I don't know why you are assuming it is standard, expected or necessary to have genome sequencing equipment on the ship. There's no doubt that they've brought it back to land and are working to identify it now.
Do you accept or deny the desirability of on-ship genome sequencing equipment?
Nobody knows the sum total of all observations made by mankind. If one can effectively sequence immediately, one can quickly how novel the genome is, and if its not novel, if its a novel lifestage.
On the way to land the specimen (if alive) may die, or (if dead) be consumed and rot on the way to land.
If the species or closest known artificially sustainable life-form can be identified on-ship, probability to keep it alive can be increased.
I don't doubt they are working to identify it, and I wouldn't be surprised if they already did (perhaps on-ship). What disturbs me is major popular science platforms are pro-actively feeding mysticism and trolls by staying mute on the most obvious next logical step.
I do not at all assume it is standard: I assume the number of nation-state actors investing resources in exploring the deep sea ecology (to this depth) constitutes a very small list. So by no means can any of this research be taken for granted and assumed standard. The mere activity of this type of research is already non-standard.
Genome sequencing equipment has been highly miniaturized and become a lot more affordable. So yes, I do expect a wet-lab on this vessel to actually have genome sequencing equipment. If not, I think the researchers have a right to lament it publically.
Having sequencing equipment on ship is undesireable.
There are practically no scenarios where the effort of making such equipment seaworthy is worth doing, compared to putting samples on ice and waiting until back in port to test.
If something was absolutely urgent it could be transferred to a helicopter. But I can't imagine any scenario that this ship would need that for.
I remember when I was studying physics, the professors kept reiterating that one doesn't study science to get rich, often lamenting the miniscule budgets assigned to science compared to other "priorities".
None of them mentioned the army of status-quo chearleaders flat-out denying desirability of cost-effective tools. The cost of just 1 such helicopter trip might suffice for the sequencing and associated equipment...
Even if you were able to start sequencing immediately, standard sequencing alone takes on the order of a day. And then depending on your computational methods, could take another few hours.
Remember that it's not just the sequencer, you also need extraction, so you need to add a centrifuge, a vortex, a pipetting station, a PCR machine, a -20 C freezer, a spectrophotometer and a whole lot of reagents, additional personnel, and probably tons of other things I'm forgetting.
Also I doubt most instruments are specced to be able to handle ship sway on the open sea.
>Even if you were able to start sequencing immediately, standard sequencing alone takes on the order of a day. And then depending on your computational methods, could take another few hours.
For a Minion most of the data is generated in the first half-hour or hour.
You can stop the sequencing process as soon as you have sufficient coverage (see the first response at the same link).
> Remember that it's not just the sequencer, you also need extraction, so you need to add a centrifuge, a vortex, a pipetting station, a PCR machine, a -20 C freezer, a spectrophotometer and a whole lot of reagents, additional personnel, and probably tons of other things I'm forgetting.
Apart from the freezer these devices aren't too sensitive to linear accelerations expected on a mothership of this size. Centrifuge and PCR exist in small and inexpensive form factors.
Non-linear accelerations (tilting of the ship): cut a square out of a table rigidly attached to the ship, mount ball bearings for one axis to a square, and mount ball bearings to the axis orthogonal to the first axis, then mount the equipment to a smaller square piece originally cut from the table. Place the equipment you wish to isolate from vertical rotations on this center piece of table, and add a weight to move the center of mass a few cm below the intersection of both axes of rotation. THat center piece of table will now stay horizontal regardlas of ship riding waves or not.
Additional personnel? One for the centrifuge, one for the PCR, one.. ? at some point one is bending over backwards to defend nonsense.
Regarding the freezer. It's not like freezers on ships don't exist. At a fundamental level its a non-problem since thermo-electric devices could be used, but I think its reasonable to assume even refrigerant-based freezers have special designs for ships.
It's a statement worth downvoting because it's laden with assumptions, as well as seemingly being a naive, sensational, and combative posturing effort that seems designed to provoke others by questioning the rationality or competency of whoever's in charge of the vessel rather than contribute positively to discussion of the result. Your subsequent responses also seem defensive, and none of these are tonal qualities worth rewarding.
Likewise, mystery is something sorely lacking in everyday life, and it's a shitty move to cast aspersions toward publications on the basis that you don't like it. If anything, we should do more to cultivate curiosity and mysticism.
That's my impression anyway, but I'm someone who'd admit to never having been on a research vessel, or part of any budgeting, logistics, or formal research process, and your comments are exactly what I'd expect myself to say if I was 19 again and just as arrogant as I was then. Perhaps none of these were your intention, and perhaps you have no malicious intent, I'm not accusing you of that, but that's kind of how it comes across.
>It's a statement worth downvoting because it's laden with assumptions
Every statement refers to assumptions or prerequisite knowledge.
Should every comment re-include basic education, higher educations, all the text-books and journal articles supporting each assumption? What is known as facts by some may seem like vacuous assumptions to others.
When making such a comment, could you at least point to the apparent assumptions you are unable to follow?
>Likewise, mystery is something sorely lacking in everyday life, and it's a shitty move to cast aspersions toward publications on the basis that you don't like it. If anything, we should do more to cultivate curiosity and mysticism.
What is missing in everyday life is enthusiasm, excitement, ... not mysticism. There are plenty of open problems that are truly mystic for now. Collecting a specimen and not mentioning already done or upcoming sequencing effort is just feeding inappropriate mysticism. Think of how many children have weird fantasies of Loch Ness monster, Yeti, Area 51 aliens, etc... What a waste of mankinds power to fantasize. Give the kids unfettered access to journal articles without paywall such that they can revel in profound actual mysteries as opposed to artificial ones... I don't think theres anything arrogant about such a position.
Nobody knows the sum total of all observations made by mankind. If one can effectively sequence immediately, one can quickly how novel the genome is, and if its not novel, if its a novel lifestage.
On the way to land the specimen (if alive) may die, or (if dead) be consumed and rot on the way to land.
If the species or closest known artificially sustainable life-form can be identified on-ship, probability to keep it alive can be increased.
I don't doubt they are working to identify it, and I wouldn't be surprised if they already did (perhaps on-ship). What disturbs me is major popular science platforms are pro-actively feeding mysticism and trolls by staying mute on the most obvious next logical step.
I do not at all assume it is standard: I assume the number of nation-state actors investing resources in exploring the deep sea ecology (to this depth) constitutes a very small list. So by no means can any of this research be taken for granted and assumed standard. The mere activity of this type of research is already non-standard.
Genome sequencing equipment has been highly miniaturized and become a lot more affordable. So yes, I do expect a wet-lab on this vessel to actually have genome sequencing equipment. If not, I think the researchers have a right to lament it publically.