I do often wonder about stories like this in the context of forensic science – my (incomplete!) understanding a lot of the time suspect DNA samples are taken from small areas and amplified significantly with high-cycle count PCR. I'd worry that any jury presented with a statistical argument about a fragment of somebody's DNA being very unlikely ("1 in 100 million") to be different to the sample found at the scene would not be aware of all of the potential systematic reasons why the actual true probability may be much, much higher.
buried the lede, imho: we have enough DNA profiles to match their sampling up with.
I'm always stunned when reminded that a full genome sequencing has gone from Human Genome Project's extreme cost and (edit: glacial) speed to using seqencing as the easy button.
I hear we've also got machines that'll seqence, fit on a bench, and cost high five/low six figures. They've got issues to work out still though- iirc something about damaged sections causing issues.
Paleontology has been really helped by the ease of sequencing, to the point where many evolutionary arguments are moot. Humans are apes, birds are dinosaurs. Some people still dispute it, but not with evidence on their side.
there’s youtubers that have videos about doing this in a home wetlab. very achievable. some amateur soil biologists using this to try and sample microdiversity as the planet… humanifies.
Should be noted, though, the cheaper/quicker techniques do still come with compromises compared to the "gold standard" technique used for the Human Genome Project.
I was chatting with a biologist friend a while back, and one tidbit he dropped in was that any sample of air from anywhere on earth will likely contain the dna of organisms unknown to science, so abundant the tree of life is.
I do often wonder about stories like this in the context of forensic science – my (incomplete!) understanding a lot of the time suspect DNA samples are taken from small areas and amplified significantly with high-cycle count PCR. I'd worry that any jury presented with a statistical argument about a fragment of somebody's DNA being very unlikely ("1 in 100 million") to be different to the sample found at the scene would not be aware of all of the potential systematic reasons why the actual true probability may be much, much higher.
Probability seems to be one of those things humans habitually mess-up at.
"The chances of this person's unique DNA showing up at the scene are a zillion to one!"
"What does that really mean when the sample also contains unique DNA for a hundred other people? Did all of them commit the crime as a group?"
buried the lede, imho: we have enough DNA profiles to match their sampling up with.
I'm always stunned when reminded that a full genome sequencing has gone from Human Genome Project's extreme cost and (edit: glacial) speed to using seqencing as the easy button.
I hear we've also got machines that'll seqence, fit on a bench, and cost high five/low six figures. They've got issues to work out still though- iirc something about damaged sections causing issues.
Paleontology has been really helped by the ease of sequencing, to the point where many evolutionary arguments are moot. Humans are apes, birds are dinosaurs. Some people still dispute it, but not with evidence on their side.
> Some people still dispute it
I particularly like this Futurama clip on the subject. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=VzGtk7Ip4NU
four figures these days. fits in your hand. nanopore is a revolution. https://nanoporetech.com/products/sequence/minion
there’s youtubers that have videos about doing this in a home wetlab. very achievable. some amateur soil biologists using this to try and sample microdiversity as the planet… humanifies.
Do you have links to these youtubers? Sounds interesting
Not OP, but The Thought Emporium is a personal favourite. Their name belies the hands-on nature of their videos.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F0_q-fD_lyU
Should be noted, though, the cheaper/quicker techniques do still come with compromises compared to the "gold standard" technique used for the Human Genome Project.
Let's wait for smartphones with nanopores
I was chatting with a biologist friend a while back, and one tidbit he dropped in was that any sample of air from anywhere on earth will likely contain the dna of organisms unknown to science, so abundant the tree of life is.
[stub for offtopicness]