This site may earn affiliate commissions from the links on this page. Terms of use.

Sequencing DNA is very, very simple: there's a molecule, you look at information technology, you write downward what you lot find. You'd call up information technology would exist piece of cake — and it is. The problem isn't looking in and checking the chemical identity of each link in the concatenation of a molecule of DNA, it's checking those identities tens of millions of times while making essentially no mistakes. That is what's hard, but the nature of DNA is such that if you lot've only got 95% of the correct sequence, you might as well have goose egg at all. And then how do scientists actually read the blueprints of biology, and with them build a huge proportion of mod medicine and biotechnology?

It all started, more or less, with a guy named Frederick Sanger. Sanger created an ingenious method of reading a Dna molecule, which involved using a specialized version of DNA bases called dDNA, or di-deoxy-ribonucleic acid. The 'di' refers to the fact that dDNA bases are without both of the -OH groups found on RNA bases, while normal deoxy-ribonucleic acid (Deoxyribonucleic acid) still take one. In normal Dna bases, this unmarried -OH group acts as the attachment point for the adjacent link in the chain of a DNA molecule. Without i of its own, dDNA bases tin can't course DNA'southward feature chains, so they end whatever chain-growth process when they're incorporated into a growing DNA strand. Sanger realized he could exploit this tendency of dDNA bases to stall any chain-elongation process to see the sequence of the chain itself.

The speed of DNA sequencing has been increasing exponentially, but can that trend continue?

The speed of Deoxyribonucleic acid sequencing has been increasing exponentially, merely can that tendency continue?

Allow's practice a quick thought experiment: Let's say I have a 4-base Deoxyribonucleic acid molecule with the sequence ATGC, though I don't know that sequence and I'd similar to. I know that Deoxyribonucleic acid can be made to replicate itself fairly easily; just heat information technology to the point that the double helix "melts" into two divide strands in the presence of enzymes that snap free-floating DNA bases onto them, and you'll eventually end up with 2 separate double helices where you lot originally had one. Simply what if the free-floating bases being snapped onto these single strands are a mix of regular Dna bases and "terminal" dDNA bases?

Well, in that example we'd get a mixture of products, depending on where in the growing chains our fluorescently-labelled terminal dDNA bases ended up being inserted. For our ATGC molecule, some of the replicated strands would be full length and unlabelled — no dDNA base happened to get inserted at all. But we'd also stop up with some i-base of operations strands catastrophe in the dDNA base C — only a unmarried A-C base pair. More than helpfully, we'd also get a mixture of two-base strands ending in a labelled G, iii-base strands catastrophe in a labelled T, and four-base of operations strands ending in a labelled A. This gives usa a sequence read of CGTA, significant the original complementary sequence was ATGC.

However, fifty-fifty automating this procedure remained far too slow to allow the sort of population scale meta-analysis modern medicine and genomics were requiring. That's where so-called "massively parallel sequencing" came in, sometimes colloquially referred to every bit shotgun sequencing. This basically refers to the thought that if you break a long sequence of DNA up into smaller fragments, you can simultaneously read them all. You accept to read many, many copies of your overall sample, since you have to have that fragmented data and run a puzzle-like algorithm to figure out how they went together in the first place.

Selexa sequencing, simplified.

Selexa sequencing, simplified.

The most popular of these shotgun methods was probably Solexa, which saw Deoxyribonucleic acid broken upwards and adhered to a glass plate. The process uses reversibly terminal bases — bases that will stall the chain-growth procedure for a while, until the scientists choose to unblock them and allow the next link to exist added. The strict add together-read-unblock bicycle lets scientists accept a snapshot of many millions of fragments, reading the base at the end of each one before allowing the addition of another temporarily concluding base and taking a new snapshot.

Massively parallel sequencing changed the game for genomics researchers, but it'south the step afterwards even these techniques that could revolutionize public health by making enormous sequencing speed much more than affordable and practical. There are several competing bids to do this, merely they all attempt to remove the DNA replication procedure birthday — then-called "direct" reading of a Dna molecule without the need for messy, demanding, time-consuming reactions of Dna with enzymes.

MinION USB stick DNA sequencer

Side by side-gen Dna sequencers are more than just fast — they're practical.

The most successful of these early technologies is nanopore sequencing. This method actually feeds a strand of DNA through a pore in a conductive material. As the bases move through this nanopore, their slightly unlike sizes stretch the pore a characteristic amount — and that alter in mechanical stress on the pore translates to a change in electric conductivity. By reading the changes in conductivity as a strand of DNA is fed through a nanopore, these sequencers can do away with the replication reactions of onetime.

That will exist of import, as more than and more DNA technologies are invented that could help aid workers in inhospitable environments, or just millions of family doctors effectually the world who can't afford to run a Solexa experiment every 24-hour interval or then. Improving sequencing tech volition open a few new inquiry doors, only for well-funded labs the limits on sequencing are already astronomically loftier. At this indicate, the import of newer, better sequencing tech is in the ability to democratize probably the nigh emergent branch of the concrete sciences, right now. Sequencing breakthroughs may allow new scientific insights, merely more than likely they'll allow real-world awarding of insights nosotros've had for a while.

All those articles y'all've read most the potential of personalized medicine? These sorts of sequencing breakthroughs will demand to proceed, to make them a reality. Just unlike the graphenes and the superconductors of the globe, sequencing tech virtually undeniably will get there, and non slowly. So, the question now becomes not, "How do we sequence more Deoxyribonucleic acid?" merely rather, "What can we exercise with those sequences, in one case nosotros've put them in equally many hands as possible?"

Check out our ExtremeTech Explains series for more in-depth coverage of today's hottest tech topics.