![]() |
This is a very superficial but hopefully easy to understand post on DNa and genomics.
My analogy: Scientific research is like Hogwarths stairs. The goal is to get to the top (and discover something). You start on the staircase of those before you. Sometimes the staircase moves in the wrong direction, sometimes it goes nowhere, sometimes you have to start from the beginning and climb back up. Cant get anywhere without that first step or building a foundation. To use known examples newton. Then Einstein then hawking.
My entire life I've been used to indifference from the nonscience sector or people. At best they would ask some questions at worst their eyes would glaze over. What I wasn't used to is people picking fights or personal attacks. During covid I had almost daily encounters until I eventually gave up.
Yes. Please tell me again that you're mucho macho immune system will protect you when the 30 to 50 male demographic was hit the hardest.
The human genome project started in the 1990s and was partially completed in 2003 in which it identified 92% of our DNA sequences. It was only possible with the collaboration of many labs University and countries across the world. 6 billion base pairs in endlessly recombined chromosomes. In 2021 the telomere to telomere project "completed" it at 98%.
The delay was a combination of governments withdrawing funding, biotech private companies investment companies stepping in for funding (but needing a financial return), different measuring techniques and the non-existence of supercomputers.
There are still gaps, we don't know what most of it does, junk DNA is probably just dormant DNA, we can identify a few abnormalities and mutations but nothing related to any genetic heritage beyond grandparents. And almost nothing pertaining to phenotypes or geographic adaptation. That's still the work of forensic anthropologist. (Bone structure).
In 2003 the entire genome of drosophila the Fruitfly was sequenced, easy to study, some scientist probably joked humans were fruitflies without wings the media ran with it and turned it into we share 99% with them. We don't. It's akin to claiming that just because my chair shares the same atoms as me; I'm a chair.
Where it is being used successfully is reclassifying living Animals. (More on that later).
Within 1000 years about 75% of DNA is completely gone. We barely have fragments left.
So. What we have right now is being called DNA profiling. It's possible to identify an individual and their closest relatives (siblings and parents), but that's it. If the idealized situation happens you get 50% from each of your parents, 25% from your grandparents, 12.5% from your great grandparents genetically speaking, but there are dominant and recessive genes, how it all recombines is an unknown. At best there are 4 generations (80 years if each generation is 20 years), but not 10 generations or 200 years.
If there's further interest make sure you look at which century and decade something was published, who published it and what their background was.
Will there be technology in the future that will discover what we can't measure yet because we don't even know it exists? Yes.
Update: Here's a good article from an angry geneticist.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2025/mar/06/woolly-mammoth-us-scientists-unethical-government
The only problem is a mammoth baby will probably be handraised. A modern herd will not know that it's different other than hairy and might not be able to communicate. If successful there will likely be a herd. I'm certain he knows that but is trying to get public support not to do this.
Please note: I do not have enough knowledge about ancient DNA and the type of tissue samples they take. That specialized field is paleoanthropology. This is a continuation of previous posts. Have samples been taken from famous people? Yes. Again I don't know how usable they are, but they won't connect a lineage.
There goes my aristocratic chateau in France.
The good news is, DNA degrades completely after 7 million years, so Dinosaurs are never coming back. Big sigh of relief.

I'm in the "eyes glaze over" group. I'm not smart and don't pretend to be.
ReplyDeleteOK. Thank you for letting me know;)
DeleteCodex above.
DeleteAlso my DNA results class my brother as a cousin though we have the same mother, just different fathers.
ReplyDeleteCodex: Depending on the test that should not happen.
DeleteCodex: RIIIIIVER. It's me, your 7th cousin twice removed. So glad we found eachother. Hugs?
Delete🤣
DeleteGenetics is fascinating, I remember some things from Science Class, but like River, don't think I'm smart enuf to dive deep. I do know about Dominant and Recessive Genes and how one Friend in my Science Class found out she was either Adopted, or not her Father's Child. She had Two Blue Eyed Parents {Recessive/Recessive} and yet she had Brown Eyes. *Ruh Roh Dominant, with the Recessive from a Blue Eyed Mother PERHAPS if she WAS her Mother's Biological Child}, but, no way can Two Blue Eyes Parents have a Brown Eyed Child. But, Two Brown Eyed Parents CAN have a Blue Eyed Child if each is carrying that Recessive Gene. I could Follow that, along with why it takes another Generation to carry that Recessive forward enuf to show up. And along with why White Tigers have to be bred with Regular ones to keep the White Tiger anomaly going forward. It fascinates me yet is still quite the Mystery, isn't it?
ReplyDeletePS: According to Google tho' there are RARE instances where Two Blue Eyed Parents can have a Brown Eyed Child since Eye Color is determines by more factors than originally thought of back in the day when I had Science Class in School... you know, at the turn of the Century. winks
DeleteCodex: It's rare, but it does happen. Impossible to study for ethical reasons. I should clarify one would have to take samples of the fetus. We can't even measure how it happens. Yet.
DeleteScience is taught poorly in high school but getting adults to take a class as an update because knowledge changes would be important for health.
I'm not sure about Tigers, but the Savannah is a new cat breed that requires a wild cat every three generations because it's sterile. White Tigers happen in nature but nothing has driven them in evolution to stay white.
Fascinating. Also not smart enough, but (eyes peeled) I feel like I now understand the tenuous connection between genealogy and DNA.
ReplyDeleteCodex: nothing to do with smart. People are intelligent enough to understand this. Thank you I hoped that I made a complicated subject approachable.
DeleteYour chair analogy made me laugh. And good news about the dinosaurs but will they please stop trying to resurrect the wooly mammoth. Why, to what end? There is no ecosystem to support it.
ReplyDeleteBut according to my sister's genealogical research I'm possibly descended from a Danish princess.
Codex: I made myself laugh with that analogy.
DeleteIt will be a hybrid if they manage it. Farming of some sort.
Well. I won't start calling you your highness
Princess will do.
DeleteMilady, found an article that will interest you.
Delete