Talk:Caveolin
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
Untitled
[edit]Would it be appropriate to put this article into Category:transport proteins? Thanks, delldot | talk 07:21, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
- According to the hierarchy visible at Mesh, yes. --Arcadian 07:40, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks! I went ahead and added the cat. delldot | talk 18:01, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
- I reverted this change for two reasons: (1) because the category 'transport proteins' on wikipedia contains merely proteins like proton pumps, glucose transfer molecules, etc. It doesn't contain proteins that play a role in vesicular transport (such as clathrin or caveolin): the category that caveolin is assigned to in MeSH. Perhaps it would be a good idea to create this category on wikipedia as well (2) caveolin is not 'just' a vesicular transport protein; it plays major roles in signal transduction as well. Also, the role of caveolin in cholesterol transport is still under investigation. The fact that the role of these proteins in cell biology is not fully elucidated brings me to the conclusion that it's safer to classify caveolin under the 'membrane proteins' for now. This 'broad label' can always be changed when more info on the proteins emerges. -- 21 January 2007 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.75.181.168 (talk • contribs)
- OK, thanks for catching that. As you say, better safe than sorry. However, to respond to some points, I'd say it's not necessary for the protein to be only a transport protein in order to merit inclusion in the category; for example, Ronald Reagan is in both Category:American film actors and Category:Presidents of the United States. Also, vesicular transport proteins are transport proteins, so I think it's reasonable to include them in category:transport proteins. Articles that are not already in the category can and should be added, in my opinion. We could create a subcategory for vesicular transport proteins but it would probably be quite small for now. Anyway, it's good that you removed the cat since the research isn't for sure on whether it's really a transport protein. delldot | talk 03:41, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
- I reverted this change for two reasons: (1) because the category 'transport proteins' on wikipedia contains merely proteins like proton pumps, glucose transfer molecules, etc. It doesn't contain proteins that play a role in vesicular transport (such as clathrin or caveolin): the category that caveolin is assigned to in MeSH. Perhaps it would be a good idea to create this category on wikipedia as well (2) caveolin is not 'just' a vesicular transport protein; it plays major roles in signal transduction as well. Also, the role of caveolin in cholesterol transport is still under investigation. The fact that the role of these proteins in cell biology is not fully elucidated brings me to the conclusion that it's safer to classify caveolin under the 'membrane proteins' for now. This 'broad label' can always be changed when more info on the proteins emerges. -- 21 January 2007 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.75.181.168 (talk • contribs)
- Thanks! I went ahead and added the cat. delldot | talk 18:01, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
Function section
[edit]Whoever added this section, could you please cite the journal sources from which these discoveries came? (Especially the claims about Caveolin-1 knockout (-/-) mice and angiogenic responses)