Talk:Self-incompatibility

	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 Mid-importance).
	This article is supported by the Molecular and Cell Biology task force (assessed as Mid-importance).

Plants High‑importance

	Plants portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Plants, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of plants and botany 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.PlantsWikipedia:WikiProject PlantsTemplate:WikiProject Plantsplant articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Third System?

Latest comment: 18 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

There are more systems, but, what should that third system in Potentilla/Dasiphora fruticosa be? Is there any literature? Innes and Lenz call it gametophytic, so it's not a new system. (Innes, R.L. and L.M. Lenz. 1990. A Genetic Analysis of Self-Incompatibility and Double Flowers in Potentilla fruticosa L. Euphytica 51:241-248.) --134.93.62.50 00:46, 25 April 2006 (UTC)Reply

Heterostyly

I believe heterostyly should have its own page. The terms heterostyly and self-incompatibility are not synonomous as far as I know.

Should We Split This Article?

Latest comment: 17 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Following a discussion in the Hebrew Wikipedia about whether or not each species should have its own article, the subject of the self-incompatibility article has also risen. Someone claims that this article should be split - as it relates to different mechanisms which are evolutionarily independent. One of the disadvantages of the current (merged) format, is that the S locus, described for different mechanisms in parallel, can be mistakenly conceived to consist of a single locus for all mechanisms. Do you think this article should be split? You are also welcome to state your opinion about the one species-one article idea, although Wikipedia's policy was already stated here: [1]. Thank you in advance, Gidip 20:17, 10 March 2007 (UTC).Reply

If any one section gets too big, then it should be budded off, and the article should take on a summary format. I don't think it matters that it's evolved many times, as this is about a set of mechanisms that have the function. —Pengo 07:39, 11 March 2007 (UTC)Reply

Restructure

Latest comment: 17 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I am thinking of doing some major editing to this article and so thought I would make my plants avalible. Intro 1 - Heteromorphic SI

2 - S-RNase GSI (intro) 2.1 S-RNAse 2.2 Male Specificity Determinant 2.3 Modifier Genes 2.4 Gate Keeper Model 2.5 Inhibitor model

3 - GSI in the Papaverceae 3.1 S proteins 3.2 Mechanism of incompatibility

4 - SSI 4.1 SRK and SLG 4.2 SCR/SP11 4.3 Mechanism 4.4 Dominace and Genetic Complexities

And then other sections already in the article. (Million_Moments 14:01, 20 April 2007 (UTC))Reply

Add topic