You can write lists like that for pretty much half the genes in the genome. If you ask a pharma company to rank order genes they would like to get exclusively as targets these would be ranked in 4 digits if not 3. There’s a reason no lab bothered to discover it for so long.
Sydney Brenner said in the 60s that they already discovered all there is to molecular biology and leave the details to the “Americans” (1). These are the details. This work would have been pedestrian back in the 60s, it’s downright boring at this point. When people ask why science sucks today this is a great example. Not that this research was performed, of course someone had to at some point. But that people have been led to believe this is worth of celebration at this level.
Sydney might be proud and vain but his statement of relevance here was not due to that. Scientists are supposed to constantly try and indemnify what’s hard and important and pursue those fields. He said that statement because back then he believed the important fields to explore were developmental biology and neuroscience. More recently he wrote an editorial suggesting how a field like connectomics would be the equivalent new, exciting, important field would be.
The celebration of mediocrity with Nobels for no real reason except probably politics (I sat near to the Nobel cabals in lectures these candidate prize winners will come give talks at) isn’t in the interest of science or progress is all.
Sydney Brenner said in the 60s that they already discovered all there is to molecular biology and leave the details to the “Americans” (1). These are the details. This work would have been pedestrian back in the 60s, it’s downright boring at this point. When people ask why science sucks today this is a great example. Not that this research was performed, of course someone had to at some point. But that people have been led to believe this is worth of celebration at this level.
[1] https://www.hobertlab.org/how-the-worm-got-started/ and https://www.genetics.org/content/165/4/1633