Insight Into Human Diseases Prediction Biology Essay

Published: Last Edited:

This essay has been submitted by a student. This is not an example of the work written by our professional essay writers.

By NGS method DNA sequencing is made possible. And Scientist can expound the information of any biological sytem. NGS has transfigured the genomic science. It gives the infinite acumen into the transcriptome, and epigenome. The principle perception overdue NGS is same to CE-sangar sequencing i.e the small fragments of DNA resynthesized as all bases are recognized.

Mandate has never been greater for innovation technologies that deliver reckless, inexpensive and accurate genome information. This challenge has accelerated the advancement of next-generation sequencing (NGS) technologies. The economical manufacturing of great bulk of sequence data is the fundamental benefit over conservative approach. Here, a technical review of template preparation, sequencing, genome arrangement and assembly approaches, and current advances in current and near-term commercially obtainable NGS instruments. Here are drawn some broad range of applications of NGS technologies. [ref 1]

Any kind of disease factors are tend to accuma-ulate and express in next generation influenced by environmental factor. NGS provided novel applications such as, ancient DNA sampling, from which metagenomic investigation is made conceiveable.


Though DNA was discovered in 1953 but it was not possible to analyse even a small fragment of DNA after several decade. First, Genome of Bacteriophage MS2, was analysed and sequenced by Walter Fiers and his co-worker at university of GHENT ( Belgium). (ref3,4,5 of google). Fredrick Sanger developed a rapid DNA sequencing method, the method is based on chain termination technique. Maxam and Gilbert developed another method of DNA sequencing by chemical degradation. First DNA next generation sequencing was developed by Nyren and his co-worker and patient them as a ''PYROSEQUENCING.



The fundamental of this method is the radiolabelling at 5' end. Chemical are used to generate the cleavage. These chemical break them in a proportion of one or two of the four nucleotide like, T, G+C, A, C+T. Purines are treated with formic acid. Guanine and adenine are methylated by dimethylsulfate. The sodium salt usually inhibits the methylation of thymine. This modified fragment is trated with hot Piperidine which make a cut at the site of modified DNA. The concentration of the pipredine is controlled per DNA molecule. Thus chain of fragments are obtained. Their length is from radiolabel site to the first cut site in the DNA molecule.File:Maxam gilbert sequencing.png

Fig1: Diagramatic representation of Maxm Gilbet method.


Sanger method is developed by Frederick Sanger in 1977. This classic methods involves the single stranded DNA i.e dNTP'S and ddNTP's. This ddNTP's lack the 3'-OH end that is necessary for chain elongation as a result chain elongation is stopped. This ddNTP's are radioactively or fluorescently labelled for recognition. These bands may be seen by autodariograph , Uv light or by X-ray film.


Table 1

Advantages and disadvantages of biochemical-based methods to study soil microbial diversity

Method Advantages Disadvantages Selected references

Plate counts Fast Unculturable microorganisms Tabacchioni et al. (2000),

Inexpensive not detected

Bias towards fast growing individuals

Bias towards fungal species that produce large quantities of spores

Trevors (1998b)

Community level physiological Fast Only represents culturable Classen et al. (2003), Garland profiling (CLPP) Highly reproducible fraction of community (1996a), Garland and Mills

Relatively inexpensive Favours fast growing (1991)

Fatty acid methyl ester analysis


Differentiate between microbial communities Generates large amount of data Option of using bacterial, fungal plates or site specific carbon sources (Biolog)

No culturing of microorganisms, direct extraction from soil

Follow specific organisms or communities


Only represents those organisms capable of utilizing available carbon sources Potential metabolic diversity, not in situ diversity

Sensitive to inoculum density If using fungal spores, a lot of material is needed

Can be influenced by external factors

Possibility results can be confounded by other microorganisms

Graham et al. (1995), Siciliano and Germida (1998), Zelles (1999)

Table 2

Advantages and disadvantages of some molecular-based methods to study soil microbial diversity

Method Advantages Disadvantages Selected references

Guanine plus cytosine


Not influenced by PCR


Requires large quantities of


Nusslein and Tiedje (1999), Tiedje et al. (1999)

Includes all DNA extracted Dependent on lysing and

Quantitative extraction efficiency

Includes rare members of community

Coarse level of resolution

Nucleic acid reassociation Total DNA extracted Lack of sensitivity Torsvik et al. (1990a,b,

and hybridization Not influenced by PCR


Sequences need to be in high copy number to be

1996), Cho and Tiedje


Study DNA or RNA detected

Can be studied in situ Dependent on lysing and extraction efficiency

DNA microarrays and DNA


Denaturing and temperature gradient gel electrophoresis (DGGE

and TGGE)

Same as nucleic acid hybridization

Thousands of genes can be


If using genes or DNA fragments, increased specificity

Large number of samples can be analyzed simultaneously

Reliable, reproducible and


Only detect most abundant species

Need to be able to culture


Only accurate in low diversity systems

PCR biases

Dependent on lysing and extraction efficiency Sample handling can

influence community, i.e. if

stored too long before extraction, community can change

One band can represent more than one species (co-migration)

Only detects dominant


Hubert et al. (1999), Cho and Tiedje (2001), Greene and Voordouw (2003)

Muyzer et al. (1993), Duineveld et al. (2001), Maarit-Niemi et al. (2001)

Single strand conformation Same as DGGE/TGGE PCR biases Lee et al. (1996), Tiedje polymorphism (SSCP) No GC clamp Some ssDNA can form et al. (1999)

No gradient more than one stable


Amplified ribosomal DNA Detect structural changes in PCR biases Liu et al. (1997), Tiedje

restriction analysis (ARDRA) or restriction fragment length polymorphism (RFLP)

microbial community Banding patterns often too complex

et al. (1999)

Terminal restriction fragment length

Simpler banding patterns than RFLP

Dependent on extraction and lysing efficiency

Tiedje et al. (1999), Dunbar et al. (2000), Osborn et al.

polymorphism (T-RFLP) Can be automated; large PCR biases (2000)

number of samples

Highly reproducible

Type of Taq can increase variability

Compare differences in Choice of universal primers microbial communities Choice of restriction

enzymes will influence

community fingerprint

Ribosomal intergenic spacer analysis (RISA)/automated ribosomal intergenic spacer analysis (ARISA)

Highly reproducible community profiles

Requires large quantities of


Fisher and Triplett (1999)


J.L. Kirk et al. / Journal of Microbiological Methods 58 (2004) 169-188