In article <DHBI7z.M16 at ebi.ac.uk>, tome at EMBL-EBI.ac.uk says...
>>>In article <DH9BzK.H7 at news.tcd.ie>, dbarton at acer.gen.tcd.ie (Dr David E
>Barton) writes:
>>In article <4700dv$9db at metro.ucc.su.oz.au>,
>>Alberto Catalano <alcat at cyberspace.org> wrote:
>>>Dear bionetters,
>>>>>>Does nayone know the meaning and/or origin of the AFM nomenclature for
>>STS
>>>sequences?
>>>Thanks
>>>>>>>I've no idea of the meaning of all the heiroglyphics that follow AFM,
>>but
>>this prefix denotes markers developed by Genethon.
>>>> | David Barton
>> | National Centre for Medical Genetics
>> | Our Lady's Hospital for Sick Children
>> | Crumlin, Dublin 12, Ireland.
>> | Tel +353 1 455 0515 Fax 455 8873
>>>Well, as I said before AFM=Association Francaise contre les Myopathies,
>the French muscular distrophy association that provides the funding
>for
>the research at Genethon
>>and the hieroglyphics that follow AFM - come on, nobody recognized
>plate number and position on the plate ( well OK, it may not be true
>for all of them but you can see the pattern. If it is not the plate, it
is
>the tube :-)
>>
Am I right in assuming that STS's developed in other centres are not
referred to by AFM numbers?
If not then what is the standard for naming STS sequences or primer pairs?
I originally thought that D#S### type nomenclature (e.g. D12S1057) was the
standard, but the databases are saturated with AFM type names that don't
seem to have a corresponding D number.
If there isn't a standard, or a (group of) committee(s) that controls the
nomenclature, how can we be sure that someone doesn't duplicate a name for
an STS.
Thanks
