New Method To Revolutionize DNA Sequencing 239
An anonymous reader writes "A new method of DNA sequencing published this week in Science identifies incorporation of single bases by fluorescence. This has been shown to increase read lengths from 20 bases (454 sequencing) to >4000 bases, with a 99.3% accuracy. Single molecule reading can reduce costs and increase the rate at which reads can be performed. 'So far, the team has built a chip housing 3000 ZMWs [waveguides], which the company hopes will hit the market in 2010. By 2013, it aims to squeeze a million ZMWs [waveguides] onto a single chip and observe DNA being assembled in each simultaneously. Company founder Stephen Turner estimates that such a chip would be able to sequence an entire human genome in under half an hour to 99.999 per cent accuracy for under $1000.'"
Gattica... (Score:1, Funny)
Gattica, here we come!
But at least there's Uma Thurman.
Sub-$1000 genome sequencing (Score:4, Funny)
Sub-$1000 genome sequencing will put the creation of 'designer' kids into the realm of the affordable for much of the middle class. Scary stuff. Now we just need to combine that with cheap and reliable cloning techniques and my plans for world domination will be comlete!
Re:99.3% accurate? (Score:5, Funny)
1 Hour Genome Sequencing: 30,000 errors or less or YOUR MONEY BACK!
Re:99.3% accurate? (Score:1, Funny)
I want a cute little baby velociraptor!
Re:Sub-$1000 genome sequencing (Score:4, Funny)
Hopefully you'll fix that nasty intercalary deletion [wikipedia.org] bug first!
Re:99.3% accurate? (Score:3, Funny)
If you got B on the second run you'd be pretty sure it was incorrect.. ;-)
Re:99.3% accurate? (Score:3, Funny)
Sorry, you're asking for the impossible - I've never seen a well-organized mammoth hunt.
Re:Sub-$1000 genome sequencing (Score:2, Funny)
I will, but I gotta P first!
Re:99.3% accurate? (Score:5, Funny)
If you were sequencing DNA and got a B then you'd seriously need to recheck the equipment (or the competence of the operator). Perhaps a T or a G, or even a C but never a B.
Re:99.3% accurate? (Score:4, Funny)
Oh well. At least it's not the first time somebody missed a point on /.
Don't you mean "Oh well. At least it's not the first time somebody missed a point on /".
Re:Sub-$1000 genome sequencing (Score:3, Funny)
Hopefully you'll fix that nasty intercalary deletion bug first!
As long as it's not a missing G, T, C, or A, he'll be OK.
Re:GATTACA is here (Score:3, Funny)
Gattaca was supposed to show us a dark future. It was supposed to be a cautionary tale. The message was, "if your DNA isn't good enough, you'll have to make do banging Uma Thermon - poor you."
I don't think the producers thought their cunning plan all the way through.
Re:99.3% accurate? (Score:3, Funny)
Re:99.999% accuracy (Score:3, Funny)
error's
That character you're using... I don't think it means what you think it means...
You must be new here. You see, here on teh interweb, many of us are terribly afraid of word's ending in "s" - Plural's, possessive's, contraction's with the word "is", and occasionally even name's. The apostrophe is a polite way of warning the general reading public that an "s" is approaching so that we can brace ourselve's accordingly.
Re:99.3% accurate? (Score:4, Funny)
Unless of course all three of your compasses are giving you different readings. In that case, you simply yell "Where the hell is my sextant."