Quote:
Originally Posted by duga
This is perfect. This would probably be the end all for the species debate, but as you said, we simply lack the tools to sequence whole genomes as rapidly as would be needed for this level of bioinformatics. We are getting close, though! We have several organisms sequences (including humans, obviously) and can now use those existing genome sequences to "map" another individual's genome to determine if they have certain genetic disorders or predispositions to one. This level of computation was unheard of and unthinkable even 15 years ago...10 more years and I'm sure we will be at the level needed for mass genome sequencing.
|
I agree. I keep feeling there's a huge snag somewhere, but all I can see at the moment are problems that look/sound like they can be overcome, but that's no different from and perhaps even slightly better than for the other species definitions.
Comparing whole genomes would need some smart algorithms and so on so you'd need some clever programmers and mathematicians. However, even if there's a problem with an algorithm used to define species, at least you can just improve the algorithm and run it again. Although one should definetly try and find one best way to do it, you could easily define species in a number of different ways with something like this. For example, one could use different algorithms or perhaps restrict analysis to only certain bits of DNA (f.ex mitochondrial DNA) and so on.