Skip to content
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(the courier mail)   Scientists discover DNA "instruction manual" for building mammals. The race for home-grown supermodels commences   (thecouriermail.news.com.au) divider line
    More: Cool  
•       •       •

16965 clicks; posted to Main » on 11 May 2004 at 1:19 AM (18 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



160 Comments     (+0 »)


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2004-05-11 1:24:26 AM  
I for one welcome our new DNA weilding overlords.
 
2004-05-11 1:25:29 AM  
Will it have five asses though? pfft
 
2004-05-11 1:26:04 AM  
Uh, I'd clone it?

Kathy baby, wherever you are, call me!

[image from modelport.com too old to be available]
 
2004-05-11 1:26:14 AM  
Make me an elephanpotamus.
 
2004-05-11 1:26:46 AM  
Good use of cool tag. I'll take a half-dozen supermodels, mixed variety, extra- tipsy. Can you hurry?
 
2004-05-11 1:26:47 AM  
The whole Fark front page is ugly now. Thanks, poster. Use shorter source names.
 
2004-05-11 1:26:54 AM  
Chomp chomp pa-chooey chomp.
 
2004-05-11 1:27:22 AM  
-The arse of Kylie Minogue
-The tits of Liz Hurley
-The legs of Elle MacPherson
-The face of Elisha Dusku
-The bank account of Queen Elizabeth
-The talking ability of Helen Keller. Now get to work on my Frankenho !
[image from austinchronicle.com too old to be available]
 
2004-05-11 1:29:52 AM  
Remember that Star Trek episode where the humans, Klingons, Ferengi, and Romulans were all chasing after what they thought was a super-weapon and it turned out to be a message from an ancient race who planted the seeds of humanoid evolution in the dna of the primordial ooze from a bunch of different planets?

Yeah that was thought provoking.
 
2004-05-11 1:30:12 AM  
If they are correct, then we are about 15 years away from Moore's law applying to Lifespans. Whether this is a good or Bad thing I honestly cannot say, but we had best get shaking on a Mars Colony and FTL or overpopulation is gonna be a biatch....


Getting closer everyday to my ultimate ambition of dying bathed in the rays of an alien sun......
 
2004-05-11 1:31:34 AM  
I'd make your mom.

OHHHHH SNAP!!!
 
2004-05-11 1:32:53 AM  
putnam2k2

The whole Fark front page is ugly now. Thanks, poster. Use shorter source names.

So, you ascribe to that whole philosophy of only getting bothered about the big things then? I've heard that's pretty cool.
 
2004-05-11 1:34:39 AM  
Magorn:

If they are correct, then we are about 15 years away from Moore's law applying to Lifespans.

15 years from now, a Farker goes to see his doctor...

"I have some good news and some bad news. The good news is that we've succeeded in making to immortal. The bad news is that now you'll be a 40 year old virgin forever."
 
2004-05-11 1:36:21 AM  
vossiewulf

Ah, but the fate of so much is decided by simple aesthetics...

Political elections, the popularity of celebrities, the immortality of master artists, etc.
 
2004-05-11 1:37:19 AM  
Magorn

its the same sun! earth sun, mars sun, they're the same! i invented the piano key necktie! i invented it! i feel like i'm taking crazy pills!
 
2004-05-11 1:42:41 AM  
Gene Roddenberry surrenders.

/Yeah, I saw STRYPERSWINE's post, but it was my first Fark-cliche-ridden thought upon seeing the headline.
 
2004-05-11 1:43:10 AM  
Oh this is BS. Their "research" was entirely lifted off of the timecube website. The scientific establishment scoffs at the timecube, but secretly they wish to harness the power of 4 days in 1.
 
2004-05-11 1:43:16 AM  
putnam2k2

The whole Fark front page is ugly now. Thanks, poster. Use shorter source names.

Time to upgrade your 14-inch monitor.
 
2004-05-11 1:46:05 AM  
Very ignorant about genomics. Doesn't this just require a "Ctrl + F" on each of animal's gene files? Is it more complicated?

/looking for edumacation
 
2004-05-11 1:47:42 AM  
gawd...blah blah...human
 
2004-05-11 1:52:35 AM  
I think the idea of RNA control is old news. I think the news is that they found some tasty hard evidence of it, and gene sequences that might be acting as the switches in mammals.

Now they get to hunt around and see what RNA sequences control what proteins, and in what order. Get ready for thousands of mice with their spinal columns twisted inside-out.

I bet this only made the papers in Australia because they never get published, and it's a big deal there. Eh Mate, we got science!

/Australian for basic research.
 
2004-05-11 1:54:15 AM  
[image from internationalhero.co.uk too old to be available]

Instruction manual? Damn, I've been looking all over for it!
 
2004-05-11 1:55:49 AM  
Bring on the cloned supermodels!
Sweet!
/Peter Griffin laugh
 
2004-05-11 1:59:53 AM  
On the verge, of what will be, the evolution of new and existing species, by the hand of man, this quantifier must still be inserted into the ground breaking announcement:


Bases are the building blocks of DNA, rather like the letters of the alphabet.


Moore's law of lifespans, wouldn't that be more 1984/Logan's Run scenario, with a great decrease in human population? I mean, after my drogoies and I round all you natural borns up...

 
2004-05-11 2:00:49 AM  
"The odds of them being the same in all three animals is about one in 10 with 22 zeroes after it, so they must be there for a reason."

It's ok, you can say 10^22. No one's head is going to explode.
 
2004-05-11 2:01:08 AM  
One word: Gattaca
 
2004-05-11 2:08:14 AM  
[image from bullzeye.com too old to be available]
Here comes tEh science?
 
2004-05-11 2:12:44 AM  
I think the idea of RNA control is old news. I think the news is that they found some tasty hard evidence of it, and gene sequences that might be acting as the switches in mammals.

Now they get to hunt around and see what RNA sequences control what proteins, and in what order. Get ready for thousands of mice with their spinal columns twisted inside-out.

I bet this only made the papers in Australia because they never get published, and it's a big deal there. Eh Mate, we got science!

/Australian for basic research

Not so... check it out:

http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/abstract/1098119v1


An article in Science is pretty decent...(sitting in the lab as an underpaid graduate student at 2:11 AM wishing my name was on some Science paper so I could graduate)
 
2004-05-11 2:20:34 AM  
carnstar
It's a lot more complicated. Here's the best known method for sequence homology detection.
I work (or at least worked) in protein bioinformatics, which is what this program is for, not gene informatics, which I'm not familiar, but the basic idea is the same.
Here's a much simpler tool for searching for homologous proteins, and it has a gene search tool as well.
Plus you've got to consider that the average mammal genome is about a billion bases long. The algorithms for doing sequence searches generally run in O(n^2) time per pair of sequences compared, so it's not like you can just paste in a couple of genomes and expect to finish anytime soon. These guys aren't looking for genes either, so you can't use gene prediction software to narrow your search.
 
2004-05-11 2:22:05 AM  
"The odds of them being the same in all three animals is about one in 10 with 22 zeroes after it, so they must be there for a reason."

And, guess how many animals have ever existed on this planet? A lot more than 10 to the 22nd. So the odds of finding three with a conserved gene is greater than one, making this article uninteresting.

Seriously, this is not that exciting, especially with the lack of concrete information in the article.
 
2004-05-11 2:22:37 AM  
Here comes the Gattaca?

/crossing cliches
 
2004-05-11 2:23:10 AM  
I'd like to order a pair of Gauge's, please.
 
2004-05-11 2:27:48 AM  
"Ah, but the fate of so much is decided by simple aesthetics...
Political elections, the popularity of celebrities, the immortality of master artists, etc."

No it isn't, no it isn't, no it isn't!

Okay, maybe a little bit. But only for stupid people.

I'll give you the artist thing though.

Ack. Fricking graphic design people. "How pretty the information is is more important than the information!" Shut up!
 
2004-05-11 2:30:43 AM  
endosymbiont
They're talking about species here. The odds of three different species all having the exact same 200 base sequence in their genome by chance is virtually nil.
 
2004-05-11 2:38:03 AM  
Here comes the Weird Science.

[image from movieprop.com too old to be available]
 
2004-05-11 2:45:36 AM  
Genetics and computers have quite a bit in common. Proteins are analogous to message packets in networks and the codons (combinations of molecular sequences) in DNA are similar to mnemonics. Except instead of electrons, you're using chemical interactions.

It makes sense from a genetic 'programming' perspective for there to be a few base functions that are nearly identical across entire kingdoms of life.

Its amazing how well engineered life really is. I'm no creationist, but it does make you wonder if something not too different from that star trek episode someone mentioned above could've occured, billions of years ago..

/not trying to start a flame war, just been drinkin and philosophizing..
 
2004-05-11 2:45:59 AM  
One with a cellphone and a digital camera with at least 3 megapixel res, please
 
2004-05-11 2:50:59 AM  
RNA regulation on promotors i would think is nothing new. Protiens such as steriods do the same thing for promoting/repressing genes via direct interaction on DNA. I dont think that anyone would disbelieve that RNA cannot do the same (it can hybredize with DNA and effect transcription). So my question would be ok so you got this RNA that is conserved among some species,and some other paper found some RNA that behaves as a regulator to certian genes. Until they tie these two together I will hold out on any further speculation.

Wonder what they will name the RNA if its confirmed to be regulatory? I also wonder if its a simple hybridiztion system? Also what turns on(controls) these genes?

Its amazing that you can get published in Science from doing a similarty search on a sequence databank, sure there's more to it, it just seems that way.
 
2004-05-11 2:51:13 AM  
Now they just need to find the subsection on building mamories :)
 
2004-05-11 2:55:18 AM  
Smegbot

gwad...not BLAST

that is the bane of my research:

"Hey can you go on BLAST and find this gene for lipooxengenase for me, oh and while you are at it design some primers too, but make sure that its in frame, because if its not and we order em you owe me $20 chump."
 
2004-05-11 3:03:33 AM  
This is the BIOS, guys.

The other 'meaningful' genes are the OS and basic software.

The 'junk' sequences are data.
 
2004-05-11 3:11:41 AM  
This is the BIOS, guys.

The other 'meaningful' genes are the OS and basic software.

The 'junk' sequences are data


"junk sequences" or introns dont code for anything, hense not "data" per-se, they should be "bad sectors".

that metaphor is a bit convoluted, im not sure how to explain it. I think my disagreement is mostly with saying that the RNA regulators are at a "lower level" than the DNA that codes for them.
 
2004-05-11 3:17:50 AM  
[image from serialsquadron.com too old to be available]
 
2004-05-11 3:18:13 AM  
OK, this must be the OS then.

and I disagree about the introns. They don't code for anything but they affect the way coding takes place, that's why I called them data.
 
2004-05-11 3:20:06 AM  
i.e. although we're only just discovering their effects, I totally disagree with the premise that 'junk' introns don't do anything. There are far too many of them. I personally think (and I've seen some evidence to that effect) that they contain data in a parsed format, like a descriptive language, i.e. one single sequence is meaningless unless you know the context.
 
2004-05-11 3:37:46 AM  
lindseyp

On a transcriptional level introns are transcribed right along with the exons, so they do not affect the way coding takes place in that sense.

Exon shuffling is a post-transcriptal modification, that may be influced by introns (i forget exactly how introns effect protein domains, if they do at all) Introns are spliced out, and not handled in any other way, coding in exons procedes as usual.

Introns are there (imo at least) to prevent transposons from inserting to important gene promotors, and allow for protein domains to be shuffled and assembled IE dna pol.
 
2004-05-11 3:40:39 AM  
Interesting to see some molecular biology talk on Fark, it is true that a lot of stuff in Science isn't always so amazing, but then again I think some of it (maybe most of it) is just so esoteric. I do enjoy some of the Immunology papers given that's my field of study in the lab and for the most part the immunology stuff is usually pretty novel and cutting edge
 
2004-05-11 3:42:12 AM  
Yes, that is all well and good, but can they grow me a new liver yet?
 
2004-05-11 3:43:54 AM  
And the human genome is taking me forever to download :(

But the mouse genome is much, much smaller!
 
2004-05-11 3:44:08 AM  
Great, another great "woohoo! Scifi has lost the Fi!" link gone down the toilet because someone had to bring reality back into it, and prove that this is just another small step of science.

I hope you're proud of yourselves.

/Goes off looking for mindless entertainment
 
Displayed 50 of 160 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Newest | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking




On Twitter


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.