Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

In 2010, after a long anatomical study, they performed DNA barcoding on a slice of the snack and found it to match that of agave’s by 89 percent [narrowed] down to Agave Sisalana. [...] Next, they chopped off its leaves and there it was: the fat, white, watery trunk familiar to millions of Indians from food carts. They ate a slice from it, and it was tasteless and crunchy just like Ram Kand. The findings were published inCurrent Science the following year.

When I look at the Jicama plant it doesn't even remotely look like an Agave. It certainly doesn't seem to me that DNA barcoding would yield an 89% match with Agave Sisalana.




The source code for two applications might match 89% and yield completely different results


I'm not sure that I get the point of your analogy.

To be clear, I'm saying that genetic match supersedes any list of superficial attributes to determine identity. If it's established that X and Y are an 89% DNA match, even though X tastes and looks like Z, the fact that Y and Z belong in distant genetic branches should be enough to dismiss X as a possible Z.


Humans and chimps share 98% of their DNA, We also share like 84% with pigs.

89% doesn’t really seem like a case closed kind of stat.


You should look up DNA barcoding. We don't have an 84% barcode match with pigs.


My point is that being an 89% match doesn't necessarily mean very much.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: