98% of Your DNA is Junk

New research shows our DNA is absolutely loaded with... NOTHING. 98 percent of our DNA plays no role in our development. But as Trace learns, the findings may not be so black and white.

Read More:

'Junk' DNA Mystery Solved: It's Not Needed
"The humped bladderwort plant (shown here in a scanning electron micrograph) is a voracious carnivore, with its tiny bladders leveraging vacuum pressure to suck in bitty prey at great speed."

Evolutionarily Conserved Noncoding DNA in the Human Genome: How Much and What For?
"The noncoding component of the human genome is receiving increased attention from biologists because of its predicted role in regulation of transcription, DNA replication, chromosome pairing, and chromosome condensation."

Carnivorous Bladderwort Genome Contradicts Notion That Vast Quantities Of Noncoding DNA Crucial For Complex Life
"Genes make up about 2 percent of the human genome. The rest consists of a genetic material known as noncoding DNA, and scientists have spent years puzzling over why this material exists in such voluminous quantities."

Noncoding DNA
"In genetics, noncoding DNA describes components of an organism's DNA sequences that do not encode for protein sequences."

Human Genome Is Much More Than Just Genes
"The human genome—the sum total of hereditary information in a person—contains a lot more than the protein-coding genes teenagers learn about in school, a massive international project has found."

____________________

DNews is dedicated to satisfying your curiosity and to bringing you mind-bending stories & perspectives you won't find anywhere else! New videos twice daily.

Watch More

Subscribe

DNews Twitter

Anthony Carboni Twitter

Laci Green Twitter

Trace Dominguez Twitter

DNews Facebook

DNews Google+

DNews Website

[lee-daniels]

This doesn't make sense. I think the junk is scientists' level of understanding.

[mosesexodus]

Your video is grossly out-dated. You may want to post an updated version with the correct information.

[connorbyrne]

This needs an update :D Junk DNA is more like the background operational programs that command and co-ordinate activation/deactivation of genes.

[spikegilfer]

Plot twist: Re-write non-coded DNA for superpowers.

[NXTstorms]

My bio book says that non-coding DNA form functional RNA molecules which have regulatory functions.

[Daywalkerr]

maybe its extra space like a hardrive for updates

[valentintorres]

You guys should update this video because some new research suggest that junk DNA might not be junk.

[Leo-iZ]

If it wasn't needed it wouldn't be there

[s.unosson]

This video was science 10 years ago, today it is history junk.

[johngajdos]

Just because we have not discovered what it does, is no reason to assume it's junk. It may be what directs parts around the cell. There is far more we don't know than what we do.

[deisisase]

Apparently That non-coding DNA is important because the loss of a few thousand base pairs can cause severe diablity or even death for the unfortunate person who aquires such a mutation.

[ashuatthama]

It's not junk we haven't found their uses yet

[spartacandream]

Guess we weren't very intelligently designed.

[Competitive_Antagonist]

I once had the idea that it's merely a cache from our past ancestors. Just like how when you delete a file it still remains on the hard drive or your windows temp folder that needs to be cleaned every so often. They probably used to code for traits we've since grown out of and so lost their ability to code. I guess it's similar to when Microsoft brings out a new OS and still keep some of the old code, just deactivate it and add new code.

[benthemiester]

I also urge viewers to actually read the original paper which did not use the term "absolutely" as in "New research shows our DNA is absolutely loaded with... read the critiques on this study. Furthermore, one of the citations offered by poster of video actually cites ENCODES findings of 80% having functionality. The second paper referenced dates back to 2001 and it does not make the claim that 98% of the genome is useless. And in fact says further studies have to be done.

[MoreParksLessParking]

Can I have some sources for this please?

[PyroNicampt]

Perhaps this "Junk" DNA is actually used as "fillers" or "spacers" to put the useful DNA in the correct places so that it's a bit easier for RNA to get the right sequences when they have to. Sort of like when you leave space between paragraphs and areas of text so you can actually read that text, RNA uses those spaces to better "read" the DNA sequence.

[seanbrown]

B.S. !! This has been disproven. This is why you are considered entertainment and science reporting

[ninjaskater]

Having that extra DNA does do something. It makes it more likely that mutations will occur in non coding areas of the genome, causing less detrimental effeccts

[tarcal]

Well, if you read the article in the description: "It's more plausible that, by chance, the bladderwort plant has biological processes that favor stripping out extraneous DNA over adding it in, Albert said."