According to a new study, the last woolly mammoth population vanished due to a sudden, random event 4,000 years ago. The genome analysis suggests that the mammoths did not go extinct for genetic reasons, as earlier believed.

Woolly mammoths lived across the frozen land of Europe, North America, and Asia. However, as the ice started to melt, the food they lived on became scarce which caused their population to shrink considerably.

Also Read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/science/gray-whales-shrinking-in-size-along-the-pacific-northwest-coast-734650">Gray whales shrinking in size along the Pacific Northwest coast</a>

The last population of mammoths that traveled across the ice to Wrangel Island located in Russia, were cut off from the mainland about 10,000 years ago. According to the researchers, the small group on the island consisted of at least eight mammoths which grew to about 200-300. This population is known to survive 6,000 years more than the rest.

When compared with the mainland population, the island population shows evidence that suggests inbreeding and low genetic diversity. However, the mammoths only accumulated mildly harmful mutations, that were not adverse enough to lead to their extinction. The more harmful mutations were not viable and were discarded by the population over time.

“We can now confidently reject the idea that the population was simply too small and that they were doomed to go extinct for genetic reasons,” said senior author Love Dalén, an evolutionary geneticist at the Centre for Palaeogenetics, a collaboration between the Swedish Museum of Natural History and Stockholm University. “This means it was probably just some random event that killed them off, and if that random event hadn't happened, then we would still have mammoths today.”

Also Read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/science/jurassic-king-with-a-crown-scientists-discover-fancy-headgear-on-78-million-year-old-dinosaur-733808">Jurassic king with a crown? Scientists discover fancy headgear on 78-million-year-old dinosaur</a>

The mammoth genomes examined in this research did not include the last 300 years of their time on Earth. New fossils have been discovered by researchers and will be studied in future.

“What happened at the end is a bit of a mystery still—we don't know why they went extinct after having been more or less fine for 6,000 years, but we think it was something sudden,” said Dalén. “I would say there is still hope to figure out why they went extinct, but no promises.”

This study not only analyses how the woolly mammoths were killed but may also provide us insights into current endangered species and make informed strategies for their conservation.&nbsp;

(With inputs from agencies)

According to a new study, the last woolly mammoth population vanished due to a sudden, random event 4,000 years ago. The genome analysis suggests that the mammoths did not go extinct for genetic reasons, as earlier believed.

According to a new study, the last woolly mammoth population vanished due to a sudden, random event 4,000 years ago. The genome analysis suggests that the mammoths did not go extinct for genetic reasons, as earlier believed. Woolly mammoths lived across the frozen land of Europe, North America, and Asia. However, as the ice started to melt, the food they lived on became scarce which caused their population to shrink considerably. Also Read | Gray whales shrinking in size along the Pacific Northwest coast The last population of mammoths that traveled across the ice to Wrangel Island located in Russia, were cut off from the mainland about 10,000 years ago. According to the researchers, the small group on the island consisted of at least eight mammoths which grew to about 200-300. This population is known to survive 6,000 years more than the rest. When compared with the mainland population, the island population shows evidence that suggests inbreeding and low genetic diversity. However, the mammoths only accumulated mildly harmful mutations, that were not adverse enough to lead to their extinction. The more harmful mutations were not viable and were discarded by the population over time. “We can now confidently reject the idea that the population was simply too small and that they were doomed to go extinct for genetic reasons,” said senior author Love Dalén, an evolutionary geneticist at the Centre for Palaeogenetics, a collaboration between the Swedish Museum of Natural History and Stockholm University. “This means it was probably just some random event that killed them off, and if that random event hadn't happened, then we would still have mammoths today.” Also Read | Jurassic king with a crown? Scientists discover fancy headgear on 78-million-year-old dinosaur The mammoth genomes examined in this research did not include the last 300 years of their time on Earth. New fossils have been discovered by researchers and will be studied in future. “What happened at the end is a bit of a mystery still—we don't know why they went extinct after having been more or less fine for 6,000 years, but we think it was something sudden,” said Dalén. “I would say there is still hope to figure out why they went extinct, but no promises.” This study not only analyses how the woolly mammoths were killed but may also provide us insights into current endangered species and make informed strategies for their conservation. (With inputs from agencies)

Mysterious event led to the woolly mammoths perishing from Earth: Study

What makes us human? Primate genome study offers some clues

An expert has predicted that within five years, rare diseases in children would be much easier to spot.&nbsp;Professor Matt Brown, the Chief Scientific Officer at Genomics England has predicted that very soon parents will be able to have it checked if their baby is at a higher risk of illnesses. He said that for this, parents could have their children’s genetic code read by the NHS.

Also read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/science/this-is-how-you-can-beat-health-hazards-of-sitting-all-day-552608">Dread health hazards of sitting all day, take a five-minute walk every half an hour</a>

Currently, each year, about 3,000 children in Britain are born with rare conditions and on average it takes up to five years, countless tests and visits to doctors for them to get a diagnosis. The delays can cause irreparable damage, which, thanks to this genome, sequencing could be avoided.

Last month, Genomic England and NHS announced the ‘Newborn Genomes Programme’. The pilot scheme which was announced last month will sequence the genomes of 100,000 babies over the next two years.&nbsp;

Also read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/science/hormone-replacement-therapy-may-help-reduce-risk-of-alzheimers-disease-in-women-study-552570">Hormone replacement therapy may help reduce risk of Alzheimer’s disease in women: Study</a>

As per the vision document, if the £105 million ($128.2 million) pilot is successful, it will be added to the NHS routine care. However, Brown remarked that the programme would never be compulsory and people will have to consent to have their baby’s genome sequenced by NHS.

Currently, whole genome sequencing (WGS) as per Daily Mail costs the NHS £800 ($978) to £1,000 ($1,223) every time, however with the programme it would cost around £150 ($183).

(With inputs from agencies)

WATCH WION LIVE HERE

<iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="350" loading="”lazy”" src="https://www.wionews.com/live-tv/embed?autoplay=1&amp;mute=1" width="100%"></iframe>

You can now write for wionews.com and be a part of the community. Share your stories and opinions with us <a href="https://www.wionews.com/content-contribution-registration-form">here</a>.

An expert has predicted that within five years, rare diseases in children would be much easier to spot. Professor Matt Brown, the Chief Scientific Officer at Genomics England has predicted that very soon parents will be able to have it checked if their baby is at a higher risk of illnesses.

An expert has predicted that within five years, rare diseases in children would be much easier to spot. Professor Matt Brown, the Chief Scientific Officer at Genomics England has predicted that very soon parents will be able to have it checked if their baby is at a higher risk of illnesses. He said that for this, parents could have their children’s genetic code read by the NHS. Also read | Dread health hazards of sitting all day, take a five-minute walk every half an hour Currently, each year, about 3,000 children in Britain are born with rare conditions and on average it takes up to five years, countless tests and visits to doctors for them to get a diagnosis. The delays can cause irreparable damage, which, thanks to this genome, sequencing could be avoided. Last month, Genomic England and NHS announced the ‘Newborn Genomes Programme’. The pilot scheme which was announced last month will sequence the genomes of 100,000 babies over the next two years. Also read | Hormone replacement therapy may help reduce risk of Alzheimer’s disease in women: Study As per the vision document, if the £105 million ($128.2 million) pilot is successful, it will be added to the NHS routine care. However, Brown remarked that the programme would never be compulsory and people will have to consent to have their baby’s genome sequenced by NHS. Currently, whole genome sequencing (WGS) as per Daily Mail costs the NHS £800 ($978) to £1,000 ($1,223) every time, however with the programme it would cost around £150 ($183). (With inputs from agencies) WATCH WION LIVE HERE You can now write for wionews.com and be a part of the community. Share your stories and opinions with us here.

UK's NHS and Genomics England to use genome sequencing to identify rare diseases in babies

It is often said and believed that a dog is man's best friend. The saying may or may not be true, but a recent study by some scientists from the UK has shown that a dog is definitely man's oldest best friend.

A study of dog DNA was conducted at the&nbsp;Ancient Genomics laboratory at London's Crick Institute. This study revealed that the dogs have been domesticated since the end of the last age, which is nearly&nbsp;11,000 years ago. This claim has also proved that dogs were the first animal to be domesticated by human beings.

Greger Larson, author and Director of the Palaeogenomics and Bio-Archaeology Research Network at the University of Oxford, says: "Dogs are our oldest and closest animal partner. Using DNA from ancient dogs is showing us just how far back our shared history goes and will ultimately help us understand when and where this deep relationship began."

The study was conducted by leading scientists at the Francis Crick Institute, University of Oxford, University of Vienna and archaeologists from more than 10 countries and was published in the Science journal on Thursday. In this research oh ancient genomes, scientists extracted and analysed DNA from skeletal material.

Dr Pontus Skoglund, co-author of the study and group leader of the Ancient Genomics laboratory at London's Crick Institute, told BBC News: "Dogs are really unique in being this quite strange thing if you think about it when all people were still hunter gatherers, they domesticate what is really a wild carnivore - wolves are pretty frightening in many parts of the world.

"The question of why did people do that? How did that come about? That's what we're ultimately interested in."

The research also revealed that the genetic patterns of dogs were almost similar to that of humans, to some extent. The reason behind this may be that humans were accompanied by their domesticated dogs wherever they moved and shifted. However, differences do exist.&nbsp;

It was also observed that the diversity of dogs that exists today is mainly from the time period when human beings were hunter and gatherers as the dogs were widespread across the Northern Hemisphere by the end of the Ice Age.&nbsp;"Some of the variation you see between dogs walking down the street today originated in the Ice Age. By the end of this period, dogs were already widespread across the northern hemisphere,"&nbsp; Skoglund said.

One thing that the scientists have not been able to figure out is the lack of similarity between human and dog diversity in some cases. The diversity in European countries was diminished by one dog, but the same was nor mirrored in human beings.

"Just as ancient DNA has revolutionised the study of our own ancestors, it's now starting to do the same for dogs and other domesticated animals. Studying our animal companions adds another layer to our understanding of human history."

The researchers have not closed the study, for now, as they still aim to find out where and in which human cultural context, dogs were first domesticated.

It is often said and believed that a dog is man's best friend. The saying may or may not be true, but a recent study by some scientists from the UK has shown that a dog is definitely man's oldest best friend.

It is often said and believed that a dog is man's best friend. The saying may or may not be true, but a recent study by some scientists from the UK has shown that a dog is definitely man's oldest best friend. A study of dog DNA was conducted at the Ancient Genomics laboratory at London's Crick Institute. This study revealed that the dogs have been domesticated since the end of the last age, which is nearly 11,000 years ago. This claim has also proved that dogs were the first animal to be domesticated by human beings. Greger Larson, author and Director of the Palaeogenomics and Bio-Archaeology Research Network at the University of Oxford, says: "Dogs are our oldest and closest animal partner. Using DNA from ancient dogs is showing us just how far back our shared history goes and will ultimately help us understand when and where this deep relationship began." The study was conducted by leading scientists at the Francis Crick Institute, University of Oxford, University of Vienna and archaeologists from more than 10 countries and was published in the Science journal on Thursday. In this research oh ancient genomes, scientists extracted and analysed DNA from skeletal material. Dr Pontus Skoglund, co-author of the study and group leader of the Ancient Genomics laboratory at London's Crick Institute, told BBC News: "Dogs are really unique in being this quite strange thing if you think about it when all people were still hunter gatherers, they domesticate what is really a wild carnivore - wolves are pretty frightening in many parts of the world. "The question of why did people do that? How did that come about? That's what we're ultimately interested in." The research also revealed that the genetic patterns of dogs were almost similar to that of humans, to some extent. The reason behind this may be that humans were accompanied by their domesticated dogs wherever they moved and shifted. However, differences do exist. It was also observed that the diversity of dogs that exists today is mainly from the time period when human beings were hunter and gatherers as the dogs were widespread across the Northern Hemisphere by the end of the Ice Age. "Some of the variation you see between dogs walking down the street today originated in the Ice Age. By the end of this period, dogs were already widespread across the northern hemisphere," Skoglund said. One thing that the scientists have not been able to figure out is the lack of similarity between human and dog diversity in some cases. The diversity in European countries was diminished by one dog, but the same was nor mirrored in human beings. "Just as ancient DNA has revolutionised the study of our own ancestors, it's now starting to do the same for dogs and other domesticated animals. Studying our animal companions adds another layer to our understanding of human history." The researchers have not closed the study, for now, as they still aim to find out where and in which human cultural context, dogs were first domesticated.

Dogs are man's oldest best friends, DNA study reveals

The University of California will soon be granted a potentially valuable patent on the revolutionary gene-editing technology known as CRISPR, according to a document filed by the US patent office on Friday.

The US Patent and Trademark Office decision to grant the patent could further fuel a long-running rivalry between the university and the Broad Institute, a biological and genomic research centre affiliated with the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) and Harvard University that also holds patents on CRISPR.

Patent rights to CRISPR could eventually be worth billions of dollars because the technology could revolutionize the treatment of diseases, crop engineering, and other areas.

The so-called notice of allowance from the Patent and Trademark Office means the patent will likely be issued within eight weeks. Once issued, it could still face challenges in administrative or court proceedings.

"The issued patent will encompass the use of CRISPR-Cas9 technology in any cellular or non-cellular environment", Eldora Ellison, a lead patent strategist on CRISPR matters for the University of California, said in an online statement.

CRISPR works as molecular scissors that can trim away unwanted pieces of genetic material and replace them with new ones. Easier to use than older techniques, it has quickly become a preferred method of gene editing in research labs.

The patent being approved stems from an application filed by microbiologists Jennifer Doudna of the University of California at Berkeley and Emmanuelle Charpentier of the University of Vienna in 2012. The scientists filed the application, the first ever for a CRISPR-related patent after they discovered how CRISPR could be used to edit genomes in simple pieces of DNA called plasmids.

A team at the Broad Institute led by bioengineer Feng Zhang applied for their own patent months later but paid for a fast-track review process, which landed them the first CRISPR patent in 2014. The Broad's patents covered CRISPR's use in so-called eukaryotic cells, which include animal and human cells.

The new patent decision "does not affect the CRISPR patent estate held by Broad, MIT, and Harvard in any way," Broad Institute spokesman David Cameron said in a statement.

In April 2015, the University of California filed a petition with the Patent and Trademark Office challenging the Broad Institute's patents, claiming they covered the same thing as the university's earlier application.

However, the board rejected that petition, allowing both the University of California's application and the Broad Institute patents to stand. Its decision was upheld by a federal appeals court last year.

Both institutions have licensed their CRISPR intellectual property to biotech companies.

The University of California will soon be granted a potentially valuable patent on the revolutionary gene-editing technology known as CRISPR, according to a document filed by the US patent office on Friday.

The University of California will soon be granted a potentially valuable patent on the revolutionary gene-editing technology known as CRISPR, according to a document filed by the US patent office on Friday. The US Patent and Trademark Office decision to grant the patent could further fuel a long-running rivalry between the university and the Broad Institute, a biological and genomic research centre affiliated with the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) and Harvard University that also holds patents on CRISPR. Patent rights to CRISPR could eventually be worth billions of dollars because the technology could revolutionize the treatment of diseases, crop engineering, and other areas. The so-called notice of allowance from the Patent and Trademark Office means the patent will likely be issued within eight weeks. Once issued, it could still face challenges in administrative or court proceedings. "The issued patent will encompass the use of CRISPR-Cas9 technology in any cellular or non-cellular environment", Eldora Ellison, a lead patent strategist on CRISPR matters for the University of California, said in an online statement. CRISPR works as molecular scissors that can trim away unwanted pieces of genetic material and replace them with new ones. Easier to use than older techniques, it has quickly become a preferred method of gene editing in research labs. The patent being approved stems from an application filed by microbiologists Jennifer Doudna of the University of California at Berkeley and Emmanuelle Charpentier of the University of Vienna in 2012. The scientists filed the application, the first ever for a CRISPR-related patent after they discovered how CRISPR could be used to edit genomes in simple pieces of DNA called plasmids. A team at the Broad Institute led by bioengineer Feng Zhang applied for their own patent months later but paid for a fast-track review process, which landed them the first CRISPR patent in 2014. The Broad's patents covered CRISPR's use in so-called eukaryotic cells, which include animal and human cells. The new patent decision "does not affect the CRISPR patent estate held by Broad, MIT, and Harvard in any way," Broad Institute spokesman David Cameron said in a statement. In April 2015, the University of California filed a petition with the Patent and Trademark Office challenging the Broad Institute's patents, claiming they covered the same thing as the university's earlier application. However, the board rejected that petition, allowing both the University of California's application and the Broad Institute patents to stand. Its decision was upheld by a federal appeals court last year. Both institutions have licensed their CRISPR intellectual property to biotech companies.

University of California to be granted pioneering CRISPR patent

genomic-research

Genomic Research, News on Genomic Research, stories on Genomic Research, articles on Genomic Research, Genomic Research stories at Wion, Genomic Research news, Genomic Research latest news