Talk:Meselson–Stahl experiment

Untitled

Nasty error in figure showing 14N / 15N - Two of the three DNA molecules are left handed. Can this be corrected?

Date

Shouldn't this article have a date about when the experiment was performed? --75.36.155.150 (talk) 05:45, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

I added 1958: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC528642/?tool=pubmed Markus00000 (talk) 09:44, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

This article is a bit stubbish. There's nowhere near enough information for my AS biology notes. Perhaps a geneticist could help us out? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.127.35.212 (talk) 13:40, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

Request for Expert Clarification

This article presently describes either the experiment or some other background information incompletely. For example, a "dispersive" model of replication where each new double helix consists of a fixed number (say 1000) of base pairs from the original cell, followed by an equal number of new base pairs, and so on would also be consistent with the experimental results. What led Meselson and Stahl (and others) to conclude that such was not the case?

Someone who knows the missing parts fill them in. --Stagyar 01:54, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

This is no longer the standard model of replication, see Renata Maas, Unexspected assortment of DNA strands during exponential growth of Escheria coli, DNA Repair Volume 9 (2010), see www.elsevier.com --84.176.233.33 (talk) 07:32, 27 October 2010 (UTC)