Track your comments!
[x]


When you register, comments on your articles and replies to your comments appear here. Register Now!

Sign in to your account
[x]

Not a Scientific Blogging member yet?

Register Now for a Free Scientificblogging.com Account

  • Customize your profile with pictures, banner, a blogroll and more.
  • Leave comments on articles, add other members to your friend lists, chat with people on the site.
  • Write blog posts that can be seen by hundreds of thousands of readers.

It's free and it only takes a minute!

Already a Scientific Blogging member?

Sign In Now

Banner
By News Staff | May 20th 2009 12:00 AM | 4 comments | Print | E-mail | Track Comments
Scientists sometimes regret when the terms they use in a scientific way get a colloquial meaning.   In physics, Peter Higgs has to like his name recognition but might edit out references to a 'God particle' if he had it to do over again, and in biology a week doesn't go by that biologists won't complain that people misunderstand the term 'junk DNA.'

Well, 'junk' had a meaning before biology and everyone knew it - junk DNA in biology isn't garbage yet it dominates the genome and seems to lack specific functions. Why nature would force the genome to carry so much excess baggage is a puzzle still unsolved.

Researchers from Princeton University and Indiana University who have been studying the genome of a pond organism have found some new data showing what all of you knew - junk DNA may not be so junky after all.   Their new(ish) insight - DNA sequences from regions of what had been viewed as the "dispensable genome" are actually performing functions that are central for the organism. They have concluded that the genes spur an almost acrobatic rearrangement of the entire genome that is necessary for the organism to grow.  

It all happens very quickly. Genes called transposons in the single-celled pond-dwelling organism  Oxytricha produce cell proteins known as transposases. During development, the transposons appear to first influence hundreds of thousands of DNA pieces to regroup. Then, when no longer needed, the organism cleverly erases the transposases from its genetic material, paring its genome to a slim 5 percent of its original load. 

"The transposons actually perform a central role for the cell," said Laura Landweber, a professor of ecology and evolutionary biology at Princeton and an author of the study. "They stitch together the genes in working form."

In order to prove that the transposons have this reassembly function, the scientists disabled several thousand of these genes in some Oxytricha. The organisms with the altered DNA, they found, failed to develop properly. 

Landweber and other members of her team are researching the origin and evolution of genes and genome rearrangement, with particular focus on Oxytricha because it undergoes massive genome reorganization during development. 

In her lab, Landweber studies the evolutionary origin of novel genetic systems such as Oxytricha's. By combining molecular, evolutionary, theoretical and synthetic biology, Landweber and colleagues last year discovered an RNA (ribonucleic acid)-guided mechanism underlying its complex genome rearrangements. 

"Last year, we found the instruction book for how to put this genome back together again -- the instruction set comes in the form of RNA that is passed briefly from parent to offspring and these maternal RNAs provide templates for the rearrangement process," Landweber said. "Now we've been studying the actual machinery involved in the process of cutting and splicing tremendous amounts of DNA. Transposons are very good at that." 

The term "junk DNA" was originally coined to refer to a region of DNA that contained no genetic information. Scientists are beginning to find, however, that much of this so-called junk plays important roles in the regulation of gene activity. No one yet knows how extensive that role may be. 

Instead, scientists sometimes refer to these regions as "selfish DNA" if they make no specific contribution to the reproductive success of the host organism. Like a computer virus that copies itself ad nauseum, selfish DNA replicates and passes from parent to offspring for the sole benefit of the DNA itself. The present study suggests that some selfish DNA transposons can instead confer an important role to their hosts, thereby establishing themselves as long-term residents of the genome. 

The work appeared in the May 15 edition of Science. Other authors from Princeton's Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology include: postdoctoral fellows Mariusz Nowacki and Brian Higgins; 2006 alumna Genevieve Maquilan; and graduate student Estienne Swart. Former Princeton postdoctoral fellow Thomas Doak, now of Indiana University, also contributed to the study.

Comments

Thanks for the article. Sounds like very interesting research. And I love the sentence about "junk" having a meaning before biology and everybody knowing it. I don't get why so many biologists are so up in arms about the word "junk" (with at least one person apparently devoting his entire website to basically what amounts to swimming against a semantic storm - I'm talking about Genomicron, of course). Like so many other biological terms (e.g., "epigenetics" or even "genomics" and heck even "gene"), indeed like so many words (just look at the dictionary and see how many different definitions most words have), there is no single best or right way to use "junk DNA." All of these guys so intent on fighting the press (and others) for their coverage of junk DNA would service science a lot better by picking more fruitful fights or, better yet, doing more science and less talking.

logicman's picture
doing more science and less talking.

That's a good idea for most sciences, but it would soon bring linguistics to a standstill.

I would have to agree. "Junk" doesn't always or necessarily mean useless. Heck, look at the good old "junk drawer" that almost everyone has in their house. It may be the most useful drawer in your house, but it's just a bunch of random stuff that can't easily be categorized/organized. You often can't even name what's in there, and probably have stuff in there you've forgotten even exists until you go digging through it and find a little gem. I think that's probably a pretty good analogy for "junk DNA."

logicman's picture
It may be the most useful drawer in your house, but it's just a bunch
of random stuff that can't easily be categorized/organized. You often
can't even name what's in there, and probably have stuff in there
you've forgotten even exists until you go digging through it and find a
little gem.

Drawer?  Heck, you just described my entire house! :)

Add a comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <sup> <sub> <a> <em> <strong> <center> <cite> <code> <TH><ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd> <img> <br> <p> <blockquote> <strike> <object> <param> <embed> <del> <pre> <b> <i> <table> <tbody> <div> <tr> <td> <h1> <h2> <h3> <h4> <h5> <h6> <hr> <iframe>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
CAPTCHA
If you register, you will never be bothered to prove you are human again. And you get a real editor toolbar to use instead of this HTML thing that wards off spam bots.