h a l f b a k e r yBone to the bad.
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
Please log in.
Before you can vote, you need to register.
Please log in or create an account.
|
Which sounds better £46 or £115.83?
Now the NMRM Corp tie-in with DNA-WPR*, you need
only
take a swab, send the sample to a lab in Knoxville,
Tenn.
and have peace of mind!!!
Later edit - Ah, I forgot to include the actual point of
the idea. It's expensive to get DNA tests for ancestry
websites, so this might be a cheap way to do it.
(exchange rates are a ruff calculation)
(*DNA World Pet Registry)
[link]
|
| |
There's an even cheaper way. Just walk into any police
station and say "I'd just like to mention that I was in no way
involved in this recent spate of murders", and they'll have you
profiled in no time. |
|
| |
Full genome? The police have enough paperwork. |
|
| |
Probably not, but then again dog testing kits only cover a
fraction of the [canine] genome. |
|
| |
Ah, I forgot to include the actual point of the idea.
It's expensive to get DNA tests for ancestry websites,
so this might be a cheap way to do it. |
|
| |
But, finding out me and Lassie have 57 points of
congruence isn't really that useful. |
|
| |
I was dreaming we can get a better price and speed by getting an uncoiled chromatid to flow, in a microfluidic channel , past a reader section, measuring the nucleotide cogs. Attaching a large molecule to one end of the chromatid and by using gravity, might 'train' it's length down a column through some sort of base discriminating sensor. Position and base relative to the chromatid would be maintained. |
|
| |
Measuring the cogs is the hard part. However, Oxford
Nanopore's execrable technology sort of does this (though not
for whole chromosomes, and with abysmally low accuracy). |
|
| |
After a cursory look, my initial feeling is the electronic state of the nanopore needs to be known more accurately to get a better read. I suggest, some molecular groups attached to the nanopore with their own reading layer to help with the a baseline. Just more data to get a better look. |
|
| |
The positional charges on the DNA atoms would be variable within a range , would they not? |
|
| |
The problem with nanopore sequencing is that the pore is
several nucleotides long. Hence, the signal at any instant is
sort of averaged over several bases. |
|
| |
What happens when I get the results and it shows I'm
prone to hard pad? |
|
| |
[not_morrison_rm] Nothing a good soak/whiskey can't fix but check your not feeling an ill temper. |
|
| |
[Max]Is several still small enough to be listed? It is interesting trying to read a changing section of a flow to try and determine subunits.
I did have another wonder, whether light or another energy form could used lightly to condition the read environment so the nucleotides have a more determining signal. |
|
| |
// several still small enough to be listed?// I think it's
something like 5 or 10. You can recover sequence data, but
the raw error rate is something horrendous like 10%, which
makes it useless for many applications. |
|
| |
//whether light or another energy form could used lightly to
condition the read environment so the nucleotides have a
more determining signal// I have no idea what that means. |
|
| |
Doesn't the signal have to range more widely and cleanly to remove raw read errors? chilling a magnet will will give a stronger field. |
|
| |
Is there a way of accentuating the charges to give a better resolve? Make the strand flow through an environmental change to which each base reacts with a stronger difference to compared to the others. Magnetism, light field, temperature. It would be good if it was like a photocopier, impart charge to strand, print it off at sensor. |
|
| |
I must say, great work having a mechanism that can capture a strand and flow it's long length through an known volumetric space. It's just a matter of time before the reader becomes accurate enough. |
|
| |
//accentuating the charges// it's not based on charge per se.
Instead, they measure the current flowing through the pore;
that current is reduced by the DNA, and the amount of
reduction depends on which bases are in the pore. |
|
| |
So its all about the base? |
|
| |
Doesn't seem like any treble at all, then. |
|
| |
There's only 10% tremble when the DNA rubs off with some of the charge. |
|
| |
I still think, because of DNA's sole purpose, a near 100% accurate read should be possible. |
|
| |
My hope is for a stack of carbon nanosheets that can have a multiple reads as the DNA spirals through even though base gap is 0.34 nm or 3.4 Å and carbon sheets range from 1 to 100nm plus insulator distance. Theoretically the gap between reader sheets should not matter. |
|
| |
Though if the animal DNA full genome sequence price drops I will use that. |
|
| |