Page 7

Update item information
Title GENE is out of the Bottle, The
Description The 55th Annual Frederick William Reynolds Lecture.
Creator Gesteland, Raymond F.
Publisher University of Utah
Date 1995-11-07
Date Digital 2008-05-29
Type Text
Format image/jpeg
Digitization Specifications Original scanned on Epson Expression 10000XL flatbed scanner and saved as 400 ppi uncompressed tiff. Display images generated in PhotoshopCS and uploaded into CONTENTdm Aquisition Station.
Language eng
Relation Is part of: Annual Frederick William Reynolds lecture
Rights Digital Image Copyright University of Utah
Metadata Cataloger Seungkeol Choe
ARK ark:/87278/s6mk69v5
Setname uu_fwrl
Date Created 2008-07-29
Date Modified 2008-07-29
ID 320758
Reference URL https://collections.lib.utah.edu/ark:/87278/s6mk69v5

Page Metadata

Title Page 7
Description But what about the goal of developing appropriate technology for large-scale sequencing? It was largely ignored by the scientific community. Why? Because mapping was more appealing: it was technically straight-forward, and it had immediate payoffs in providing the tools to find genes causing disease. (An early pragmatic political decision had dictated that genome money would not be used directly to find genes - only to develop the tools. It was thought to be politically risky to encroach on the "disease turf' of other NIH institutes. This restriction holds true today, except for the $42 million that is budgeted for an NIH Intramural program led by Francis Collins. In retrospect, that decision was probably a mistake, as the direct benefits of finding genes are very clear and they argue a strong case.) Sequencing was another matter. It was hard to sequence DNA, especially complex human DNA, and to develop new technology required assembling new working groups with specialists outside of molecular biology. Initially it was hoped that the DOE national labs would fill this niche but governmental inertia has only been overcome in the last two years. The NIH notion of establishing a few centers that would have the resources and latitude to develop technical specialities was the right idea, but initially these centers concentrated primarily on attacking the mapping problem. Now that mapping is essentially over, these groups are finding it difficult to make the transition to sequencing. As a consequence, the shift of grant funds from mapping to sequencing has been slow. The budget for the Genome project has increased modestly over the first five years. Its total current annual budget is $245,000,000 -roughly the cost of one engine, one wing and maybe a stabilizer for a Bl bomber. National Institutes of Health (NIH) $130 million Dept. of Energy (DOE) $70 million Dept. of Energy Microbial Sequencing $3 million National Institutes of Health Intramural Program $42 million Where Are We After Five Years? We have known since the 1950s that the sequence of just the 4 bases in DNA - A, G, C, and T - carried the genetic blueprint for all organisms, and since the 1960s how the 64 possible triplets of these four bases in linear DNA dictated the sequence of amino acids of proteins, the products of genes. But, it was the invention of DNA sequencing in the 1970s by Sanger and the Maxam-Gilbert group
Format image/jpeg
Identifier 007-RNLT-GestelandRE_Page 7.jpg
Source Original Manuscript: The GENE is out of the bottle by Raymond F. Gesteland.
Setname uu_fwrl
Date Created 2008-07-29
Date Modified 2008-07-29
ID 320741
Reference URL https://collections.lib.utah.edu/ark:/87278/s6mk69v5/320741