Follow-up: Another ‘junk DNA’ study

The blog Science Life (University of Chicago Medical Center) has an excellent follow-up piece to the story about the discovery of non-coding DNA that contributes to heart disease (SciTechStory: More ‘junk DNA’ that actually does something) The Science Life post mentions that work and details another study done by the University of Chicago and the National Institute of Health (NIH, USA), which also considered the vast stretches of ‘junk DNA’ and decided to look for DNA switches – pieces of DNA that do not code for proteins, but instead are used to switch on or off protein building in heart related cells.

To help with the enormous task of searching nearly 3 billion DNA pairs for these switches, the team developed computer routines that looked for sequences related to heart cell development. To their great surprise they didn’t find a few switches, or even many switches, but a whole network of 42,000 potential switches involved with heart cell regulation. That’s more than twice the number of genes in the human genome.

We can finally say that there is a well-defined genetic code hardwired in our genomes that can be used to specifically identify heart regulatory elements in the vast sequence that makes up the human genome,” said Ovcharenko, of the NIH’s National Center for Biotechnology Information. “With the advance of computational methods, we can use computers to break this code, learn its encryption, and understand the signals heart cells receive to regulate genes.”

The model is not specific to the heart; a shorter experiment in the paper demonstrated that the program can also be used to detect switches important for certain types of brain cells, and the authors note that it can be applied to any organ or tissue. And characterizing the chorus of switches that orchestrate cell development is more than just mere code-breaking; knowledge about what needs to go right can turn up clues about what goes wrong in cases of heart disease or other illnesses. One such instance of a “junk DNA” sequence causing heart disease was described yesterday in Nature – deletion of a non-coding sequence in mice dramatically affected the expression of two genes and caused the mice to die earlier than normal.

“For some of these diseases, there’s nothing wrong with the protein sequence itself,” Nobrega said. “But there may be an alteration in how and when the protein is made, which can lead to disease as well. That’s the urgency and need for this kind of work to basically crack the other codes that are present in the genome.

[Source: A fishfinder for the junk dna seas]

Finding a ‘network of 42,000 potential switches’ is like opening a can of worms – or maybe 5,000 cans, give or take. It means there are more complications to the story of ‘junk DNA’ than scientists had bargained for (by misreading these huge tracts of DNA as junk). This and other studies indicate that at least some of these segments of DNA are vital for the proper differentiation and development of cells – or conversely, may be responsible for some of the diseases caused by malfunctioning cells.

There’s a lot of work to be done, but it does seem like it’s going through an appropriate course correction.

Research Spectrum

Share
This entry was posted in News and tagged , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink. Post a comment or leave a trackback: Trackback URL.

Posts in this Impact Area: (DNA Decoding)

  • Gene expression and regulation: It’s the location, baby.
  • Fetal DNA sequencing: Reading ma and pa’s genome
  • Bonobo Genome: Our ever-lovin’ kin get closer
  • microDNA: A new piece of genetics puzzle
  • Personal genome disease risk analysis: New study finds important limits
  • Human genetics: The mysterious unequal mutation by sex
  • Oh Daphnia, why so many genes?
  • Hoogsteen base pairs: An alternate structure in DNA
  • The shape of the genome influences genetics
  • DNA redundancy: Genetic sequence copies are more prevalent and important than thought
  • Histones: DNA packaging and much more
  • A form of muscular dystrophy depends on ‘junk’ DNA
  • Transposons and the dynamic genome
  • microRNA: A cellular communicator
  • Update: Research on ‘old-age genes’ challenged
  • The Human Genome Project: Ten years later
  • Fascinating: Many of us have genes from Neanderthals
  • The growing GWAS controversy
  • Genetic pause control
  • A new layer of genetic information: DNA sub-code
  • The pitfalls of ‘informed consent’ for DNA analysis
  • Surprise verdict in U.S. gene patent case
  • Fingered by hand bacteria
  • Clinical genetics: Two cases
  • New study: Metagenomics gets a gut feel
  • Small RNA: New pathways for gene regulation?
  • Follow-up: Another ‘junk DNA’ study
  • More ‘junk DNA’ that actually does something
  • Waking the dead
  • New study and research tool: DNA mutations and molecular effects
  • Common diseases: Rare gene mutations are important
  • Update: Males not at the end of genetic line
  • New study: Males not at the end of genetic line
  • Heart disease linked to epigenetics
  • In the helix grooves – how proteins find the DNA
  • Biological clocks: RNA keeps time
  • Corn (maize) genome sequenced
  • Important bacteria protein-DNA link discovered
  • DNA Barcoding and the supermarket of genetic identification
  • Evolution seen through 10K vertebrate genomes
  • Beyond the genome: Mapping the epigenome
  • Mapping human genome variations
  • Post a Comment

    Your email is never published nor shared. Required fields are marked *

    *
    *

    You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

    *