I think the Human Genome Project succesfully identified the code sequences for every protien in the body. It was the other 99% that was a problem.
Not so much wrong as perhaps overstated. The HGP certainly identified a whole lot of Open reading frames which were likely candidates for protein coding, but it would be an exaggeration to suggest they have identified genes coding for every protein in the body. Those genes are bound to be there in the sequence but where and what they do are mostly unknown.
Pseudogenes are the remains of genes that once did something useful, but don't any more. If a gene is no longer needed (because it codes for an emzyne that is no longer needed, for instance, or simply got duplicated and is a spare) it may mutate into somthing that looks like a gene, but is gibberish. Definatly junk...
Some genes previously identified as pseudogenes have subsequently been shown to have functions, such as one instance where an mRNA transcript was produced from a 'pseudogene' of
Makorin1 which helped to stabilise
Makorin1 mRNA. So even if a 'pseudogene' has clear elements showing it has lost its protein-coding function, say loss of an ATG sit, it may still have a function.
TTFN,
WK
™ Version 4.2
