AbyssalRemark
commented
7 months ago So according to Nancy we have DNA data. Shes really confident in this. Admittedly. It doesn't matter too much to us. As they are virtually interchangeable. It only changes what we might need to do with the data. It doesn't change the graph algorithm just constructing the graph.
I think there a lot of confusion about what we have and what were trying to do. I am sure I am not alone in this.
We 100% have RNA data. GUAC, not ATGC. T not U. This is very easy to verify. Open up and look at any of the files we have.
But we were just told were doing DNA..
This, causes a lot of concern. The process is the same (for now). So we can continue moving forward. Luckily
So what do we have and how does it effect us?
mRNA extraction and DNA extraction is different. I don't totally understand in what way it is different. But from what I remember being told is that the DNA extraction should be really clean while the RNA extraction can be contaminated.
This might not be correct. Further reading needed.
Now is it mRNA or just RNA? I am not sure if we can tell from the files. From what I was told from the people who did the lab work, we should be looking at mRNA. And that the m(?)RNA info probably has other gunk in it. So that when we get to try and see if we can identify by comparing to known sequences like human and yeast and bacteria to rule out data points. Hence why we would really like to have DNA data and mRNA data..
From what I understand, There were (at least one) DNA extractions and two mRNA extractions a control plant and one that was poked a bunch. We currently have some mRNA data. Is that the control or the poked plant? Well the folder is labeled "Sample1Control1" which if we trust in Occam's Razor, that is probably what we have.
How does this effect us?
At the very least, I hope it inspires just a little bit of skepticism and inform us why its important to try and understand the context of our work not just the task we are given. But otherwise, I am unsure. What do you think?