this post was submitted on 14 Mar 2024
101 points (98.1% liked)
And Finally...
1070 readers
326 users here now
A place for odd or quirky world news stories.
Elsewhere in the Fediverse:
- !weirdnews@real.lemmy.fan
- !offbeat@lemmy.ca
- !nottheonion@lemmy.world
- !nottheonion@lemmy.ml
- !nottheonion@zerobytes.monster
- !aiop@lemmy.world
- !jingszo@lemmy.world
- !forteana@feddit.uk
- !strangetimes@lemmy.world
- !goodnews@feddit.uk
- !upliftingnews@lemmy.world
Rules:
- Be excellent to each other
- The Internet will resurface old "And finally..." material. Just mark it [VINTAGE]
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
The number of chromosomes is not relevant for distinguishing dog breeds based on sequenced DNA. It is not even relevant to distinguish between dog and human.
Here is some more academic teaching material about genome sequencing: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9291972/
Here is the wikipedia article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DNA_sequencing
I'm not sure what an article about whole genome sequencing has to do with anything? These companies are looking at a handful of SNPS.
Can you explain how it is possible to look at an SNP without knowing which chromosome it is located on?
And how the other companies were confident there was no dog DNA in the sample and this company said it found dog DNA in only one of the two samples sent?
The article is about sequencing technology. This is what is needed to get from physical DNA to its textual representation. The assignment to chromosomes is lost in the process. It can either be reconstructed after sequencing, by e.g. whole genome assembly or k-mer based methods.
But there are other methods of identifying races than looking at correctly identified SNPs. Often, k-mer content is enough. And it is likely more efficient, because it does not require any computationally heavy assembly.