raw wiki text. However because of the large number of protein boxes, the graphic in the final rendered form of the article ended up being displayed considerably below this section and therefore the reader may not be aware that the figure exists when reading the corresponding mechanism section text. As it stands now, the mechanism graphic is above the mechanism section of the text, but once the reader reaches the mechanism text, the reader will remember seeing the graphic and can refer back it.
Cheers. Boghog2 06:30, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
[edit] hey hey hey
I know bupkis about molecular biology but NF-whatever is in the news:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/7119552.stm —Preceding unsigned comment added by Foogus (talk • contribs) 04:50, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Dimer
I thought there was no single NF-kB. Several members of the family can associate to form a functional dimer, which is not limited to p50 with p52 (e.g., p50 and p65 also exist, other dimers with RelA (=p65), c-Rel, RelB, etc.). In fact the so-called 'canonical' pathway involves p65 associated with p50, and not p50 + p52. Jack the Stripper (talk) 17:18, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
- I.e. not as implied here: In contrast, the NF-κB1 and NF-κB2 proteins are synthesized as large precursors, p105, and p100, which undergo processing to generate the mature NF-κB subunits, p50 and p52, respectively. Jack the Stripper (talk) 17:20, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Reorganization
I propose that this article be reorganized slightly to make it more generally accessible and to mirror the format of many NF-κB reviews. It might be helpful if "Inhibitors of NF-κB" are discussed earlier, at least before "Activation of NF-κB." (Many reviews include the IκB proteins in the list of NF-κB family members.) I would also like to remove some of the information from protein boxes (some are redundant while others contain little information) to clean the page up a bit.
If there are no objections, I would like to begin making some of these changes. Jacchigua (talk) 16:23, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
- Hi Jacchigua. Your proposed reorganization sounds reasonable. However I don't understand your comment concerning the protein boxes. Which information is redundant and/or contains little information? Perhaps the protein/gene names which are based on the official HUGO gene names could be abbreviated which would make the boxes look cleaner. Cheers. Boghog2 (talk) 16:46, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
- Hey Boghog2. I thought that a couple of the protein boxes were duplicates lacking structures, but now I see that I got lost in the HUGO gene names and that there is a box for each protein discussed in the article. Abbreviating the HUGO names to the more common names used in the article is about all I would change with the protein boxes. I've been watching this article for a while and it is looking nice. Thanks! Jacchigua (talk) 18:27, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
