4 ms·

I'm not a biologist. Still, do genes really have "functions"? Guess some have, such as producing an enzyme to break down a particular kind of suger. But that th

I'm not a biologist. Still, do genes really have "functions"? Guess some have, such as producing an enzyme to break down a particular kind of suger. But that this would be the case for every human gene sounds unlikely to me.

eurasiantiger 4y ago
All human proteins are encoded in genes. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Human_proteins https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Human_proteins
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
projektfu 4y ago
A gene is a DNA (or RNA) sequence that codes for some protein or RNA product. There are other functional sequences in DNA but they're not called genes. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gene?wprov=sfti1 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gene?wprov=sfti1
dekhn 4y ago
For your last sentence: that's right, to get any press attention today you have to basically say you've solved all cancer or done something pan-genomic, in a way that massively overstates the importance of the specific result and its impact on health care delivery. That said, Jonathan Weissman is a great guy who has pushed the field forward and the techniques they are using really are powerful.
- panabee 4y ago
  thanks for all your comments and insights. can you recommend other people to follow on the leading edge of integrating technology and biology?
david_l_lin 4y ago
All genes have a function. This paper helps us understand genes of unknown function (which is a LOT of them). Some of these functions are not intuitive: maybe they regulate the function of another protein, maybe they only function in the context of a particular stressor, etc. You can think of nearly unlimited scenarios to apply and you start to understand the complexity of understanding how a gene functions.
- dekhn 4y ago
  "All genes have a function" <- this is a generalist statement that is wrong in its specifics, but also raises semantic question of what "function" actually means.
  - pfisherman 4y ago
    “All genes have a function” is analogous to saying, “All particles play a role in our physical reality”. This should be uncontroversial.
    - dekhn 4y ago
      This is a bit of a semantic argument, but gene function is a fairly nebulous term. The essence of what I am saying is that there may be proteins that currently have no actual function, aren't under functional selection, yet are duplicated, transcribed, and expressed (not just pseudogenes). Function is a rabbit hole. Biologists get in big arguments about the semantics of this all the time (http://cryptogenomicon.org/encode-says-what.html http://cryptogenomicon.org/encode-says-what.html). I don't really care. I care about the minimal set of necessary proteins for a model organism to exist and reproduce in a media-rich environment. And, whether there are actually subsets of mutually compensatory groups of proteins instead of a single minimal set. Protein function is one of those things that, at first, seems really simple to define, but the further you go down the rabbit hole, the more complicated it gets, until it's fractally complex and you realize that not only does the exception prove the rule, it's all exceptions. See also: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enzyme_promiscuity https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enzyme_promiscuity
commandlinefan 4y ago
> do genes really have "functions"? Makes me think of Douglas Hofstatder's "grandma neuron": https://www.livescience.com/grandmother-neurons-discovery.html https://www.livescience.com/grandmother-neurons-discovery.ht...
- radicality 4y ago
  His explanation in GEB of how genes, DNA, and RNA function was probably the clearest one I’ve ever read. It’s been a while and I forgot the details, but reading his analogies made everything click at the time. Maybe it’s time to re-read GEB.
Obi_Juan_Kenobi 4y ago
A gene is essentially defined as having a gene product, either an RNA or protein. So yes, all genes are functional. Genes that aren't translated into protein sequences (noncoding genes) can create structural RNAs as with Ribosomes, microRNAs that have regulatory functions, etc. There are lots of non-gene genetic elements that do things, though. Many are involved in gene regulation, affecting the transcription rates of nearby loci through a variety of mechanisms. There are also vast swaths of inactivated transposons, retroviruses, and other repetitive genetic sequence.

eurasiantiger 4y ago

All human proteins are encoded in genes. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Human_proteins https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Human_proteins

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

projektfu 4y ago

A gene is a DNA (or RNA) sequence that codes for some protein or RNA product. There are other functional sequences in DNA but they're not called genes. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gene?wprov=sfti1 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gene?wprov=sfti1

dekhn 4y ago

For your last sentence: that's right, to get any press attention today you have to basically say you've solved all cancer or done something pan-genomic, in a way that massively overstates the importance of the specific result and its impact on health care delivery. That said, Jonathan Weissman is a great guy who has pushed the field forward and the techniques they are using really are powerful.

panabee 4y ago
thanks for all your comments and insights. can you recommend other people to follow on the leading edge of integrating technology and biology?

david_l_lin 4y ago

All genes have a function. This paper helps us understand genes of unknown function (which is a LOT of them). Some of these functions are not intuitive: maybe they regulate the function of another protein, maybe they only function in the context of a particular stressor, etc. You can think of nearly unlimited scenarios to apply and you start to understand the complexity of understanding how a gene functions.

dekhn 4y ago
"All genes have a function" <- this is a generalist statement that is wrong in its specifics, but also raises semantic question of what "function" actually means.
- pfisherman 4y ago
  “All genes have a function” is analogous to saying, “All particles play a role in our physical reality”. This should be uncontroversial.
  - dekhn 4y ago
    This is a bit of a semantic argument, but gene function is a fairly nebulous term. The essence of what I am saying is that there may be proteins that currently have no actual function, aren't under functional selection, yet are duplicated, transcribed, and expressed (not just pseudogenes). Function is a rabbit hole. Biologists get in big arguments about the semantics of this all the time (http://cryptogenomicon.org/encode-says-what.html http://cryptogenomicon.org/encode-says-what.html). I don't really care. I care about the minimal set of necessary proteins for a model organism to exist and reproduce in a media-rich environment. And, whether there are actually subsets of mutually compensatory groups of proteins instead of a single minimal set. Protein function is one of those things that, at first, seems really simple to define, but the further you go down the rabbit hole, the more complicated it gets, until it's fractally complex and you realize that not only does the exception prove the rule, it's all exceptions. See also: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enzyme_promiscuity https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enzyme_promiscuity

commandlinefan 4y ago

> do genes really have "functions"? Makes me think of Douglas Hofstatder's "grandma neuron": https://www.livescience.com/grandmother-neurons-discovery.html https://www.livescience.com/grandmother-neurons-discovery.ht...

radicality 4y ago
His explanation in GEB of how genes, DNA, and RNA function was probably the clearest one I’ve ever read. It’s been a while and I forgot the details, but reading his analogies made everything click at the time. Maybe it’s time to re-read GEB.

Obi_Juan_Kenobi 4y ago

A gene is essentially defined as having a gene product, either an RNA or protein. So yes, all genes are functional. Genes that aren't translated into protein sequences (noncoding genes) can create structural RNAs as with Ribosomes, microRNAs that have regulatory functions, etc. There are lots of non-gene genetic elements that do things, though. Many are involved in gene regulation, affecting the transcription rates of nearby loci through a variety of mechanisms. There are also vast swaths of inactivated transposons, retroviruses, and other repetitive genetic sequence.