Diets of Organisms Can Affect the DNA sequences of their Genes

Recent studies have found that the DNA sequence of an organism can be affected by their diet. This particular study was conducted at the University of Oxford where researchers studied DNA sequences of parasites. The parasites were then divided into two groups, depending on the composition of their diets, in which the researchers then observed differences in their DNA sequences. The co-author of this study, Dr. Steven Kelly, from Oxford's Department of Plant Sciences, shares insights about their hypothesis of this study, which was that an organism's DNA could be altered by the composition of the food it consumes.

Parasites were the ideal organisms to be used in this study because they are simple, and while they do share a common ancestor, they have since evolved to benefit from a variety of hosts and their diets very much differ. Parasites that were specifically used in this study were eukaryotic and bacterial parasites, that infect either plant or animal hosts. It was found in the study that changes in the DNA in each organism were typically caused by the level of nitrogen in the parasite's diet; particularly parasites with low nitrogen levels but high sugar levels had DNA sequences that consumed less nitrogen than a parasite with high nitrogen levels and high protein diets.



Researchers also were able to find a relationship between cellular metabolism and evolution, that prior to this study is believed to have been hidden. This newfound relationship was found based on mathematical models constructed by researchers; this model also helps to show how DNA sequences may be influenced by an adaptation to a different diet. From this evidence and information gained, researchers believe it is possible to use the analysis of DNA sequences of genes to predict the diets of other organisms that are closely related. These researchers are now beginning to look at more complicated organisms to see if they will find the same result. All of the data that has come out of this experiment certainly makes me believe that it will soon be possible to definitively tell for many more organisms, even more complex organisms, that the analysis of DNA sequencing of genes in one organism will surely help predict the diets of other organisms related to it.

http://www.wired.it/topic/dna/

<www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2016/11/161115111720.htm>.

Proving that You Are What You Eat

We often say, "you are what you eat," when it comes to a healthy diet. According to Samantha Heller, clinical nutritionist at NYU Medical Center, "everything you eat becomes a part of not only your inner being, but the outer fabric of your body as well." Healthier food promotes healthier skin and the opposite is true when you consume unhealthy foods. Eating junk food or unhealthy food can lead to sallow, dry and old skin overtime. In addition, other skin problems can occur such as acne, eczema, and psoriasis. However, scientists have found genetic evidence that proves "you are what you eat."

At the University of Oxford, researchers have proved that an organism's diet can affect the DNA sequences of their genes. By doing a study on two parasites, scientists have detected a difference in DNA sequences based on the organism's diet. Researchers hypothesized that the composition of an organism's diet can alter an organism's DNA.  The hypothesis was tested using two different groups of parasites: eukaryotic parasites (Kinetoplastida) and bacterial parasites (Mollicutes). According to Dr. Steven Kelly from Oxford's Department of Plant Sciences,  the parasites selected serves as an excellent model system because they share a common ancestor but have evolved to infect different hosts and eat very different foods.

Based on their results, researchers found that different levels of nitrogen in the parasites' diets contributed to the change in DNA sequences. Parasites that usually have a low nitrogen, high-sugar diet, had a different DNA comparison to parasites with nitrogen-rich, high-protein diets. Using mathematical models, researchers have been able to predict the diets of related organisms by analyzing the DNA sequence of the genes. 

While the hypothesis holds true for simple organisms, it is still unclear if the same will occur in complex organisms. While there are many factors that can affect the DNA structure of an organism, the study has proved that a high percentage of the differences in DNA sequences are due to diet composition. If results do end up proving to be true for complex organisms, it will be quite useful in encouraging public awareness for promoting a healthier lifestyle for everyone. It will serve essential in providing evidence how an individual's diet can certainly affect future generations and hopefully encourage everyone to maintain a healthy diet. 

The Big Search to Find Out Where Dogs Come From

Humans had dogs before any other animal, and scientists are still debating exactly when and where these ancient animals originated. A large new study being carried out at the University of Oxford may provide some answers. Scientists came up with an oversimplified, broad idea that hunter-gatherers used to take wolf puppies from their den and raised them as tamer wolves, later becoming the pets we love and cuddle with. But, this prevailing scientific opinion is hardly plausible because wolves are very hard to tame. This makes it easier to believe that dogs actually invented themselves.

Dogs are different from wolves in many ways: dogs do not travel in packs like wolves do, dogs will eat comfortably in the presence of people whereas wolves do not, and dogs’ skulls are wider and snouts are shorter than wolves’. Scientists generally agree dogs originated around 15,000 years ago, while biologists argue that dogs originated well over 30,000 years ago based on DNA and the shape of their skulls. Modern and ancient DNA sources show that dogs originated in East Asia, Mongolia, Siberia, Europe, and Africa. Unfortunately, Greger Larson, a biologist at the University of Oxford, says that a dog's DNA is very hard to identify due to the interbreeding and blending. In order to get to the bottom of this, Larson and colleague Keith Dobney persuaded "Who's Who" of dog researchers to join a broad project to analyze ancient bones and their DNA. 
            
This is only the beginning of this study, and when it is confirmed where and how dogs originated, it will be a huge milestone for canine science and genetics. Canine scientists need more information on mitochondrial and nuclear DNA, but this risks damaging ancient fossils. What geneticists try to establish is how different the DNA of one animal is from another. Adding ancient DNA gives many more points of reference over a long time span. Dr. Larson is hoping that the project will be able to determine whether the domestication process occurred closer to 15,000 or 30,000 years ago, and in what region it took place. But, it is not quite the date, exact location and name of the ancient hunter that some dog lovers might hope for.

I think it may be hard to access more information because ancient fossils are not to be tampered with, but in order to gain this knowledge some might have to be compromised. If scientists study ancient fossils, they can compare DNA and determine when dogs were domesticated. The fossils will also provide important information like how similar wolves' and dogs' DNA were back 15,000 years ago. Comparing the DNA of wolves and dogs now might not show much, because they are so different today. But, if scientists could access ancient DNA from both species they can compare the two when they were both similar, before any evolutionary changes may have happened. To me, it is obvious that sampling ancient fossils will open many doors and bring canine scientists to a conclusion.