Joku osaavampi voi suomentaa tätä vähän?
>Remnants of extinct monkeys are hiding inside you, along with those of lizards, jellyfish and other animals. Your DNA is built upon gene fragments from primal ancestors.
For some 20 years, scientists have used algorithms to compute their way hundreds of millions of years back into the evolutionary past. Starting with present-day gene sequences, they perform what's called ancestral sequence reconstruction (ASR) to determine past mutations and figure out the genes' primal forerunners.
But ASR algorithms have faced logical criticism. Species based on those primal genes are long extinct, and scientists can't travel back in time to observe mutations that have happened since. So, how can anyone find any physical benchmark to verify and gauge ASR?
Time travel substitute
A team of researchers led by Eric Gaucher, an associate professor at Georgia Tech's School of Biological Sciences, did it by building an evolutionary framework out of myriad mutations. Then they benchmarked ASR algorithms against it -- no time machine required.
Their results have shored up confidence that the widely used algorithms are working as they should.
"Most of them did a very good job -- 98% accurate," Gaucher said of contemporary algorithms' ability to compute ancient gene sequences. Their determination of proteins encoded by those sequences was virtually perfect.
By confirming the high accuracy of the algorithms, the Georgia Tech team has also corroborated the validity of current evolutionary science they're based on.
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2016/09/160915090018.htm
Onko solon enää täällä? Utti, bg-ope,moloch_horridus, ejk? Pliis suomentakaa toi kaikille ymmärrettäväksi!
>Remnants of extinct monkeys are hiding inside you, along with those of lizards, jellyfish and other animals. Your DNA is built upon gene fragments from primal ancestors.
For some 20 years, scientists have used algorithms to compute their way hundreds of millions of years back into the evolutionary past. Starting with present-day gene sequences, they perform what's called ancestral sequence reconstruction (ASR) to determine past mutations and figure out the genes' primal forerunners.
But ASR algorithms have faced logical criticism. Species based on those primal genes are long extinct, and scientists can't travel back in time to observe mutations that have happened since. So, how can anyone find any physical benchmark to verify and gauge ASR?
Time travel substitute
A team of researchers led by Eric Gaucher, an associate professor at Georgia Tech's School of Biological Sciences, did it by building an evolutionary framework out of myriad mutations. Then they benchmarked ASR algorithms against it -- no time machine required.
Their results have shored up confidence that the widely used algorithms are working as they should.
"Most of them did a very good job -- 98% accurate," Gaucher said of contemporary algorithms' ability to compute ancient gene sequences. Their determination of proteins encoded by those sequences was virtually perfect.
By confirming the high accuracy of the algorithms, the Georgia Tech team has also corroborated the validity of current evolutionary science they're based on.
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2016/09/160915090018.htm
Onko solon enää täällä? Utti, bg-ope,moloch_horridus, ejk? Pliis suomentakaa toi kaikille ymmärrettäväksi!
Vastaukset 4
Vanhimmat
Evoluutikot tekee evoluutiota tukevan algortimin??? Päivän vitsi!
Et vissiin osaa lukea?
This could not be true, its not even a good attempt.
Pikaisesti lukien ja tiivistäen:
Tuossa on tuotettu ihan fyysisesti tutkittavaksi pieni bakteerien sukupuu mutaatioiden kautta, ja lopputuloksena syntyneiden vaihtelevien bakteerien geenisekvensseihin on sovellettu useampia vaihtoehtoisia tietokonealgoritmeja, joita käytetään yleisesti päättelemään minkälaisia eliöiden yhteisten kantamuotojen geenisekvenssit ovat olleet. Algoritmien tuloksia on sitten verrattu niihin oikeisiin kantamuotoihin, joista nuo testattavat muunnokset olivat lähtöisin. Tuloksena oli että kyllä, tutkitut algoritmit osuvat hyvin tarkasti oikeaan, joskin pientä eroakin niiden välillä on.
Voimme siis olla taas aiempaa varmempia, että esim. noilla algoritmeilla päätellyt apinoiden yms. kanssa yhteisten kantamuotojemme geenisekvenssit vastaavat hyvin todellisuutta, vaikka nuo kantamuodot ovatkin kuolleet sukupuuttoon ja niiden geenisekvenssit eivät ole suoraan saatavilla.