Because this sequence did not match any sequence in the Riftia symbiont genomic database, it could be contamination from bacteria living close to the branchial plume of the worm.
These findings are both notable for the identification of the enzyme responsible for glycosylation, because the sequence did not reveal such activity, and because of the dearth of information about heptosylating enzymes.
Failure in GO term assignment was due to either a negative result in the BLAST search (NoBLAST, 53%), the absence of GO annotation in any of the BLAST hits (NoMapping, 7%) or because the sequence did not fulfil quality parameters of trustable annotation (NoAnnotation, 40%).
Because the "ACGT" sequence does not occur primarily in the yeast genome, this specificity of the "ACGT" sequence cannot be attributed to chance.
Because the amiRNA sequence does not have to be perfectly complementary to the target site, it can be optimized to target only one or, alternatively, several sequence-related genes.
However, because the resistant sequence does form a significant cluster with two susceptible sequences that are both from the M form, we can speculate that the mutation probably occurred first in the M form.
That is, DNA can be obtained just once at any time during development because the DNA sequence does not change during development or in response to the environment.
Because this sequence variation does not result in an amino acid substitution, it would not be predicted to be pathogenic unless it disrupts splicing of the SLC26A5 transcript.
Just because two things happen in sequence doesn't mean the first one caused the second, and things that happen at the same time don't necessarily share causes.
At the time it was universally assumed - by everybody, including Crick - that because these sequences did not code for protein they must be junk, and they were rationalized as hangovers of early evolution.
