What Genomes have been Sequenced?

Sun Oct 11 10:34:00 EST 1992

1) The "landmark paper" on Yeast Chromosome III appeared in NATURE, vol. 357
   pp. 38-46 and not in Science. I'm not quite sure whether the cited
   number of authors (>100) was ironical or not. If so, why (I'm not a co-
2) Keith Robison has forgotten *Bacillus subtilis* in his review of partly
   but well under way sequenced genomes (no sweat, this is not my favourite
3) About a former posting: in yeast chromosome III, there are 182
   open reading frames longer than 300 bp (thus coding for proteins longer
   than 100 aa). Some of them correspond to already known genes, and 145
   ORFs are novel (see the Nature paper). Note that these figures are
   consistent with a study of the chrIII transcripts, hence most of these
   ORFs are actually translated. My point is that an ORF or a gene is not
   weird or strange if one gets no phenotype upon its disruption:
        a) not getting a phenotype *in your laboratory conditions* does not
           mean that the gene is useless!
        b) it is quite possible that these genes may be duplicated,
           triplicated, etc... on other chromosomes. Disrupting one copy
           will make no harm.
That more than 50% of the ORFs in ChrIII do not resemble anything
previously known is one great information afforded by its sequencing.
Remember also that yeast is a small eukaryotic organism, whose genome
contains introns and exons, and that reverse genetic experiments are easy
with yeast. The choice of this organism for a collaborative project was not
done by chance...
  | Jean-Loup Risler                    |                         |
  | CNRS                                |                         |
  | Centre de Genetique Moleculaire     |  Risler at frcgm51.bitnet  |
  | 91190 Gif sur Yvette   France       |                         |

More information about the Bio-soft mailing list

Send comments to us at biosci-help [At] net.bio.net