Talk:CH391L/S12/CH391L/S12/Ancestral Sequence Reconstruction
When you say that the ancestral species sequences are inferred from extant species, is that the sole source of sequence information, or has DNA also been extracted from fossils to gain information needed to synthesize biomolecules? Razan Alnahhas 00:56, 3 February 2012 (EST)
- Jared Ellefson 14:44, 13 February 2012 (EST):This is a cool thought. Although, Fossils themselves (mineralized) will not contain any useful DNA as it is long since degraded at that point. But, it is possible to get useful amounts of DNA from extinct species that are well preserved (in ice for instance). Woolly mammoth and Sabercat DNA have been sequenced. To my knowledge this sequence information has not been used in any reconstruction. Interesting thought if it would be useful or "how" useful.
- Jeffrey E. Barrick 11:11, 5 February 2012 (EST):Cite the Pauling and Zuckerkandl paper as a reference? All of the phylogenetic methods have been around longer than sequence data, so I'm not sure "30 years before the phylogenetic methods" is quite correct. It's true that it was only possible to implement a lot of these with computers for larger data sets.
- Jared Ellefson 14:44, 13 February 2012 (EST): Yes I suppose this wasn't properly worded. I'll change it to be more explicit.
- Jeffrey E. Barrick 11:17, 5 February 2012 (EST):Can you find a sequence alignment from a paper to use as an image that shows some extant sequences and the reconstructed ancestral sequence as an example? Either that or show a little picture of phylogenetic tree like you did in class and a simple scenario for inferring an ancestor?
- Jared Ellefson 14:44, 13 February 2012 (EST): Put up a little something.