|Which one is it?|
One long-time controversy in genomics is what has been called "codon usage bias", or CUB (Junk DNA R Us - 3).
When we think of what is meant by the word "bias" our conclusion will be based on various types of analysis.
After all the word has more than one meaning (Meriam-Webster Dictionary).
Microbes probably don't have dictionaries to look-up the meaning of bias, so their supposed bias is more likely than not scientists playing with the Frankenstein dolls again.
Regular readers will remember that Dredd Blog has focused on some of the characteristics of codons in DNA and RNA in terms of quantum mechanics in previous posts.
For another example, there are lists by chromosome (Quantum Biology - 6).
But those do not focus on "bias", so to assist readers with contemplating and focusing on what this "bias" is all about, today I have included two appendices which show codon locations in an Omicron variant (Appendix One) and a non-variant SARS-CoV-2 (Appendix Two).
To get what they are talking about when they mention "bias" notice that some of the codons are located in twice or so more places in the virus genome than other codons are.
They hypothesize that microscopic organisms (microbes) are biased and therefore like voters at the polls, they make biased choices:
(Plasmids 101: Codon usage bias, [my comments in brackets]). We don't know "is an embarrassment" according to the scientist featured in the first video below.
There are many embarrassments that finger biologists as metaphorically playing with dolls while practicing teleology:
"When organic chemists anthropomorphize molecules, they say that molecules “want
to be in their lowest energy conformation”. This means that when they
have energy molecules can move into different conformations, but they
have a resting position that they come back to."
In a future post I plan to discuss the atomic-level application of Löwdin's hypothesis in greater detail because it is non-teleological.
The previous post in this series is here.