ABOUT COSMIC LOG

Quantum fluctuations in space, science, exploration and other cosmic fields... served up regularly by MSNBC.com science editor Alan Boyle since 2002.

Alan Boyle covers the physical sciences, anthropology, technological innovation and space science and exploration for MSNBC.com. He is a winner of the AAAS Science Journalism Award, the NASW Science-in-Society Award and other honors; a contributor to "A Field Guide for Science Writers"; and a member of the board of the Council for the Advancement of Science Writing.

Check out Boyle's biography or send a message to Cosmic Log via cosmiclog@msnbc.com.



Let a thousand genomes bloom

Posted: Tuesday, January 22, 2008 9:18 AM by Alan Boyle

Genetic researchers in China, Britain and the United States are teaming up to unravel the full genetic code of at least 1,000 people around the world - an unprecedented scientific project that could cost tens of millions of dollars and eventually reveal the roots of hundreds of diseases.

"The 1000 Genomes Project will examine the human genome at a level of detail that no one has done before," Richard Durbin of Britain's Wellcome Trust Sanger Institute, who is the project consortium's co chair, said in today's announcement. "Such a project would have been unthinkable two years ago. Today, thanks to amazing strides in sequencing technology, bioinformatics and population genomics, it is now within our grasp."

The project will build on the foundation created for HapMap, a similarly international gene-decoding effort. HapMap charted genetic differences between various geographical populations by looking at variations in "letters" of genetic code, known as single nucleotide polymorphism or SNPs. This time, researchers will analyze the full volume of human genetic information - which runs to a length of 3 billion letters, or roughly the entire English-language content of Wikipedia.

Using HapMap and other genetic databases, researchers already have identified about 100 regions of the genome that are associated with increased risk for diseases ranging from cancer and diabetes to cystic fibrosis and Huntington's disease. But in order to track down exactly what goes wrong and how to fix it, researchers generally have to go through another circuitous round of genetic sequencing.

Taking the shortcut
The 1000 Genomes Project is aimed at providing a shortcut: The organizers of the effort figure that by mapping at least 1,000 full human genomes, they should be able to catalog the variants that appear in 1 percent or more of the global population across most of the genome. Within specific genes, the precision should be even better, catching variations down to the 0.5 percent level.

That would improve the sensitivity of disease discovery efforts by a factor of five for the full genome, and by a factor of 10 or more within gene regions, said Francis Collins, who headed the Human Genome Project and is now director of the federally funded National Human Genome Research Institute.

Once the project's database is filled out, researchers could use genome-wide association studies to narrow down an area that appeared to be associated with a disease. Then they could consult the catalog for the assorted variations within that region. Finally, they could run studies to figure out whether - and exactly how - particular variations contribute to the disease in question.

The data will be made freely available to researchers around the world, starting in 2011 or so, via the National Center for Biotechnology Information, the European Bioinformatics Institute and the Beijing Genomics Institute in Shenzhen.

Who's involved?
The first samples for the 1000 Genomes Project will be coming from specimens already collected for the HapMap project and the extended HapMap set. The DNA is not linked to personal medical data, but rather to ethnic/geographical populations: Yoruba in Nigeria, Japanese in Tokyo, Chinese in Beijing, Utah residents with northern European ancestry, Luhya and Maasai in Kenya, Toscani in Italy, Gujarat Indians in Houston, Chinese in metropolitan Denver, Mexican-Americans in Los Angeles and African-Americans in the Southwest.

The project is getting major support from the institutes headed by Durbin and Collins, as well as from the Beijing Genomics Institute. A variety of American institutes and universities will be working through the National Human Genome Research Institute's Large-Scale Sequencing Network - and more institutions may join the international consortium as time goes on.

Based on current rates, the cost of sequencing so many genomes would amount to at least $350 million, and perhaps more than $500 million. Earlier this month, Massachusetts-based Knome and the Beijing Genetics Institute announced that they were pairing up to do whole-genome sequencing for 20 people, with a price tag starting at $350,000 per genome. (You think that's expensive? BGI did the first Chinese personal genome last year for $1.3 million.)

Over the next three years, the 1000 Genomes Project is aiming to bring the cost down to a tenth of the current rate - for a total cost of between $30 million and $50 million - by employing new sequencing technologies with greater efficiency.

The road ahead
The first year of the international effort will be taken up with pilot projects, aimed at finding out which combination of low-resolution and high-resolution sequencing will work the best. Then, during the scheduled two-year production phase, researchers hope to churn out an average of 8.2 billion DNA bases per day - the equivalent of more than two full human genomes every 24 hours.

"When up and running at full speed, this project will generate more sequence in two days than was added to public databases for all of the past year," the University of Oxford's Gil McVean, one of the co-chairs of the consortium's analysis group, said in today's announcement.

Will the project hasten the day when your genome is an open book, revealing your predisposition to suffer deadly diseases - and perhaps to do dastardly deeds? The project's organizers say that they're deploying a phalanx of ethicists to guard against abuses, and that the privacy of genetic donors will be preserved. What do you think? Learn more about the project from the 1000 Genomes Web site, as well as this advance report from Nature, then weigh in with your comments below.

Update for 10:50 a.m ET: Nature's follow-up report says some scientists fear the project's goals are too ambitious for its budget and timeline. The report also quotes Knome's George Church as saying the project might not be ambitious enough, because the database won't link genetic variants directly with disease data. The project organizers held back from doing that due to privacy concerns - and also because they felt the medical applications were best left to follow-up studies. More food for thought...

MAIN PAGE

Email this EMAIL THIS

Comments

It is very interesting. I would like to hear more about this reaserch

It would be nice to believe that when genome detailing for medical reasons is routine, that information will be tightly guarded.  But like identity theft, it might be tempting for some to try to obtain those details for illegal purposes.  Insurance companies in particular would find it "useful" to know which of their customers have genetic markers for future diseases and which customers do not.  And there are other concerns about genome details being made public- for example, if cancer or some other serious disease is in your future, how might a potential employer take that news?  What about a potential spouse?  How difficult would it be to get a mortgage or a business loan?  Even the psychological impact of knowing some serious medical problem is in the cards would have to be addressed.

Genome detailing could be a great diagnostic tool, but until there are ways to *correct* any defects found- a much more difficult task that’s still far in the future- then knowing what your medical future holds might help you prepare for the inevitable if the news is bad, but having to live with that news might not be worth it if what’s to happen can’t be prevented or cured.  
I can think of a few reasons why this shouldn't be done, then again, there are many reasons why it should.  On reason would be curing too many people will lead to a severe over-population of the world.  Not somewhere I would want to live.
As someone who is actively doing bioinformatics research, there seems to be one very large misconception that the public has of genomics, that a sequenced genome does not imply that we know what everything does.

Simply put a sequenced genome is just a huge collection of A's C's T's and G's.  Genomes arn't helpfully annotated by nature to let us know what everything does, that's the truly hard part of genetic research. Genetics isn't so nice as to be straight forward when it comes to correlating data, infact there are usually dozens of interrelated variables contributing to gene expression.  This means that while you may have the gene for a greater risk for heart deseise you may also have transcription factors that prevent it from ever coming into play, or annother gene that negates it's effects etc etc.  Only the most grand scale genetic disorders such as down syndrome are straightforward to detect.  The more data that we get, however, the easier it is to make correlations and deduce functions of sections of the genomes but it still takes far more time than just the sequencing itself.

Still, bravo to this new initiative, the more data we can bank the better.  As this data hits the public domain there will be researchers annotating and studying this data for the next few decades.  
It seems that knowing the human genome is as informative
as knowing what the score of a football game will be
without knowing the teams opponents.
This project could be done much quicker if is utilized available computers around the world similar to a project at SETI@home. As it progresses and major areas of interest are disclosed, these areas could be farmed out separately to speed overall efficiency.
Detailing is just the first step. Then comes understanding, followed by altering. Genetic cancer risk? Rewrite the code! Just like a computer program, you can eliminate the bugs. Maybe even enhance or add new "features". Exciting and terrifying all at once!

What worries me besides the potential breach of confidential genome information is the gap that might exist between the time we finally understand what each gene does and our ability to alter or repair faulty genes to prevent diseases.  While we're moving forward at a rapid pace to detail the genome- and yes, it's going to take years to understand what each gene does- we have few ideas how to change or modify our genes. Some of the experiments involving viruses designed to introduce "corrections" have not gone well, and the whole field of gene modification is still in its infancy.  Not so with genome detailing, which is roaring full speed ahead.  The time might come when we can point to a certain sequence of genes in a person's code and know it spells medical trouble in the future for that person, but have no means to prevent that trouble from occurring.  In other words, for more than a few people there could be a death sentence staring them in the face when their genome is read, and the question becomes whether you would even want to know what nature has in store for you if nothing can be about it or if ignorance (in this case) is indeed bliss.

By no means should this conundrum stop or even slow down our efforts to detail the genome, but the wisdom of someday reading everyone's genome as some sort of routine "screening" tool is questionable if there aren't methods in place to fix what we find broken.

As for myself, I think I would like to know if I'll develop Alzheimer’s someday or some other incurable genetic disease- just as long as I knew for certain no one else could "discover" that news.  Not everyone, I’m aware, would like to know something like that- and that should be their right.
I want my genes all mapped out and posted on the internet.  I want lots of clones... (-:
As Mr. Spock would say "INTERESTING".
This has to be done.  We've been manipulating genes ever since our ancient ancestors picked the largest grains, sweetest fruits, most plentiful pulses and planted their seeds to yield better food or how humans genetically weeded out all the poisonous almond trees and started planting and eating the ones that didn't yield poison.  The same can be said by the domestication of cows, pigs, chickens, horses to best suit our needs.  Now we're drawing a picture with much much more clarity...let's just hope the bible thumpers don't obscure our vision.
Actually Spock would say, "Fascinating" and it is.  I feel sorry for the person above who doesn't want to cure too many people for fear of over population, maybe those people who live will be a bit more productive than they are.


SEND A COMMENT

PLEASE READ: All comments must be approved before appearing in the thread; time and space constraints prevent all comments from appearing. We will only approve comments that are directly related to the blog, use appropriate language and are not attacking the comments of others.

Message (please, no HTML tags. Web addresses will be hyperlinked):

TRACKBACKS

Trackbacks are links to weblogs that reference this post. Like comments, trackbacks do not appear until approved by us. The trackback URL for this post is: http://cosmiclog.msnbc.msn.com/trackback.aspx?PostID=596585

Latest Tech & Science News

Syndicate This Site

Add Cosmic Log to your news reader:
live.com xml
myyahoo msn
bloglines newsgator
google