Rethinking junk DNA

Phronesis

Expert Member
Joined
Oct 6, 2008
Messages
3,675
Reaction score
0
Transcriptomics: Rethinking junk DNA
When the complete sequence of human chromosome 22 was first published in 1999 (ref. 4), John Rinn, an assistant professor at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center and an associate member of the Broad Institute in Cambridge, Massachusetts, got very excited. He was not interested in looking at the map of known protein-coding genes on the chromosome, but rather everything else. "We wanted to see if we could find biologically active molecules in the human genome that no one previously knew about," he says.

Armed with the sequence of an entire chromosome — and a year later the whole human genome — researchers and developers began to create genome-wide tiling microarrays. "By probing these tiling arrays we found out that there are tonnes of biologically active regions by proxy of RNA being made," says Rinn — results he and his colleagues reported in 2003 (ref. 5). Since then, Rinn has focused his efforts on understanding a collection of these RNAs known as large intervening non-coding RNAs (lincRNAs).

"Initially many people thought that this had to be an artefact of the technology: how could there be so many RNA molecules that we have never seen before?" says Rinn. Arguments against a true biological purpose for lincRNAs came largely from the lack of evolutionary conservation within their sequences — conservation implies function, whereas lack of conservation can often imply noise.

As so few functional lincRNAs had been described, Rinn and his colleagues set out to find more. In 2007 they reported the identification of a new 2.2-kilobase large non-coding RNA, which they called HOTAIR. It played a role in the guiding of chromatin complexes within the cell6. Although only a single new functional lincRNA — and still only one of four known to be functional at the time — the discovery gave Rinn an idea on how to enrich for functional lincRNAs from the genome.

458240a-i1.0.jpg

J. RINN

HOTAIR is one of an increasing number of functional non-coding RNAs identified from the human genome.

"What we did next was to go after things that looked like HOTAIR," he explains. Instead of using an RNA-based approach, the group decided to look at chromatin structure. Histones have clear indications of where active genes start and stop. Using high-throughput chromatin immunoprecipitation (ChIP) sequencing on the Illumina Genome Analyzer to look for these marks, Rinn and his colleagues at the Broad Institute developed genome-wide chromatin state maps. Then, just as with his analysis of chromosome 22 almost ten years ago, Rinn says he threw out the known protein-coding genes and looked at what was left. He identified 1,600 other RNAs located by themselves in the middle of nowhere in the genome that look just like HOTAIR7.

To determine if some of their newly discovered RNAs were functional, the team took a 'guilt by association' approach, using microarrays to profile a number of the newly identified lincRNAs in 21 different tissue samples while at the same time profiling protein-coding genes in the same tissue samples.

Then they asked the question: which RNAs had similar profiles to protein-coding genes of known function? Their initial analysis was followed by further validation using independent systems. "This has turbo-charged the field, as not only can we identify these things now but we can get a good idea of what they might be doing to test functional relationships," says Rinn.

For Rinn and his colleagues it is now time to muster all the force they can to explore these RNAs. "We are going to throw the Broad kitchen sink at them," says Rinn, who is teaming up with a number of scientific platforms at the Broad Institute to look at the effects of knocking down each newly discovered lincRNA.

N.B.
 
RNA: Master Regulator Of Motor Neuron Firing Discovered
ScienceDaily (Mar. 15, 2009) — When the Human Genome Project was complete, DNA bowed out of the limelight and gave way to RNA as a major player in genetic regulation. Now, findings at Rockefeller University mirror this ideological shift, revealing that one of the most important physiological events in the body — the wiring of motor neurons and muscles — is regulated at the level of RNA.

The paper:
Rescuing Z agrin splicing in Nova null mice restores synapse formation and unmasks a physiologic defect in motor neuron firing
 
Note to mods.

Please retitle this thread to "Transcriptomics: Rethinking junk DNA" which is the title of the paper being referred to.

"The transcriptome is the set of all messenger RNA (mRNA) molecules, or "transcripts," produced in one or a population of cells. The term can be applied to the total set of transcripts in a given organism, or to the specific subset of transcripts present in a particular cell type. Unlike the genome, which is roughly fixed for a given cell line (excluding mutations), the transcriptome can vary with external environmental conditions. Because it includes all mRNA transcripts in the cell, the transcriptome reflects the genes that are being actively expressed at any given time, with the exception of mRNA degradation phenomena such as transcriptional attenuation. The study of transcriptomics, also referred to as Expression Profiling, examines the expression level of mRNAs in a given cell population, often using high-throughput techniques based on DNA microarray technology. The use of next-generation sequencing technology to study the transcriptome at the nucleotide level is known as RNA-Seq [1].
 
Nuclear Architecture of Rod Photoreceptor Cells Adapts to Vision in Mammalian Evolution
Summary

We show that the nuclear architecture of rod photoreceptor cells differs fundamentally in nocturnal and diurnal mammals. The rods of diurnal retinas possess the conventional architecture found in nearly all eukaryotic cells, with most heterochromatin situated at the nuclear periphery and euchromatin residing toward the nuclear interior. The rods of nocturnal retinas have a unique inverted pattern, where heterochromatin localizes in the nuclear center, whereas euchromatin, as well as nascent transcripts and splicing machinery, line the nuclear border. The inverted pattern forms by remodeling of the conventional one during terminal differentiation of rods. The inverted rod nuclei act as collecting lenses, and computer simulations indicate that columns of such nuclei channel light efficiently toward the light-sensing rod outer segments. Comparison of the two patterns suggests that the conventional architecture prevails in eukaryotic nuclei because it results in more flexible chromosome arrangements, facilitating positional regulation of nuclear functions

So, a few years ago, some were under the misguided notion that some streches of DNA are just letfover junk as a result of blind undirected processes. perhaps because of a faulty worldview... No doubt there are still strecthes of DNA that we have no function for, but should one assume that it is junk?
More from the article:

Mouse rod cells look strikingly unusual even after simple staining with DAPI. In all mouse cells, including other retinal cells, it brightly stains several (usually six to seven) chromocenters adjoining the nuclear periphery or the nucleolus (Figure 1B), and a rim of condensed chromatin along the nuclear border (arrows). In contrast, rods have a single very large central chromocenter and no staining at the nuclear border. To understand the spatial organization of these unusual nuclei, we studied the distribution of euchromatin and heterochromatin using fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) for marker repetitive sequences.

Chromatin of Mouse Rod Nuclei Is Arranged in a Concentric Fashion According to Gene Density

Centromeres and telomeres were detected by FISH with the minor satellite repeat probe and pantelomere probe, respectively. In rod nuclei, clusters of centromeres (three to five per nucleus) were found only on the surface of the chromocenters; each centromere cluster was associated with a cluster of telomeres (Figure 1D). Since all mouse chromosomes are acrocentric, these clusters were obviously formed by the proximal telomeres that are directly adjacent to the centromeres. Distal telomeres were predominantly distributed in the layer of peripheral chromatin (Figure 1D, arrows). Other retinal cells had more (6–18) clusters of centromeres, and their distal telomeres were usually located in the inner nuclear regions (Figure 1D).

Next, we determined the spatial distribution of the repetitive sequences characteristic of the C, G, and R bands of mouse chromosomes, which correspond to subcentromeric satellite DNA (constitutive heterochromatin, present on all mouse chromosomes and localized to the chromocenters), gene-poor mid-late replicating noncentromeric heterochromatin (L1-rich heterochromatin), and gene-dense early-replicating chromatin (euchromatin), respectively. To this end, we used probes for MSR (C bands), L1 (the major class of the long interspersed repetitive sequences; G bands) and B1 (the major class of the short interspersed repetitive sequences related to human Alu sequences; R bands) (c.f. Waterston et al., 2002). The chromosomal distribution of the used probes was confirmed by FISH on metaphase spreads (Figure S1 available online). In rod nuclei, FISH on cryosections revealed a single MSR-positive chromocenter surrounded by a thick shell of L1-rich chromatin and a thin outer shell of B1-rich euchromatin (Figures 1C1 and 1E1). By contrast, ganglion cells (Figure 1F1), bipolar cells, and cones (Figures S2A and S2B) showed the conventional nuclear architecture: B1-rich gene-dense chromatin was found toward the interior of the nucleus, whereas L1-rich gene-poor chromatin adjoined the nuclear border and surrounded the chromocenters. This pattern was also found in cultured mouse embryonic fibroblasts, with the exception that we did not observe L1-rich chromatin around the chromocenters (Figure 1G1). Quantitative evaluation of the radial distribution (Figures 1E2–1G2) confirmed the dramatic difference in the spatial distributions of marker DNA sequences between rods and cells with the conventional nuclear architecture.
See the "R bands", repetitive sequences related to human Alu sequences?
Consider the following article (also the source):
As an example, in humans there is one particular family of junk DNA called Alu sequences that are repeated some million times or so, and this one family alone accounts for about 5% of our DNA. There are numerous other examples.

Now what are the alu-like sequences doing in the eyes of mice? Well, the nuclear architecture specifically aids nocturnal vision. From the article:

Inversion of Rod Nuclear Architecture Alters Light Transmission through the ONL

The correlation between the inverted nuclear architecture and night vision suggested that the inverted pattern might have an optical ramification. Nocturnal mammals see at light intensities a million times lower than those available during the day, and their rod photoreceptors possess a light sensitivity down to the level of a few photons (Sterling, 2003). This high sensitivity rests primarily on the high density and small size of the outer segments (OS, Figure 1A) and therefore demands a large number of rod cells, which increases the thickness of the ONL ([Sterling, 2003] and Williams and Moody, 2003 R.W. Williams and S.A. Moody, Developmental and genetic control of cell number in the retina. In: L.M. Chalupa and J.S. Werner, Editors, The Visual Neurosciences, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA (2003), pp. 65–78.[Williams and Moody, 2003]). The optimization of light transmission through the ONL could therefore provide crucial advantages for nocturnal vision.

Would science proceed better if one were to assume function and design and then try and figure out what it is and how it works than to assume junk that accumulated for no reason?

The example of previously thought "junk DNA" does provide an intriging example of how the latter style of thinking seems to fail.
 
Last edited:
Guess this is another blow to those who used the "junk DNA" argument as an argument for bad design pffff. Any more arguments from ignorance from them? One would hope not :eek:.

'Junk' DNA Has Important Role, Researchers Find
ScienceDaily (May 21, 2009) — Scientists have called it "junk DNA." They have long been perplexed by these extensive strands of genetic material that dominate the genome but seem to lack specific functions. Why would nature force the genome to carry so much excess baggage?
 
Last edited:
"previously believed to be useless 'junk' DNA"....luckily science move on from junk notions.... "Junk" now found to tune gene activity.
Saved By Junk DNA: Vital Role In The Evolution Of Human Genome
ScienceDaily (May 30, 2009) — Researchers at K.U. Leuven and Harvard University show that stretches of DNA previously believed to be useless 'junk' DNA play a vital role in the evolution of our genome. They found that unstable pieces of junk DNA help tuning gene activity and enable organisms to quickly adapt to changes in their environments. The results will be published in the journal Science.

Any more arguments from ignorance from those who want to argue... "bah! it looks like bad design"...?
 
Another one for those "thinkers" who thought junk DNA meant "no purpose" and "bad design" :p. Where are they now?
'Junk' DNA Proves To Be Highly Valuable
ScienceDaily (June 6, 2009) — What was once thought of as DNA with zero value in plants--dubbed "junk" DNA--may turn out to be key in helping scientists improve the control of gene expression in transgenic crops.

That's according to Agricultural Research Service (ARS) plant pathologist Bret Cooper at the agency's Soybean Genomics and Improvement Laboratory in Beltsville, Md., and collaborators at Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore, Md.

For more than 30 years, scientists have been perplexed by the workings of intergenic DNA, which is located between genes. Scientists have since found that, among other functions, some intergenic DNA plays a physical role in protecting and linking chromosomes. But after subtracting intergenic DNA, there was still leftover or "junk" DNA which seemed to have no purpose.

Cooper and collaborators investigated "junk" DNA in the model plant Arabidopsis thaliana, using a computer program to find short segments of DNA that appeared as molecular patterns. When comparing these patterns to genes, Cooper's team found that 50 percent of the genes had the exact same sequences as the molecular patterns. This discovery showed a sequence pattern link between "junk" and coding DNA. These linked patterns are called pyknons, which Cooper and his team believe might be evidence of something important that drives genome expansion in plants.

The researchers found that pyknons are also the same in sequence and size as small segments of RNA that regulate gene expression through a method known as gene silencing. This evidence suggests that these RNA segments are converted back into DNA and are integrated into the intergenic space. Over time, these sequences repeatedly accumulate. Prior to this discovery, pyknons were only known to exist in the human genome. Thus, this discovery in plants illustrates that the link between coding DNA and junk DNA crosses higher orders of biology and suggests a universal genetic mechanism at play that is not yet fully understood.

The data suggest that scientists might be able to use this information to determine which genes are regulated by gene silencing, and that there may be some application for the improvement of transgenic plants by using the pyknon information.
 
Last edited:
Nice functions and mechanisms of microRNAs.
Genome-wide Map Shows Precisely Where MicroRNAs Do Their Work
ScienceDaily (July 6, 2009) — MicroRNAs are the newest kid on the genetic block. By regulating the unzipping of genetic information, these tiny molecules have set the scientific world alight with such wide-ranging applications as onions that can’t make you cry and therapeutic potential for new treatments for viral infections, cancer and degenerative diseases. But the question remains: How do they work?
090618190622.jpg

Three's a crowd. By using a technique that molecularly cements the protein Argonaute (gray) to messenger RNA (blue), scientists have mapped the precise location of microRNAs (red) across the mouse genome. Understanding where microRNAs bind could help scientists devise ways of turning off problematic genes such as those linked to cancer. (Credit: Image courtesy of Rockefeller University)
In research to appear in the June 17 advance online issue of Nature, Robert B. Darnell, head of the Laboratory of Molecular Neuro-oncology, and his team at Rockefeller University provide a long-awaited key clue to answering that question. By using a technique that molecularly cements proteins to RNAs, the team has decoded a map of microRNA-messenger RNA interactions in the brain, an advance that holds promise for biology and human disease, for example by silencing trouble-making genes linked to disease.

MicroRNAs rewrote the rules of gene expression in 2001 when they were found to bind to messenger RNA and shut down protein production, a process called RNA interference.
Also heralded the end of an era for the argument from ignorance that was.... "junk DNA".

By 2006, when the Nobel Prize in medicine was given for the discovery of RNA interference, scientists around the globe had even narrowed down microRNAs’ primary site of action to somewhere around the end of the RNA transcript. What scientists couldn’t nail down was the exact string of nucleotides to which the microRNAs bind along a messenger RNA transcript.

“To understand exactly how microRNAs work, you want to know their precise targets,” says Darnell, who is a Howard Hughes Medical Institute investigator

and Robert and Harriet Heilbrunn Professor at Rockefeller. “You want a map that tells you which messenger RNAs each microRNA targets and exactly where they are binding.”

The problem was that on any given messenger RNA, there are many sites to which a single microRNA can theoretically bind, and there are hundreds of microRNAs in every cell. Prior techniques — primarily relying on computer predictions — weren’t very good at sorting through the morass of predictions to identify the real sites, explains Darnell. The trick to getting such a map was to freeze a snapshot of microRNAs directly bound to messenger RNA in living cells. Working specifically in mouse brain tissue, that’s what Darnell and his team did using a technique the lab developed called high throughput sequence-crosslinking immunoprecipitation, or HITS-CLIP.

In order to shut down a gene before it is translated, microRNAs must be guided to their target messenger RNAs via a protein called Argonaute. The Argonaute-microRNA-messenger RNA complex now forms a sandwich structure where the microRNA is compressed in the middle. By using their technique to fuse Argonaute to these two RNAs, the team was then able to identify the bound microRNA and its precise target sites across all messenger RNAs expressed in the mouse brain.

The researchers, including first author Sung-Wook Chi, a graduate fellow in the Tri-Institutional Computational Biology Program, Julie Zang, a biomedical fellow, and Aldo Mele, a research assistant, found that on average, about two microRNAs bind to each messenger RNA. They also found that microRNAs bind to nucleotides not only at the terminal end of a messenger RNA, but also at other regions including sequences coding for proteins and sequences once thought to be “junk RNA,” providing new insights into microRNA biology.

“It is thought that RNA is the molecule that can explain the gap between the complexity of cellular functions and our limited number of genes,” says Darnell. “We now have a platform to evaluate the degree to which microRNAs contribute to this complexity with an extraordinary amount of precision.”

Interesting protein-complex that Argonaute...
Here is the structure of the micro-RNA decoding machinery from Pyrococcus furiosus (primitive organism from the species of Archaea):
 
Last edited:
Nice functions and mechanisms of microRNAs.
Genome-wide Map Shows Precisely Where MicroRNAs Do Their Work

090618190622.jpg

Three's a crowd. By using a technique that molecularly cements the protein Argonaute (gray) to messenger RNA (blue), scientists have mapped the precise location of microRNAs (red) across the mouse genome. Understanding where microRNAs bind could help scientists devise ways of turning off problematic genes such as those linked to cancer. (Credit: Image courtesy of Rockefeller University)

Also heralded the end of an era for the argument from ignorance that was.... "junk DNA".


Interesting protein-complex that Argonaute...
Here is the structure of the micro-RNA decoding machinery from Pyrococcus furiosus (primitive organism from the species of Archaea):

Why do you always cut and paste? Do you have nothing original? A link to relevant posts with YOUR conclusions would be much better. I don’t read all this cut ‘n paste crap. Does anyone?
 
Oh stop moaning like an old lady with a wet panty. I even rendered the structure of the protein for you so you can look at it. Heck, if you are nice I can show you how to.

Hey look, more representations of the micro-RNA decoding machinery from Pyrococcus furiosus (primitive organism from the species of Archaea):
picture.php

Simple wire representation
picture.php

Ribbons with see-through hydrophobicity surface
picture.php

Hydrophobicity surface​
 
Last edited:
Why do you always cut and paste? Do you have nothing original? A link to relevant posts with YOUR conclusions would be much better. I don’t read all this cut ‘n paste crap. Does anyone?

uhhh.. yeah

Nice phron. Keep it up!
 
uhhh.. yeah

Nice phron. Keep it up!
Thanks, I aprreciate it. Careful though, you might be accused of sock puppetry by those pesky non-teleological, non-intentional, truth-questioning, wombat zombie-like critters :rolleyes:.
 
Thanks, I aprreciate it. Careful though, you might be accused of sock puppetry by those pesky non-teleological, non-intentional, truth-questioning, wombat zombie-like critters :rolleyes:.

After which they will carry on sucking their thumbs for answers? :)

DNA Is Dynamic And Has High Energy; Not Stiff Or Static As First Envisioned

The interaction represented produced the famous explanation of the structure of DNA, but the model pictured is a stiff snapshot of idealized DNA. As researchers from Baylor College of Medicine and the University of Houston note in a report that appears online in the journal Nucleic Acids Research, DNA is not a stiff or static. It is dynamic with high energy. It exists naturally in a slightly underwound state and its status changes in waves generated by normal cell functions such as DNA replication, transcription, repair and recombination.

Sounding more like strings to me ;)

Oops.. forgot to add link for those who just LOVE to read quotes :D
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/07/090713160523.htm
 
Last edited:
After which they will carry on sucking their thumbs for answers? :)
As soon as someone accuses you of sock puppetry we'll also know who sucks answers from their thumbs! This is great stuff!! Congratulations!!

Who knew that a strawman can be effective after all!
 
As soon as someone accuses you of sock puppetry we'll also know who sucks answers from their thumbs! This is great stuff!! Congratulations!!

Who knew that a strawman can be effective after all!
I don't see him talking to you, why do you have to come and troll this thead as well. Sod off please. No doubt your next response here will yet again be BS trash-talking...one would have hoped by now that you are all nice and grown-up and post something relevant. Guess "junk-DNA" is not your cup of tea. Coffee perhaps? Here:

The regulated retrotransposon transcriptome of mammalian cells.

Although repetitive elements pervade mammalian genomes, their overall contribution to transcriptional activity is poorly defined. Here, as part of the FANTOM4 project, we report that 6-30% of cap-selected mouse and human RNA transcripts initiate within repetitive elements. Analysis of approximately 250,000 retrotransposon-derived transcription start sites shows that the associated transcripts are generally tissue specific, coincide with gene-dense regions and form pronounced clusters when aligned to full-length retrotransposon sequences. Retrotransposons located immediately 5' of protein-coding loci frequently function as alternative promoters and/or express noncoding RNAs. More than a quarter of RefSeqs possess a retrotransposon in their 3' UTR, with strong evidence for the reduced expression of these transcripts relative to retrotransposon-free transcripts. Finally, a genome-wide screen identifies 23,000 candidate regulatory regions derived from retrotransposons, in addition to more than 2,000 examples of bidirectional transcription. We conclude that retrotransposon transcription has a key influence upon the transcriptional output of the mammalian genome.

Retrotransposons...junk DNA? I think not.
 
I don't see him talking to you, why do you have to come and troll this thead as well. Sod off please. No doubt your next response here will yet again be BS trash-talking...one would have hoped by now that you are all nice and grown-up and post something relevant.
I'll post where and when and how I will. Stop prescribing to me. Your insults are noted and the irony of your moral high horse hypocrisy is amusing to behold.
 
ROFL... no surprise in that response....just useless trash-talk. C
 
Not useless at all.

It points out your hypocrisy when you talk about others as trash talking and illuminate yet again your control freak nature in trying to prescribe to me what I am allowed to say. Ludicrous beyond words.

It furthermore points out that you really aren't here to engage in any sort of constructive conversation even as you usually decry a lack of this from any one who opposes you. Anybody that says anything you disagree with is uncivil and insulting.

Your position on this is frankly stupid beyond words.

In light of all these not such a useless post after all eh?
 
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X