VOLUME 1 || ISSUE 2 || .

OCT 2016

THE BIONOVE
Sathyabama Institute of Science and Technology

The Genetics Issue MS. PAMELA IRENE

EKKA
VISION OF THE DEPARTMENT
MS.NANCYBIJI
The department of Biotechnology envisages to empower the students with MR. PADMANABHAN
analytical skills and to create an ethical workforce, competent to transform the STAFF EDITOR:
future with social consciousness on par with global standards. DR. MASILAMANISELVAM
.
MISSION OF THE DEPARTMENT
1. To enable the students to acquire technical skills in core aspects of
Bioengineering pertaining to the development of innovative technologies.
WHAT’S CHANGED IN
2. To increase the employability of students by exposing them to various GENETICS SINCE YOUR
industrial, academic and research environment.
3. To inculcate leadership and inter-personal skills by involving students in HIGH SCHOOL BIOLOGY
diversified activities.. CLASS?
4. To instil the societal and ethical responsibility in our students.

PROGRAMME EDUCATIONAL OBJECTIVES (PEO's)

PEO1: To prepare globally competent graduates having strong fundamentals, SCIENTISTS IDENTIFY GENES
domain knowledge, updated with modern technology to provide effective CONNECTED TO WELLBEING,
solutions for engineering problems. DEPRESSION AND NEUROTICISM
PEO2: To acquaint the graduates to work as a committed professional with
strong professional ethics and values, sense of responsibilities, understanding
of legal, safety, health, societal, cultural and environmental issues. YOUR BEST DIET MIGHT
PEO3: To mould committed and motivated graduates with research attitude,
lifelong learning, investigative approach and multidisciplinary thinking.
DEPEND ON YOUR
PEO4: To prepare the graduates with strong managerial and communication GENETICS
skills to work efficiently as individual as well as in teams.
 What’s changed in genetics since your
high school biology class?
-Nishanthi B
The field of genetics has seen astonishing breakthroughs and the development of world-changing technologies in the past half
century. With such rapid progress, the field has likely raced well beyond the high school biology textbook your class used to study
alleles, fruit flies and eye color inheritance.
Joel Eissenberg, Ph.D., associate dean for research and professor of biochemistry and molecular biology at Saint Louis University
School of Medicine, shares a recap to get up to speed on the remarkable advances that are changing not only science and
medicine, but also fields like forensics and ancestry.
Over the course of the last few decades, advances in genetics have shed light on inherited diseases, cancer, personalized
medicine, genetic counseling, the microbiome, diagnosis and discovery of viruses, taxonomy of species, genealogy, forensic
science, epigenetics, junk DNA, gene therapy and gene editing.
From Angelina Jolie's proactive surgical strategy upon learning she carries BRCA cancer genes to Harvard University's project to
bring back woolly mammoth traits, Jurassic Park-style, to millions learning about their ancestry through genetic testing,
technologies using principles of genetics now surround us.
Whether you're foggy on the concept of "epigenetics" or just want to recap the high points of the science of genetics, check out
Eissenberg's overview of some of the most exciting advances in the last 50 years: Discoveries in DNA: What's New Since You
Went to High School?
When Did You Go to High School?
If you took high school biology in the …
1960s, you learned about the structure of the double helix and how sequences of DNA encode amino acids.
1970s, you may also have learned about cloning and the potential for recombinant DNA.
1980s, your class may have covered the clinical use of recombinant human insulin for diabetes treatment and the advent of GMO
foods.
1990s, your class may have studied the molecular basis for human genetic disorders, like cystic fibrosis.
2000s, your teachers likely described how the human genome was being sequenced.
 Removing race from human
genetic research -Ilanagai A

"It is time for biologists to find a better way," concludes the opening passage of a recently published paper in Science, written by Drexel School of Public
Health's Michael Yudell, the University of Pennsylvania's Dorothy Roberts and Sarah Tishkoff, and the American Museum of Natural History's Robert
DeSalle.
Yudell and his co-authors point to evidence from phylogenetics and population genetics "that racial classifications do not makes sense in terms of genetics."
When applying simple biological methods, the co-authors contend that commonly defined racial groups "lack clear-cut genetic boundaries."
One clear problem with using race as a distinguishing factor in modern biology and medicine is that "racial assumptions are not the biological guideposts
some believe them to be," the co-authors said. Furthermore, they point to how the continued use of race in genetic studies has fueled racist beliefs, so
much so that leading biologists were forced, in 2014, to refute claims about "the genetic basis of social differences between races."
It's also important to not confuse ancestry with the concept of race, the co-authors point out.
"Ancestry is a statement about an individual's relationship to other individuals in their genealogical history; thus, it is a very personal understanding of one's
genomic heritage," they said. "Race, on the other hand, is a pattern-based concept that has led scientists and laypersons alike to draw conclusions about
hierarchical organization of humans."
As such, the team of experts believes that race should be phased out from genetic research and more deliberate language like "ancestry or population"
used to describe the grouping for studies. Those terms should also be "clearly define[d]."
"Language matters, and the scientific language of race has a significant influence on how the public (which includes scientists) understands human
diversity," the co-authors wrote. "Having journals rationalize the use of classificatory terminology in studying human genetic diversity would force scientists
to clarify their use and allow researchers to understand and interpret data across studies."
Such an effort would allow for less confusion across studies and also "send out an important message to scientists and the public alike: historical racial
categories that are treated as natural and infused with notions of superiority and inferiority have no place in biology."
That's not to say that race as a construct has no value at all when it comes to scientific study. Yudell and his co-authors agree that, although it contains it's
own set of issues, race can be used as a social and political category to better understand inequities and the health disparities therein.
But using race as a category in genomics should be a thing of the past, and Yudell, Roberts, Tishkoff, and DeSalle urge the United State National
Academies of Sciences to convene a panel of experts to figure out new tools for looking into human diversity without utilizing the race concept.
"We believe that genetics continues to operate in a paradox: The belief that race is a tool to elucidate human genetic diversity and believing that race is a
poorly defined marker of that diversity and an imprecise proxy for the relation between ancestry and genetics," Yudell said. "It is time that scientists find a
way to resolve to improve the study of human diversity."
 Scientists identify genes connected to
wellbeing, depression and neuroticism
- Cinthya Selvarathinam
An international group of more than 190
scientists who analyzed the genomes of
298,420 individuals have found genetic
variants that may influence our sense of
wellbeing, depression and neuroticism.
The study, to be published April 18 by the
journal Nature Genetics, is one of the largest
genomic studies to date on behavioral
genetics.
"We have known for a long time that these
traits have a genetic component, but until
now, we had identified only a few specific
genetic variants related to these traits," said
Daniel Benjamin, corresponding author and
an associate professor of the Center for
Economic and Social Research in the USC
Dornsife College of Letters, Arts and
Sciences.
Benjamin said that the genetic variants do not
determine whether someone develops
depressive symptoms, neuroticism or have a
poor sense of wellbeing.
"Psychological well-being is jointly influenced
by genes and environment," he said. "The
genetic variants that we found account for a
small fraction of these genetic associations."
The scientists found three genetic variants
associated with "subjective wellbeing" - how
happy or satisfied a person reports feeling
about his or her life - based on an analysis of
roughly 300,000 people. The researchers
also found two genetic variants associated
with depressive symptoms, based on an
analysis of nearly 180,000 people, and 11
genetic variants associated with neuroticism,
based on an analysis of 170,000 people. The
depression results were replicated through an
analysis of another sample of nearly 370,000
people.
"We found that most of the genetic variants associated with
depressive symptoms and/or neuroticism also were linked to
subjective well-being, and vice-versa," Benjamin said. "When
examined individually, each genetic variant explains very little
about these traits. But when taken together, these findings
imply that the genetic influences on depression, neuroticism
and subjective wellbeing result from the cumulative effects of
at least thousands, if not millions, of different variants."
The study also found that subjective wellbeing, neuroticism
and depression are predominantly influenced by the same set
of genes. The scientists said this finding indicates that
researchers may want to consider studying these traits jointly
for future work.
The interdisciplinary team - which included medical
researchers and psychologists -- also studied whether the
genetic variants that they had identified overlap with genetic
variants associated with other diseases and disorders,
including Alzheimer's disease, anxiety disorders, autism
spectrum disorder, bipolar disorder and schizophrenia.
The strongest link was with anxiety disorders. The
researchers also found the genetic variants tied to subjective
wellbeing, depression and neuroticism moderately overlap
with the variants that are associated with schizophrenia and
bipolar disorder.
Because the study has found some of the first genetic
variants associated with wellbeing, depression and
neuroticism, it is too soon to draw conclusions about how the
genes affect biological mechanisms, Benjamin said.
The scientists issued several cautions for interpreting the
results of their study.
"Genetics is only one factor that influences these
psychological traits. The environment is at least as important
and it interacts with the genetic effects," Benjamin said.
 First happiness genes have been
located -Shruti C
For the first time in history, researchers have
isolated the parts of the human genome that could
explain the differences in how humans experience
happiness. These are the findings of a large-scale
international study in over 298,000 people,
conducted by VU Amsterdam professors Meike
Bartels (Genetics and Wellbeing) and Philipp
Koellinger (Genoeconomics). The researchers
found three genetic variants for happiness, two
variants that can account for differences in
symptoms of depression, and eleven locations on
the human genome that could account for varying
degrees of neuroticism. The genetic variants for
happiness are mainly expressed in the central
nervous system and the adrenal glands and
pancreatic system. The results were published in
the journal Nature Genetics.
Genetic influences on happiness
Prior twin and family research using information
from the Netherlands Twin Register and other
sources has shown that individual differences in
happiness and well-being can be partially ascribed
to genetic differences between people. Happiness
and wellbeing are the topics of an increasing
number of scientific studies in a variety of academic
disciplines. Policy makers are increasingly focusing
on wellbeing, drawing primarily on the growing
body of evidence suggesting that wellbeing is a
factor in mental and physical health.
VU Amsterdam professor Meike Bartels explains:
"This study is both a milestone and a new
beginning: A milestone because we are now certain
that there is a genetic aspect to happiness and a
new beginning because the three variants that we
know are involved account for only a small fraction
of the differences between human beings. We
expect that many variants will play a part." Locating
these variants will also allow us to better study the
interplay between nature and nurture, as the
environment is certainly responsible -- to some
extent -- for differences in the way people
experience happiness."
Further research is now possible
These findings, which resulted from a collaborative
project with the Social Science Genetic Association
Consortium, are available for follow-up research.
This will create an increasingly clearer picture of
what causes differences in happiness. Professor
Bartels points out that "The genetic overlap with
depressive symptoms that we have found is also a
breakthrough. This shows that research into
happiness can also offer new insights into the
causes of one of the greatest medical challenges of
our time: depression." The research effort headed
by professors Bartels and Koellinger is the largest
ever study into the genetic variants for happiness. It
was successfully completed thanks to the
assistance of 181 researchers from 145 scientific
institutes, including medical centres in Rotterdam,
Groningen, Leiden and Utrecht, and the universities
of Rotterdam and Groningen
Your best diet might depend on
your genetics
-Susmita Das
If you've ever seen a friend have
good results from a diet but then
not been able to match those
results yourself, you may not be
surprised by new findings in mice
that show that diet response is
highly individualized.
"There is an overgeneralization of
health benefits or risks tied to
certain diets," said William
Barrington, Ph.D., a researcher
from North Carolina State
University who conducted this
work in the laboratory of David
Threadgill, Ph.D., at Texas A&M
University. "Our study showed
that the impact of the diet is likely
dependent on the genetic
composition of the individual
eating the diet, meaning that
different individuals have different
optimal diets."
Barrington will present these new
findings at The Allied Genetics
Conference, a meeting hosted by
the Genetics Society of America.

The new study not only has implications for people seeking the
healthiest diet, but also for dietary recommendations such as the
ones issued by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Since
these recommendations are based on average responses of
many people, they may not be applicable to many individuals.
"Mice provide a powerful model for studying the effects of diets in
different genetic backgrounds because they have similar
susceptibilities to obesity and metabolic syndrome, and we can
model the genetic diversity that is seen in humans while
controlling for environmental factors," said Barrington.
The researchers used four mouse strains to model genetic
diversity. All the mice in each strain shared the same genetics,
thus representing the genetics of one person. The genetic
differences between any two strains were similar to that of two
unrelated people.
For six months the mice received food equivalent to today's
Western diet, a traditional Japanese diet, a traditional
Mediterranean diet, or a high fat, low carb Atkin's-like diet known
as ketogenic, while some mice received standard mouse chow for
comparison. The mice could eat as much food as they wanted,
but the researchers kept tabs on how much was consumed.
The researchers took care to match the test diets closely with
what people would eat on the same diet. For example, the
Japanese diet used rice as the main carbohydrate and included
green tea extract to mimic the effects of this bioactive compound.
For the Mediterranean diet, wheat was the main carbohydrate,
and red wine extract was included to imitate this key dietary
component.
The researchers monitored a variety of health-related diet
responses and found that effects of each diet were strongly
dependent on the strain of mice. While mice eating the Western
diet generally showed negative health effects, including increased
obesity, fatty liver disease, and detrimental effects on cholesterol,
the severity of those effects varied widely depending on the
strain. In fact, one strain of mice appeared largely resistant to any
negative health effects from this diet.
The Western diet and the ketogenic diet, which are both high in
fat, showed opposite responses for two strains of mice. For one
strain, the researchers observed very negative health effects on
the Western diet, including increased obesity and fatty liver
disease, but saw no negative health effects when this strain ate
the high fat, low carb ketogenic diet. On the other hand, a
different strain of mice had increased obesity and signs of
metabolic syndrome on the ketogenic diet but was much
healthier on the Western diet.
"We also found that the causes for obesity were different," said
Barrington. "Some mice on specific diets simply ate more
calories, and this caused them to become obese. However,
mice on other diets ate less but still became obese."
For all the mouse strains, the ketogenic diet increased calorie
burn without any increase in activity level, but some strains of
mice ate so much on this diet that they still became obese and
experienced negative health effects.
"Given the metabolic and genetic similarity of humans and
mice, it is highly likely that the level of diversity of diet response
seen in our study will also be observed in humans," said
Barrington. "Since there are different optimal diets for different
individuals, this underscores the need for precision nutrition,
which would identify optimal dietary patterns for each person."
The researchers are now working to identify the genes and
biological mechanisms involved in the varying responses to
diets. This line of research could eventually lead to a genetic
test that identifies who is likely to benefit or experience negative
health effects from certain diets.
"We've largely viewed diet the same way for the last 100 years
-- assuming that there is one optimal diet," said Barrington.
"Now that we've identified that this is likely not the case, I think
that in the future we will be able to identify the genetic factors
involved in the varying responses to diet and use those to
predict diet response in humans."
Barrington will present "Pathophysiological responses to dietary
patterns differ with genetic backgrounds" during The Allied
Genetics Conference from 11:45 a.m. to 12:00 p.m. on Friday,
July 15, in Crystal Ballroom G1 at the Orlando World Center
Marriott in Orlando, Florida.