I think that nowadays "gene" refers only to a subset of a nucleic acid. Sequences of ACTG (or ACUG in the case of RNA) only, and only in that organism's chromosomes.

If you inherit a virus from your mother, for instance, I think most would call that non-genetic inheritance, even though viruses have genes too. Same goes for methyl and acetyl markers, transcription factors, nutrients, toxins, and whatever else comes along for the ride in the meiotic cell.

▲

terminalshort 11 hours ago | parent [-]

Got it. I had thought that actual genes were only a part of what was considered "genetics."

	▲	__MatrixMan__ 9 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Back in the day when they didn't know which cellular chemical was responsible for the majority of heritability I think the usage was indeed more general. But now we have "the central dogma of biology" which puts nucleic acids on a pedestal. Convenient to have rules so you can keep track of their many exceptions.