The Scientist has a good review of genome sequencing (coming from a more biomedical perspective). I tend to present genomics from an evolutionary angle (rather than functional). This is a good read if you're not too familiar with the field, and all you know about genomics is what I've told you.
- Log in to post comments
More like this
ScienceWoman has a great post on balancing responsibilities in a new tenure track job, with an eye to publishing papers and setting up a robust and productive research program. It's a must-read, especially for those who are lucky enough to be starting tenure track gigs in the fall. Since I'm…
Chris Mooney is encouraging people to read the longer paper on which his Washington Post op-ed piece was based (some of my thoughts on the op-ed are here). So I did.
My short take: there's some good, mixed in with some bad. I'll behave unusually and describe the good first.
The powerful…
Yes, you read the title correctly--I'll get to that in a bit. Nicholas Wade's article about the Human Genome Project (HGP), "A Decade Later, Genetic Map Yields Few New Cures" has been getting a lot of play. Thankfully, ScienceBlogling Orac summed up perfectly my thoughts about both the science…
This week's New York Times Book Review features a review of Richard Dawkins's The God Delusion that judges the book fairly harshly:
The least satisfying part of this book is Dawkins's treatment of the traditional arguments for the existence of God. The "ontological argument" says that God must…
God bless complexity! The emergence of complexity, that can't be derived from underlying structures and functions, was forecasted by Steve Gould as the main problem that the genome project was going to face in the future. Going from genes to cells is a leap of several leyers of biological hierarchy. Good luck.