Biology's next revolution
mergin genes, dna, data analysis and modern IT
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v445/n7126/full/445369a.html
where I started out in the 1985ish study years transforming from a genetics freak to IT - out of necessity not by plan or purpose - I find stuff we thought/ prototyped or used back then more often in art (cellular automata, dot plots, structural analysis) and at the center of scientific interest again.
that dna is data storage is not a big surprise, the interesting part is the encoding which is by for more challenging than a simple 4 letter chain would suggest.
the biology I learned - and some of my teachers will cringe or would if still around - was more of the nature philosophy variety and not so much hard core natural science (compared i.e. to physics) - no I did not study in the 1880ies :)
of course physics and chemistry where part of biologies tools. statistics - as is in right tool for problem at hand - was not and computers where either mainframes or abused as typewriters - and not many at that.
genetics was a different beast all together. firmly in hand of theorists or experimentalists one could choose ... easy if you are lazy and hate labs like me. dot plots, 2d, 2.5d and 3d structures generated by ever more sophisticated theories - all wrong viewed from 20 years later. but we saw the necessity to use the latest and greatest in computing, write programs, learn the 'other' side and basically merge the disciplines. both benefit, nobody looses out - except the formal academic career, that does not fit into this pictures or vice versa.
for the last couple of years this bio-informatics became mainstream ... again I was ahead of times, but at least I have fond memories, lots of contacts and still can comment on current 'revolutionary' books/ theories.
where I started out in the 1985ish study years transforming from a genetics freak to IT - out of necessity not by plan or purpose - I find stuff we thought/ prototyped or used back then more often in art (cellular automata, dot plots, structural analysis) and at the center of scientific interest again.
that dna is data storage is not a big surprise, the interesting part is the encoding which is by for more challenging than a simple 4 letter chain would suggest.
the biology I learned - and some of my teachers will cringe or would if still around - was more of the nature philosophy variety and not so much hard core natural science (compared i.e. to physics) - no I did not study in the 1880ies :)
of course physics and chemistry where part of biologies tools. statistics - as is in right tool for problem at hand - was not and computers where either mainframes or abused as typewriters - and not many at that.
genetics was a different beast all together. firmly in hand of theorists or experimentalists one could choose ... easy if you are lazy and hate labs like me. dot plots, 2d, 2.5d and 3d structures generated by ever more sophisticated theories - all wrong viewed from 20 years later. but we saw the necessity to use the latest and greatest in computing, write programs, learn the 'other' side and basically merge the disciplines. both benefit, nobody looses out - except the formal academic career, that does not fit into this pictures or vice versa.
for the last couple of years this bio-informatics became mainstream ... again I was ahead of times, but at least I have fond memories, lots of contacts and still can comment on current 'revolutionary' books/ theories.