Tag Archives: genes

Amazing Designs of Life

The More We Know About Genes, the Less We Understand by Carl Zimmer

All living things, ourselves included, turn genes on and off in a similar way, by making switch-like proteins called transcription factors. And as scientists have identified more of these, they’ve discovered something remarkable: They form a chain of command. The job of some transcription factors is to switch others on and off, and they in turn are controlled by other transcription factors. Even a seemingly simple microbe like E. coli has an impressive hierarchy. Just nine genes rule over about half of the 4,000-odd genes in E. coli.

E. coli’s network allows it to respond quickly to the challenges it meets, from starvation to heat to the loss of oxygen. It can rapidly reorganize itself, switching on hundreds of genes and switching off hundreds of others. What makes this network all the more impressive are the feedback loops that keep it from spinning out of control. When one gene switches on, for example, it may make a protein that shuts down the gene that switched it on in the first place.

Yet even as scientists uncover this network, they discover yet another mystery. In the latest issue of Nature, scientists reported an experiment in which they wreaked havoc with E. coli’s network. They randomly added new links between the transcription factors at the top of the microbe’s hierarchy. Now a transcription factor could turn on another one that it never had before. The scientists randomly rewired the network in 598 different ways and then stepped back to see what happened to the bacteria.

You might expect that they all died. After all, if you were to pop open the back of an iPod and start linking its components together in random ways, you’d expect it to crash. But that’s not what happened.

About 95 percent of the rewired bacteria did just fine with their new networks. They went on with their lives, feeding, growing and dividing. Some even performed better than microbes with the original wiring, under some conditions.

Related: Programing BacteriaSick spinach: Meet the killer E coliBacteria Can Transfer Genes to Other BacteriaEvolution is Fundamental to Sciencegenes tagged posts

Royal Ant Genes

Royal corruption is rife in the ant world

“The accepted theory was that queens were produced solely by nurture: certain larvae were fed certain foods to prompt their development into queens and all larvae could have that opportunity,” explains Dr Hughes. “But we carried out DNA fingerprinting on five colonies of leaf-cutting ants and discovered that the offspring of some fathers are more likely to become queens than others. These ants have a ‘royal’ gene or genes, giving them an unfair advantage and enabling them to cheat many of their altruistic sisters out of their chance to become a queen themselves.”

“When studying social insects like ants and bees, it’s often the cooperative aspect of their society that first stands out,” says Dr Hughes. “However, when you look more deeply, you can see there is conflict and cheating – and obviously human society is also a prime example of this. It was thought that ants were an exception, but our genetic analysis has shown that their society is also rife with corruption – and royal corruption at that!”

Interesting. I am not convinced of the “corruption” but maybe the research itself provides more evidence of this trait not just being interesting but equivalent to corruption.

Related: Ants on Stilts for ScienceSwimming Antsposts on ants

Androgenesis

All Dad by Carl Zimmer

This week’s revelation is androgenesis. Androgenesis is what happens when kids get all their genes from their father.

Androgenesis, it turns out, transforms fatherhood into a parasitic invasion. It begins like normal fertilization, with a sperm fusing to an egg. But then the egg’s DNA gets hurled out of its nucleus, so that the sperm’s genes are the only ones left in the egg. The egg begins to develop into an embryo, but only after it has lost the mother’s DNA.

Related: Bdelloid Rotifers Abandoned Sex 100 Million Years AgoOne Species’ Genome Discovered Inside Another’sSex and the SeahorseFemale Sharks Can Reproduce AloneExplaining Genetics

Mutation Rate and Evolution

Stop the Mutants! by Olivia Judson

I’m going to wave a magic wand and reduce the mutation rate to zero, instantly, in all species, and forever. Then I’m going to watch to see how long it takes for evolution to stop.

Actually stopping mutations is a physical impossibility – hence the need for a magic wand. But if they were to stop, so would raw invention. But evolution would not. Not for a long time.

And sometimes natural selection actively promotes the persistence of genetic variation. This can happen when there’s an advantage to having genes that are rare. Among guppies, for example, males with rare color patterns are much more likely to survive than those with common color patterns, presumably because predators get good at spotting the patterns they encounter often. In such situations, the rare type does well, begins to become common – and then becomes the victim of its own success and starts to do badly. In situations like this, the frequencies of different genes can rise and fall, cycling indefinitely.

Among lifestyles that promote genetic diversity, far and away the most important is sex. Sex shuffles up genes, continually producing new gene combinations. (An important difference between sex and mutation is that sex can only create genetic novelty if it already exists in the population. If everyone is genetically identical, sex will have no effect.) Sex also – and this is important – decouples the fates of genes from one another.

Good stuff. Related: Evolution is Fundamental to ScienceEvolution In ActionEvolution in Darwin’s Finches

Secret Life of Microbes

New Window Opens on the Secret Life of Microbes: Scientists Develop First Microbial Profiles of Ecosystems

Nowhere is the principle of “strength in numbers” more apparent than in the collective power of microbes: despite their simplicity, these one-cell organisms–which number about 5 million trillion trillion strong (no, that is not a typo) on Earth–affect virtually every ecological process, from the decay of organic material to the production of oxygen.

But even though microbes essentially rule the Earth, scientists have never before been able to conduct comprehensive studies of microbes and their interactions with one another in their natural habitats.

Because microbes are an ecosystem’s first-responders, by monitoring changes in an ecosystem’s microbial capabilities, scientists can detect ecological responses to stresses earlier than would otherwise be possible–even before such responses might be visibly apparent in plants or animals, Rohwer said.

Evidence that viruses–which are known to be ten times more abundant than even microbes–serve as gene banks for ecosystems. This evidence includes observations that viruses in the nine ecosystems carried large loads of DNA without using such DNA themselves. Rohwer believes that the viruses probably transfer such excess DNA to bacteria during infections, and thereby pass on “new genetic tricks” to their microbial hosts. The study also indicates that by transporting the DNA to new locations, viruses may serve as important agents in the evolution of microbes.

Related: Archaea, Bacteria, Fungi, Protista and VirusesMicrobe FoodBacterium Living with High Level Radiation

DNA Seen Through the Eyes of a Coder

Great paper looking at DNA from the perspective of a computer programmer. DNA seen through the eyes of a coder by Bert Hubert:

The language of DNA is digital, but not binary. Where binary encoding has 0 and 1 to work with (2 – hence the ‘bi’nary), DNA has 4 positions, T, C, G and A. Whereas a digital byte is mostly 8 binary digits, a DNA ‘byte’ (called a ‘codon’) has three digits. Because each digit can have 4 values instead of 2, an DNA codon has 64 possible values, compared to a binary byte which has 256.

A typical example of a DNA codon is ‘GCC’, which encodes the amino acid Alanine. A larger number of these amino acids combined are called a ‘polypeptide’ or ‘protein’, and these are chemically active in making a living being.

Furthermore, 97% of your DNA is commented out. DNA is linear and read from start to end. The parts that should not be decoded are marked very clearly, much like C comments. The 3% that is used directly form the so called ‘exons’. The comments, that come ‘inbetween’ are called ‘introns’.

Related: RNA Interference WebcastHiring Software DevelopersDonald Knuth, Computer Scientist

One Species’ Genome Discovered Inside Another’s

Video describing genome inside genome Watch video of Professor Werren describing the genome-in-a-genome at the University of Rochester.

More incredible gene research. Scientists at the University of Rochester and the J. Craig Venter Institute have discovered a copy of the genome of a bacterial parasite residing inside the genome of its host species. The research, reported in today’s Science, also shows that lateral gene transfer—the movement of genes between unrelated species—may happen much more frequently between bacteria and multicellular organisms than scientists previously believed, posing dramatic implications for evolution.

Such large-scale heritable gene transfers may allow species to acquire new genes and functions extremely quickly, says Jack Werren, a principle investigator of the study. If such genes provide new abilities in species that cause or transmit disease, they could provide new targets for fighting these diseases.

subscribe to Curious Cat Engineering Blog

The results also have serious repercussions for genome-sequencing projects. Bacterial DNA is routinely discarded when scientists are assembling invertebrate genomes, yet these genes may very well be part of the organism’s genome, and might even be responsible for functioning traits.

“This study establishes the widespread occurrence and high frequency of a process that we would have dismissed as science fiction until just a few years ago,” says W. Ford Doolittle, Canada Research Chair in Comparative Microbial Genomics at Dalhousie University, who is not connected to the study. “This is stunning evidence for increased frequency of gene transfer.”

Related: Opossum Genome Shows ‘Junk’ DNA is Not JunkBdelloid Rotifers Abandoned Sex 100 Million Years AgoScientists discover new class of RNAWhere Bacteria Get Their GenesNew Understanding of Human DNAOld Viruses Resurrected Through DNA

Continue reading

Origins of the Domestic Cat

DNA traces origin of domestic cat:

The study suggests the progenitors of today’s cats split from their wild counterparts more than 100,000 years ago – much earlier than once thought. At least five female ancestors from the region gave rise to all the domestic cats alive today, scientists believe. DNA evidence suggests that, apart from accidental cross-breeding, European wildcats are not part of the domestic moggy’s family tree. Neither are the Central Asian wildcat, the Southern African wildcat, or the Chinese desert cat.

The earliest archaeological evidence of cat domestication dates back 9,500 years, when cats were thought to have lived alongside humans in settlement sites in Cyprus. However, the new results show the house cat lineage is far older. Ancestors of domestic cats are now thought to have broken away from their wild relatives and started living with humans as early as 130,000 years ago. The researchers focused on DNA in the mitochondria, the power plants of cells which supply energy and have their own genetic material.

Cool. Related: Cat HistoryDNA Offers New Insight Concerning Cat EvolutionMidichloria mitochondrii

Evolution In Action

Evolution In Action

the way they watched the process was to sequence the whole genome of each bacterial isolate. What they found were a total of 35 mutations, which developed sequentially as the treatment continued (and the levels of resistance rose). Here’s natural selection, operating in real time, under the strongest magnifying glass available. And it’s in the service of a potentially serious problem, since resistant bacteria are no joke. (Reading between the lines of the PNAS abstract, for example, it appears that the patient involved in this study may well not have survived).

The technology involved here is worth thinking about. Even now, this was a rather costly experiment as these things go, and it’s worth a paper in a good journal. But a few years ago, needless to say, it would have been a borderline-insane idea, and a few years before that it would have been flatly impossible. A few years from now it’ll be routine, and a few years after that it probably won’t be done at all, having been superseded by something more elegant that no one’s come up with yet. But for now, we’re entering the age where wildly sequence-intensive experiments, many of which no one even bothered to think about before, will start to run.

Very interesting. He is exactly right that the technology advances continuing at an amazing pace allow for experiments we (at least I) can’t even imagine today to become common in just a few years. And the insights from those experiments will allow us to think of new experiments… Wonderful.

Related: How do antibiotics kill bacteria?Drug Resistant Bacteria More CommonStatistics for Experimenters

Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act

I agree with restricting the use of genetic information for things like insurance – US to outlaw corporate prejudice based on genes:

Soon it will be illegal to deny US citizens jobs or insurance simply because they have an inherited illness, or a genetic predisposition to a particular disease.

On 25 April, the House of Representatives voted 420 to 3 to pass the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act (GINA). The Senate is expected to endorse the act within a few weeks, which is also supported by President Bush. “I am so stunned by the majority,” says Sharon Terry, president of the Genetic Alliance, a charity lobbying for the rights of people with inherited illnesses.

Genetic information can provide valuable information about risks. It is not often that I am for saying people should be prohibited from using information that would aid them in making better decisions. However it can be the best public policy to require insurance companies to be prohibited from using information that would allow them to better access risks and price insurance accordingly. So those that know they have such genetic risks will be paying less than they would if the insurance companies were allowed to use that information and everyone else will pay more (to cover for those with the increased risk). I think that is the best policy for the society. However it is not really about outlawing corporate prejudice it is about saying that we will have everyone is society share the cost of risks rather than those that can be identified as greater health risks.

Thinking this is about preventing bad corporate behavior seems to me an attempt to change the focus of the real issue. And that is not a good idea because this is a complex area that we are going to have to make a wide number of decisions about as a society. Pretending the issue is simple does society a disservice. This is an large economic issue and what choices various societies decided to make will be debated extensively for quite some time I believe..

Related: Improving the heath care system posts (from our management blog) – post about health care (from this blog)