Real Science Friday: Now Soft Tissue from a Mosasaur!
- Thread starter Jefferson
- Start date
Unfortunately, the golden days of antediluvian DNA did not last. A critical review of ancient DNA literature through the development of the field highlights that few recent studies have succeeded in amplifying DNA from remains older than several hundred thousand years.[13] A greater appreciation for the risks of environmental contamination and studies on the chemical stability of DNA have resulted in concerns being raised over previous reported results. The Dinosaur DNA was later revealed to be human Y-Chromosome,[14] while the DNA reported from encapsulated halobacteria has been criticized based on its similarity to modern bacteria, which hints at contamination.[15] Recent work also suggest that these bacterial DNA samples may not have survived from ancient times but may instead be the product of long-term, low-level metabolic activity.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancient_DNA
Rats. So no dino DNA. They could be wrong, of course. But I guess not. It might still be possible to look at Australopithecine DNA. But not dinosaurs.
First soft tissue turns out to be wrong, and now DNA. Sad.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancient_DNA
Rats. So no dino DNA. They could be wrong, of course. But I guess not. It might still be possible to look at Australopithecine DNA. But not dinosaurs.
First soft tissue turns out to be wrong, and now DNA. Sad.