4 ms·
Like how thr non-coding regions of the genome were termed junk DNA
by FullMtlAlcoholc 10y ago
Like how thr non-coding regions of the genome were termed junk DNA
- fabian2k 10y agoThe term junk DNA is mostly used in popular science media, not by scientists themselves. It was pretty obvious early that some noncoding regions did do something and weren't just junk, but somehow the term still survived.
- dekhn 10y agoLots of scientists use the term junk DNA. I've worked in and around sequencing for 20+ years now and the term in common in arguments about what the function of non-coding regions is.
- knicholes 10y agoIn my introduction to biology class at UVU in 2004 they taught us "junk DNA."
- blisterpeanuts 10y agoMy bio course taught the terms introns and exons. Exons are the portions of DNA that are used to express proteins. Introns correspond to "junk DNA" and are removed prior to protein expression. Their function is not fully understood.
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- dekhn 10y agoThis is missing a ton of important details. Much of so-called junk DNA is in non-coding regions that are not within introns. For example, there are long regions containing just repetitive viral DNA sequences with no coding DNA anywhere; this is often what people mean when they say junk DNA. But those regions aren't intronic, because they are not spliced out of the preprocessed mRNAs.
- FullMtlAlcoholc 10y agoIn the textbooks and online resources I used to learn molecular bio, the term junk DNA was used liberally
- tejtm 10y agothe term junk was intended to convey something apparently worth keeping (perhaps in the attic), as opposed to garbage, which is thrown away.