Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 88 (8852 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 08-16-2018 12:02 AM
187 online now:
DrJones*, LamarkNewAge (2 members, 185 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: rldawnca
Post Volume:
Total: 836,942 Year: 11,765/29,783 Month: 787/1,642 Week: 201/460 Day: 0/40 Hour: 0/3


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Prev1
2
Author Topic:   Random DNA Sequences Contain Information
CRR
Member (Idle past 100 days)
Posts: 579
From: Australia
Joined: 10-19-2016


Message 16 of 18 (816618)
08-08-2017 8:03 AM


An interesting and surprising result. It bears watching.
  
Dr Jack
Member
Posts: 3507
From: Leicester, England
Joined: 07-14-2003


Message 17 of 18 (817985)
08-22-2017 11:31 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by Taq
07-19-2017 4:48 PM


Nature blog casts doubts
A Nature blog post critical of the study. Their objections are different to mine but I agree with them too.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Taq, posted 07-19-2017 4:48 PM Taq has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 18 by Taq, posted 08-23-2017 1:00 PM Dr Jack has acknowledged this reply

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 7518
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 3.3


(1)
Message 18 of 18 (818095)
08-23-2017 1:00 PM
Reply to: Message 17 by Dr Jack
08-22-2017 11:31 AM


Re: Nature blog casts doubts
Dr Jack writes:

A Nature blog post critical of the study. Their objections are different to mine but I agree with them too.

I agree with most of them, too. There is no way around the fact that the lac promoter is leaky, so you will always get some expression. This will bias your results, even in the absence of induction with IPTG. Even after a few generations, their library will be skewed away from lethal and neutral mutations and towards slightly beneficial and beneficial mutations. That selection will be skewed once again when you have strong over-expression with IPTG.

One could also easily argue that a specific gene is slightly beneficial with low expression, but deleterious with high expression. This may be why they see stable variation with no induction, but changes after induction.

Either way, they seem to have found beneficial genes among random sequences. The real question is how common are they?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 17 by Dr Jack, posted 08-22-2017 11:31 AM Dr Jack has acknowledged this reply

  
Prev1
2
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2015 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2018