The Oxygen Rush: late January, all of February and a Day in November

I have just returned from British Columbia in Canada. I have to admit that their license plate motto is quite accurate: BC is incredibly beautiful. Another thing that struck me is the provincial flag of BC: the Union Jack at the top (OK, it is British Columbia), there are white and blue horizontal stripes, and a yellow sun setting at the bottom. Good thing they have the sun on their flag, because it sure isn’t visible in the sky.

In 1909 Charles D. Walcott made one of the most incredible discoveries in paleontology, and probably in biology in general. A treasure trove of fossils was revealed in Burgess Pass in the Canadian Rockies, eastern British Columbia. Because of unique process of mineralization in the shale, animal soft tissue was also fossilized. The number and diversity of species found was enormous. The quality of the fossils found was excellent. In many cases, soft tissue was preserved, which helped us better understand the anatomy of the creatures found. Together with other fossil beds the Burgess Shale taught us about the Cambrian Explosion: a relatively brief period in the history of life when most of the ancestors of today’s animals appeared. In a few geological heaves for about 10 million years between 550 and 540 Mya, the arthropods, echinoderms (starfish, sea-urchins and trilobites),  brachiopods, molluscs and many others appeared and diversified into thousands of species. Eventually, many of those early species went extinct, but those animals that remain today on earth are their descendants.
ResearchBlogging.org

It’s not clear what, if anything, prompted this rapid appearance and diversification of species. The ancient super-continent Gondwana was breaking up, so maybe the addition of ecological niches, such as shallow seas, accelerated diversification. Shallow seas would have been more oxygenated than the deep ocean surrounding the supercontinent,  creating more habitable niches to be filled.  A mass-extinction is also thought to have occurred just prior to the Cambrian Explosion: the end-Ediacaran extinction.  Mass-extinctions are known to wipe the evolutionary slate clean, and prompt the diversification of the species surviving the mass-extinction. Think of mammals before and after the dinosaur extinction. The niches occupied by large predators and herbivores were populated by mammals only after the K-T extinction. Or maybe it was a combination of these factors, or maybe the genotypic diversity has attained a critical mass that it triggered a consequent phenotypic and species diversity to follow.

Cambrian Critters (Source: the Smithsonian)

Burgess Shale life Credit: the Smithsonian Institute

Recently, Lawrence David and Eric Alm from MIT published an article in Nature that describes the microbial and molecular equivalent of the Cambrian Explosion. They show an explosion of new genes appearing in very short evolutionary time: a mere 470 million years or so. 27% of modern gene families were born in a starting about 3.3 billion years ago. The accelerated gene birth lasted until 2.85 billion years ago, when the rate of gene birth slowed down to what it is now. New genes still occur, but at a much lower rate. Today, and since about 2.5 billion years ago, genomes gain two to four new genes every 10 million years. But during the Archaean Expansion, as David and Alm named this period of accelerated gene appearance, the gene gain rate peaked at 10 genes per genome per 10 million years. This explosion of new genes was accompanied by the appearance of many new bacterial species too. David and Alm used software they developed called AnGST: “analyzer of gene and species trees”.  AnGST looks at specific gene phylogeny as well as the broader species phylogeny from the tree of life. This enabled them to trace the gene history back to the Archean period, and to view this expansion.

Just to place things in perspective: if the history of life on earth was compressed into one year,  unicellular organisms were the only life you could find from January through most of August, which is when multicellular life emerged.  The Cambrian explosion did not happen until mid-November, and did not last much more than a day. It was quite a formative day though, because even through at least three mass-extinctions took place after that day, all animals you can find on December 31 (today) can trace their ancestry to that day in November. But the Archaean gene expansion took place much earlier: for whole 40 days starting late January through early March; much longer and quite earlier than the Cambrian explosion.

Geological time spiral

Click for larger image. Source: Wikimedia commons

So what triggered the Archaean expansion? To answer the question, David and Alm examined the genes originating in the AE. They found an unusually high number  of genes that have to do with oxygen-based respiration, and everything surrounding it: for example, genes having to do with oxygen transporting metals, such as iron.  The timeline they show for the Archaean gene expansion roughly corresponds to that of earth’s great oxygenationprobably triggered by photosynthetic bacteria some 2.5 billion years ago. The increasing concentration of atmospheric oxygen created a new situation, in which cohorts of oxygen respiration genes appeared.

It took  nearly half a billlion  years for the Archaean gene expansion, but the stage was set. Those “two months” life spent acquiring those genes resulted in permanent long term changes to earth’s biosphere. Over the next 2.5 billion years (or “eight months”) microorgnisms eventually colonized the whole planet, creating nutrient cycles,  the soil system, and constantly raising the oxygen concentration until… boom! One day in November there was enough oxygen for the animals to step in. Life has not been the same since. Actually, life has never been the same ever. Which is why life is so cool.

EDIT: This post has been submitted to the 2011 NESCENT best evolution-themed blog post.


David, L., & Alm, E. (2010). Rapid evolutionary innovation during an Archaean genetic expansion Nature, 469 (7328), 93-96 DOI: 10.1038/nature09649

Share and Enjoy:
  • Fark
  • Digg
  • Technorati
  • del.icio.us
  • StumbleUpon
  • Facebook
  • Reddit
  • Twitter
  • FriendFeed
  • PDF
  • email
  • Print
  • Google Bookmarks

Bad Project

No apologies to Lady Gaga necessary.

Share and Enjoy:
  • Fark
  • Digg
  • Technorati
  • del.icio.us
  • StumbleUpon
  • Facebook
  • Reddit
  • Twitter
  • FriendFeed
  • PDF
  • email
  • Print
  • Google Bookmarks

Why it’s hard to assemble repetitive DNA regions

Exhibit 1

Exhibit 2

So here are EssOh and OhOne assembling a rather frustrating puzzle containing cows. The same 5-6 cow “characters” are repeated, which is a perfect way to illustrate low-complexity DNA sequences, and why they are hard to assemble, especially when the pieces are small, like those you get from some second generation sequencers.

Share and Enjoy:
  • Fark
  • Digg
  • Technorati
  • del.icio.us
  • StumbleUpon
  • Facebook
  • Reddit
  • Twitter
  • FriendFeed
  • PDF
  • email
  • Print
  • Google Bookmarks

Email Bankruptcy – Brilliant

I received this from a colleague today. The sender’s name and identifying information have been removed to protect the guilty.

Under the United States Constitution Article I, Section 8, Clause 4

as enacted in Title 11 USC Chapter 7, individuals may declare
personal bankruptcy when their debts cannot be satisfied.  You are hereby notified that ■■■■■■ ■■■■■■■■■ (hereafter, DEBTOR) is declaring ELECTRONIC CORRESPONDENCE (EMAIL) BANKRUPTCY AND LIQUIDATION, as his electronic correspondence (email) debts grossly exceed his capacity to respond. The DEBTOR receives 45,000 email messages per year but is able to provide only 10,000 responses annually.  While many incoming
message claims have been dismissed as de minimis, at present the DEBTOR owes responses to 5,000 substantive unaddressed messages, and DEBTOR has no prospects of being able to satisfy this debt.

You have been identified as a CREDITOR, having sent the DEBTOR one or more
electronic mail messages to which the DEBTOR owes a response.  A summary
of these messages is listed at the bottom of this NOTICE.  Unless you
petition the TRUSTEE via bankrupt@■■■.■■■, the DEBTOR’s
obligation to respond to CREDITOR’s email shall be conclusively considered
null and void.  The TRUSTEE shall adjudicate any claims within twelve (12)
months of filing.  For most favorable consideration, it is advised that
CREDITORS defer claim submission for several months to avoid creating a
new backlog.

In accordance with the email bankruptcy procedures, the DEBTOR is
undergoing email credit counseling and reducing his email debt capacity by
temporarily suspending active daily use of his email account,
■■■■■@■■■.■■■.

Following is a personal note from the DEBTOR to CREDITORS:
I’m sorry I couldn’t answer your email!  Messages generally lingered in my
inbox because they deserved more attention and thoughtful responses than I
could provide at the time they arrived (though some messages that came at
especially busy times were never processed at all).  Unfortunately, it has
become impossible to address the ever increasing backlog. It is necessary for me to have a clean slate.

If your message is still relevant, please re-send it after a few months to ■■■■■@■■■.■■■ .

Share and Enjoy:
  • Fark
  • Digg
  • Technorati
  • del.icio.us
  • StumbleUpon
  • Facebook
  • Reddit
  • Twitter
  • FriendFeed
  • PDF
  • email
  • Print
  • Google Bookmarks

Open Access: the Revolution Will be Convenient

Some time ago an article in Linux Journal discussed the adoption of free/open course software (FOSS) by the general public. The article (I can’t seem to find it now) talked about the people that do not care about the distinction between Free as in Free Beer vs. Free as in Freedom (libre). They want software that works, and they are even willing to pay for it, although free would be nice. Also, the lack of licensing hassles is a serious bonus. The Open Source advocates and developers are the ones who care deeply about the dissemination model: code should be available more modification and reuse. Not because of the price tag, but because not sharing code hinders development. The success stories of the open source model are obvious: Internet and WWW protocols are open source, most servers are Linux based, Mac OSX is based on FreeBSD, and I’m writing this post from a Linux machine on WordPress. Also, the programmers and FOSS advocates are not starving: they are selling books, documentation, maintenance services and penguin T-shirts. My university is switching to Sakai, a FOSS based course management system and they are hiring programmers to maintain it. The IT managers realize (I hope!) that the adoption of Sakai will not “free” as in no $$$, as these programmers will cost money.  The benefit of such a system over the closed system we have used so far would be to draw upon the general knowledge of the Sakai users community, and to be able to adopt and adapt modules for a learning system suited to my university’s needs.



Credit: mcwetboy on Flickr http://www.flickr.com/photos/mcwetboy/3394518027/

Android is a Linux-based operating system for smartphones which works great. One of the reasons Android gained such a large market share from Apple’s iPhone is Android’s FOSS-friendliness for app developers, as well as the operating system’s portability to many platforms.
The not-so-successful story is FOSS in desktops. Windows still rules, and frankly up until recently, Linux desktops were not that great. They failed the “grandmother test”, in which you got your grandmother who is used to windows to try and adopt Linux. There was too much under-the-hood knowledge needed for granny to be able to even do her email and word processing on a Linux machine. I believe that now the main hindrance to adopting Linux as a desktop is not the granny test, but simply things like inertia and compatibility of certain software. The Linux desktop is quite usable now.
Which brings us to the point that the adoption of FOSS by most computer users is not one of ideology, but of convenience. If they can get the job done for free, fine. If they have to pay some money for it, fine too, as long as they are not milked into continuous upgrade and support (and sometimes even that works). But they want a convenient and familiar working platform. Linux is a choice for servers because it is much better than Windows server. Android is cheaper and has more apps than iPhone, (in a large part due to the open development model) and you are not locked into hardware. Purchasers of Android phones take all of these into consideration, not the openness of the system, since most of them will never use Android in a way which directly exploits its openness. Yes, they do benefit indirectly from openness, but  that is not what attracts them.
So what has Open Access (the title) has to do with Open Source?
I believe that the advocates of scientific Open Access publication are in the same situation that Open Source advocates were in a few years ago. Advocates of both OA and FOSS models had to fight interest groups to gain acceptance. The respective fights have been mostly won. Both OA and FOSS have gained enough traction to stay and even be adopted, to some extent, by some of their previous opponents from the respective industries of publishing and software.
However, OA  adoption is not yet quite wide-spread.  From a recent poll published in Science, only 10% of the published papers are in OA journals, but 90% of  scientists support OA.  So OA is a good idea, but few adopt it. Reason: by analogy ot the Linux desktop, OA does not quite yet fit “user” expectations. You might say OA fails the “old professor” test.  it appears that most scientists care primarily about two things: the perceived prestige of the publication venue, and the associated price tag(*).  Also, most of the scientists polled did not care about such things as retaining copyright and Creative Commons (CC) licensing. These are the equivalent of Android users that do not care (or even know) about Open Source licensing. From a non-representative polling of my colleagues, it seems to me that many are unaware of  CC  and see licensing issues as niceties rather than essentials. So like in the world of Open Source it is convenience, rather than ideology, that will determine the adoption of Open Access. How much does it cost? Is it in a “good” journal? Those are the equivalent questions to those that your grandmother may ask: “can I email my grandkids with it” and “can I do my taxes with it”?
So while the Open Access movement, like the FOSS movement, is fueled by an ideal, and people carrying this ideal, the ultimate adoption will be one of convenience and self-interest.
Finally, here is a slideshow of the  Open Access poll highlights, from the website of the Study of Open Access Publishing project.
—————–
(*) One comment about the price tag: a lot has been said about how libraries have to pay to maintain subscription to toll-access journals, how that fee is rolled over to researchers in terms of overhead, and how open-access can eliminate that. I doubt widespread adoption of Open Access publication model would make much of a difference, but I confess I don’t understand very well how the economics of science publication work. Even with a wide adoption of open access, that would mean replacing one line item (overhead) with another (publication fees). Also in the past, University of California researchers have threatened boycotts against Cell Press and Nature Publishing Group when the subscription hikes were deemed to high. Yes, institutional fees are part of the price tag. But also, most researchers would go with a closed-access subscriber-pays model, as long as the price is not perceived as exorbitant.
Share and Enjoy:
  • Fark
  • Digg
  • Technorati
  • del.icio.us
  • StumbleUpon
  • Facebook
  • Reddit
  • Twitter
  • FriendFeed
  • PDF
  • email
  • Print
  • Google Bookmarks

The Assemblathon

The Genome Center at University of California Davis and researchers at UC Santa Cruz are  organizing a genome assembly competition which they call The Assemblathon. They have released two simulated genomes  for competing groups to assemble as best they can. Assemblies are due February 6th, 2011. So there is still time, if you would like to showcase your genome assembly skillz.  The rules are pretty straightforward:

  1. A total of three two genome sequences will be made available to participants.
  2. One genome sequence will be a real set of Illumina reads from an unspecified organism. Update: real Illumina data will now be available as part of Assemblathon 2
  3. The other two genomes will be derived from a pair of related ‘virtual’ species whose genomes have been artificially evolved using the EVOLVER program (Edgar, R.C., Asimenos, G., Batzoglou, S, and Sidow, A.). The estimated divergence time between the two virtual species is 100 million years.
  4. One synthetic genome will already be assembled and participants will be able to (optionally) use information from this ‘sister’ species’ genome to guide the assembly of the other unassembled genome (which will exist as a set of synthetic Illumina reads).
  5. Reads from the virtual assembly will be made to simulate the dynamics of ‘real’ Illumina reads as much as possible and will be derived from a mixture of Paired-reads and Mate Pairs from a mixture of insert sizes.
  6. Genome data will be available to download from December 1st, 2010.
  7. Participants have until February 6th 2011 to submit their assemblies for the synthetic genome.
  8. Assemblies will be assessed using a variety of metrics: one of the goals of the Assemblathon is to devise new ways of quantifying and qualifying genome assemblies.
  9. Results from the Assemblathon will be discussed by invited participants at the Genome Assembly Workshop, in March 2011

Why do we need an Assemblathon?

There are many genome assembly programs out there, but it is not always clear as to which is the best. Part of the problem is that it is not easy to define what ‘best’ is and an assembler that might work well in one situation (e.g. assembling a high-repeat-content genome) might not fare as well in other situations. Part of the reason for organizing this Assemblathon is to see if we can produce newer metrics for assessing the quality of a genome assembly that will complement existing statistics such as N50 contig size.

The ever changing landscape of sequencing technology also means that it is important to continually appraise new methods as well as re-appraise old ones. Assemblers that work well with the short reads from ‘next generation’ sequencers (e.g. Illumina and SOLiD) might not work as well (or at all) with reads from even newer technologies such as the new sequencers from PacBio. There is also a separate, but related, need to assemble transcriptomes from RNA-Seq data.

Another more fundamental need for a project such as the Assemblathon is that even when we believe that an assembler has made a good job of assembling a genome, we are never entirely sure what the actual solution is. This is a bit like putting a jigsaw together where the pieces all all one of four different colors; how do you know what the final picture is supposed to look like? To tackle this issue, the Assemblathon will provide participants with simulated reads from synthetic genomes. By starting with a complete genome that has been generated in silico, we will know what the final ‘answer’ should be. Additionally, there will also be a ‘real’ genome sequence to assemble.

As someone involved in two analogous efforts (prediction of protein function and of genotype/phenotype connections) I think this is a terrific idea that will help us advance the field of sequence assembly. Of course,  I would have called this effort CASA: Critical Assessment of Sequence Assemblies. First, it fits well with the “Critical Assessment” meme, which describes community efforts of bioinformaticians to assess how well their software is performing (e.g. CASP, CAFASP, CAPRI, CAGI, CAFA etc.) Second,  you can have a lot of fun with the word casa, especially in California.

Credit: Flickr http://www.flickr.com/photos/dullhunk/4422952630/


Share and Enjoy:
  • Fark
  • Digg
  • Technorati
  • del.icio.us
  • StumbleUpon
  • Facebook
  • Reddit
  • Twitter
  • FriendFeed
  • PDF
  • email
  • Print
  • Google Bookmarks

Peter Yates 24 July 1928 – 9 January 2011

Two of my favorite films were directed by Peter Yates, who died yesterday at the age of 82. Bullit which features a great car chase scene through the streets of San Francisco. A 1968 Mustang GT 390 Fastback driven by Steve McQueen, playing Lieutenant Frank Bullitt. Bullitt chased a black Dodge Charger R/T driven by suspected murderers through the streets of San Francisco. It is safe to say that any car chase since is derived from this one.

Breaking Away is the quintessential coming-of-age-in-a small-town film. But a lot more than that. Again, many lesser derivatives were made.

Share and Enjoy:
  • Fark
  • Digg
  • Technorati
  • del.icio.us
  • StumbleUpon
  • Facebook
  • Reddit
  • Twitter
  • FriendFeed
  • PDF
  • email
  • Print
  • Google Bookmarks

Open Lab 2010 Finalists Announced

Open Lab is a collection of the crème-de-la-crème of the science blog posts over each year. Meticulously edited, only the finest of posts make it. Out of nearly 900 submissions this year, 50 (plus six poems and one cartoon) were carefully selected. Truly an amazing achievement of Bora Zivkovic, and especially his co-editor this year, Jason Goldman and all the Open Lab 2010 judges. Each and every one of these hard-working geniuses possesses  a discerning eye, frontal cortex and various other cognitively-applicable CNS-parts. The blogging community, the scientifically-cognizant public and all sentient beings should be eternally grateful for their heroic editing efforts which culminated in this compendium of brilliant and unparalleled posts, which shall serve to enlighten mankind of the scientific developments which took place in the year 2010.

Why yes, one of my posts did make it in. However did you guess?

Share and Enjoy:
  • Fark
  • Digg
  • Technorati
  • del.icio.us
  • StumbleUpon
  • Facebook
  • Reddit
  • Twitter
  • FriendFeed
  • PDF
  • email
  • Print
  • Google Bookmarks

Are you up to the 2011 PhD Challenge?

The PhD Challenge asks graduate students to do their utmost in their submitted papers. You thought getting a paper accepted is hard? Try getting a paper accepted which contains the sentence “I smoke crack rocks”. That was the PhD challenge for 2010, and Gabriel Parent from Carnegie Mellon University has lived up to it with his paper Toward Better Crowd Sourced Transcription: Transcription Of A Year Of The Let’s Go Bus Information System Data published in Proceedings of IEEE Workshop on Spoken Language Technology.

This year, PhD Challenge step it up:

We are excited to announce that the new 2011 PhD Challenge is now open for submissions. The goal of this year’s challenge is to get either the nickname “DIRTY OLD MAN” or“CRAZY CAT LADY” included in the byline for at least one author in the final version of a peer-reviewed academic paper. As an example, an eligible submission could contain the authors John “Dirty Old Man” Smith and/or Jane “Crazy Cat Lady” Smith. The task for this challenge is quite difficult, but we are confident that the world’s best and brightest minds are eager to overcome adversity.

The official Call for Participation contains all of the details of the contest, including the submission dates and the prizes to be awarded to the winner. The PhD Challenge is open to all current graduate students in four-year universities and institutions. Be sure to also read the eligibility rules to make sure that your submission follows the guidelines of the contest.

I’d love to see you get that one in, grad students (Master’s students are also eligible). For more information go to the PhD Challenge site.

Share and Enjoy:
  • Fark
  • Digg
  • Technorati
  • del.icio.us
  • StumbleUpon
  • Facebook
  • Reddit
  • Twitter
  • FriendFeed
  • PDF
  • email
  • Print
  • Google Bookmarks

catgcgccgccgtattaaaatgaatggtaatatgaagcgcgt

catgaacgcgaataagcgcgcgaataaagcatggaataaaacatttgcgaataatttattcgcgaatggcgcaaaagc

Share and Enjoy:
  • Fark
  • Digg
  • Technorati
  • del.icio.us
  • StumbleUpon
  • Facebook
  • Reddit
  • Twitter
  • FriendFeed
  • PDF
  • email
  • Print
  • Google Bookmarks

Music: Dr. Who / Mankind

One of the more bizarre outcomes of the series.

They had me with the keyboard player dressed like Tom Baker with a mustache.

Share and Enjoy:
  • Fark
  • Digg
  • Technorati
  • del.icio.us
  • StumbleUpon
  • Facebook
  • Reddit
  • Twitter
  • FriendFeed
  • PDF
  • email
  • Print
  • Google Bookmarks

Strawberries, Chocolate and Open Access Genomics

Nature Genetics seems to have taken a page from the Food Network Magazine by timing two publications to the annual obsession with festive foods among many, NG readership included.  I am talking about the genomes of the Strawberry and of the Cocoa plants.  Both are important crops,  both are components of luxurious eating. Both papers are comprehensive reports, which give no immediate new insights into the biology of either plant but whose data can be hopefully used later to the advantage of crop growers.

One thing I learned form the Cocoa paper: Cocoa may be a recent descendant of the common eudicot ancestor, and becuase of that and because it is easily manipulated, it can bee a good model for tree fruit crops.

It does not, however, boost immunity:

Two things I learned from the Strawberry paper: strawberries have small genomes. Seven chromosomes, diploid, 240,000,000 bp. The smallest plant genome sequenced so far, besides Arabidopsis thaliana. They actually managed to do it all with de-novo assembly from short reads. Wow.

ResearchBlogging.org

But the other very important thing I learned is that the strawberry project had no central funding source, and that the genome sequencing and assembly were done under an open-access model. Now that is actually cool and interesting. I looked a bit on the web, trying to find how this project was managed, but I only came up with university press releases and this server. I would be really interested to read a methods paper on how to manage a community-based open-access genome project. Publishing their methodology would  have a serious benefit to the genomics community.

UPDATE: Kevin Folta has shared the story behind the story of the strawberry genome.  A great read about politics, plants, papers and punding… er.. funding.

Based on image from Clockworkgrue, Flickr

Argout, X., Salse, J., Aury, J., Guiltinan, M., Droc, G., Gouzy, J., Allegre, M., Chaparro, C., Legavre, T., Maximova, S., Abrouk, M., Murat, F., Fouet, O., Poulain, J., Ruiz, M., Roguet, Y., Rodier-Goud, M., Barbosa-Neto, J., Sabot, F., Kudrna, D., Ammiraju, J., Schuster, S., Carlson, J., Sallet, E., Schiex, T., Dievart, A., Kramer, M., Gelley, L., Shi, Z., Bérard, A., Viot, C., Boccara, M., Risterucci, A., Guignon, V., Sabau, X., Axtell, M., Ma, Z., Zhang, Y., Brown, S., Bourge, M., Golser, W., Song, X., Clement, D., Rivallan, R., Tahi, M., Akaza, J., Pitollat, B., Gramacho, K., D’Hont, A., Brunel, D., Infante, D., Kebe, I., Costet, P., Wing, R., McCombie, W., Guiderdoni, E., Quetier, F., Panaud, O., Wincker, P., Bocs, S., & Lanaud, C. (2010). The genome of Theobroma cacao Nature Genetics DOI: 10.1038/ng.736

Shulaev, V., Sargent, D., Crowhurst, R., Mockler, T., Folkerts, O., Delcher, A., Jaiswal, P., Mockaitis, K., Liston, A., Mane, S., Burns, P., Davis, T., Slovin, J., Bassil, N., Hellens, R., Evans, C., Harkins, T., Kodira, C., Desany, B., Crasta, O., Jensen, R., Allan, A., Michael, T., Setubal, J., Celton, J., Rees, D., Williams, K., Holt, S., Rojas, J., Chatterjee, M., Liu, B., Silva, H., Meisel, L., Adato, A., Filichkin, S., Troggio, M., Viola, R., Ashman, T., Wang, H., Dharmawardhana, P., Elser, J., Raja, R., Priest, H., Bryant, D., Fox, S., Givan, S., Wilhelm, L., Naithani, S., Christoffels, A., Salama, D., Carter, J., Girona, E., Zdepski, A., Wang, W., Kerstetter, R., Schwab, W., Korban, S., Davik, J., Monfort, A., Denoyes-Rothan, B., Arus, P., Mittler, R., Flinn, B., Aharoni, A., Bennetzen, J., Salzberg, S., Dickerman, A., Velasco, R., Borodovsky, M., Veilleux, R., & Folta, K. (2010). The genome of woodland strawberry (Fragaria vesca) Nature Genetics DOI: 10.1038/ng.740

Share and Enjoy:
  • Fark
  • Digg
  • Technorati
  • del.icio.us
  • StumbleUpon
  • Facebook
  • Reddit
  • Twitter
  • FriendFeed
  • PDF
  • email
  • Print
  • Google Bookmarks

Personalized Medicine Poetry

The personal genomics company 23&me is hosting a poetry contest. The winner receives a free pass to the Personalized World Medicine Conference. Poems should include a bunch of keywords having to do with 23&me, personalized genomics and all that jazz.

I’m no poet (and don’t you know it), so here is my Haiku non-entry:

My genome was seq-
uenced. But with gaps which caused some
bad annotation

Share and Enjoy:
  • Fark
  • Digg
  • Technorati
  • del.icio.us
  • StumbleUpon
  • Facebook
  • Reddit
  • Twitter
  • FriendFeed
  • PDF
  • email
  • Print
  • Google Bookmarks

Winter Solstice Lunar Eclipse

Winter Solstice Lunar Eclipse from William Castleman on Vimeo.

Time lapse video of Winter Solstice Lunar Eclipse on December 21, 2010 from 1:10 AM EST (6:10 GMT) to 5:03 AM EST (10:03 GMT) from Gainesville Florida. Music is Claude Debussy Nocturnes: Sirènes.

Share and Enjoy:
  • Fark
  • Digg
  • Technorati
  • del.icio.us
  • StumbleUpon
  • Facebook
  • Reddit
  • Twitter
  • FriendFeed
  • PDF
  • email
  • Print
  • Google Bookmarks

Do you use Byte Size Biology to teach?

If you are a teacher / instructor in the broadest sense of the word and have used this blog in your instructional capacity, please take a couple of minutes to fill out this short survey below (Five questions only, short. Really! short!!) It is important for me to know the extent of BsB’s outreach and breadth of involvement in education and training. Thanks for taking the time to do this. Uh, if you are taking the time, that is.

Create your free online surveys with SurveyMonkey, the world’s leading questionnaire tool.

Share and Enjoy:
  • Fark
  • Digg
  • Technorati
  • del.icio.us
  • StumbleUpon
  • Facebook
  • Reddit
  • Twitter
  • FriendFeed
  • PDF
  • email
  • Print
  • Google Bookmarks