Обсуждение:Функциональная генетика
Определение[править]
Изменения затрагивают определение "Функциональной генетики" - направление в генетике, целью которого является познание механизмов (первичных реакций) поддержания жизни и передачи наследуемых признаков организмов в ряду поколений путем изучения количественных закономерностей функционирования (работы) генетического аппарата клетки (геном, ДНК, нуклеопротеид) в связи с различными проявлениями жизнедеятельности (биологическими процессами). К этим процессам относится митотический цикл, специализация (дифференцировка) и выполнение "работы", соответствующей её специализации в "норме" и "патологии".
Раздел "методология" остается без изменений, но в конце предлагается дополнение: - "В современной биологии распространен альтернативный подход к достижению основной цели - молекулярно-биологический, основанный на изучении "структуры" генетического аппарата клетки. Это направление принято называть "функциональной геномикой".
- Приведите источники. CyclowikiBot (обсуждение) 13:43, 1 августа 2022 (UTC)
«Functional genetics» – it seems to be there, but it is not there yet.[править]
B.L. Pereverzev, MD A few years ago, my definition of the term "Functional Genetics" was published on Wikipedia. Then it was deleted, but the text remained on the Internet. The reason for the deletion was the opinion of one of the readers, who stated that we are talking about an independent direction of science, which, for some reason, does not arouse the interest of the scientific community - it is "suspicious"! I explain this fact by the fact that we are dealing with a science that is ahead of time, and revolutionary, carrying an alternative methodology for biology that is new to the generally accepted one, which is represented by molecular biology with its satellite - "Functional Genomics". The "new" methodology is a methodology of exact science, the principles of which are based on the language adopted in mathematics. First of all, this concerns the requirement for the accuracy of the professional language. Biology is not an exact science. Accordingly, this is her vocabulary – the unresolved terminological problem is one of the main reasons for the relatively low efficiency of biology, as well as a source of misunderstandings that arise between specialists. In our case, the confrontation between "Functional genetics" and "Functional genomics" is caused by different interpretations of such concepts as "function", "genome", as well as reading the name of a global scientific problem – "study of the structure and function of the genome". Here I will quote excerpts from an article by one of the prominent Russian biologists – B.M. Mednikov (1982): - "The study of the "structure of the genome" has reached a dead end: this direction largely works for itself." - "In molecular biology, the ideas of that naive time are still alive, when it seemed that, having comprehended the structure, we would also understand the "function". - "Apparently, it is possible to study a function only by studying a function, and not a structure at all. Moreover, only by understanding the principles of the functioning of genomes, we will be able to explain the amazing differences in their structure; the reverse approach has convincingly shown its helplessness and futility. In short, we will understand the structure from the function, not the function from the structure." His oral statement to our works is interesting: "The ideas are crazy, but how simple everything is!" (Moscow State University, 1983). In our interpretation, "Functional genetics" claims to create the possibility of experimental study of the "function" of the genome, that is, the patterns that determine certain manifestations of the vital activity of cells and organisms. The apologists of "Functional Genomics" also talk about this, but their capabilities are fundamentally different. They study the "functions" of individual genes and, by summing up the relevant information, imagine the genome. They do not deal directly with the genome as an integral entity. The word "function" is also perceived differently. For us, this is a kind of mathematical expression based on objective quantitative data, which allows us to use them to gain additional knowledge. In the second case, these are just words, "theory", the pinnacle of knowledge, which can be interpreted in different ways. For the first time, the methodology of "Functional Genetics" appeared in the works of G. Mendel (mid-19th century). Let me remind you that he established numerical ratios that reveal the regularity of the distribution of the characteristics of parents in a number of generations. The fate of his discovery is known – recognition came after many decades, and the methodological essence of the discovery remains insufficiently evaluated until now. The success of G. Mendel was predetermined by the accuracy of the formulation of the research task (at that time he was teaching physics) and the successful choice of the object. A hundred years later, another important event in science took place – the mass exodus of major physicists working on the atomic project to biology. Many were attracted by the problem of cancer. Among them was the future academician N.M. Emanuel. The problem remained unsolved, but he created the "kinetics of biological processes" - one of the directions of biophysics. My work is done within the framework of his teachings. As a result, a direct relationship was established between the content of DNA and RNA in proliferating cells (a = RNA/DNA ≤ 1) and the corresponding coefficient was given a physical meaning – this is an indicator of the relative rate of RNA neoplasm and, at the same time, one of the kinetic parameters of the cellular differentiation process. It is possible that the coefficient also indicates the proportion of the genome functioning in cells of a certain type, in other words, it is their "quantitative passport". In the development of such ideas, for the first time in world practice, we have established "kinetic parameters of the process of cellular differentiation". There is nothing like this in the scientific literature. Obviously, such information is shocking and they cannot but arouse suspicion and a lot of questions, including about the identity of the author or authors. Here it is important to emphasize the importance of the ideas of N.M. Emanuel. He considered kinetics (the science of the speeds of chemical processes) as a universal technological technique that allows solving the problems of practical biology and medicine, as well as purposefully studying the mechanisms of biological processes in norm and pathology. I am an oncologist by education and became his student. Even before I met him, I had an interest in studying the DNA content in the genome of malignant cells (1963). It was the time of the formation of molecular biology. I didn't know then that I would have to touch the Achilles heel of biology – the terminological problem. In order to carry out measurements on individual cells, it was necessary to create appropriate methods. It took years. N.M.'s participation was reduced not only to organizational assistance during certain stages of work (a special measuring microscope was created, some methods and techniques of quantitative cytochemistry were developed), but, and this is the main thing – he influenced the formation of the peculiarities of thinking of his medical students. As a result, "Functional Genetics" appeared, and with it the causes of the crisis of modern biology became clear. As for oncology, in the new conditions, ideas about ways to solve the problem of cancer have completely changed. The study of DNA fragments is a dead–end path, the solution to the problem lies through the study of the "kinetic parameters of the process of cellular differentiation" in norm and pathology. Moscow, 12. 2022
Переведено translate.yandex.ru/