Kolata, Gina. "No Bones About It: Scientists Recover Ancient DNA From Cave Dirt." The New York Times. The New York Times, 27 Apr. 2017. Web. 30 Apr. 2017.
I read the article “No Bones About It: Scientists Recover Ancient DNA From Cave Dirt” by Gina Kolata. I thought that the article was very interesting and I was able to learn a lot. The article talks about a study done in Eurasia which involved searching for ancient DNA in caves where humans were known to have lived. Until recently the only way to study the genes of ancient humans was to recover DNA from fossil bones. But these bones are scarce and hard to find, which limited research. Although DNA sticks to minerals and decayed plants in soil, scientists did not know whether it would ever be possible to fish out gene fragments that were tens of thousands of years old and buried deep among other genetic debris.
Dr. Meyer and his colleagues would first determine “which DNA in the cave sediment was prehistoric by looking for telltale signs of degradation at the ends of the molecules.” After identifying which ones were prehistoric they would pluck the DNA by using molecular hooks to snare genes in mitochondria. They would then use the new robotic system to analyze the samples quickly. The old way would take several days to analyze only a fraction as many samples, and the scientists would have to pipet by hand. From using this new system they recovered between 5,000 and 2.8 million DNA fragments. This allows the researchers to begin searching for bones where the dirt indicated habitation by ancient humans.
This article is relevant in society today because the author is able to shed light on how the technology is advancing. This new “robotic system” will help researchers and scientists track the geographic distribution and migration patterns of ancient humans faster. The next step is to look for evidence of ancient human DNA in open air sites, instead of looking for bones in caves. Overall the article was well written but it was a little hard to follow. I wish that the author directly stated what the new study was compared to the old way of searching for DNA.
I decided to comment on Isabel’s review of “No Bones About It: Scientists Recover Ancient DNA From Cave Dirt.” Overall, I thought the review and the article were very well-written. One thing I liked about her review was how she compares the one to study genes now with the way genes were studied in the past. This helped to show how revolutionary this new find was. Another thing I liked was how she talked about why the find was so important. For example, she writes, that bones are scarce and hard to find, which limited research. Finally, I liked how she explained the way that Dr. Meyer and his colleagues analyzed the DNA. This makes it easier to understand the process.
ReplyDeleteEven though the article was very well-written, there were some areas that could have been improved. For example, I wish she had gone into more specifics on how this new system could be helpful. How could analyzing DNA faster really improve society? Another thing that she could have improved is that she could have taken more about this specific find. Using it as an example could have made the process easier to follow.
Overall, both the review and the article were very well-written. I found it interesting that scientists are now able to use robots to study DNA. I would find it interesting to learn more about these robots and what they are capable of. I would also like to know more about how analyzing this DNA could really impact society.
Isabel's review of the article "No Bones About It: Scientists Recover Ancient DNA From Cave Dirt" was very well written and informative. Her summary was very thorough and gave the reader a deep understanding of the topic. She also included specific details about the new DNA recovery process scientists are using, writing, "From using this new system they recovered between 5,000 and 2.8 million DNA fragments." Finally she brought the discussion to a higher level by explaining new possible opportunities for DNA exploration.
ReplyDeleteAlthough Isabel wrote a great review, there are a few things she could work on. A quote from an expert on the topic would have added to the reader's sense of the article. I also wished she would have further explained how the new system for processing DNA is different than the old one.
Overall, this was a well written review on an interesting topic. I look forward to seeing how this discovery will impact society in the future.