Michael Grieco
AP Biology
Current Event 8 - Review
November 14, 2018
Davison, Angus. “World's Longest DNA Sequence Decoded.” BBC News, BBC, 31 Oct. 2018,
This article by Angus Davison from the University of Nottingham talks about a new breakthrough in
DNA sequencing methods. UK scientists decoded a human DNA strand of 2.3 million bases in one read.
It gives context on this ongoing “competition” that will end when scientists decode an entire genome. The
method the scientists used was called nanopore sequencing, which is a simpler and more cost-effective
method compared to the current sequencing methods. This new method also reduces the cost of
replicating a human genome from one million dollars to one thousand dollars. The article states that this
reduction arises from the increased length of a single read. In the past, even with technological
advancements, the only ways of sequencing a genome was in smaller pieces. And after this, scientists
would have to piece together the sequences, a complicated process that the article compared to a jigsaw
puzzle. Finally, the article discusses the applications of this breakthrough, such as further advancements
in cancer research.
DNA sequencing methods. UK scientists decoded a human DNA strand of 2.3 million bases in one read.
It gives context on this ongoing “competition” that will end when scientists decode an entire genome. The
method the scientists used was called nanopore sequencing, which is a simpler and more cost-effective
method compared to the current sequencing methods. This new method also reduces the cost of
replicating a human genome from one million dollars to one thousand dollars. The article states that this
reduction arises from the increased length of a single read. In the past, even with technological
advancements, the only ways of sequencing a genome was in smaller pieces. And after this, scientists
would have to piece together the sequences, a complicated process that the article compared to a jigsaw
puzzle. Finally, the article discusses the applications of this breakthrough, such as further advancements
in cancer research.
As stated above, the extension of sequenced DNA strands can help cancer research, which studies the
rearrangement of DNA. By removing the need to rearrange smaller strands, scientists can increase the
accuracy of studies. With this advancement, we can apply similar tactics to processes such as CRISPR
in order to eliminate disease and increase the quality of life for humans. Additionally, because this
process can be applied to other organisms, we can study evolution to a further extent, allowing us to
understand the history of life on Earth.
This article explains the new study in a very detailed manner. It includes lots of information, regarding
the history of DNA sequencing, how this new method is different, and the potential applications of it. I
believe that the author could have included information regarding how the process actually works. This
could further the understanding of the importance of the study. And by giving the inner workings of the
nanopore sequencing, we could compare it to past methods not just based on efficiency.
the history of DNA sequencing, how this new method is different, and the potential applications of it. I
believe that the author could have included information regarding how the process actually works. This
could further the understanding of the importance of the study. And by giving the inner workings of the
nanopore sequencing, we could compare it to past methods not just based on efficiency.
Michael Grieco’s summary of Angus Davidson’s, “World’s Longest DNA Sequence Decoded” is very well written. For example, Grieco covers all of the important points of the summary in one concise sentence per point without simply restating a point with a quote from the article as is the case with many of these reviews. For example, Grieco describes the new record, the cost effectiveness of the new technology, the relative cost effectiveness of genome sequencing now compared to 17 years ago and why this has been the case (being able to read more base pairs at once); without stating the less important points such as the “Beluga Whale Scale” or the Singapore Grand Prix. Additionally, he went beyond the article’s applications of the new technology, citing CRISPR as something important that will be helped by the technology and going beyond the “whale” point in isolation to describe evolution as a whole. Thirdly, Grieco offers a valid compliment and critique of the article based on evidence from the text: the article did indeed offer some context of the pitfalls of DNA sequencing and how the new technology improved off of that (ie the “jigsaw puzzle” and the “3.2 km of DNA around the fist without breaking or tangling” points), while it is indeed true that the article offered no insight into how the nanopore technology actually works to read more base pairs in a more cost effective machine, which is something the reader would ultimately be curious about while reading the original article.
ReplyDeleteThis was a very thorough yet concise review with nearly no flaws. One minor improvement that could be made to the review is that in the critique paragraph, the article doesn’t offer much into the history of genetic sequencing at all, and in fact this is something that the article could have included to give a more complete insight into how innovative nanopore actually is: to give the history of DNA sequencing, it should be described that as in the early days of computers, DNA sequencing machines took and continue to take up entire rooms in laboratories, and as in in the early days of computers, very few people actually had and still have access to them due to expesne and the sheer amount of space they take up. The article completely forgot to mention that given this context, the nanopore technology may be the beginning of the personal computer DNA sequencer, the same way the iPhone is like a pocket computer now. Therefore, Grieco could improve the review by describing the “history” aspect as a critique and not something the article did well. The societal impact paragraph could also be slightly more complete by adding onto what the article described about how a parent could potentially read the baby’s genetic sequence before birth: this would be an important addition because a parent could decide what genes are acceptable or unacceptable in a child, which could alter the genetic makeup of society. This is the most staggering potential impact of nanopore.
Lastly, a revelation that I had while reading this article is that the nanopore technology may usher in a new era: not only will the DNA sequencing device become more like a laptop or desktop compared to the behemoths that now fill multiple rooms in laboratories, but this will also usher in a new era in which someone can immediately understand their own genetic flaws and account for them in a significantly shorter time. This is important for someone like me because I didn’t realize for years that I had a genetic mutation that makes me deficient in Vitamin B and affects everything from my energy to my emotions. It took many shots in the dark before finally realizing that 23andMe might identify a genetic component to my problem, and it still takes days to weeks to receive the test results. Maybe in the future, if someone were curious, they could connect a nanopore device to their phone, use a sample of DNA, and have their entire genetic sequence immediately. This would likely have saved me years.
Ally Bruno
ReplyDeleteMr. Ippolito
AP Biology D Even
November 26, 2018
Davison, Angus. “World's Longest DNA Sequence Decoded.” BBC News, BBC, 31 Oct. 2018,
.
Michael wrote an extremely informative and eloquent current event which delves into the facts behind the decoding of the longest DNA sequence in the science world today. Michael opened his article by discussing the sequence and the method. As a reader who did not much about the methods used to decode genome sequence, this was a perfect way for Michael to open his review. This provided background information for the rest of the review. Also, Michael did a great job of putting the importance of this article into perspective. In his second paragraph he described the effects of these new discoveries on the way scientist persvive the early stages of earth. Lastly, Michael demonstrated a deep understanding and interest in the topic by ending his current event with a comparison to other methods that were previously used to decode DNA. This was an extra step that really made Michael’s work stronger and even more credible.
Although I believe Michael’s current event was a wonderful representation of both the article and himself as a scientist, Michael could have further discussed the ways in which Davidson excelled and fell short in his article. If Mike had discussed the author's credibility, that would have added more validity to his arguments. Also, Michael could have made his current event even stronger by talking more about the research as far as its relationship to cancer studies. With cancer being such a devastating topic of the world today, the fact that this research aids cancer research makes Davidsons article should have been emphasized further.
After reading both the current event and the article, I was most interested in the direct link between the decoding of this gene sequence and its possible connection to cancer. This correlation makes the article extremely meaningful and valuable in science and medical communities as well as among families all over the world. Both Davidson and Mike where right to call attention to such an important study.
Clara DeMagalhaes Current Event #9
ReplyDeleteDavison, Angus. “World's Longest DNA Sequence Decoded.” BBC News, BBC, 31 Oct. 2018,
.
Michael’s review talked about an extremely interesting and important topic and was overall very informative. One aspect that was well done was how his overall review was written in a clear and concise manner. Every sentence contributed something to the overall subject and there were was no confusion that could come from reading it, despite the fact that it’s a topic that many people aren’t familiar with. Also, the critique section explained the ups and downs of the source material in great detail. It was evident that a lot of effort was put into analyzing the article and the criticisms were fair. Lastly, Michael did a great job in explaining just how important this contribution is today. He talks about how it helps advance important scientific fields, such as cancer research, genetic engineering, and the study of evolution.
Despite the positives, there are a couple of things that I believe should be tweaked. For starters, I think Michael should have mentioned who the scientists were by name and talked about whatever information was said about them in the article, like how the scientific team led by Matt Loose conducted their findings at Nottingham University. This way, credibility would be established better and it’d be more specific than simply referring to them as a group of scientists. Additionally, I think that quotes from the original article could be incorporated into the review. This gives the reader an idea of how the article is written and once again establishes credibility.
Michel picked an article that discusses an intriguing and extremely important topic. As he talked about in his review, the possible scientific outcomes that could result from these findings include many that greatly benefit the human race. I liked learning about how decoding DNA relates to studies about cancer and genetic engineering techniques like CRISPR, and it definitely makes me want to keep more up to date with breakthroughs in the scientific community.
Alisa Kanganis
ReplyDeleteAP Biology
December 9, 2018
Current Event 11
Davison, Angus. “World's Longest DNA Sequence Decoded.” BBC News, BBC, 31 Oct.
2018, .
I enjoyed reading Michael’s review of “World’s Longest DNA Sequence Decoded” by Angus Davison. His writing is very concise, yet his review contained an abundance of information. For instance, I thought his remark about the price of the sequencing was very interesting. He stated that “this new method also reduces the cost of replicating a human genome from one million dollars to one thousand dollars”. By including this information, the reader is able to obtain a good understanding of the impact of this new technology. Michael also goes on to explain that this could have breakthroughs in cancer research, which concerns itself with rearranging DNA. I like how he mentioned a specific example of where this technology could make an impact. I also like how he stated that this could help us better understand the history of life on Earth, as the sequencing can also be applied to other organisms besides humans.
As for areas of improvement, there are two that really stand out to me. I think it would add to Michael’s review if he included a personal explanation for why this topic is important to him. I also think it would have been interesting if he added some more information as to how exactly this technology came to exist. What is different from this machine compared to previous ones?
I found this topic of DNA sequencing very interesting, especially the part about cost reduction. I think a number of good things will come out of this, and will hopefully be able to have major impacts in cancer research, as the review suggests. I hope to learn more about this process in the future.