Evolution of genome sequencing techniques

The quality and the speed for genome sequencing has advanced at the same time that technology boundaries are stretched. This advancement has been divided so far in three generations. The first-generation methods enabled sequencing of clonal DNA populations. The second-generation massively increased throughput by parallelizing many reactions while the third-generation methods allow direct sequencing of single DNA molecules. The first techniques to sequence DNA were not developed until the mid-1970s, when two distinct sequencing methods were developed almost simultaneously, one by Alan Maxam and Walter Gilbert, and the other one by Frederick Sanger. The first one is a chemical method to cleave DNA at specific points and the second one uses ddNTPs, which synthesizes a copy from the DNA chain template. Nevertheless, both methods generate fragments of varying lengths that are further electrophoresed. Moreover, it is important to say that until the 1990s, the sequencing of DNA was relatively expensive and it was seen as a long process. Besides, using radiolabeled nucleotides also compounded the problem through safety concerns and prevented the automation. Some advancements within the first generation include the replacement of radioactive labels by fluorescent labeled ddNTPs and cycle sequencing with thermostable DNA polymerase, which allows automation and signal amplification, making the process cheaper, safer and faster. Another method is Pyrosequencing, which is based on the “sequencing by synthesis” principle. It differs from Sanger sequencing, in that it relies on the detection of pyrophosphate release on nucleotide incorporation. By the end of the last millennia, parallelization of this method started the Next Generation Sequencing (NGS) with 454 as the first of many methods that can process multiple samples, calling it the 2º generation sequencing. Here electrophoresis was completely eliminated. One of the methods that is sometimes used is SOLiD, based on sequencing by ligation of fluorescently dye-labeled di-base probes which competes to ligate to the sequencing primer. Specificity of the di-base probe is achieved by interrogating every 1st and 2nd base in each ligation reaction. The widely used Solexa/Illumina method uses modified dNTPs containing so called “reversible terminators” which blocks further polymerization. The terminator also contains a fluorescent label, which can be detected by a camera. Now, the previous step towards the third generation was in charge of Ion Torrent, who developed a technique that is based in a method of “sequencing-by-synthesis”. Its main feature is the detection of hydrogen ions that are released during base incorporation. Likewise, the third generation takes into account nanotechnology advancements for the processing of unique DNA molecules to a real time synthesis sequencing system like PacBio; and finally, the NANOPORE, projected since 1995, also uses Nano-sensors forming channels obtained from bacteria that conducts the sample to a sensor that allows the detection of each nucleotide residue in the DNA strand. The advancements in terms of technology that we have nowadays have been so quick, that it makes wonder: ¿How do we imagine the next generation?

The Myosin Heavy Chain specific A4.1025 antibody discriminates different cardiac segments in ancient groups of gnathostomes: Morphological and evolutionary implications

The pan-Myosin Heavy Chain (pan-MyHC) marker MF20 have been reported to show similar, homogeneous signal in the myocardial segments of the heart of teleosts and tetrapods. However, in an ongoing study of the myocardial structure of the dogfish (Scyliorhinus canicula; Chondrichthyes), we observed differential immunostaining of the cardiac segments using another pan-MyHC, the A4.1025 antibody. In order to investigate the relevance of this finding for better understanding of the morphology and evolution of the vertebrate heart, we performed immunohistochemistry, slot blot and western blot in several species of chondrichthyans, actinopterygians and mammals using the above mentioned antibodies. In the dogfish heart, A4.1025 and MF20 specifically recognized MyHC isoforms, although with different degree of affinity. MF20 reactivity was homogeneous and high in all the myocardial segments. However, A4.1025 reactivity was heterogeneous. It was high in the sinus venosus (external layer), atrium and atrioventricular region, low in the ventricle and conus arteriosus, and null in the internal layer of the sinus venosus. A heterogeneous pattern of A4.1025 immunoreactivity was also detected in two other elasmobranchs, a holocephalan, a polypteryform and an acipenseriform. In all of these species, MF20 immunoreactivity was homogeneous. In addition, both markers showed a homogeneous immunoreactivity pattern in teleosts and mammals. Our results indicate that in the hearts of ancient gnathostomes, in all of which a conspicuous conus arteriosus exists, one or more MyHC isoforms with low affinity for A4.1025 show segment-specific distributions. Thus, A4.1025 appears to be an appropriated marker to identify the cardiac segments and their boundaries. We propose that the segmentspecific distribution of MyHC isoforms may generate a particular type of myocardial contractility associated with the presence of a conus arteriosus.