Major Advances in Synthetic Biology Result in Cyborg Cells and Artificial Genome

I have issues with the term 'redundant DNA", when what we actually mean is "DNA component parts we do not currently understand"

Genomicist here (study whole genome as opposed to individual genes) but my area of research is in codons, and in particular, codon degeneracy. Just thought I'd clarify some things for people that may have gotten the wrong impression as he does make a slight mistake when talking about it. First, he gave a pretty basic breakdown of the process from DNA - Proteins, so I'll clarify a bit more: DNA consists of 4 nucleotides ATCG, first rule is that 'A' always, or at least is supposed to always, bind to 'T' on the opposite strand, likewise for 'G' to 'C'. This is present in every organism on Earth so it likely evolved the common ancestor of all life (likewise these nucleotides tend to form more stable chemical bonds with their set counterpart). When something like a protein or enzyme is required, an enzyme known as an RNA polymerase is used to make a copy of the sequence by binding to the DNA and synthesizing the RNA (the messenger RNA or mRNA) which carries the RNA information for the reverse sequence of the DNA template to the ribosome where the other RNA nucleosides and Amino Acids which form the proteins. Another RNA molecule known as a transfer RNA (tRNA) is the RNA which is bound chemically to the amino acid, importantly, however, is that the tRNA is shaped like an upside down crucifix (the religious folks had a field day with that one). On the longer end of the crucifix there is the amino acid, but on the other end lies a series of 3 nucleosides that bind to a specific sequence in the mRNA which encodes that particular amino acid (this 3 letter sequence is what we refer to as a codon). Once bound to mRNA, the next tRNA binds and the amino acids form a bond, which signals the tRNA to release the amino acid and itself from the mRNA sequence. Now, in the video he implies that the amino acid codons seem redundant as there are many different codons for each amino acid and, if you look at the table, it's quite varied. This is true, the genome does have a great deal of redundancy. However, he also makes out that this is a bad thing and reduces how streamlined our genome is however, while this is true, this redundancy is there for a very important reason (bare in mind this is present in ALL life on Earth unchanged (in terms of base evolution)). The very important reason it exists is as a way to deal with mutations, one thing our genome is very good at is making mistakes and messing up (EA and Disney would be proud), life thus evolved codon redundancy to reduce the impact of the most common mutations namely 'point' mutations (mutations which change a single nucleotide) in this case usually a substitution mutation (namely a mutation where the wrong nucleoside is substituted in the mRNA). This mutation is most commonly concentrated at the end of each nucleoside as a result it is usually the 3rd nucleoside in the sequence which is redundant (known as the 'synonymous' site or 'wobble' position) but by having this redundancy built in, this ensure that the correct amino acid is incorporated into the protein regardless of the codon which is incorporated into the mRNA. While this does potentially increase the metabolic burden on an organism and potentially slow things down, it is the best way life evolved to deal with the impact of the most common mutations, as errors during protein synthesis can result in the protein either being non-functional, having reduced functionality (or effectiveness), or even cause the protein to gain the ability to do something harmful to the organism. This is why we theorise it's remained present in all life right down to bacteria, as the strengths outweigh the weakness gained. While this streamlining of the genome in this study does present some opportunities to improve the production of certain essential chemicals and substances, it remains to be seen what potential negative impacts this may have on these organisms. lesson over. Thank you for your time.

My mainline intake consists mainly of sci-fi horror, so I can see all of this going really well.

"Nanomachines, son"

Cyborgs .... what could possibly go wrong 🤔

I, for one, welcome our new yeast overlords.

Clankeryotic Cells

AI needs a body.

3:58 sounds like a weapon

12:28 I agree; there's a lot of dough to be made in the synthetic production of yeast.