Subscribe Log in

Log in

Remember me. [?]
Forgotten password
Not got an account?

Subscribe or register here

Toggle navigation
Student BMJ
Search
  • News & views
    • At a glance >>
    • Life
    • Briefings
    • Research explained
    • Views
    • People
  • Clinical
    • Practical skills
    • Clinical reviews
    • Ethics & law
    • Picture quizzes
    • Junior doctor survival kit
  • Specialties
    • Cardiology
    • Emergency medicine
    • Gastroenterology
    • General practice
    • General Surgery
    • Geriatric medicine
    • Neurology
    • Obstetrics & Gynaecology
    • Paediatrics
    • Psychiatry
    • Radiology
    • Respiratory
  • Careers
    • Career planning
    • A career in...
    • Electives
    • Foundation programme
    • Careers advice
  • Applying to medical school
    • At a glance >>
    • Application timeline
    • Considering medicine
    • Medical School Selector
    • Work experience
    • Personal statement
    • Entrance exams
    • Interviews
    • Plan B
    • Graduate entry medicine
    • Mediprep course
  • Subscribe

Junk DNA

Sequencing the human genome has revolutionised the way molecular biologists look at our DNA. And junk DNA, material once thought of as irrelevant genetic waste, is becoming a focus of scientific interest, as Raghav Chawla explains

By: Raghav chawla

“Today, we are learning the language in which God created life,” US President Bill Clinton said on 26 June 2000. The initial sequencing of the human genome had historically been completed.1

Eight months on, two research teams published their draft versions of the sequence.23 In an article accompanying the publication in Nature, David Baltimore, remarked, “For conceptual impact, it does not hold a candle to Watson and Crick's 1953 paper describing the structure of DNA. Nonetheless, it is a seminal paper, launching the era of post-genomic science.” 45

For a long time, scientists believed that non-coding DNA was useless junk. Coined by Susumu Ohno,1516 the phrase “junk DNA” initially related only to DNA satellites but was soon used to describe most categories of non-coding DNA.1718

Junk DNA has since been shown to be much more important, however. And possibly “the amount of non-coding DNA per genome is a more valid

To read the rest of this article log in or subscribe to Student BMJ.

If you're not ready to subscribe yet you can access News & views for free or register with us to receive free updates on our latest content.

Log in Subscribe
  • Most viewed
  • What's new

Stay in touch

  • Register for email alerts

Contact us

  • Contact us
  • Advertisers and sponsors
  • Media

About Student BMJ

  • About us
  • Join the BMA
  • Subscribe
  • Write for Student BMJ
  • Review articles for Student BMJ
  • The BMJ
  • The Student BMJ scholarship
  • Request permissions
  • Sitemap

Terms and Conditions

  • Website T&Cs
  • Medical School Selector T&Cs
  • Privacy policy

© BMJ Publishing Group Limited 2018. All rights reserved.