From: Robert J. Bradbury (bradbury@aeiveos.com)
Date: Sun Aug 31 2003 - 11:22:47 MDT
On Sun, 31 Aug 2003, Aubrey de Grey wrote:
> I'd sequence a large (really large) number of microbial genomes,
> mostly from soil bacteria and fungi. This would greatly speed up
> the discovery of genes encoding enzymes that can break down stuff
> that we can't [snip]
I don't think that is going to work Aubrey. Is it know for example
that existing stomach enzymes don't break down the materials that you
mention? The problem might end up being a lack of specificity or an
inability to work at "normal" PH. In which case I don't think having
more enzymes is going to do the trick -- it seems unlikely that nature
would have evolved enzymes to deal with the specific materials but rather
enzymes that are capable of breaking specific types of bonds. In which
case their use might produce rather nasty side effects.
One might have to resort instead to "directed evolution" of the type
that Maxygen does to get enzymes with the desired specificity. Or
finally one might just have to do the enzyme tweeking "by hand" as
was done to several of the DNA polymerases to get them to function
more effectively in sequencing applications.
I think one may need to devote more attention to what lipofuscin really is
(perhaps to the extent that they have studied what amyloid is) before
one can effectively begin to take it apart.
Robert
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sun Aug 31 2003 - 11:34:21 MDT