In the evolution v. creationism/ID debate there have been many claims dealing with the importance of non-coding, non-regulatory DNA (aka "junk" DNA). Most recently, the ENCODE project has made the bold claim that 80% of the human genome has a function, if you define function so that it is nearly meaningless.
T. Ryan Gregory took another approach to this debate in what he called the "Onion Test". As it turns out, the onion genome is made up of 15 billion bases, about 5 times as many DNA bases as the human genome. So why does the comparatively simpler onion need 5 times more DNA than a human?
Well, now there is the Bladderwort test. As it turns out, the bladderwort genome is made up of a paltry 82 million bases which is just ~3% the size of the human genome. Coding genes make up a whopping 75% of the total bladderwort genome compared to just 1.5% in the human genome. The evolution of the bladderwort removed massive amounts of junk DNA, and the plant is doing just fine. You can read more here:
Flesh-Eating Plant Cleaned Junk From Its Minimalist Genome
So the real test for those who argue that junk DNA has important function is to explain why the bladderwort genome can work so well with almost all of the junk DNA removed.
Anyone?
™ Version 4.2