From: Robert J. Bradbury (bradbury@www.aeiveos.com)
Date: Mon Sep 27 1999 - 11:02:11 MDT
On Mon, 27 Sep 1999 k_aegis@mindspring.com wrote:
> Today's Washington Post Business section has an article regarding the
> potential return for investors as Celera prepares to complete its
> human genome research.
>
> http://www.washingtonpost.com and then scroll down to 'A Gene Dream'
>
The actual URL is:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/WPlate/1999-09/27/031l-092799-idx.html
An interesting article. Mostly accurate. Of couse the devil is
in the details. Celera is in a race with several government
funded labs to publish genome sequence. To Celera's credit
is the fact that they have finished sequencing the Drosophila
genome (at 10-11x redundancy) and this sequence will be published
in late October. However, with regard to the human genome, the
government funded labs and Celera both are on track to publish
significant amounts of the human genome next year.
What was really interesting about the Celera talks at the
TIGR genome conference was that fact that once they have
a prototype mamamalian genome (human) they can drop the
sequencing requirements (for random short fragments)
from 10-11x down to ~3x. So following the human genome,
the mouse, etc. genomes should follow rapidly.
The fundamental problem with large genomes is the difficulty
of ensuring that you have things reconstructed in the
right order given inversions, duplications, repetitive
elements, etc. One of the presentations at the TIGR conf.
lead me to believe that the Drosophila genome is more difficult
than the human genome (more repetative sequences). So though
the Human genome may be bigger (requiring several months
of computing time for a 1+ TeraOp machine), its complexity
is lower, so the assembly process is likely to be fairly
straight forward.
Clearly the government scientists and strategies have been
scooped in this affair. However the credit should go more
to Marc Adams who clearly knows how to assemble a high throughput
production facility and Eugene Myers who clearly understands
the mathematics and programming requirements.
The *fundamental* problem that Celera faces is harvesting
enough information from the project that they can come up
with a few hundred unique patents to justify the investment.
Can they do this? Probably. They have to strech out quite
far beyond simply sequencing genes and take it into the realm
of function where they can solve the "unique" and "nonobvious"
criteria for patentability.
However, Human Genome Sciences appears to have made this
transition, so I expect that Celera may as well.
Robert
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 15:05:18 MST