Read What Other People Are Writing

I'm trying to emerge from hibernation, and I'll hopefully have some good blogging material up in the next few days. In lieu of my own ideas, I'm going to link to what other people have written. Read them, because I ain't saying much right now. The list can be found below the fold.

  • Neil Saunders points us to this article from the BBC on a new function for "junk DNA". I hope Neil is right: "one day the term 'junk DNA' will fall into disuse."
  • John Hawks has a good discussion of a recent paper on inferring population size using mtDNA. Apparently cytoplasmic DNA is under selection, and that, combined with the low recombination rate, makes it a poor neutral marker.
  • The Contingency Table summarizes how genomic data can be used to detect natural selection. The idea here is that if you have multiple loci, you can generate an empirical distribution of your favorite statistic and look for loci that are significant outliers.
  • The upcoming issue of Nature will contain an article on a highly conserved non-protein-coding sequence that is derived from a transposable element (read a summary of the article here). The authors hypothesize that the motifs may play an important role in the evolution of terrestrial vertebrates.

More like this

Mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) is one of the most used markers in molecular ecology1. A good molecular marker for population level studies should be neutral, so that researchers can use it to infer things like: Population size and changes in population size (expansions and bottlenecks); Population…
My little screed on junk DNA elicited some good feedback, including a comment from Dan Graur. In a somewhat ill-thought out rant, I implied that anyone who uses the term 'junk DNA' should be ostracized from the scientific community (or something along those lines). I restated my opinion in a far…
I present for you an example of inferring a bit too much from inappropriate data. This isn't quite the same as making claims about demography based on 100 nucleotides from 6 individuals. But it's not much better given that this example is from a study of extant organisms. Abstracts to clarify what…
I've recently come across two articles on junk DNA. The first one, from New Scientist, includes a pretty thorough coverage of recent studies that have identified functions for non-protein-coding regions of the human genome ("Why 'junk DNA' may be useful after all"). The article is set up as if it…