Human Genetics

[Anonymous No.16185469]

>It is estimated that humans have between 20,000 and 25,000 genes.
A Source: https://medlineplus.gov/genetics/understanding/basics/gene/

>98.5% of our DNA is "junk" or thought inactive.
A Source: https://www.discovermagazine.com/health/our-cells-are-filled-with-junk-dna-heres-why-we-need-it

Doesn't that mean we are comprised of less than 1,000 individual, expressed genes? Thoughts?

[Anonymous No.16185573]

>>16185469
Bumping so someone smarter than me can answer. My guess is that genetics is incredibly complicated.

[Anonymous No.16185593]

>>16185469
>>It is estimated that humans have between 20,000 and 25,000 genes.
That we know about and have documented. The upper estimate is actually around 100,000.
Those genes aren't identical between humans.
Most human genes are between 1000 and 1000,000 base pairs in length.
Every 1000 base pairs there is roughly one base pair difference between individuals in the same genes.
They are called single-nucleotide polymorphisms.
So that means there are millions of possible inheritable differences you can have since there are 3+ billions base pairs in the human genome.
So the total number of possible different humans you could have is 1,000,000!=An unimaginably huge number that's too large to be written down in a 4chan comment.
>>98.5% of our DNA is "junk" or thought inactive.
The reality is that we simply don't know what it does. I expect that with further knowledge growth the designated "junk" section of DNA will gradually shrink.
Also Identical twins don't have identical DNA.
That's why the correlation of disorders between them is very similar but not exactly the same.
The only genetically identical organisms in nature are clones created in laboratories.

[Anonymous No.16185610]

>>16185593
So, a single gene might contain 3,000 pairs of one of four letters, and this is how it is expressed. Though it is still a single gene, so would it be fair to say we have perhaps 1,000 protein-coded (active genes) that primarily make up our individual coding?
>We share 98% of our genes with monkeys
But this is the amount that lack protein (are inactive).

[Anonymous No.16185641]

>>16185610
No, that's wrong.
Junk DNA doesn't code for proteins.
Their are 20,000 protein-coding genes and the rest of the human genome has unknown function and so is labelled junk DNA.
Junk DNA doesn't code for proteins.
So your confusion comes from not knowing what junk DNA in humans is.

[Anonymous No.16185643]

>>16185593
>>16185469

1 base pair 4 bit
1 gene 4megabit
100000 genes 400 Terrabit

is it really that less ?
soon we can save a full human on a hard disk

[Anonymous No.16185678]

>>16185469
Most of the junk DNA is stuff like inactivated retrotransposons. Genes aren't considered a part of that.

[Anonymous No.16185756]

>>16185593
>Also Identical twins don't have identical DNA.
I read somewhere that a crime happened and they had dna samples of the culprit but since it belonged to twins police labs couldn't determine who exactly he was between the two.

[Anonymous No.16185913]

>>16185756
>I read somewhere that a crime happened and they had dna samples of the culprit but since it belonged to twins police labs couldn't determine who exactly he was between the two.

Even today DNA profiling doesn't compare whole genomes base by base so it can't distinguish between monozygotic twins even though they aren't genetically identical.

[Anonymous No.16186151]

>>16185469
>98.5% of our DNA is "junk"

Sounds about right, 98.5% of our behavior is also junk.

>thoughts?

We are less complicated than we think?

[Anonymous No.16186224]

>>16186151
What you call junk, I call necessary. Imagine a movie with absolutely no space to let a scene breathe. It would cease to be artistic and soulful. Just because you think something is unnecessary just shows your ignorance.

[Anonymous No.16186700]

>>16185643
whole human genome is 3 Gbp (Giga base pairs) long, and can the full sequence can be downloaded by anyone as a textfile
>>16185593
> we simply don't know what it does
only correct answer
>>16185469
no, out of 3 billion base pairs of human genome about 1% is transcribed into mRNA, a lot of the rest are transcribed into other types of RNA, still technically genes but are called "non-coding". The rest that isn't transcribed into RNA are regions like CpG islands, telomeres, centromeres, intergenic regions etc. which control the expression of coding and non-coding genes, but that's what molecular biologists say of any sequence they don't understand the function of.

[Anonymous No.16186879]

>tfw no linux gf

[Anonymous No.16186890]

>>16185469
There is no junk DNA. We got no git for DNA, so disabled code gets commented out just in case it will be necessary in the future.