Editing 1605: DNA

Jump to: navigation, search

Warning: You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you log in or create an account, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.

The edit can be undone. Please check the comparison below to verify that this is what you want to do, and then save the changes below to finish undoing the edit.
Latest revision Your text
Line 22: Line 22:
 
The joke of the title text is that the responsible gene is located in ''the region between the start and the end of every {{w|chromosome}}'' meaning that the whole genome, not any one gene or DNA segment, must be considered responsible for the referenced trait, since the interconnected nature of DNA and environment during development means that every gene is at least partially responsible in generating any complex traits. [[Randall]] even includes the {{w|mitochondria}}, recognizing that the short DNA sequences present in these organelles, which are located outside the cell-nucleus, also contribute to development. The organismal chromosome or chromosomes are located in the nucleus, but mitochondria have their own tiny independent genome, reflecting their distant ancestry as separate but symbiotic organisms. This means that the DNA segments coding for any given human trait are not even necessarily all found on the main chromosomes in the nucleus.
 
The joke of the title text is that the responsible gene is located in ''the region between the start and the end of every {{w|chromosome}}'' meaning that the whole genome, not any one gene or DNA segment, must be considered responsible for the referenced trait, since the interconnected nature of DNA and environment during development means that every gene is at least partially responsible in generating any complex traits. [[Randall]] even includes the {{w|mitochondria}}, recognizing that the short DNA sequences present in these organelles, which are located outside the cell-nucleus, also contribute to development. The organismal chromosome or chromosomes are located in the nucleus, but mitochondria have their own tiny independent genome, reflecting their distant ancestry as separate but symbiotic organisms. This means that the DNA segments coding for any given human trait are not even necessarily all found on the main chromosomes in the nucleus.
  
βˆ’
Technically a gene is "a locus (or region) of DNA that encodes a functional RNA or protein product", which means that it is a single discrete unit of DNA, with human DNA containing over 20,000 genes. Thus the theoretical gene could not include the entire ''region between the start and the end of every chromosome'' since that region contains thousands of genes, any more than it's possible to say that the ace of clubs is the card everywhere from the top of the full deck of cards to the bottom of it.
+
Technically a gene is "a locus (or region) of DNA that encodes a functional RNA or protein product", which means that it is a single discrete unit of DNA, with human DNA containing over 20,000 genes. Thus the theoretical gene could not include the entire ''region between the start and the end of every chromosome'' since that region contains thousands of genes, any more then it's possible to say that the ace of clubs is the card everywhere from the top of the full deck of cards to the bottom of it.
  
 
Of course if such a gene actually did exist, then we would never be able to correctly identify where it was since we would make a mistake every time we thought we found a gene for something specific. So the whole title text is either a {{w|contradiction}} (they could never find this gene if it was there) and/or it is a {{w|Tautology (logic)|tautology}} since if the gene did exist, then of course it has to be part of our entire DNA. (If it is a tautology it is the second title text using this in just two weeks, the last being [[1602: Linguistics Club]].)
 
Of course if such a gene actually did exist, then we would never be able to correctly identify where it was since we would make a mistake every time we thought we found a gene for something specific. So the whole title text is either a {{w|contradiction}} (they could never find this gene if it was there) and/or it is a {{w|Tautology (logic)|tautology}} since if the gene did exist, then of course it has to be part of our entire DNA. (If it is a tautology it is the second title text using this in just two weeks, the last being [[1602: Linguistics Club]].)

Please note that all contributions to explain xkcd may be edited, altered, or removed by other contributors. If you do not want your writing to be edited mercilessly, then do not submit it here.
You are also promising us that you wrote this yourself, or copied it from a public domain or similar free resource (see explain xkcd:Copyrights for details). Do not submit copyrighted work without permission!

To protect the wiki against automated edit spam, we kindly ask you to solve the following CAPTCHA:

Cancel | Editing help (opens in new window)