My Genome is Sequenced!

"I’m busy clubbin’ with some seal friends of mine right now..."

We're making seal-clubbing jokes now?

ok joviality aside, I wonder if there is someone who knows enough about the method used to sequence this genome to be able to address some real questions i have:

1. Is the technique the chinese used repeatable, and if so, will we be seeing it used to even more rapidly sequence genomes in the future?

2. There are pitfalls mentioned wrt to what I will call "overscaffolding" which imply that certain gene patterns can be lost with this techinique. Could someone better describe exactly how this could occur, what the real impacts are, and if there is a way to mitigate this?

The headline clearly says "Giant Panda Genome". Professor Steve Steve, have you looked at your self in a ruler lately?

Well, now we can figure out how to give Steve Steve a real thumb.

-jr said: The headline clearly says "Giant Panda Genome". Professor Steve Steve, have you looked at your self in a ruler lately?

Stuart Weinstein said: Well, now we can figure out how to give Steve Steve a real thumb.

-jr said: The headline clearly says "Giant Panda Genome". Professor Steve Steve, have you looked at your self in a ruler lately?

I've worked with some short-read, deep sequencing (20x--30x) data and found it to be a big pain. Mapping and assembly error is a really big problem. Short-read sequencing might produce $1000 genomes, but it will come with $100,000 analysis.

-jr said: The headline clearly says "Giant Panda Genome". Professor Steve Steve, have you looked at your self in a ruler lately?

dammit reed! that was not there when I wrote that!

Thank-you, Reed!

dpr

I've worked with some short-read, deep sequencing (20x–30x) data and found it to be a big pain. Mapping and assembly error is a really big problem. Short-read sequencing might produce $1000 genomes, but it will come with $100,000 analysis.

so you think this will not become a widely accepted technique then?

or is it modifiable such as to be able curb a bit of the "jigsaw" aspect to it?

I don't know enough about this technique to hazard a guess.

robert van bakel said: I'm with Mr Weinstein; what can this completed mapping tell us about the evolution of, 'the Panda's thumb?

That's not the giant panda genome, it's the genome of the giant panda, right? There is a difference!

IanW -

In many cases you would be right. For example, the "flag of Canada" is also the "Canadian flag", but it is grammatically incorrect to refer to it, in English, as the "Canada flag".

However, in the case of genome sequencing, the English language has adopted a different grammatical convention.

The noun form of the common name of the species, followed by the word "genome", is accepted by convention. Hence "human genome", "mouse genome", and so on.

Therefore, in this context, you are incorrect. The genome of the giant panda is, in fact, correctly referred to as "the giant panda genome". That is the English language convention, when referring to sequenced genomes, as established by prior use in the scientific literature.

harold said: The genome of the giant panda is, in fact, correctly referred to as "the giant panda genome".

Reed A. Cartwright said:

-jr said: The headline clearly says "Giant Panda Genome". Professor Steve Steve, have you looked at your self in a ruler lately?

Size doesn't matter.

Did anyone else catch Steve Steve's cameo on CSI last Thursday? (1-21-10)

He played a bloody golf club cover.

So the Panda´s Gnome is saved, one minute bevore they are died out...