Human genome more variable than previously thought
Surprisingly large segments of DNA found to differ from person to person.
Nearly six years after the sequence of the human genome was sketched out, one might assume that researchers had worked out what all that DNA means. But a new investigation has left them wondering just how similar one person's genome is to another's.
Read the story here.
Comments
Very interesting article.
While the underlying idea may be in the ether within the related academic areas, this is the first time I have encountered this much more elaborate model of DNA and the variation from person to person.
It might even lead to a different model for evolution - greater diversity of DNA within an apparently homogeneous population may be a better underlying mechanism for speciation than my simplistic single mutant gene concept.
Brent
Posted by: Brent Beach | November 23, 2006 01:59 AM
What is surprising, is that biologists continue to be surprised at the complexity of genomic DNA. Embedded in genomic DNA is information that instructs inanimate matter to be assembled into a new state, with an emergent property called life. It will likely take a new generation of mathematicians, computer scientists and molecular geneticists, working cooperatively, to decipher the code of life. In the meantime, we should recall the words of Erwin Schrödinger, written in 1944: "In calling the structure of the chromosome fibre a code-script we mean that the all penetrating mind, once conceived by LaPlace, to which every causal connection lay immediately open, could tell from their structure whether the egg would develop, under suitable conditions, into a black cock, or into a speckled hen, into a fly or a maize plant, a rhododendron, a beetle, a mouse or a woman”
Posted by: John Commissiong | November 23, 2006 03:17 AM
As a member of the Board of Directors of the Browne Genetic Research Foundation, I am energized regarding this research. The likelihood of precise genetic replication, despite the fact that of being acknowledged in theory, has at all times been problematic to specifically elucidate. Imminent research will almost certainly produce more minutiae concerning secondary variances, as well as showing how these apparently lesser deviations can set off major problems. It is my personal conviction that as we collect additional thorough comprehension of genetics, the slightest aberration may be shown to trigger wide-ranging variances.
Posted by: R. E. THIGPEN | November 24, 2006 06:52 AM
It would be interesting to know how much intrapersonal variation there is. Mosaicism, especially with respect to CNV's, seems like an obvious explanation for MS, ALS, and other genetic disorders that have a random component to them.
It would also be interesting to know how much variation there is between MZ twins. We already know that genetic differences do occur, sometimes, despite the popular myth that MZ twins are genetically identical. Neural aneuploidy can lead to differences in gene expression between the brains of MZ twins but its not clear how often mosaicism occurs outside the brain.
Posted by: chiz | November 28, 2006 06:46 AM