4 ms·

> One point in what you wrote: the blank pages (introns) can be really important Yes it is -- which is why you get that data with WGS. Seriously, the only seq

> One point in what you wrote: the blank pages (introns) can be really important Yes it is -- which is why you get that data with WGS. Seriously, the only sequence that is really difficult to get is around centromeres and telomeres (and some smaller repetitive regions). The other issues that we have with germline sequence is when there are novel structural rearrangements, but with enough depth (or a slightly different technology), we can see those too. > Because we're saying the same thing I don't think we are... you keep misusing some of the key terms here. Those "blank pages" weren't introns, they were the ends of the chromosomes (telomere) and the middle (centromere). Those are hard and repetitive. The rest -- the parts you'd really care about if you wanted to do some late life genetic replacement -- are largely covered. For the context, we use a reference genome. We then look to see where the smaller subsequences align to the the reference genome. This isn't a wet-lab technique, but a dry-lab technique. With enough copies of the smaller sequences (coverage), we can establish what the underlying "full" sequence is. Given sufficient depth, this is a solved problem at this point. The only issues are depth and cost (of sequencing and processing/storage). I left this part out earlier because it wasn't what you were asking about. We don't have a technique that you can spit in a tube and get the entire sequence of a chromosome all at once. They are simply too long for that to be practical. We do have technology to get a lot (millions) of shorter reads that we can align back to a reference (the company we are talking about in the post does this). We also have technology to get very long sequences (up to 2Mb), but they aren't as accurate as shorter reads. But, if you merge the two together, it can get you all the data you're really after here, even without a reference genome.

henearkr 4y ago
Ok, thank you! So, this means there is hope for getting the data required for a full DNA restoration: - bases near the telomeres, difficult to get (i.e. difficult to locate) with standard sequencing, can be sequenced (and located) with long-sequence sequencing (but this kind of GWS cheap service doesn't use long-sequencing right?) - for bases around centromeres, do we assume that they are surrounded by a sea of nothingness, and that relying on a unique reference genome's centromere is enough? Isn't that risky, are we really sure that individual variations do not matter for centromeres? My aim is to imagine a future where any defects, including centromeres, could be fixed, if necessary by regenerating whole chromosomes. Using data gathered now and safely stored.

henearkr 4y ago

Ok, thank you! So, this means there is hope for getting the data required for a full DNA restoration: - bases near the telomeres, difficult to get (i.e. difficult to locate) with standard sequencing, can be sequenced (and located) with long-sequence sequencing (but this kind of GWS cheap service doesn't use long-sequencing right?) - for bases around centromeres, do we assume that they are surrounded by a sea of nothingness, and that relying on a unique reference genome's centromere is enough? Isn't that risky, are we really sure that individual variations do not matter for centromeres? My aim is to imagine a future where any defects, including centromeres, could be fixed, if necessary by regenerating whole chromosomes. Using data gathered now and safely stored.