tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post352574259984966790..comments2024-03-27T14:50:47.345-04:00Comments on <center>Sandwalk</center>: Are splice variants functional or noise?Larry Moranhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05756598746605455848noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-86217582574692008912018-02-13T10:35:06.620-05:002018-02-13T10:35:06.620-05:00@Gary Gaulin
You have already been warned once ab...@Gary Gaulin<br /><br />You have already been warned once about spamming my blog with your kooky ideas. This is your second warning.<br /><br />Do it again and you will be banned. Larry Moranhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05756598746605455848noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-32124283357942711412018-02-13T09:57:12.272-05:002018-02-13T09:57:12.272-05:00It's not like there are chromosomes that prima...<i>It's not like there are chromosomes that primarily code for anything. When you compare synteny across species, you realise that over millions of years genes have been shuffled and reshuffled continuously. This leaves one with the inevitable impression that whichever genes happen to be grouped together on a chromosome at any point in time are going to ultimately be a coincidence.</i><br /><br />My cognitive science related interests made it necessary for me to first check whether the chromosome being used as a good example of lncRNA activity is known to be involved in brain development or reproduction. If it were not then I would have been less interested in the topic and went back to work on the next step after my <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UIvjax0_lLE&list=PLPCENRDc3DcTAW6uMMi3HNjF8Fvpn6vWx" rel="nofollow">previous cognitive model</a>, with a first of its kind spatial reasoning system using waves instead of "connection weights" typical of modern AI. Neuroscience is reporting that the "engrams" of our memory are not in the connections, after all. Focus is now most on the RNA that's inside brain cells. At Reddit I plucked the best part out of a long article on the topic:<br /><br /><a href="https://www.reddit.com/r/neuroscience/comments/7vwfh7/somewhere_in_the_brain_is_a_storage_device_for/" rel="nofollow">https://www.reddit.com/r/neuroscience/comments/7vwfh7/somewhere_in_the_brain_is_a_storage_device_for/</a><br /><br />I conceptualize gene locations being most dependent on where things end up after replication, when the chromosomes have fully uncoiled into intermingling territories and networks are at full function again. It seems most important to preserve that topology, even where that ends up breaking some connections causing re-splicing to the nearest sites around. So I can agree by saying that where things end up after being coiled for replication is very different from where they need to be when not.<br /><br />I also have software and .png images I made for digitally banding Chromosome 2, and later highlighting features of the fusion site with single pixels against a black background:<br /><br /><a href="https://sites.google.com/site/digitalchromosomebanding/home" rel="nofollow">https://sites.google.com/site/digitalchromosomebanding/home</a><br /><br />In regards to bridging AI to Neuroscience the model I now have is from what I can see: all that's left standing. At least part of the reason why is maybe because using waves and a small number of simple rules at each place in the map to for complex place avoidance behaviors of animals being something only a kook like me would actually code, but it worked!<br /><br />Going into more cellular detail requires modeling in the basic functions of the RNA and protein systems, which all together as in slime molds too makes cells inherently good at anticipating events and acting ahead a time. I expect almost most or all of that behavior to be caused by the system outside the nucleus. Inside the nucleus is for the over the long haul morphological behavior of the system which also can be modeled in when enough is known for it to be possible to do so, shuffling genes and all.Gary Gaulinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10925297296758439900noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-53470202263469055492018-02-12T09:02:12.924-05:002018-02-12T09:02:12.924-05:00It's not like there are chromosomes that prima...It's not like there are chromosomes that primarily code for anything. When you compare synteny across species, you realise that over millions of years genes have been shuffled and reshuffled continuously. This leaves one with the inevitable impression that whichever genes happen to be grouped together on a chromosome at any point in time are going to ultimately be a coincidence.Aceofspadeshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09534611408824723712noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-67627689807965278722018-02-10T08:45:32.643-05:002018-02-10T08:45:32.643-05:00This, perhaps:
https://genomebiology.biomedcentral...This, perhaps:<br />https://genomebiology.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13059-017-1344-6Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15668432866034699214noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-25284928966821861562018-02-09T18:40:39.226-05:002018-02-09T18:40:39.226-05:00Out of curiosity I had to check for what chromosom...Out of curiosity I had to check for what chromosome 21 primarily codes for. What I found indicates that it's very involved in brain morphogenesis and reproduction. Correct?<br /><br /><br />Gary Gaulinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10925297296758439900noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-10913955871292605012018-02-09T17:46:05.044-05:002018-02-09T17:46:05.044-05:00As usual, you must be right Larry. Just don't ...As usual, you must be right Larry. Just don't forget to put it in your book.Jasshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00012083978513644307noreply@blogger.com