DNAprint Genomics (DNAG)

[NikLinna]

mingwan0 wrote: If true it means that it is going to be a lot harder to do all of the things that the genome revolution promised

I don't think that will be the case at all. The distinction between code and data is well understood in computer science (and some programming languages such as Lisp are known for treating code as data, manipulating and transforming it to produce new algorithms, which I wouldn't be at all surprised to hear DNA does too). They're already creating programmed-genome virii out there. If this theory proves correct, then once a couple of labs capture the mechanisms "coding" genes use to interpret "junk" (data) genes, things will really start rolling! If anything, I think this would make it even easier to do all the things the genome revolution promises.

Relevance to DNAPrint? They're doing statistical tests based on presence of gene sequences. Whether those are for code or data doesn't matter; what matters is the statistical correlation of their mere presence in an individual's genome with particular traits. At worst they'll have to account for coding sequences and the data they use as separate parameters; different combinations would probably have different trait realizations.

--Nik, long and strong on DNAP