The Naked Scientists
  • Login
  • Register
  • Podcasts
      • The Naked Scientists
      • eLife
      • Naked Genetics
      • Naked Astronomy
      • In short
      • Naked Neuroscience
      • Ask! The Naked Scientists
      • Question of the Week
      • Archive
      • Video
      • SUBSCRIBE to our Podcasts
  • Articles
      • Science News
      • Features
      • Interviews
      • Answers to Science Questions
  • Get Naked
      • Donate
      • Do an Experiment
      • Science Forum
      • Ask a Question
  • About
      • Meet the team
      • Our Sponsors
      • Site Map
      • Contact us

User menu

  • Login
  • Register
  • Home
  • Help
  • Search
  • Tags
  • Member Map
  • Recent Topics
  • Login
  • Register
  1. Naked Science Forum
  2. Life Sciences
  3. Plant Sciences, Zoology & Evolution
  4. Is non-coding DNA the same as "junk DNA"
« previous next »
  • Print
Pages: [1]   Go Down

Is non-coding DNA the same as "junk DNA"

  • 2 Replies
  • 2338 Views
  • 0 Tags

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline cheryl j (OP)

  • Naked Science Forum King!
  • ******
  • 1478
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Thanked: 6 times
    • View Profile
Is non-coding DNA the same as "junk DNA"
« on: 26/01/2014 14:20:27 »
This article from Science Daily says new genes spring from non coding DNA (although they also come from duplication and modification of existing genes.) I just wondered if this is what people refer to as "junk DNA"?

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/01/140123142029.htm
Logged
 



Offline CliffordK

  • Naked Science Forum King!
  • ******
  • 6408
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Thanked: 15 times
  • Site Moderator
    • View Profile
Re: Is non-coding DNA the same as "junk DNA"
« Reply #1 on: 26/01/2014 20:03:40 »
It is not surprising that mutations could lead to enabling or disabling non-coding DNA.  There have been questions why many organisms have so much non-coding DNA. 

Bacteria, of course, can sample environmental DNA, as well as exchanging plasmids.  Such ability to rapidly change could be very dangerous for more complex organisms.  However, the ability to slowly change and adapt is vital for the more complex organisms.  Thus, keeping a library of unused "code" would be reasonable, allowing slow evolution, without catastrophic rapid changes.   
Logged
 

Offline evan_au

  • Global Moderator
  • Naked Science Forum King!
  • ********
  • 8994
  • Activity:
    73.5%
  • Thanked: 883 times
    • View Profile
Re: Is non-coding DNA the same as "junk DNA"
« Reply #2 on: 26/01/2014 21:04:40 »
"Junk DNA" is DNA which has no purpose (that we have discovered yet...).

In the 1960s, it was thought that the purpose of DNA was to be transcribed into messenger RNA, which gets transcribed into proteins. This "protein-coding DNA" makes up around 2% of the human genome. That would make 98% "Junk".

Since the ENCODE project released its results in 2012, it seems that over 80% of human DNA is "conserved" (ie the DNA sequence is not changing randomly), which implies that it has some biological function, even if that function is not known to us at present.

Some functions for this DNA-previously-known-as-Junk include:
  • RNA which regulates expression of DNA
  • Structures which assist the replication of the cell's DNA, like centromeres & telomeres
  • Spacers to help align genes during meiosis

If some randomly-changing section of DNA is suddenly transcribed in some individual, that could represent a new gene, although not necessarily a protein-coding gene.
See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noncoding_DNA
« Last Edit: 26/01/2014 21:06:14 by evan_au »
Logged
 



  • Print
Pages: [1]   Go Up
« previous next »
Tags:
 

Similar topics (5)

How do different viral loads affect the virus propagation within the body ?"

Started by PetrochemicalsBoard Physiology & Medicine

Replies: 5
Views: 4047
Last post 03/04/2020 23:01:41
by Petrochemicals
"Does photon actually exist in the space between source A and destination B?

Started by Alan McDougallBoard Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology

Replies: 1
Views: 1716
Last post 05/06/2016 21:05:43
by PmbPhy
What proportion of 16" shells fired by battleships hit their targets

Started by syhprumBoard Technology

Replies: 2
Views: 321
Last post 16/10/2020 11:41:53
by alancalverd
does potential gravitational energy have "weight?

Started by ChaseWBoard Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology

Replies: 5
Views: 3922
Last post 05/01/2009 22:08:33
by lightarrow
The godsent "Garbage Enzyme)

Started by VadermortBoard Plant Sciences, Zoology & Evolution

Replies: 5
Views: 16667
Last post 27/02/2011 14:20:50
by JohnCompostCossham
There was an error while thanking
Thanking...
  • SMF 2.0.15 | SMF © 2017, Simple Machines
    Privacy Policy
    SMFAds for Free Forums
  • Naked Science Forum ©

Page created in 0.147 seconds with 40 queries.

  • Podcasts
  • Articles
  • Get Naked
  • About
  • Contact us
  • Advertise
  • Privacy Policy
  • Subscribe to newsletter
  • We love feedback

Follow us

cambridge_logo_footer.png

©The Naked Scientists® 2000–2017 | The Naked Scientists® and Naked Science® are registered trademarks created by Dr Chris Smith. Information presented on this website is the opinion of the individual contributors and does not reflect the general views of the administrators, editors, moderators, sponsors, Cambridge University or the public at large.