What is the application of storing information in DNA?

**visser300** · August 18, 2012, 09:25 PM

http://hms.harvard.edu/content/writing-book-dna

Instead of storing a book in DNA, what else could the scientists do with this invention? Could we store information in an DNA and "plug" it into our brain so we can acquire the information without passing a study process?

**Magicman2051** · August 18, 2012, 09:31 PM

If we our minds could actively read DNA and then allow us to consciously call it up on command... sure. But DNA doesn't work like that.

**Gaidin** · August 18, 2012, 09:39 PM

DNA is as much process commands as it is information anyway, if not more. If you don't know how to read the information you're storing, it's not going to do you much good.

**Aanker** · August 19, 2012, 03:43 AM

If you are facing the problem of not being able to transfer any non-biological message, or feel the need to leave an easter egg in someone's genes, writing it in the DNA might be a decent idea.

**Visna** · August 21, 2012, 09:15 AM

Originally Posted by Aanker

If you are facing the problem of not being able to transfer any non-biological message, or feel the need to leave an easter egg in someone's genes, writing it in the DNA might be a decent idea.

That has been possible for quite a while now. Some Japanese researchers stored the special relativity equation in bacterial DNA. Imagine the surprised look on the face of the fellow who, in a few thousand years, decides to read the DNA from that bacteria strain.

It's a revolutionary information storing technology, but it comes with some issues that need to be solved first. First of all, how to access the information effectively and second, how to deal with possible mutations. It will be quite a while before we see any practical applications, but I love the idea.

**Menelik_I** · August 21, 2012, 09:51 AM

Originally Posted by Visna

That has been possible for quite a while now. Some Japanese researchers stored the special relativity equation in bacterial DNA. Imagine the surprised look on the face of the fellow who, in a few thousand years, decides to read the DNA from that bacteria strain.

Why can't biologists be trolls too

**Morbius Sire** · August 21, 2012, 03:37 AM

Well, is there a possible side-effect to this method? long term or short term?

I do see this as possible. Maybe the body[specific genes responsible for handling DNA multiplication in cells mainly] can heavily methylate the book or information to a specific DNA strand, and keep it there without disturbance or usage.
A specific book-reader can somehow decode and read the book in that DNA strand, at least in the initial period of the technology.

As well, I do see a lot of applications in espionage.

It is mind-blowing how the next step of human 'manipulation' is use and manipulate the human body itself on a DNA level. It seems human physiological variation will be interesting in the next 50 years.

N.B: If I made any simple or logical mistakes, my bad(biology/genetics isn't my main field)

**visser300** · August 21, 2012, 09:18 AM

What's the problem with reading information in a DNA :-?

**Visna** · August 21, 2012, 09:27 AM

Originally Posted by visser300

What's the problem with reading information in a DNA :-?

As with all technology it comes down to cost, speed and size. It's still in it's infancy, machines are big, comparatively slow and very expensive.
But a, say, 25 year old super computer is utterly beaten on all three counts by a Playstation 3 or something. Give it time.

**Gaidin** · August 22, 2012, 12:14 PM

Originally Posted by visser300

What's the problem with reading information in a DNA :-?

Put simply, try reading the 1's and 0's on your hard drive without the interpretive commands the processor runs which are also stored in memory as 1's and 0's. Many of those 1's and 0's are command instructions for the processor. Many are data for the processor. Without one, the other is useless.

**Himster** · August 21, 2012, 09:54 AM

Theoretically we could tweak our dormant attributes, such as a usable tail, primitive gills etc. We could even add new traits, but our knowledge of what would happen if we do this isn't great, I think cybernetics will happen first.

**Imperial Glory** · August 22, 2012, 01:40 PM

So Assasins or Templars?

**hellheaven1987** · August 22, 2012, 09:49 PM

There is no problem to put word information as DNA form, the problem is your body would not recognize it so why bother anyway.

**Gaidin** · August 23, 2012, 09:11 PM

With proper instructions also in DNA, the body would.

**hellheaven1987** · August 23, 2012, 11:16 PM

Originally Posted by Gaidin

With proper instructions also in DNA, the body would.

What do you proper instructions? Like turn the information into proteins?

**Gaidin** · August 24, 2012, 06:30 AM

Originally Posted by hellheaven1987

What do you proper instructions? Like turn the information into proteins?

That's the instructions the body needs to execute current functions as they need to be, but theoretically, you can have instructions that explain, well...anything. This whole thread's an exercise in thought, so in thought, we could treat a DNA strand like a hard drive big enough to hold every bit of information in books on continental US(even duplicate books), and have absolutely more than enough room in that single strand to store instructions in how to interpret and make sense of the data. Now, that gets a bit touchier when you go worldwide. In an informational sense, given the number of proteins, DNA is essentially a base 4 system. You can still store all the information, but, theoretically, you more than likely won't have the room needed for instructions, and it becomes a useless mess of 0s, 1s, 2s, and 3s that can't be interpreted or made sense of.