Paul Winalski wrote:Well, my obvious first question is, "given the genetic variability and mutability of Pinot Noir, just which Pinot Noir did you sequence?"
Are the genetic markers that make Pinot Noir Pinot Noir all sorted out yet? I could see that taking years.
And I think it's definitley being overly optimistic, and is bordering on hubris, to declare that this means genetic engineering to "improve" grape vines. All this means is that geneticists will now know for the first time exactly how much they don't have a clue about.
I'll settle for genetic engineering figuring out why Vitis vinifera is sensitive to Phylloxera, and coming up with a way to fix that.
Paul, I posted this on another board some time ago when the news first broke.
"Means squat as of now.
OK. They sequenced the base pairs for Pinot Noir. I wonder which clone, or are they all the same? Naw, couldn't be if there is any truth to differences.
Uh, do they know which pairs codes for what? Produce better wines? I'll believe it when I taste it.
Sure, insert a gene for mildew resistence...does that affect anything else? Does a shift in the sequence turn on something that was selected out earlier and produces a rancid quality?
I keep hearing all these great things about DNA sequencing, and yes. Yes they are great things. But it's years away from actually doing anything with the knowledge. For better or worse.
There are more dormant 'genes' in higher life forms than active ones. Be careful what you wish for.
I'm all for progress. Just keep it in perspective."
It's been nearly 30 years since I did any genetic study/class. When they say sequenced doesn't that mean just that? Got all the base pairs lined up? Doesn't that mean they still have to figure out what bases make up a gene?