A friend asked me to explain DNA, RNA, and epigenetics. he said that others had tried before, but it didn’t click for him.
I happen to play the piano, so I gave him a simple, albeit imperfect, analogy.
After this analogy, he finally understood! Here’s the piano analogy.
🧵
Imagine a piano with 30,000 keys. Each key represents a gene.
Nearly all of your somatic cells have the exact same piano—the same keys, the same genes. So why does a nerve cell look different from a cheek cell?
Because they’re playing different pieces on the identical pianos.
The piano is just a set of keys! The music—the composition—is the result of playing specific keys in a particular sequence and rhythm.
Pressing a key to play a note is like expressing a gene to produce mRNA.
Playing a note multiple times => multiple mRNA molecules from that gene.
Within a cell, the pattern of mRNA expression changes over time, just like the notes change over time in a musical score.
At any given moment, a fraction of the keys are being played.
Epigenetics is like the way the piano is played.
Some keys are easy to press; others harder to reach or require more effort.
Some keys might be muted or locked in certain cells; impossible to play there but functional in others. some keys play indirectly when you press another.
These differences to a key, like heavier key, muted key, hard to reach key, can be written on the keys themselves (for one cell). Here’s a register of various epigenetic changes in “keys”
As before, this register may change based on cell, type of cell, etc.
These performances are recorded into songs, much like proteins are synthesized based on mRNA templates.
Proteins are the final products—they have specific structures and functions, giving cells their unique characteristics.
The mRNA (the notes you play) might degrade quickly, but the proteins (the recorded songs) can remain in the cell as long as needed.
So, even though every cell has the same “piano,” the diverse “music” played leads to different cell types and functions.
I hope this analogy makes DNA, RNA, and epigenetics clearer!
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
In a surprising paper published in Nature, scientists accomplished what sounds impossible: using genes from a single-celled organism to create mouse stem cells, which eventually developed into a living, breathing mouse.
Animal multicellularity emerged ~700mn years ago.
The genes in this study—from choanoflagellates, ancient single-celled organisms—are somewhat of evolutionary relics.
They predate multicellular life and now appear to have played a foundational role in animal development.
Choanoflagellates don’t form stem cells, but they have versions of Sox and POU genes.
In animals, these same genes drive pluripotency—the ability of stem cells to turn into any cell type.
we recently saw an insane discovery in biology, which if true, in my opinion, makes extraterrestrial life far far more likely.
🧵
new research suggests that life on Earth became surprisingly complex very early, reshaping our understanding of life’s origins and its implications for the existence of life elsewhere in the universe.
a paper about the Last Universal Common Ancestor (LUCA) hypothesis reconstructed the genome of our LUCA, dating it to about 4.2 billion years ago…
…just a few hundred million years after Earth formed 4.5 billion years ago.
let's talk biological age.
aging markers boost health management, refine life expectancy, and enhance well-being. yet, consensus on the very idea of aging is still in the works.
here's my thread 1 of 3 on biological age markers.
🧵OPEN THE THREAD🧵
here's what we do know
- age is a significant marker across the board
- people age differently
- it is biological, rather than chronological, age that actually matters in medicine
clinicians in routine checkups are actually often measuring biological age.
this includes max. O2 consumption, kidney function, inflammatory markers, grip strength, sit-and-reach, soft lean mass, and more.
these may be insufficient in isolation - more on that later.