Podcast brought to you by: See your company name here. - Promote your organization by aligning it with today's latest trends.
Ross Hardison, PhD, Professor of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Penn State University Bio and Contact Info
Listen (3:39) ENCODE has provided valuable data
Listen (3:36) Lineage specific selection
Listen (6:50) Looking for specific biochemical activities that are important
Listen (9:28) It's not so simple as big science vs small science
Listen (4:08) Have the critisicms changed your mind at all?
Listen (4:11) The debate itself a great outcome
In an earlier show, we interviewed Dan Graur and Michael Eisen about the ENCODE project, a massive research undertaking to further characterize the human genome. It’s been done by over 400 researchers at a cost of over $400 million. Both of the guests were quite critical of the published findings of the project and of big projects like this in general.
To represent the ENCODE project we're joined by Ross Hardison, a professor of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology at Penn State University and a collaborator on the ENCODE project from the beginning. Ross says he is delighted with the debate about how much of the genome is functional that the Graur paper has excited. And he makes a strong argument that the ENCODE team was focused on specific biochemical activities, and that these are important. He says Graur's charge on our previous show that the project might have called 100% of the genome functional because all DNA replicates, "just silly." He also says that Graur's and Eisen's rants about Big Science don't mean much to him. He considers himself a researcher funded by RO1's just as they are. It's not as simple as Big Science vs. Small Science. What was the goal of ENCODE and are they reaching that goal, we ask Hardison in Part II of Debating Encode.