Supposed 'junk' DNA, found in between genes, plays a role in suppressing cancer, according to new research. The human genome contains around three meters of DNA, of which only about two per cent contains genes that code for proteins. Since the sequencing of the complete human genome in 2000, scientists have puzzled over the role of the remaining 98 per cent.
Supposed "junk" DNA, found in between genes, plays a role in suppressing cancer, according to new research by Universities of Bath and Cambridge. The human genome contains around three metres of DNA, of which only about two per cent contains genes that code for proteins. Show More Summary
Some cellular DNA yields molecules that serve mysterious but important functions in the cell, new research suggests.
MADISON, Wis. -- A study of rats released today shows that blocking a type of RNA produced by what used to be called "junk DNA" can prevent a significant portion of the neural destruction that follows a stroke. The research points toward...Show More Summary
The defense attorney for Jorge Torrez, accused of the 2005 murder of two young girls in Zion, said in court Tuesday that the state's DNA evidence is "junk," and he will argue at trial that Jerry Hobbs, who initially confessed to the murders but was later exonerated, is the likely killer. "Our defense...
Science can’t decide if our genes have more or less value than the Baldwin brothers The post Junk DNA: How much of our genetic material pulls its weight? appeared first on Macleans.ca.
I’ve now read two novel attempts to explain the existence of junk DNA. To a lot of people, the very idea of junk DNA is offensive: whatever process built us, whether divine fiat or the razor-sharp honing of natural selection, must be powerful, omnipotent or nearly so, and incapable of tolerating any noise or sloppiness,…
Science writer Carl Zimmer just wrote an article in the New York Times about the junk DNA wars and it's worth a read. Zimmer presents conflicting expert opinions about the definition of 'junk' and the exact role that junk DNA plays in various genetic processes. Show More Summary
From yesterday's New York Times Magazine, here's an excellent intro by Carl Zimmer to the Junk DNA Wars. In January, Francis Collins, the director of the National Institutes of Health, made a comment that revealed just how far the consensus has moved. Show More Summary
“Over millions of years, essential genes haven’t changed very much, while junk DNA has picked up many harmless mutations. Scientists at the University of Oxford have measured evolutionary change over the past 100 million years at every spot in the human genome. ‘I can today say, hand on my heart, that 8 percent, plus or […]
Single-letter genetic variations within parts of the genome once dismissed as 'junk DNA' can increase cancer risk through wormhole-like effects on far-off genes, new research shows. Researchers found that DNA sequences within 'gene deserts'...Show More Summary
A study released today by researchers at Lund University in Sweden indicates that inherited viruses may be responsible for creating the complex neural networks that make up the human brain. For many years, the endogenous retroviruses that comprise about 5 percent of human DNA were thought to be...
It arises from what scientists previously described as "junk DNA" or "the dark matter of the genome," but this gene is definitely not junk. The gene GAS5 acts as a brake on steroid hormone receptors, making it a key player in diseases such as hormone-sensitive prostate and breast cancer. read more
A big dispute erupted in the genomics world in 2012 with the publication of the ENCODE consortium's data - and with their interpretation of it. How much of the human genome is functional? And just what does "functional" mean? The ENCODE...Show More Summary
A team has mined genomic sequences sequences to identify a non-protein-coding RNA whose expression is linked to ovarian cancer.
PHILADELPHIA - Over the years researchers have made tremendous strides in the understanding and treatment of cancer by searching genomes for links between genetic alterations and disease. read more
More than a decade has passed since the completion of the Human Genome Project, the international collaboration to map all of the "letters" in our DNA. The huge effort led to revolutionary genomic discoveries, but more than 10 yearsShow More Summary
Geneticists at Oxford University are making the astounding claim that a mere 8.2% of our DNA does something biologically important. That means upwards of 90% of the human genome is "junk" — a discovery that could dramatically hasten genetic research. Read more...
Only 8.2 percent of human DNA is likely to be doing something important -- is 'functional' -- say researchers. This figure is very different from one given in 2012, when some scientists involved in the ENCODE (Encyclopedia of DNA Elements) project stated that 80% of our genome has some biochemical function.
This is the paper to read: Palazzo & Gregory’s The Case for Junk DNA. It clearly and logically lays out the complete argument from evidence and theory for the thesis that most of the genome is junk. It’s not revolutionary or radical, though: the whole story is based on very fundamental population genetics and molecular…