Jump to content

Talk:James Watson

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by The velociraptor (talk | contribs) at 04:40, 4 June 2008. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.


Introductory Paragraph

"James Dewey Watson (born April 6, 1928) is an American molecular biologist, best known as one of the co-discoverers of the structure of DNA. Watson, Francis Crick, and Maurice Wilkins were awarded the 1962 Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine "for their discoveries concerning the molecular structure of nucleic acids and its significance for information transfer in living material".[3]"

Considering the length of his career and the scale of his achievements and the fact that he is still alive, the above is far too short; just compare it to that of Francis Crick for example:

"Francis Harry Compton Crick OM FRS (8 June 1916 – 28 July 2004), (Ph.D., Gonville and Caius College, Cambridge, 1953) was an English molecular biologist, physicist, and neuroscientist, and most noted for being one of the co-discoverers of the structure of the DNA molecule in 1953. He, James D. Watson, and Maurice Wilkins were jointly awarded the 1962 Nobel Prize for Physiology or Medicine "for their discoveries concerning the molecular structure of nucleic acids and its significance for information transfer in living material".[2]

His later work, until 1977, at the MRC Laboratory of Molecular Biology, has not received as much formal recognition. Crick is widely known for use of the term “central dogma” to summarize an idea that genetic information flow in cells is essentially one-way, from DNA to RNA to protein. Crick was an important theoretical molecular biologist and played an important role in research related to revealing the genetic code.[3]

During the remainder of his career, he held the post of J.W. Kieckhefer Distinguished Research Professor at the Salk Institute for Biological Studies in La Jolla, California. His later research centered on theoretical neurobiology and attempts to advance the scientific study of human consciousness. He remained in this post until his death; "he was editing a manuscript on his death bed, a scientist until the bitter end" said his close associate Christof Koch[4]."

The first paragraph needs to be expanded, especially in the light of recent events, but mainly to do justice to such a world famous/'infamous' (media-wise) scientist; any comments please?

91.108.16.49 (talk)nitramrekcap91.108.16.49 (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 19:59, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

added to the introductory paragraph

...He studied at the University of Chicago and Indiana University and subsequently worked at the University of Cambridge's Cavendish Laboratory in England where he first met Francis Crick.

In 1956 he became a faculty member of Harvard University's Biological Laboratories until 1976, but in 1968 served as Director of Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory on Long Island, New York and shifted its research emphasis to the study of cancer. In 1994 he became its President for ten years, and then subsequently served as its Chancellor until 2007. Between 1988 and 1992 he was associated with the National Institutes of Health, helping to establish the Human Genome Project. He has written many science books, including the seminal textbook "The Molecular Biology of the Gene" (1965).

91.108.50.27 (talk) 13:33, 28 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, 91.108.50.27. Can I call you 91? There's no requirement to mirror the edits you make on the article here in the talk page. Otherwise, the talk page would duplicate the article. Just a note that you're, for example, editingthe intro to add a little more detail, would be fine. You don't even need that unless you think your edits may be controversial or for some other reason being worthy of discussion. TJRC (talk) 15:31, 28 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi TJRC, point taken! The introductory paragraph was long overdue for expansion (see above) and I had no great desire to get involved in yet another war of words like the one over Rosalind Franklin. As far as I know there is nothing to dispute in the additional material! Yours "91". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.110.190.55 (talk) 20:05, 28 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Current work ?!

I just found an article on Nature: Watson is the first human whose personal DNA was completely sequenzed. I have no idea how this could be added to the article, but I think it is worth mentioning it. Here is the reference: NATURE, 452 (7189): 872-U5; APR 17 2008 and the corresponding abstract (the full article is not free, sorry)

Abstract: The association of genetic variation with disease and drug response, and improvements in nucleic acid technologies, have given great optimism for the impact of 'genomic medicine'. However, the formidable size of the diploid human genome(1), approximately 6 gigabases, has prevented the routine application of sequencing methods to deciphering complete individual human genomes. To realize the full potential of genomics for human health, this limitation must be overcome. Here we report the DNA sequence of a diploid genome of a single individual, James D. Watson, sequenced to 7.4- fold redundancy in two months using massively parallel sequencing in picolitre- size reaction vessels. This sequence was completed in two months at approximately one-hundredth of the cost of traditional capillary electrophoresis methods. Comparison of the sequence to the reference genome led to the identification of 3.3 million single nucleotide polymorphisms, of whi ch 10,654 cause amino- acid substitution within the coding sequence. In addition, we accurately identified small-scale ( 2 - 40,000 base pair ( bp)) insertion and deletion polymorphism as well as copy number variation resulting in the large- scale gain and loss of chromosomal segments ranging from 26,000 to 1.5 million base pairs. Overall, these results agree well with recent results of sequencing of a single individual(2) by traditional methods. However, in addition to being faster and significantly less expensive, this sequencing technology avoids the arbitrary loss of genomic sequences inherent in random shotgun sequencing by bacterial cloning because it amplifies DNA in a cell- free system. As a result, we further demonstrate the acquisition of novel human sequence, including novel genes not previously identified by traditional genomic sequencing. This is the first genome sequenced by next- generation technologies. Therefore it is a pilot for the future challenges of 'pe rsonalized genome sequencing'.

Any suggestions?

Janina —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.50.153.36 (talk) 08:32, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think he was first, but his sequencing is covered in James D. Watson#Genome project, no? He became the second person [27] to publish his fully sequenced genome online, after it was presented to him on May 31, 2007 by 454 Life Sciences Corporation in collaboration with scientists at the Human Genome Sequencing Center, Baylor College of Medicine. TJRC (talk) 17:11, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Error?

It appears there's supposed to be a picture in the "Double Helix" inset, but judging from the Wilkins article, it's a duplicate. Mr. Raptor (talk) 04:40, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]