3 ms·
As noted, the shotgun sequencing wasn't any worse than the traditional chromosome walking method used by the other human genome project, and neither created a t
by jhbadger 3y ago
As noted, the shotgun sequencing wasn't any worse than the traditional chromosome walking method used by the other human genome project, and neither created a truly complete sequence, which is only possible today with improvements in technology.
And it is worth noting that despite all the critiques of shotgun sequencing at the time as "cheating", chromosome walking sequencing is dead, and shotgun is what we use today. If anything replaces that it will be long read technology like that done by Oxford Nanopore sequencing, although we aren't really there yet (you still need to assemble that data and don't really get end-to-end sequences yet).
- kazinator 3y agoI feel a joke coming on. Mother: "Amy, dear, you hardly touched any of your vegetables. Most of them are still on your plate." Amy: "That's not true, Mom; I completely sequenced them into my tummy using the shotgun method."
- robwwilliams 3y agoNot true now with PacBio Revio and new Oxford Nanopore chemistry and flow cells. We still use a bit of older Illumina data for polishing, but long read methods now as accurate. HiC and Bionano more important as supplements than 150 nucleotide pair-end reads. And the cost of a T2T using a combination of these technologies is already well under $10,000 in reagent costs. The assembly is still a complex art especially for a messy chromosome like Y.