ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 1 มิ.ย. 2024
- More DNA means more complexity, right? Scientists say not necessarily! Why is that the case?
Your Face is Made of Junk DNA! ►►►►bit.ly/1OeUfuu
Sign Up For The Seeker Newsletter Here ►►►► bit.ly/1UO1PxI
Read More:
World's Oldest Known DNA Discovered
news.discovery.com/earth/weath...
It won't make Jurassic Park a reality, but scientists have discovered 419 million-year-old DNA intact inside ancient salt deposits. The genetic material, the oldest ever found, belongs to salt-loving bacteria whose ancestors may have been among the first life forms on Earth.”
World's Largest Genome Belongs to Slow Growing Mountain Flower
www.telegraph.co.uk/news/scien...
“It is an unremarkable and rather fragile plant, but a flowering herb that frustrates gardeners for being notoriously difficult to grow has stunned scientists after they discovered it has the world's largest genome. The DNA contained within Paris japonica dwarves all other plant and animal genomes that have been analysed so far.”
Scientists Create Smallest Known Genome to Support a Living Cell
www.scienceandtechnologyresear...
“Researchers in the United States have designed and created a synthetic cell which is able to survive and replicate itself with just 473 genes, potentially leading to the development of innovative new drugs, antibodies and fuels. In a landmark for biological understanding, the scientists based at the J Craig Venter Institute of La Jolla, California, whittled away the genes of the bacterial Mycoplasma chromosome until they reached a minimum set required for life and replication.”
____________________
DNews is dedicated to satisfying your curiosity and to bringing you mind-bending stories & perspectives you won't find anywhere else! New videos twice daily.
Watch More DNews on TestTube testtube.com/dnews
Subscribe now! th-cam.com/users/subscription_c...
DNews on Twitter / dnews
Trace Dominguez on Twitter / tracedominguez
Lissette Padilla on Twitter / lizzette
DNews on Facebook / discoverynews
DNews on Google+ gplus.to/dnews
Discovery News discoverynews.com
Download the Seeker Daily App: testu.be/1ndmmMq - วิทยาศาสตร์และเทคโนโลยี
![[4K] TREASURE(트레저) “KING KONG” Band LIVE Concert 킹콩은 라이브를 찢어🦍 [it’s KPOP LIVE 잇츠라이브]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/p8bLLOxPDD8/mqdefault.jpg)
More research is needed. Oh and it's totally worth mentioning that we haven't a clue how the missing DNA would impact us (we don't even know how missing DNA affected the modified organisms).
I KNEW IT! Size doesnt matter, what matters how you use it!
XD
+Andrius Butkus No, you´re wrong!
+Andrius Butkus You just won the internet! Congratulations +1
I knew this in 94, if you could guess what I'm talking about? It would be great for me that is 😃
Well I already knew 80% of my sister's jeans were junk :/
+Dantick09 the cum stains you mean?
*Genes.
Any programmer knows that timing of functions is very important. So having base pairs which seem unused may be timing/delay functions which modulate gene expressions elsewhere.
"As a bonus the process of evolution explains why a flower can have 50 times more DNA than we do." -- I am still waiting for an explanation.
i think its because flowers might have lived longer on earth than our species (homo sapiens) ever did
Humans have less DNA than my toe nail.
Ayy lmao
Seems wasteful
Wouldn't that put you at a higher risk of cancer?
***** Just because they're aliens??? Fucking racist.
+The Sarcastic Shu Yeah aliens are people like us... wait
I took a genetic engineering course and our teacher always corrected us when someone said that the introns are not useless, they just do not affect the coding as far as we know it. :D
Introns are important, they allow the alternative splicing tô happen.
Also, he is not talking just about the introns, but the non encoding sequences out side the genes
It's a lot like programming - a program might involve 50k lines of code, but remove all the comments, white-space, redundancies, and inefficient methods and you might be able to reduce it to less than 20k.
+Peter Schmidt A version control system might be a more accurate analogy. It's not the comments etc. but all the old, unused code still lingering in the archives.
I suspect it's more like compiled code, but we don't understand the processor's instruction set or the architecture so we change a few bytes and observe what happens. A small number have a measurable and repeatable impact, others produce horrible crashes, and most don't seem to do much of anything we can discern but with a program with gigabytes of instructions maybe we just haven't found that set of circumstances call into that code in the lab yet...
I suspect it's more like DNA...
Nah, that's an awful analogy!
I'm sure that most of the "junk" DNA serves valuable functions. Some of it may only be active for a few vital hours during embryonic development, never to be active again. Also, at the molecular level, plants and other "simple" organisms can be more complex than us.
Zach Crawford they may also only become active if our circumstances change. Chemicals in the air, Air pressure what we are eating and so on birds have been found that if we stop their dna from letting them grow a beak they some how get a jaw full teeth. Which takes us to wonder why birds use to have teeth yet them have beaks today.
This video doesn't explain why plants have more DNA than us tho
I want to see the bloopers of him saying the species names
Last time i came this early
Matthew Santoro had original content.
+Kareem Abdo So... Never?
+megagene EXACTLY BRO, EX-fucking-ACTLY!
HA!
Wait,what?
That extra stuff is back up files... The more and more you learn about the human bio the more and more you realize how critical tweeks could be
wow. he snuck in a cheeky "size doesn't matter joke in there" 1:59
I've met potatoes WAY MORE COMPLEX than Steve!
Previously, it was thought that a significant portion of the human genome consisted of junk DNA. However, recent research suggests that a larger portion of the genome may have functional elements than originally believed. The Encyclopedia of DNA Elements (ENCODE) project, for example, has identified various functional elements in the non-coding regions of the genome.
It is difficult to give a precise estimate of the amount of junk DNA in the human genome because our understanding of the functional elements and non-coding regions is still evolving. Therefore, it is more accurate to say that the percentage of the human genome that is considered junk DNA is currently uncertain.
calling non-protein coding dna "junk dna" in 2016 is embarrassing.
Agreed
+ddarhe totally agreed! We have only just begun exploring what dna does. We have no basis for calling anything about it junk. We know so little.
+ddarhe Read "Junk DNA" by Nessa carey to find out.
Absolutely. Those non protein coding genes serves for a LOT of fonctions in the genome. Like producing RNA's or controling the expression of protein coding genes. They are EXTREMELY important and a fault in those regions can cause severe deseases.
you're junk dna
Nice video
Your shirt is great.
JULIAN! missed you buddy
Having 1 $20 note in pocket is better than having 20 $1 notes.
preparing for towel day? still 2 weeks to go, so DON'T PANIC! (badum tsss)
my dna made me look like an actual potato
Please write down the numbers you talk about, numbers are specially hard to understand for non natives. By hard I mean we have to pay extra attention to "decifer" them. It is something like metric system vs imperial (that you already cover, good job there).
I think recall reading we are shedding some of the older base pair DNA but very slowly??
Was the white balance off in this video? the background looks grey-ish
Julian! where you been bro?!
Having more junk DNA so that mutations are less likely to occur on useful DNA is like buying two ice-creams just in case one melts. Decaying follows 1st order, not zero order kinetics.
Beginning to think about "pulp science" for the various videos, and reading these comments, and thinking "pulp comments" none of them really worth the paper they are written on... Apparently "The quality of a comment is inversely proportional to the effort it takes to write it!"
I hate to disagree (not true) but by increasing the size of the DNA you also increase the chances a mutation will occur. If you do a lot of steps you have more area to go wrong. I assume there's a % chance that something will mutate per nucleotide and adding more useless nucleotides wouldn't per say make the other useful. It's possible that those genes possessed some use for our ancestors (as you said) and simply mutated out through chance. And, I don't know about you, but I'm unaware of anyway to remove genes from a genome. If each gene codes for a new amino acid then in theory things with more genes are more complex, but that's not true if the genes are turned off. My opinion is that it's just easier to turn the genes off then go to the work of removing them. It would explain why incredibly simple organisms have incredibly long genomes, but that is 100% a guess. What do I know?
Just have to point out a logical fallacy in the monologue. There is a certain percentage chance that any base pair will spontaneously mutate. Having more DNA around doesn't change that percentage at all. Think about it ... raindrops fall randomly on your sidewalk. Does having a bigger sidewalk make it less likely that raindrops will fall on the part where you walk?
We are between annuals and perinials. Those who hold on and those who let go.
"Nitrogeenous" umm what
Exactly 😂
Wallflower nitrogenus
Give a human meds from a doctor and they think they are a flower. When I smoke weed I know I'm happy.
Maybe its like a computer, The extra could be like a backup to an earlier os.
My genes make me look fat
Wow, so that was clickbait. I wanted to know exactly why we have less DNA than a flower. His answer: "because evolution."
Is your shirt a Coldplay reference?
Dna is like the brain size doesn't matter but how efficient you use it.
Its actually brain to body mass ratio is how intelligent you are
I feel like e should set up a website for Julian so he can afford more food.
You lookin like a Heroin addict Jules
I want the other one to do the show !
Now i know this video was inspired by the TV show duck quacks don't echo, i don't now how else they coincided to close to each other.
liking the HGTTG shirt
We have more DNA than anyone else
Aren't the lens cells in the eyes without DNA as well?
Simple answer is that plants survive polyploidy and animals often do not.
+Guy P Yap and that is beneficial for them
Sooo... Steve is a potato?
I hold on.
This guy looks like the ant chameleon from hunterxhunter
So if that flower haves more DNA it means that it has been involving longer than os?...
I actually don't have pairs of chromosomes, I have an extra one.
"Don't panic"
Don't Panic! At The Disco
I see your DNA is as big as mine!
Hey Beavis, your genome is bloated uh huh huh huh huh huh huh huh
Goodness! _What do you look up to?_ 💞
Yes yes. Our other 92 percent can be thought of like potential energy. We can either utilize it, or breeze past it. To choose either a vital or sedimentary lifestyle
I'm sure all of our DNA does something, we're just not sure what it does. We used to think the same thing about our brain, but that's been proven false.
www.scientificamerican.com/article/mutant-chicken-grows-alli/
Yet chicken can grow alligator like teeth with no added dna. So clearly there is DNA that maybe very well useful but not used.
a potatoe is a stem tuba
waiting for a Steve to comment.
keep counting!
Don't you think human eugenics will be a thing?
Why plant chromosomes are longer than animals
Why Species with lower chromosome number have longer chromosome than those having higher chromosome number?
I use to a genetic experiment on all humans for the future.
I don't know, we should probably learn how to translate the coding before we claim to know that its useless.
so this flower has SOX in its ADN?
difference between plant dna &human dna
Tell me
Think your show is great!
Just some constructive criticism: Signs your information is about the level of upper secondary school, maby listing so many organisms base pairs and things like that make the audience (who is supposedly young) lose interest. I'm not telling you to dum it down! I'm just saying to keep it light while informative, or "fun" if you will...
why did they change their name to seeker
Im trying not to panic or be disrespectful but dude needs to work out lol
OKOKOK HE SAID SEE YOU NEXT TIME ON D NEWSSSSSSSSSS
this is because plants hybridize easily
longer life has existed in the helical pattern of our solar system the longer the info for dna thats why
DNA is clearly the programing code of life so the question is why is there a programing code if there is no programmer ?
+DarkBioCloud We are the programmers. We are just not here yet.
+SinsiliuxS dna does not adapts to the environment. not good enough dna won't change to match the environment it will just die away
+SinsiliuxS yes in a way you are right but fundamentally dna isn't changing much while an individual is alive, because if it does it will be fixed else it will just be on a small amount of cell
The programming is random and natural selection is what filters it out.
We Love It: lets us learn how we can change our daily lives to influence our genes for our offspring!!!
sounds like me programming, 90% of it is commented out
I love people
junk,really now.
what kind of science is that.
because after we evolved from plants we lost the DNA our bodies found unimportant
Less DNA means more complecated DNA
No, it doesn't necessarily mean that.
Si what is the answer ...
Wow, human biology is weird!
Many small mammals have more chromosomes than humans 60-70+
not the size that matters what matters is how you use it XD
isn't nitrogenous pronounced 'nitroj-gen-es'?
2065: we only use 8% of our DNA is false, we use 100% of our DNA :V
hahaha I know right. it would be silly if nature gives us stuff we dont need, havent they learned yet that everything has its place and is there to create balance.
+ketfoen please tell me this is an in-joke I don't get.
Alien Platypus It's a joke, remember when we used to think we only use 10% of our brain? who knows what will we learn in the next decades :p
Hi, Science Ed Sheeran LOL
DNAcomparison
I doubt that DNA is actually bloated. Its much more likely that the arrogance and egos of the researchers, is what is actually bloated. Just because we do not understand something or know its function, does not necessarily mean that there is no function.
see you next time in dnews i thought it was seeker and are you guys going to continue promoting your old videos that you guys sold to Now This
0:59 Oh shit! Is that they guy from the Clickhole Clickventure where you join a cult?
Has anyone had a potato baby?
Not until you came along (∩⚆﹏⚆)⊃━☆ﾟ.*
Mycoplasma genitalium.....hmmmm, who thought of that name?🤔
it was probably found on genitalia, it is usually how they name this organisms
I am a meat popsicle.
its no big deal to me
Paris Japonica
Polycgaos Dubium
Check out this thing! Oh but this thing was proved wrong in the 60's so it really doesn't matter...
Then the rest of the video that we didn't click for....
Esh Deeran
DNews, this is old news.
Go chill. You lose this round papa
HaShem created everything perfect!