Genetics

Henrietta lives on: Genetics v. genomics with Avera Health – KELOLAND.com

Posted: Sep 17, 2020 / 04:33 PM CDT / Updated: Sep 17, 2020 / 04:33 PM CDT

If youve been reading along with our KELOLAND Living Book Club pick this month, The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks, youve found yourself thrust into a fascinating science biography and the sometimes confusing world of medical research and biomedical ethics. I know it certainly got me thinking alot about how a devoted Black mother of 5 unknowingly cointributed to historic discoveries in genetics, the treatment and prevention of disease and the unraveling of the human genome.

And that got me wondering about the differences between Genetics and Genomics. The terms sound alike, and people often use them interchangably. Yet, there are some important distinctions between the two and understanding those differences may help you make some important decisions about your health.

Dr. Casey Williams, the Chief Scientific Officer and Exective Director of Cancer Research at Avera Health, joined us to talk about the difference between genetics and genomics and the future of genomic medicine.

Understanding more about diseases which are caused by a single gene using genetics and complex diseases caused by multiple genes and environmental factors using genomics can lead to earlier diagnoses, interventions, and targeted treatments for illnesses such as cancer. You can call the Avera Cancer Institute toll-free. 24/7 with your cancer-related questions or concerns by call 888-422-1410. You can also find information online at avera.org/cancer-care.

Are you reading our KELOLAND Living Book Club picks along with us? Make sure to head over to KELOLAND Living Ashley Thompsons Facebook page to join in on book club conversations. You can find her at @KELOAshley.

Read the original here:
Henrietta lives on: Genetics v. genomics with Avera Health - KELOLAND.com

Genetics

Genetics Affect Intelligence: Confronting the Consequences, from the Left – National Review

A constructor works on a bomb at an unknown location in the then USSR, 1961.(Rosatom/Reuters)The Cult of Smart: How Our Broken Education System Perpetuates Social Injustice, by Fredrik deBoer (All Points Books, 276 pp., $28.99)

Some people are naturally smarter than others. Most of us know this intuitively, and reams of scientific evidence prove it, but few are willing to talk about it openly.

This taboo, contends the academic and Marxist essayist Fredrik deBoer in The Cult of Smart, distorts our educational practices, our ideals of meritocracy, and our public policy.

The Cult of Smart will be a success if it forces the Left to confront the findings of modern genetics. Over here on the other side of the aisle, though, it feels as if Charles Murrays 2008 book Real Education has been rewritten from a different angle, with a series of half-baked left-wing policy proposals tacked on at the end. Its not a bad read by any stretch, but its not too satisfying either.

Many who study American education find themselves distressed by gaps among groups black vs. white, rich vs. poor, and so on. DeBoer, by contrast, finds himself focused on gaps within groups. As the recent college-admissions scandal showed, even wealthy kids with every resource at their disposal sometimes cant hack it in high school and need their parents to bribe them into a decent university. As an educator himself, deBoer has seen that within any school, no matter how demographically homogeneous, theres a wide variety of student ability. Even when everyone has equal opportunities, there will be unequal results.

Why is that? Is it purely that the kids who earn straight As try harder? Well, no; a lot of it is genes. For decades, researchers have been looking at various types of siblings identical and fraternal twins, adoptive siblings, etc. and showing that people tend to be more academically and intellectually similar to each other the more genes they share. Sharing a home, which normally means sharing the same schools too, has a far smaller effect. Newer research has even begun to locate the specific genes at work. These basic findings are not sc

To be clear, deBoer does not argue that all differences in educational performance are genetic. He specifically rejects the idea that racial gaps have a genetic component, for example. What he does say is that there are profound differences in academic ability from person to person, and that our society has not bothered to grapple with the consequences of that fact.

This is most clear in education, where deBoer has spent much of his professional life: Hes taught students from kindergarten through graduate school, black and Hispanic and Asian and white students, men and women, boys and girls, and classes as small as eight students in intimate conversation groups and as large as dozens in large lecture halls; hes worked in a high-minority and largely poor public school district and tutored the sons and daughters of the immensely wealthy. In his experience, school hallways are plastered with inspirational posters telling kids they can do anything they want if they just try hard enough. Educators are urged to enforce strict graduation requirements and to increase graduation rates simultaneously, which is a problem if many kids are incapable of meeting strict criteria. (Algebra requirements in particular tend to trip kids up.) Education reformers expect teachers to get all kids up to grade level or proficiency. Teachers and schools are blamed or praised based on the test scores of their students, even though the scores are far more a function of the abilities and backgrounds of the kids than they are of the educators skills.

Meanwhile, our broader culture has fallen victim to a cult of smart in which academic achievement is equated with merit and equality of opportunity is seen as the key goal, with little attention paid to the fact that such a system largely rewards those who have hit the genetic lottery while justifying the poverty of those who havent. An obsession with academic meritocracy also puts enormous pressure on higher-achieving kids to sacrifice everything to get into the best schools. To not go to college at all is seen as an incredible personal failure.

DeBoer is right about all of this, and these are the strongest parts of the book. But then he wraps up with two chapters that focus on improving public policy.

There are some good ideas here, especially in the first, Realistic Reforms. Education reformers should drop their push for higher standards for all students, instead giving schools more flexibility to accommodate kids of different ability levels. They should also end the college-for-all craze, both because not all students are cut out for college and because giving more people college degrees just waters down the value of the credential. Even in this chapter, however, deBoer pushes into some dubious territory: Lowering the legal dropout age to twelve, eliminating charter schools, and providing universal child care and after-school care strike me as much less realistic and much less desirable.

And in the next chapter, deBoer descends into a weird hodgepodge of ideas that dont have much to do with the rest of the book. He endorses the assorted aims of the modern Left, including Medicare for All, a universal basic income, free college, and student-debt forgiveness. There is a connection here to deBoers broader themes if the market is unfair to people who inherited weaker skills through no fault of their own, its not hard to make the case for some redistribution. (This is something even the libertarian Murray has conceded.) But the pros and cons of these specific policies are really outside the scope of this book, and as a result these sections feel like a digression.

From there, deBoer proposes a fantastical socialist utopia in which markets dont exist. To illustrate his goals, he writes that

to socialize housing means that the people would take community control of the housing stock themselves and distribute it based on need rather than on the profit motive. The goal is not to transform the distribution of power and wealth within an economy but to bring about the disintegration of the concept of an economy, to achieve a society governed by the dictates of human need rather than the dictates of the accumulation of wealth.

Didnt that go rather poorly in the USSR? I hear you asking. Well, actually, real communism hasnt been tried yet: Even Marx himself thought there would need to be a period of capitalist development before communism would be possible, and while humans werent rich enough to make that work in the Soviet era, now were able to forget about markets and just do whatever we feel like doing. Okay, maybe not whatever we want, because some people will still be naturally cut out for certain roles, and we as a society will have to carefully navigate the relationship between social need and ability. But whatever you do, dont worry about human nature getting in the way. Thats merely a construct whose boundaries are defined by whatever is convenient at the moment, and people will do all sorts of productive things even if they dont need to in order to earn money. Everyone has a niche to fill.

Earlier in the book, deBoer discusses research finding that a countrys economic development depends heavily on the intellectual achievements of the top 5 percent of the population. He should take more seriously the possibilities that those folks need market incentives to drive them to better performance, even if theyre taxed to help the less gifted and theyre regulated to rein in their worst instincts; that markets really are the best way of matching people with different talents to the roles theyre suited for; and that, to keep improving, humanity will always need capitalism, no matter how wealthy and technologically developed societies become.

But Im not going to convince him of that in a small fraction of a book review, just as he didnt convert me to Marxism in a small fraction of a book about a completely different topic.

This article appears as The Left Does Genetics in the October 5, 2020, print edition of National Review.

If you enjoyed this article, we have a proposition for you: Join NRPLUS. Members getallof our content (including the magazine), no paywalls or content meters, an advertising-minimal experience, and unique access to our writers and editors (conference calls, social-media groups, etc.). And importantly, NRPLUS members help keep NR going. Consider it?

If you enjoyed this article, and were stimulated by its contents, we have a proposition for you: Join NRPLUS.

See more here:
Genetics Affect Intelligence: Confronting the Consequences, from the Left - National Review

Genetics

In genetics, you shut things down to find out what they do. COVID-19 has done the same to us – National Post

Of course, there are sometimes slight differences, Ekker said. But very often its the same. Nature did not reinvent the wheel many times.

Zimmer builds zebrafish mutants, turning off their genes one by one, to study the uptake of salt in freshwater fish. Ekker has used them in his lab to isolate genes involved in childhood epilepsy and brain development. Others, all over the world, have used them to study everything from cell regeneration to cancer growth, drug toxicity and novel treatments for rare disease.

Nature did not reinvent the wheel many times

Zebrafish are whats known as a model species. Theyre one of four main models geneticists use to map out what role specific genes play in development.We just want to understand how you build an animal, said Norbert Perrimon, a professor of genetics at Harvard Medical School.

Most research labs tend to specialize in one species or another. Charles Boone, at the University of Toronto, is a yeast guy. Perrimon focuses on fruit flies. There are fish people. Theres the mouse community. But no matter the species, theyre all doing some variation on the same thing: knocking out genes to find out what they do.

Its a research principle called loss of function and it underpins almost everything we know about the working lives, mishaps and miracles of genes. In fact, if loss of function studies did not exist, I dont know what we would be left with, Perrimon said.

Its a simple idea at its core, if one that has had a massive impact on modern science. To find out what something does, you shut it off and see what happens. Thats what makes genetics the closest thing there is to a fairy tale science. Its all about imagining what life would be like if some tiny part of it were never there.

Follow this link:
In genetics, you shut things down to find out what they do. COVID-19 has done the same to us - National Post

Genetics

Does Genetic Diversity Aid Starling Invasions Around The World? – Forbes

Why are there more than 200 million European starlings in North America? And what can genetic diversity tell us about this avian invasion?

Adult common starling (Sturnus vulgaris) in fresh plumage. Credit: Tim Felce (Airwolfhound) / CC ... [+] BY-SA 2.0)

Variation is the engine of evolution, said evolutionary anthropologist and senior author of the study, Julia Zichello, an Assistant Professor of Biology at the College of Mount Saint Vincent and a Research Associate in the Division of Anthropology at the American Museum of Natural History (AMNH), in email. She and her collaborators recently published their research reporting on the genetic variation of European starlings, Sturnus vulgaris. Genetic variationis an important force in evolution because it enables some individuals to adapt to the local environment whilst maintaining the survival of the population.

Professor Zichello initially began her scientific career by studying human genetic diversity, so why is an anthropologist studying birds?

I was staring out the window of the Education Lab for Human Origins and Comparative Genomics at AMNH and I noticed these pretty black birds all over the lawn, Professor Zichello recalled in email. Once I learned the story of their arrival to NYC and subsequent expansion, I immediately wondered how genetically homogenous they were.

An adult European starling (Sturnus vulgaris) shows off his iridescent feathers. (Credit: Deepak ... [+] Sundar / CC BY-SA 4.0)

Modern humans and European starlings are more alike than you might realize. It is well-known that, despite our current massive population size, modern humans and Neanderthals have less genetic diversity than living great apes.This is because we experienced a historic decline in population size, followed by a recent and dramatic population explosion in modern humans. This situation is similar to what European starlings are now experiencing as the result of being introduced all around the world.

European starlings were brought to North America by Eugene Schieffelin, a wealthy New York drug manufacturer with a truly peculiar hobby: introducing non-native bird species into Central Park for reasons that may never be understood. (Although it is a very popular and oft-repeated myth, there is absolutely no historic evidence to suggest that a passion for the birds mentioned in Shakespeares works played any role in Mr Schieffelins puzzling act.)

Mr Schieffelin ended up releasing a total of 100 European starlings, imported from the United Kingdom, into Central Park over a period of two years, first in 1890 and again in 1891 (p. 164).

Inexplicably, other men around the world shared Mr Schieffelins bizarre obsession, but fortunately, not all introductions of European birds were successful. For example, introductions of skylarks, song thrushes, and bullfinches all failed, and even an attempt to introduce starlings into the United States 15 years earlier fizzled, too.

Although starlings were the only species that Mr Schieffelin introduced to North America, this small founding population gave rise to an astounding avian legacy that expanded like wildfire from the east to the west coasts, and raced up to Alaska and down into Mexico in just 130 years. Currently, it is estimated that the North American starling population exceeds 200 million individuals, representing more than one-third of the global population of this species.

But weirdly, considering the many onerous geological barriers that European starlings have circumvented and the many different habitats they have colonized across North America, its quite surprising how little scientific attention theyve attracted.

I was astonished to learn that no recent studies had been done looking at their genetic diversity in the United States, despite their invasion history, massive population size and the conservation threat they pose, Professor Zichello said in email. Professor Zichellos expertise combines the study of population genetics with skeletal anatomy to understand how variation evolves within species. The central question that drives her research is: Why are some species more variable than others?

To examine starling genetic diversity, Professor Zichello collaborated with the lead author of this study, evolutionary biologist Louise Hart Bodt, whom she supervised whilst Ms Bodt pursued her Masters Degree at New York University. Lee Ann Rollins was the third collaborator on this team. As a Scientia Associate Professor at the University of New South Wales, Sydney, Professor Rollins expertise lies in investigating the molecular mechanisms that underly the rapid evolution often seen in invasive populations, like starlings, and figuring out how to use that information to improve management ofboth invasive and endangered species in Australia.

Like the United States, Australia also has problems with invasive species, including those posed by a number of introductions of European starlings that occurred in the mid-19th century in a misguided attempt to control agricultural pests (for a total of approximately 165 individuals). In contrast to Australia, there was one just one! introduction of European starlings into South Africa in the late 19th century (numbering just 18 individuals!). This South African introduction in particular provides a powerful comparison to the North America introduction because both occurred at almost the same time (1897 and 1890, respectively).

All of these founding populations were small, which created genetic bottlenecks and decreased genetic variability in the introduced starling populations from that seen in starlings still living in their native lands in the UK and western Europe. And yet, despite a sharp reduction in genetic diversity in the introduced starlings, these avian invaders adapted extremely well especially in North Americas temperate climate (Figure 1).

F I G U R E 1 Map of worldwide distribution of starlings. Green = year-round resident, yellow = ... [+] summer resident, blue = winter resident. (Source: Wikimedia commons https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:European_Starling_Range.png#file, generated from eBird Basic Dataset 2015)

When they started this study, Ms Bodt and Professor Zichello predicted that mitochondrial DNA diversity in North American starlings would be lower than in Australian starlings because there were more successful introductions of a larger number of birds in Australia. The researchers also predicted similar levels of genetic diversity in South African and North American starlings, due to similarities in the timing of introductions.

To conduct this study, Ms Bodt collected DNA from 95 tissue samples obtained from starlings culled by the United States Department of Agriculture Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (USDA APHIS) between 2014 and 2018 at 14 locations across the United States. Ms Bodt compared the mitochondrial genetic sequence data from European starlings living in the United Kingdom with that from the three established starling invasions in South Africa, Australia and the United States.

F I G U R E 2 Venn diagram showing the number of haplotypes and the haplotype diversity for the ... [+] native-range population and the three invasive populations (North America, Australia, South Africa). The total number of unique haplotypes and haplotype diversity values are listed under the name of each locality. Shared haplotypes are listed by name within each intersection. (doi:10.1002/ece3.6679)

As predicted, invasive starling populations had lower genetic diversity than those birds living in the UK (Figure 2). Surprisingly, Australias starlings had the lowest genetic diversity, despite descending from the largest number of founders (appx 165), whilst the North American starlings had the highest genetic diversity, even though they descended from an intermediate number of founders (100). Why? Were the Australian founders less genetically diverse to begin with, or was there differential survival amongst their offspring depending upon their genetics? Did the generally extreme climactic conditions in Australia reduce the overall gene pool? Is this the reason that starlings have still not colonized the arid center of the Australian continent, where the highest temperatures and lowest rainfall occur?

Ms Bodt also found that the South African starlings were genetically distinct from the Australian and North American populations, suggesting that South Africas founders were sourced from a different region of the UK than were those that were introduced into Australia and North America. Additionally, although North American and Australian starling populations are genetically similar, they only shared a single DNA marker (H_25; Figure 2), suggesting that the founders of these populations may have been sourced from the same region of the UK, but were probably genetically distinct.

As expected, the UK starlings DNA was the most diverse but oddly, lacked many of the DNA markers found in the invasive starling populations. Is this because scientists havent documented very much of the UK starlings population genetics? This finding certainly highlights the surprising lack of information about European starlings still living in their native range, and makes it difficult to localize where the founders of the three invasive populations originated.

Ms Bodt also analyzed the mitochondrial control region sequence data to identify whether there was any population structure amongst the three invasive starling populations, which would indicate the presence of smaller, locally adapted and reproductively isolated populations. She found that European starlings in Australia did show some population structure, confirming previous DNA (ref & ref) and ecological studies (ref & ref) that revealed some evidence that smaller sub-populations of starlings were adapting to the local Australian environment (ref). But the team did not find any evidence of population structure in either South African nor in North American starlings. In North America, at least, this may be due to starlings high dispersal rates combined with their chaotic and unpredictable dispersal patterns.

How do these findings in European starlings compare to what we know so far about another invasive bird that was widely introduced, the house sparrow, Passer domesticus, that also originated in the UK?

House sparrows were introduced to North America about 40 years earlier (in the 1850-60s) while thestarlingswere introduced in the 1890s, Ms Bodt replied in email. And maybe not so surprisingly, they have been introduced to all of the same places (to name a few; Australia, New Zealand, North America, South Africa) so the parallels in terms of their introduction history would make them a good comparison.

A flock of house sparrows (Passer domesticus) in winter. (Credit: Andrey / CC BY 2.0)

Studies into house sparrows have shown that there is little population structure within the introduced populations, which is similar to what weve found in starlings (except on Australia), Ms Bodt elaborated in email. Studies have also shown that, similar tostarlings, some of the populations of house sparrows are still expanding. The work into house sparrows has shown that there is genetic differentiation between native and introduced populations, which is consistent to what weve detailed about starlings in our paper.

Although few individualstarlings were released into the United States, Australia and South Africa, they have been enormously successful despite their tiny gene pool. How do they manage this?

Its always surprising when something youve been taught as a central tenet of evolution (genetic diversity is necessary for survival and adaptation) is not a barrier for the success of an invasive species, Ms Bodt replied in email. There are also so many potential barriers to gene flow its surprising when you find that an area as large as the US/North America has little to no population structure despite the presence of mountains, rivers, lakes, etc.

What allows starlings to be so successful in North America, in particular, when they are declining throughout the UK?

Good question I think its hard to fully answer this question without some further work into the native-range population, Ms Bodt replied in email, noting that starlings invasiveness may result from one or more behavioral or ecological traits. It could it be their ecological flexibility; it could be that they are selectively migratory, or it could be linked to adaptations to environmental features.

Ms Bodt also mentioned that intensifying land use by people may be the reason for starlings decline throughout the UK.

Some have suggested that increasing farmland in the UK has negatively impacted their populations by eliminating trees and breeding areas, whereas in the US,starlingsexploit farmland food resources quite aggressively.

The overwhelming success of European starling invasions in foreign lands raises important conservation questions: how does a population respond to a geneticbottleneck? How can a small population expand rapidly into novel habitats when they dont have much genetic diversity to help them adapt? In short, what is it about European starlings that makes them such successful invaders?Can any of the lessons learned from European starlings be applied to conserve endangered species, to prevent them from slipping away into oblivion forever?

European starlings roost in a tree for the night. (Credit: John Beetham / CC BY NC SA 2.0)

Considering their extreme adaptability, these handsome little birds will be helping scientists understand the mechanics of evolution for many decades to come.

[T]here is so much more research to be done onstarlingsin the US and across the world, Professor Zichello agreed in email. They are a powerful system for studying evolution and adaptation, but also interesting from an ecological and conservation perspective. We all have many ideas for futurestarlingprojects. We dont have a shortage of birds, or ideas.

Louise Hart Bodt, Lee Ann Rollins and Julia M. Zichello (2020). Contrasting mitochondrial diversity of European starlings (Sturnus vulgaris) across three invasive continental distributions, Ecology and Evolution, published online on 28 August 2020 ahead of print | doi:10.1002/ece3.6679

See the article here:
Does Genetic Diversity Aid Starling Invasions Around The World? - Forbes

Genetics

Ancient DNA is revealing the genetic landscape of people who first settled East Asia – The Conversation US

The very first human beings originally emerged in Africa before spreading across Eurasia about 60,000 years ago. After that, the story of humankind heads down many different paths, some more well-studied than others.

Eastern regions of Eurasia are home to approximately 2.3 billion people today roughly 30% of the worlds population. Archaeologists know from fossils and artifacts that modern humans have occupied Southeast Asia for 60,000 years and East Asia for 40,000 years.

But theres a lot left to untangle. Who were the people who first came to these regions and eventually developed agriculture? Where did different populations come from? Which groups ended up predominant and which died out?

Ancient DNA is helping to answer some of these questions. By sequencing the genomes of people who lived many millennia ago, scientists like meare starting to fill in the picture of how Asia was populated.

In 2016, I joined Dr. Qiaomei Fus Molecular Paleontology Lab at the Institute of Vertebrate Paleontology and Paleoanthropology, Chinese Academy of Sciences in Beijing. Our challenge: Resolve the history of humans in East Asia, with the help of collaborators who were long dead ancient humans who lived up to tens of thousands of years ago in the region.

Members of the lab extracted and sequenced ancient DNA using human remains from archaeological sites. Then Dr. Fu and I used computational genomic tools to assess how their DNA related to that of previously sequenced ancient and present-day humans.

One of our sequences came from ancient DNA extracted from the leg bones of the Tianyuan Man, a 40,000-year-old individual discovered near a famous paleoanthropological site in western Beijing. One of the earliest modern humans found in East Asia, his genetic sequence marks him as an early ancestor of todays Asians and Native Americans. That he lived where Chinas current capital stands indicates that the ancestors of todays Asians began placing roots in East Asia as early as 40,000 years ago.

Farther south, two 8,000- to 4,000-year-old Southeast Asian hunter-gatherers from Laos and Malaysia associated with the Habnhian culture have DNA that, like the Tianyuan Man, shows theyre early ancestors of Asians and Native Americans. These two came from a completely different lineage than the Tianyuan Man, which suggested that many genetically distinct populations occupied Asia in the past.

But no humans today share the same genetic makeup as either Habnhians or the Tianyuan Man, in both East and Southeast Asia. Why did ancestries that persisted for so long vanish from the gene pool of people alive now? Ancient farmers carry the key to that answer.

Based on plant remains found at archaeological sites, scientists know that people domesticated millet in northern Chinas Yellow River region about 10,000 years ago. Around the same time, people in southern Chinas Yangtze River region domesticated rice.

Unlike in Europe, plant domestication began locally and was not introduced from elsewhere. The process took thousands of years, and societies in East Asia grew increasingly complex, with the rise of the first dynasties around 4,000 years ago.

Thats also when rice cultivation appears to have spread from its origins to areas farther south, including lands that are todays Southeast Asian countries. DNA helps tell the story. When rice farmers from southern China expanded southward, they introduced not only their farming technology but also their genetics to local populations of Southeast Asian hunter-gatherers.

The overpowering influx of their DNA ended up swamping the local gene pool. Today, little trace of hunter-gatherer ancestry remains in the genes of people who live in Southeast Asia.

Farther north, a similar story played out. Ancient Siberian hunter-gatherers show little relationship with East Asians today, but later Siberian farmers are closely related to todays East Asians. Farmers from northern China moved northward into Siberia bringing their DNA with them, leading to a sharp decrease in prevalence of the previous local hunter-gatherer ancestry.

Genetically speaking, todays East Asians are not very different from each other. A lot of DNA is needed to start genetically distinguishing between people with different cultural histories.

What surprised Dr. Fu and me was how different the DNA of various ancient populations were in China. We and others found shared DNA across the Yellow River region, a place important to the development of Chinese civilization. This shared DNA represents a northern East Asian ancestry, distinct from a southern East Asian ancestry we found in coastal southern China.

When we analyzed the DNA of people who lived in coastal southern China 9,000-8,500 years ago, we realized that already by then much of China shared a common heritage. Because their archaeology and morphology was different from that of the Yellow River farmers, we had thought these coastal people might come from a lineage not closely related to those first agricultural East Asians. Maybe this groups ancestry would be similar to the Tianyuan Man or Habnhians.

But instead, every person we sampled was closely related to present-day East Asians. That means that by 9,000 years ago, DNA common to all present-day East Asians was widespread across China.

Todays northern and southern Chinese populations share more in common with ancient Yellow River populations than with ancient coastal southern Chinese. Thus, early Yellow River farmers migrated both north and south, contributing to the gene pool of humans across East and Southeast Asia.

The coastal southern Chinese ancestry did not vanish, though. It persisted in small amounts and did increase in northern Chinas Yellow River region over time. The influence of ancient southern East Asians is low on the mainland, but they had a huge impact elsewhere. On islands spanning from the Taiwan Strait to Polynesia live the Austronesians, best known for their seafaring. They possess the highest amount of southern East Asian ancestry today, highlighting their ancestrys roots in coastal southern China.

Other emerging genetic patterns show connections between Tibetans and ancient individuals from Mongolia and northern China, raising questions about the peopling of the Tibetan Plateau.

Ancient DNA reveals rapid shifts in ancestry over the last 10,000 years across Asia, likely due to migration and cultural exchange. Until more ancient human DNA is retrieved, scientists can only speculate as to exactly who, genetically speaking, lived in East Asia prior to that.

[Understand new developments in science, health and technology, each week. Subscribe to The Conversations science newsletter.]

Read the original here:
Ancient DNA is revealing the genetic landscape of people who first settled East Asia - The Conversation US

Genetics

Cardiovascular Genetic Testing Market to Witness High Growth in Near Future and Competitive Analysis – The Daily Chronicle

Data Bridge Market Research has recently published the Global research Report Titled Cardiovascular Genetic Testing Market. The study provides an overview of current statistics and future predictions of the Global Cardiovascular Genetic Testing Market. The study highlights a detailed assessment of the Market and displays market sizing trends by revenue & volume (if applicable), current growth factors, expert opinions, facts, and industry validated market development data.

Cardiovascular genetic testing market is expected to gain market growth in the forecast period of 2020 to 2027. Data Bridge Market Research analyses the market to account to USD 4.01 billion by 2027 growing at a CAGR of 13.40% in the above-mentioned forecast period. An extensive array of employment of genetic experimentation in inherent disorders and oncology will prove advantageous for genetic testing business germination in the coming years.

FREE Sample Copy of Research Report Click Here: https://www.databridgemarketresearch.com/request-a-sample/?dbmr=global-cardiovascular-genetic-testing-market&utm_source=&kA

The Global Cardiovascular Genetic Testing Market research report assembles data collected from different regulatory organizations to assess the growth of the segments. In addition, the study also appraises the global Cardiovascular Genetic Testing market on the basis of topography. It reviews the macro- and microeconomic features influencing the growth of the Cardiovascular Genetic Testing Market in each region. Various methodological tools are used to analyze the growth of the worldwide Cardiovascular Genetic Testing market.

Top Key Vendors Covered in the report:

Siemens Healthcare GmbH, F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd, QIAGEN, Pathway Genomics, Pacific Biosciences of California, Inc, Natera, Inc., Myriad Genetics, Inc., ICON plc, Laboratory Corporation of America Luminex Corporation, IntegraGen., HTG Molecular Diagnostics, Inc. , Genomic Health, Inc., Admera Health, deCODE genetics among other domestic and global players.

Regions included:

North America (United States, Canada, and Mexico)

Europe (Germany, France, UK, Russia, and Italy)

Asia-Pacific (China, Japan, Korea, India, and Southeast Asia)

South America (Brazil, Argentina, Colombia)

The Middle East and Africa (Saudi Arabia, UAE, Egypt, Nigeria, and South Africa)

How Does This Market Insights Help?

Key Pointers Covered in the Cardiovascular Genetic Testing Market Industry Trends and Forecast to 2026

Why choose us:

A complete value chain of the global Cardiovascular Genetic Testing market is presented in the research report. It is associated with the review of the downstream and upstream components of the Cardiovascular Genetic Testing Market. The market is bifurcated on the basis of the categories of products and customer application segments. The market analysis demonstrates the expansion of each segment of the global Cardiovascular Genetic Testing market. The research report assists the user in taking a decisive step that will be a milestone in developing and expanding their businesses in the global Cardiovascular Genetic Testing market.

Get Table Of Contents of This Premium Research For Free: https://www.databridgemarketresearch.com/toc/?dbmr=global-cardiovascular-genetic-testing-market&utm_source=&KA

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Part 01:Executive Summary

Part 02:Scope of the Report

Part 03:Research Methodology

Part 04:Market Landscape

Part 05:Pipeline Analysis

Pipeline Analysis

Part 06:Market Sizing

Market Definition

Market Sizing

Market Size And Forecast

Part 07:Five Forces Analysis

Bargaining Power Of Buyers

Bargaining Power Of Suppliers

Threat Of New Entrants

Threat Of Substitutes

Threat Of Rivalry

Market Condition

Part 08:Market Segmentation

Segmentation

Comparison

Market Opportunity

Part 09:Customer Landscape

Part 10:Regional Landscape

Part 11:Decision Framework

Part 12:Drivers and Challenges

Market Drivers

Market Challenges

Part 13:Market Trends

Part 14:Vendor Landscape

Part 15:Vendor Analysis

Vendors Covered

Vendor Classification

Market Positioning Of Vendors

Part 16:Appendix

For More Information or Query or Customization Before Buying, Click Here: https://www.databridgemarketresearch.com/inquire-before-buying/?dbmr=global-cardiovascular-genetic-testing-market&utm_source=&KA

Customization of the Report

Data Bridge Market Research also provides customization options to tailor the reports as per client requirements. This report can be personalized to cater to your research needs. Feel free to get in touch with our sales team, who will ensure that you get a report as per your needs.

Thanks for reading this article you can also get individual chapter wise section or region wise report versions like North America, Europe, MEA, or Asia Pacific.

About Us:

Data Bridge Market Research set forth itself as an unconventional and neoteric Market research and consulting firm with an unparalleled level of resilience and integrated approaches. We are determined to unearth the best market opportunities and foster efficient information for your business to thrive in the market. Data Bridge Market Research provides appropriate solutions to complex business challenges and initiates an effortless decision-making process.

Data Bridge adepts in creating satisfied clients who reckon upon our services and rely on our hard work with certitude.We are content with our glorious 99.9 % client satisfying rates

Contact:

US: +1 888 387 2818

UK: +44 208 089 1725

Hong Kong: +852 8192 7475

[emailprotected]

Read more:
Cardiovascular Genetic Testing Market to Witness High Growth in Near Future and Competitive Analysis - The Daily Chronicle

Genetics

AKC Canine Health Foundation Publishes Whitepaper on the State of Genetic Testing in Dogs – PRNewswire

RALEIGH, N.C., Sept.15, 2020 /PRNewswire/ --The AKC Canine Health Foundation, a non-profit organization dedicated to advancing the health of all dogs and their owners, has published a review of the current state of genetic testing in dogs. This valuable resource is intended to help dog breeders, owners, and veterinarians make sound decisions with regard to interpreting and understanding the implications of genetic test results.

Creation of this resource was initiated by 2019 AKC Board Chairman, Bill Feeney, and funded by the AKC Canine Health Foundation (CHF) and the Orthopedic Foundation for Animals (OFA). It was completed by Dr. Liza Gershony, a 2019 CHF Clinician Scientist Fellow, and Dr. Anita Oberbauer, CHF-funded researcher and recipient of the 2019 Asa Mays, DVM, Excellence in Canine Health Research Award - both from the University of California, Davis. The whitepaper was introduced by Dr. Oberbauer at the September 2020 American Kennel Club Delegates' meeting and is available on the CHF website at akcchf.org/geneticswhitepaper2020.

"While scientific advances in the area of canine DNA testing are exciting, they have also led to a desperate need for continued education," says Eddie Dziuk, Chief Operating Officer of the Orthopedic Foundation for Animals and member of the AKC Delegates Canine Health Committee."Dog breeders, owners, and even veterinary professionals often struggle with questions such as test purpose, accuracy, breed specificity/appropriateness, and interpretation of results. The genetics whitepaper is a long awaited and needed resource to address today's most pressing questions and make better use of these powerful tools to breed healthier dogs."

"The AKC Canine Health Foundation and its donors hope that dog breeders and caregivers use this resource to make informed and thoughtful decisions regarding their breeding plans and disease prevention and treatment strategies for individual dogs," states Dr. Calvin Carpenter, CHF Executive Director. "Genetic testing is most impactful when properly used as one of many tools available to dog owners."

The genetics whitepaper provides a foundation in canine genetics valuable to anyone involved in the care of and decision making for individual dogs or breeding stock. Practical applications and limitations of existing genetic tests are reviewed for the lay audience. This resource is offered as a tool to help improve the health of current and future generations of dogs.

About CHFSince 1995, the AKC Canine Health Foundation has leveraged the power of science to address the health needs of all dogs. With more than $58 million in funding to date, the Foundation provides grants for the highest quality canine health research and shares information on the discoveries that help prevent, treat and cure canine diseases. The Foundation meets and exceeds industry standards for fiscal responsibility, as demonstrated by their highest four-star Charity Navigator rating and GuideStar Platinum Seal of Transparency. Learn more at http://www.akcchf.org.

SOURCE AKC Canine Health Foundation

http://www.akcchf.org

Follow this link:
AKC Canine Health Foundation Publishes Whitepaper on the State of Genetic Testing in Dogs - PRNewswire

Cell Biology

LabRoots Announces Speakers to Present Cutting-Edge Research Findings at its 4th Annual Cell Biology Virtual Conference – PR Web

Cell Biology Virtual Event, September 23, 2020

YORBA LINDA, Calif. (PRWEB) September 17, 2020

LabRoots, the leading scientific social networking website offering premier, interactive virtual events and webinars, will be hosting its Cell Biology Virtual Event, scheduled on September 23, 2020. This day-long forum marks the fourth annual event that will attract innovative researchers, top scientists, biologists, and leading academia and industry from across the globe.

Emphasizing the principals and fundamentals of biology, the one-day program features four sessions encompassing Organelle Dynamics, Cell Biology of Cancer, Extra Cellular Matrices, and Exosomes convening global leaders to present their latest progress in cell research. Discussions on transformative new technologies and applications in the field will be unveiled via over 15 scientific presentations on topics such as the role of Nox-derived Reactive Oxygen Species in Axonal Growth and Guidance, the journey into discovery oncology at the crossroad of cell biology, Extracellular Matrix in Renal Development and Cancer, GeoMx Digital Spatial Profiling read-out for Next-Generation Sequencers with the Cancer Transcriptome Atlas (CTA), Extracellular Vesicles and Chronic Kidney Disease, and Beyond the Culture Flask: How Membrane- and Microfluidic-based Platforms can create more Physiologically Relevant Tissue Culture Systems, naming a few.

This years first keynote address will be given by internationally recognized Muller Fabbri, MD, PhD, Associate Professor, Co-Leader Cancer Biology Program, University of Hawaii Cancer Center, explaining how MicroRNAs in Extracellular Vesicles orchestrate the biology of the Tumor Microenvironment. The programs second keynote will be delivered by Steve Caplan, PhD, Professor and Vice Chair for Administration, Dept. of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Director, UNMC Advanced Microscopy Core Facility on sorting out the mechanisms of endocytic recycling. Following, Benedetta Bussolati, Associate Professor of Nephrology, University of Torino, President of the Italian Society for Extracellular Vesicles, and internationally known for her studies of stem cell biology and regenerative medicine, will explore Extracellular vesicles in Regenerative Medicine during her keynote presentation. Lastly, the final keynote talk presented by Kenneth W. Witwer, PhD, Associate Professor, Molecular and Comparative Pathobiology, John Hopkins University of School of Medicine will explore starting at the source: tissue extracellular vesicles and Alzheimers disease.

This Cell Biology event produced by Labroots includes different tracks on the most exciting approaches to understand Cell Biology, ranging from exosome/extracellular vesicles to proteomics and cancer biology, said Dr. Laura Perin, Assistant Professor at the Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, and Planning Committee Member. The Committee is grateful to the high caliber leaders and experts that will share insights and novel research which are fundamental in advancing the field of medicine bringing innovative avenues for the discovery of new treatments for our patient populations.

Cell Biology 2020 is committed to continuing our unique tradition of bringing the scientific community together providing the discovery, innovation, and medical advances that drive biomedical research forward, said Greg Cruikshank, Chief Executive Officer of LabRoots. For the 4th consecutive year, were delighted to showcase some of the brightest minds in cell science on the agenda, while offering cutting-edge educational content for our attendees on a global front.

The online event produced on LabRoots signature platform allows participants to learn and connect seamlessly across all desktop and mobile devices. Featuring up-to-date emerging findings from the field in the auditorium, poster and exhibit halls, and a networking lounge to foster collaborations, Cell Biology 2020 delivers an all-inclusive interactive environment. By attending this event, you can earn 1 Continuing Education credit per presentation for a maximum of 30 credits.

To register for the event and for more information, click here. Participants can follow the conversation online by using #LRcellbio.

About LabRoots LabRoots is the leading scientific social networking website, and primary source for scientific trending news and premier educational virtual events and webinars and more. Contributing to the advancement of science through content sharing capabilities, LabRoots is a powerful advocate in amplifying global networks and communities. Founded in 2008, LabRoots emphasizes digital innovation in scientific collaboration and learning. Offering more than articles and webcasts that go beyond the mundane and explore the latest discoveries in the world of science, LabRoots users can stay atop their field by gaining continuing education credits from a wide range of topics through their participation in the webinars and virtual events.

Share article on social media or email:

Visit link:
LabRoots Announces Speakers to Present Cutting-Edge Research Findings at its 4th Annual Cell Biology Virtual Conference - PR Web

Cell Biology

Cleveland Clinic, CWRU receive $10.4 million to study differences in glioblastoma between sexes – Crain’s Cleveland Business

Researchers from Case Western Reserve University School of Medicine and Cleveland Clinic's Lerner Research Institute are leading a team that has secured $10.4 million to explore at the molecular level the differences in glioblastoma between males and females, according to a news release.

The five-year grant from the National Institutes of Health/National Cancer Institute will support the researchers as they delve into the genetics, epigenetics (the study of changes in gene function that are heritable and not attributed to DNA sequence alterations) and the cell biology of glioblastoma, which is the most common and deadliest brain tumor in adults, according to the release. The goal is to gain better understanding of physiologic processes, which could lead to more personalized therapies.

Despite available treatments, the median survival time for glioblastomas is 12 to 14 months, with only about 5% of patients surviving more than five years, according to the release.

Previously, the researchers published work that showed significant differences between the sexes in glioblastoma incidence, survival and key molecular pathways. Glioblastoma is 60% higher in males than females, who also have a significant survival advantage over males with a median improved survival rate of up to 10 months, according to the release. Though the sex differences are understood, they're not yet considered when in the treatment of glioblastoma.

"Sex differences are inherent drivers of glioblastoma incidence and survival, and we are taking a multidimensional approach to uncover a better understanding of this differentiation," said Justin Lathia, a co-principal investigator on the multidisciplinary project, in a provided statement. "We are incorporating data from tumor cells and their surrounding micro-environment, as well as genetic programs responsible for tumor growth, and underlying epigenetic differences that may be responsible for sex differences. We aim to gain a better understanding of how these variables interrelate to better understand disease mechanism, which in turn defines better diagnostics and more personalized therapies for patients."

Lathia is vice chair of the Department of Cardiovascular and Metabolic Sciences and co-director of the Brain Tumor Research & Therapeutic Development Center of Excellence at Lerner Research Institute, as well as co-leader of the Molecular Oncology Program at the Case Comprehensive Cancer Center.

Jill Barnholtz-Sloan, of CWRU School of Medicine, is the other co-principal investigator and with Lathia will lead the team, which also includes: Dr. Joshua Rubin of Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis, James Connor of Penn State College of Medicine, and Michael Berens of Translational Genomics Research Institute (TGen).

The collaborative team will work on three related research projects that delve into the basic biology and cellular mechanisms that drive sex differences in glioblastoma formation and progression, according to the release.

"We have the molecular profiling technology and the computing and analytical strength to lead in this effort to better understand the role of sex differences in cancer, particularly for glioblastoma," said Barnholtz-Sloan, the Sally S. Morley Designated Professor in Brain Tumor Research and associate director of Data Sciences at the Case Comprehensive Cancer Center, CWRU School of Medicine, in a provided statement. "This next phase of research relies on vast, varied and complex datasets in animals and humans and promises to be a game-changer in how we understand the role of sex in tumor formation and disease outcomes. This comprehensive approach has applications to all forms of cancer, as well as other diseases."

Here is the original post:
Cleveland Clinic, CWRU receive $10.4 million to study differences in glioblastoma between sexes - Crain's Cleveland Business

Cell Biology

NIH Funds Research into Differences in Glioblastoma between Males and Females – Health Essentials from Cleveland Clinic

A team led by researchers from Case Western Reserve University School of Medicine and Cleveland Clinics Lerner Research Institute has secured $10.4 million over five years from the National Institutes of Health/National Cancer Institute to explore at the molecular level the differences in glioblastoma between males and females.

The researchers will delve into the genetics, epigenetics and cell biology of glioblastoma the most common and deadliest brain tumor in adults to better understand the physiologic processes which may lead to more personalized therapies.

The researchers have previously published research showing significant differences between the sexes in glioblastoma incidence, survival and some key molecular pathways. They found that glioblastoma is 60 percent higher in males than in females. In addition, females have a significant survival advantage over males with a median improved survival rate of up to 10 months. However, while these sex differences are understood, they are not yet considered when treating glioblastoma.

The research team is led by co-principal investigators Justin Lathia, Ph.D., of Cleveland Clinics Lerner Research Institute, and Jill Barnholtz-Sloan, Ph.D., of Case Western Reserve University School of Medicine. The team also includes colleagues from Penn State College of Medicine, Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis, and the Translational Genomics Research Institute (TGen).

Glioblastomas are rare about 3.5-4 per 100,000 in the United States from 2012-16, the most recent data available from the Central Brain Tumor Registry of the United States (CBTRUS). Despite available treatments, glioblastomas have devastating consequences for patients. The median survival time is 12 to 14 months, and only about 5% of patients survive more than five years.

We have the molecular profiling technology and the computing and analytical strength to lead in this effort to better understand the role of sex differences in cancer, particularly for glioblastoma, said Barnholtz-Sloan, the Sally S. Morley Designated Professor in Brain Tumor Research and associate director of Data Sciences at the Case Comprehensive Cancer Center, Case Western Reserve School of Medicine. This next phase of research relies on vast, varied and complex datasets in animals and humans and promises to be a game-changer in how we understand the role of sex in tumor formation and disease outcomes. This comprehensive approach has applications to all forms of cancer, as well as other diseases.

Sex differences are inherent drivers of glioblastoma incidence and survival, and we are taking a multidimensional approach to uncover a better understanding of this differentiation, said Lathia, vice chair of the Department of Cardiovascular and Metabolic Sciences and co-director of the Brain Tumor Research & Therapeutic Development Center of Excellence at Lerner Research Institute, and co-leader of the Molecular Oncology Program at the Case Comprehensive Cancer Center. We are incorporating data from tumor cells and their surrounding micro-environment, as well as genetic programs responsible for tumor growth, and underlying epigenetic differences that may be responsible for sex differences. We aim to gain a better understanding of how these variables interrelate to better understand disease mechanism, which in turn defines better diagnostics and more personalized therapies for patients.

The multi-disciplinary project involves established investigators with complementary expertise and a strong collaborative history. Along with Lathia and Barnholtz-Sloan, participating institutions and their PIs include:

Three related research projects, undertaken by this collaborative team, will delve into the basic biology and cellular mechanisms that drive sex differences in glioblastoma formation and progression. These related research projects will inform, synergize and depend on each other. Findings from the labs based on their animal models will then be queried against data from human clinical samples across multiple institutions. The vast amount of data generated from these studies requires robust data management and sophisticated data analysis for a comprehensive view of sex differences across these diverse but related inquiries.

Comprehensive findings will inform future clinical research design, the search for targets for new therapeutics, or the use of existing therapeutics that may be applied differently depending on a patients sex.

This grant was made by the NIHs National Cancer Institute. Grant number: 1P01CA245705.

Cleveland Clinic: Alicia Reale, 216-408-7444, Realeca@ccf.org

Case Western Reserve: Bill Lubinger, 216-368-4443, william.lubinger@case.edu

Go here to see the original:
NIH Funds Research into Differences in Glioblastoma between Males and Females - Health Essentials from Cleveland Clinic