To the gang:What is your take on the proteomic venture Celera has announced? Does it have the same extraordinary potential as genomics? Could it be even bigger, and possibly provide even earlier rewards than their genomic research? I would like your take on this. It seems to me that the reaction in the stock price did not reflect the potential here. The vision of this company, IMHO, is exhilarating, and I have not seen a corresponding discussion on this board. Am I off base, or is proteomics at least as promising as genomics, and possibly more so? I am interested in your thoughts.darold
IMHO proteomics is very, very exciting. If CRA becomes the leader here then their information and services will be the catalyst which leads to very real drug discoveries. I too am surprised that there has not been more discussion on this topic (having just been away for a week and waded through 388 posts many of which revolve around irrelevant polls and riddles - you guys have too much time and need to:a) get a lifeb) get a day jobc) sell some shares to calm your nervesd) take some non-FDA approved drugs to calm your nervese) sell half your CRA and buy into LYNXBack to proteomics - great strategic move, logical step and three more cheers for CRA. However, seeing as the share price has all but doubled since the split, I reckon the clever money has already given its seal of approval by voting in real $$$...CC
IMHO proteomics is very, very exciting. If CRA becomes the leader here then their information and services will be the catalyst which leads to very real drug discoveries.Proteomics is indeed the next big fish to fry. I read recently that IBM is building a super computer to work on the protein structure question. However, predicting how, why, and where proteins will fold is MUCH more complex than genome sequencing and IMHO will not produce near the therpeutic value as genomics will this decade.Brad
Hi everybody on the CRA message board, this is my first post. In the first part, I try to give definitions for three terms (Genomics, Transcriptomics, Proteomics). The IBM supercomputer mentioned by Brad is only indirectly connected to proteomics; it will facilitate elucidation of three-dimensional structures of proteins.All three terms focus on:"DNA makes (or is template for) RNA makes (or is template for)Protein". This is the so called central dogma of molecular biology; the first process is calledtranscriptin (i.e RNA synthesis); then follows translation (i.e. protein synthesis).1.) Genomics: The study of genes; determination of (complete) DNA sequences of individual organisms. That is a prerequisite for the other two fields. If the complete sequence of an organism is known, it should be possible to determine the number and organization of the genes; i.e. to annotate the genes and to compile a complete genetic map.2.) Transcriptomics: If the genetic map is available, one can analyze the transcriptome. For that purpose, chemically synthesized fragments of EACH gene are applied to solid supports. These are the DNA chips of AFFX or Incyte's Synteni division. If you isolate RNA from individual tissues, and hybridize this RNA samples to the DNA chips you fill find differentially expressed genes; i.e. some genes transcribed in one tissue are not transcribed in the other or vice versa.3.) Proteomics: The study of the total protein content of individual tissues. This complements transcriptomics but it is technically more difficult. Total protein extracts are separated on two dimensional gels and the identity of individual proteins is determined. This is important since several proteins are modified posttranslationally (e.g. phosphorylation or glycosylation). This modification is sometimes important for regulation of the activity of a given protein. In summary, each individual cell has the SAME genome (a STATIC term). In contrast, each tissue or sometimes specialized cells within a tissue have DIFFERENT transcriptomes or proteomes (DYNAMIC terms).Transcriptomes or proteomes also change in response to environmental conditions: bacterial or viral infections for example, cause changes because of the defense mechanisms. Drugs of course change these profiles, too.I hope this helps.Good luck and have a nice weekend G.
Hi everybody,besides long on CRA, I am also a shareholder of a British proteomics company called "Oxford GlycoSciences" (http://www.ogs.com). In fact, this is the only publicly traded firm dedicated entirely to the proteomics field.They hold several key patents in proteomics and are also engaged in collaborations with Dennis Hochstrasser's "Swiss Bioinformatics Institute". Dr. Venter, as mentioned in a press release, also intends to collaborate with Hochstrasser. IMHO, if CRA expands into the area of proteomics; the company should enter a collaboration with OGS.Any thoughts on that?Thank you & Good luckG.
I just read your piece on Oxford. I can't find the symbol. How can I invest in this company?
I agree with the earlier poster, this stock is the only registered company which is into hardcore proteomics. Also this is not a registered company on NASDAQ or NYSE. You can trade this stock on LONDON exchage with a symbol of 'OGS'. On Charles Schwab it is not available for trading 'on line' but you can call global investing and trade it with a symbol 'OXGSF'.Few days ago I picked it up at 28 and it is already 45 as shown in schwab account. Hope this helps - abc
First a disclosure: I did buy a small amount of CRA last week on the dip, as i said in previous posts i was waiting for.Now, can I just throw a word of caution to all the bullish types on this board?Proteomics? Transcriptomics? These are buzzwords created more by the investors than the scientists, as these technologies have barely gotten off the ground and already they are named and packaged. Beware... a fire that burns this hot this fast goes out just as fast....YOUR FRIENDLY NEIGHBORHOOD SPIDERMAN
Spiderman, Firstly, congratulations on your purchase last week on a dip. ------------------From your last post:"Now, can I just throw a word of caution to all the bullish types on this board? Proteomics? Transcriptomics? These are buzzwords created more by the investors than the scientists, as these technologies have barely gotten off the ground and already they are named and packaged. Beware... a fire that burns this hot this fast goes out just as fast....-------------------------------Please refer to page 18 of the follow-on prospectus.There they directly say that the funds raised will have an emphasis toward Proteiomics. Straight from the horse's mouth. That said I agree caution can be an appropriate measure in general, but not because investors are just speculating about the move to proteomics, they announced that as their plan. http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/77551/0000912057-00-003144.txt
Hi Spiderman,Re:Proteomics? Transcriptomics? These are buzzwords created more by the investors than the scientists, as these technologies have barely gotten off the ground and already they are named and packaged. Beware... a fire that burns this hot this fast goes out just as fast....I strongly disagree that these terms have been coined by investors. The first sentence of this article identifies the inventor of the word "proteome":http://www.signalsmag.com/signalsmag.nsf/657b06742b5748e888256570005cba01/f8a34b7efde4eb6c8825681c000b8a96?OpenDocument&Highlight=0,proteomicsIn the meantime, my fellow mad scientists have created other funny words such as "metabolome" and "regulome". There are probably many more "-omics" out there than previously anticipated (chuckles).Best regardsG.
Howdy, Maybe this is more for the PEB board but lets not forget that PE owns Perseptive Biosystems who are the market leader in MALDI-TOF mass spectrometry, which is presently a key piece of instrumentation for proteomic research. Thus, CRA has the key equiptment in the bag for a proteomics project as they did with the 3700 for the human genome. These guys have all their bases covered.Bobby
Best Of |
Favorites & Replies |
Start a New Board |
My Fool |