Genome Surprise
Catskul writes "Along with the news that the polished and (more nearly) complete human genome being published Monday, comes a surprising observation about the genome: We have substantially fewer genes than expected; between 27,000 and 40,000 as compared to an original estimate of 140,000." Update: 04/14 01:22 GMT by T : For everyone who can't look at a Z, headline updated with an S in "surprise."
Along with the news... comes a suprising observation about the genome: We have substantially fewer genes than expected
This observation was already made a couple of years back when the first draft was published. Note the date on the second link.
Begun formally in 1990, the U.S. Human Genome Project is a 13-year effort coordinated by the U.S. Department of Energy and the National Institutes of Health. The project originally was planned to last 15 years, but rapid technological advances have accelerated the expected completion date to 2003. Project goals are to
- identify all the approximate 30,000 genes in human DNA,
- determine the sequences of the 3 billion chemical base pairs
that make up human DNA,
- store this information in databases,
- improve tools for data analysis,
- transfer related technologies to the private sector, and
- address the ethical, legal, and social issues (ELSI) that may
arise from the project.
To help achieve these goals, researchers also are studying the genetic makeup of several nonhuman organisms. These include the common human gut bacterium Escherichia coli, the fruit fly, and the laboratory mouse.A unique aspect of the U.S. Human Genome Project is that it is the first large scientific undertaking to address the ELSI implications that may arise from the project.
Another important feature of the project is the federal government's long-standing dedication to the transfer of technology to the private sector. By licensing technologies to private companies and awarding grants for innovative research, the project is catalyzing the multibillion-dollar U.S. biotechnology industry and fostering the development of new medical applications.
Sequence and Analysis of the human genome working draft was published in February, 2001, in Nature and Science. See an index of these papers and learn more about the insights gained from them.
For more background information on the U.S. Human Genome Project, see the following
What's a genome? And why is it important?
To understand more read
I hate liberals. If you are a liberal, do not reply.
Actually no, still wrong. A genome is the entire complement of genes an organism possess, a chromosome is a relatively arbitrary unit in which the genome is broken into. I doubt any scientist ever suggested that "more chromosomes=more complex" seeing as how most higher plants have significantly more chromosomes than any animals. A gene on the other hand is a functional unit, it can code for one or more proteins but they have a well known beginning and end (both to us and to the transcription machinery). These three words are about as non-exchangable as three words can be. You noted you weren't "intending to be scientific", however you were commenting on a somewhat scientific article in a moderately well-read community. If you don't want anyone to insult you, don't comment on things you don't understand.
While I'm certainly not a learned expert, as a new graduate of an Honours Genetics program in Canada, I feel I must point out a few misconceptions found in the story intro.
I let out an audible groan over the 'revelation' that the human genome contains at most 40,000 genes, compared to the original estimate of ~150,000. I was relieved when I noticed that the article linked to dated to 2001. This makes sense, since that discrepancy was first discussed during my courses over two years ago.
The other grain of salt that needs to taken is the idea of a "completed" genome. The human genome is nearly sequenced, however it the annotation of the genome that matters most. To place this into context, the genome of the fruit fly, Drosophila melanogaster, is over 75% annotated. Currently only a small portion of the human genome is annotated, that is to say, the roads are mapped, and the streets (or in this case, genes) are identified and their function characterized. This is one of the most essential tasks still facing biologists today. Without knowing all the potential genes, as well as their function and expression patterns, the human genome is no better a guide than using a globe to navigate the streets of Toronto (or New York, take your pick).
As it has been mentioned before, I won't delve too far into the fact that a given stretch of DNA can code for genes in two different directions, and in three different "frames" per direction. On top of this, the mRNA produced from the DNA can be spliced in numerous ways. A single expanse of DNA can produce countless different proteins - and its proteins, not genes, that carry out all the functions our body needs to survive.
Humans are extremely complex, but as we go about our 'very' important lives, it's humbling to know that on the surface, we do not contain many more genes than some other 'lesser' forms of life on this planet.
"Nokia is not a country, it's the capital of Finland!" -Moderated "Informative". Yeesh.
I don't see why they should. More genes == more superiority? Who made up that rule?
The brightest minds of biology did, over 10 years ago... and so the central dogma of biology ("one gene => one protein => one function") was taught to a generation of students.
Of course, this completely misses two of the biggest results in the last few years: the acknowledgment of alternative splicing as a common phenomenon (10 years ago, people thought it happened in 5% of human genes, now we know it's more like 50%) and the identification of miRNAs as regulators of gene function.
But it's so hard to argue with dogma...
To within half a percent, pi seconds is a nanocentury. -- Tom Duff