DNA Chunks, Chimps And Humans: Marks Of Differences

Science Daily ^ | Nov. 6, 2008

[Soliton]

Researchers have carried out the largest study of differences between human and chimpanzee genomes, identifying regions that have been duplicated or lost during evolution of the two lineages. The study, published in Genome Research, is the first to compare many human and chimpanzee genomes in the same fashion.

The team show that particular types of genes - such as those involved in the inflammatory response and in control of cell proliferation - are more commonly involved in gain or loss. They also provide new evidence for a gene that has been associated with susceptibility to infection by HIV.

"This is the first study of this scale, comparing directly the genomes of many humans and chimpanzees," says Dr Richard Redon, from the Wellcome Trust Sanger Institute, a leading author of the study. "By looking at only one 'reference' sequence for human or chimpanzee, as has been done previously, it is not possible to tell which differences occur only among individual chimpanzees or humans and which are differences between the two species.

[Soliton]

This is the first time multiple human genomes have been compared to several chimp genomes. Very interesting.

[Kimmers]

I bet if they compared DNA from a chimp and DNA from a liberal the DNA from the chimp would be far superior

[who_would_fardels_bear]

"By looking at only one 'reference' sequence for human or chimpanzee, as has been done previously, it is not possible to tell which differences occur only among individual chimpanzees or humans and which are differences between the two species."

Or rephrased: everything that you've previously read regarding the differences between humans and chimpanzees is bunk.

[Soliton]

Or rephrased: everything that you've previously read regarding the differences between humans and chimpanzees is bunk.

No, it was just a single sample. This generalizes, but confirms, the previous study.

[Coyoteman]

Or rephrased: everything that you've previously read regarding the differences between humans and chimpanzees is bunk.

Science is a work in progress. You seem to have a problem with that.

Perhaps you would care to explain how science should work if you think it should operate other than by gradual steps, always improving the explanatory models as new data is acquired and new theory is developed?

[who_would_fardels_bear]

What I have a problem with is that I had already assumed that the DNA that had been analyzed had been from several chimps and several humans to take account of the intra-species differences.

I just now find out that this is not the case.

I work in the field of semiconductors and do not have the time to fully study the field of genetics. I depend on what I know about genetics from popular science reports in science magazines and on science websites.

Everything I have read on DNA analysis seems to suggest that the scientists are happy to just go exploring one person's DNA and they can somehow determine lots of things from this.

And yet in my field we need to sample lots of circuits and lots wafers in order to see if the variations arise from processing or from more basic physical phenomenon.

It seems that the geneticists have gotten a pass for quite some time.

[Coyoteman]

Everything I have read on DNA analysis seems to suggest that the scientists are happy to just go exploring one person's DNA and they can somehow determine lots of things from this.

And yet in my field we need to sample lots of circuits and lots wafers in order to see if the variations arise from processing or from more basic physical phenomenon.

It seems that the geneticists have gotten a pass for quite some time.

Actually, no.

Sequencing the first human genome was a project that eclipses our first trip to the moon. They didn't repeat that trip the next afternoon; it took a while to get the second up and running.

Please explain how you think science should work, if it is not one step at a time with increasing accuracy as new data is acquired. You seem to think that everything about the human genome should have been known with that first step.

[who_would_fardels_bear]

I just think that they should have reported the first results with a bit more humility.

You know like they did with all of this so-called science that proves we are headed into a molten hot future because of excess CO2.

[Coyoteman]

I just think that they should have reported the first results with a bit more humility.

Have you read the original reports?

Or just the popular science reports?

Or, perhaps, just the newspaper accounts?

Or did you just see it on TV? Or hear about it in an internet chat room?

Unless you read the original accounts you have no idea what "humility" the original report contained. You only saw what the sensationalist media reported.

I don't think I would want to judge science by what I saw in the newspaper, or heard in an internet chat room.

[who_would_fardels_bear]

I hear the chicks that study genetics are hotter than the ones that study semiconductors.

Maybe I should change fields.

[SunkenCiv]

· join list or digest · view topics · view or post blog · bookmark · post a topic · subscribe ·
	Gods Graves Glyphs	Note: this topic is from a while back. Blast from the Past. Just adding to the catalog, not sending a general distribution. To all -- please ping me to other topics which are appropriate for the GGG list. GGG managers are SunkenCiv, StayAt HomeMother, and Ernest_at_the_Beach
·Dogpile · Archaeologica · ArchaeoBlog · Archaeology · Biblical Archaeology Society · · Discover · Nat Geographic · Texas AM Anthro News · Yahoo Anthro & Archaeo · Google · · The Archaeology Channel · Excerpt, or Link only? · cgk's list of ping lists ·