Whoa, I sort of understood something...

After getting a presentation by Todd Vision on Trait Mapping, he suggested that we check out a report in Science ("Genomic Footprints of a Cryptic Plastid Endosymbiosis in Diatoms", Ahmed Moustafa, et al., 324, 26 June 2009). Since I saw a post about "how to learn about everything" I've become a little more open to just diving in and attempting to read papers. I thought this was probably a good candidate.

The most interesting thing to me was seeing how the authors structured their arguments using two fully mapped genome (one from green algae and the other a red algae) to build gene trees and pulled out several hypothesis from the results. From my twisted computer-influence mind, it was like they were decompiling the Diatom and attempting to build possible explanations for what they were seeing in the current genetic code. I have been thinking about DNA analysis as working backwards from executable code for a while (probably since I ran along this blunt viewpoint).

I still do not fully understand why the Endosymbiosis Gene Transfer (EGT) events were more likely than a missing common ancestor. They made a great argument to why that was quite unlikely, but I did not follow (I really am lacking in my science background). But Lateral Gene Transfer (LGT) events are new to me - I did not realize that happened. I do remember one late evening in Durham hanging out with folks working on AFTOL (Assembling the Fungal Tree of Life) at Duke. They asked what tools were used on BTOL (assembling the Beetle Tree of Life), and commented that we did not have to deal with host/parasite detection (since having a beetle living inside another beetle was quite unlikely, but the fungi inside of fungi does happen). It was then that I realized that fungi and plants were a far more complex area (and it did not dawn on me then that this might result in host & parasite swapping genes).

I think Tal Dagan and William Martin's discussion ("Seeing Green and Red in Diatom Genomes", Science, 324, 26 June 2009) helped me realize the importance of Moustafa, et al.'s report. I did not realize after reading Moustafa, et al. that the plastid of a red algae EGT event had completely replaced what they believe was a plastid supplied by the early green aglae EGT event they argue explains the current Diatoms make-up. But both articles made it clear that 16% of the Diatoms genes coming from green algae was unusual.

Having become somewhat comfortable with simple phylogeny concepts and terms, delving into these two articles was a bit of an adventure. I remember tuning out in Biology class (I thought the Latin names for organisms showed how unlikely it was that I'd need to know the material - after all, I was Catholic and the church realized that Latin was silly and mass was no longer in Latin...so what was up with Vombatidae?!?! Or Canis Lupus?!?!). Phylum, Kingdom, huh? I never expected to end up using the information from Biology class. I was naturally interested in Science from an aerospace perspective, being the son of an engineer working for a commercial aviation company. I loved airplanes and NASA stuff. It seems it is never too late to get back into biology and science.