They abbreviated it at PRC in the article too which is wierd. I would have expected a source like this to have gotten a simple abbreviation like this correct.
Slightly more on topic now... It wasn't mentioned in the article, but Taq polymerase is a naturally occuring enzyme, which I would not expect to be patentable. However, many biotech companies have introduced modified Taq enzymes (eg that are less error prone, more efficient, etc) which I would expect to be patentable. The article does not mention if they were attempting to patent the naturally occuring or a modified form of the enzyme.
The "junk" DNA also contains strucural (telomeres, etc) and regulatory elements (promoters, response elements, etc). The term of "junk" DNA has been around for a while in the scientific community, not just in journalism, left over from earlier days of this type of research. Mike
Slashdot Mirror
They abbreviated it at PRC in the article too which is wierd. I would have expected a source like this to have gotten a simple abbreviation like this correct.
Slightly more on topic now...
It wasn't mentioned in the article, but Taq polymerase is a naturally occuring enzyme, which I would not expect to be patentable. However, many biotech companies have introduced modified Taq enzymes (eg that are less error prone, more efficient, etc) which I would expect to be patentable. The article does not mention if they were attempting to patent the naturally occuring or a modified form of the enzyme.
Mike
The "junk" DNA also contains strucural (telomeres, etc) and regulatory elements (promoters, response elements, etc). The term of "junk" DNA has been around for a while in the scientific community, not just in journalism, left over from earlier days of this type of research. Mike