Complete Genomics Service Targets $1000 Genome by 2009

Complete Genomics emerged from stealth mode today brandishing an audacious service model for wholesale next-generation sequencing, with its first human genome already assembled and the CEO’s pledge to reach the magical “$1000 genome” price point as early as spring 2009.

Based in Mountain View, Calif., Complete Genomics has raised $46 million in three rounds of financing since its incorporation in 2006. Unlike its commercial next-gen sequencing rivals – Roche/454, Illumina, Applied Biosystems (ABI) and Helicos – Complete Genomics will not be selling individual instruments, but rather offer a service aimed initially at big pharma and major genome institutes.

“Our mission is to be the global leader in complete human genome sequencing,” chairman, president and CEO Clifford Reid in a briefing last week. “We are setting out to completely change the economics of genome sequencing so that we can do diagnostic quality human genome sequencing at a medically affordable price. Essentially, [we’ll] transition this genome sequencing world from a scientific and academic endeavor into a pharmaceutical and medical endeavor.”

Do you want to know more?

Be a part of the XTractor community. XTractor is the first of its kind – Literature alert service, that provides manually curated and annotated sentences for the Keywords of user preference. XTractor maps the extracted entities (genes, processes, drugs, diseases etc) to multiple ontologies and enables customized report generation. With XTractor the sentences are categorized into biological significant relationships and it also provides the user with the ability to create his own database for a set of Key terms. Also the user could change the Keywords of preference from time to time, with changing research needs. The categorized sentences could then be tagged and shared across multiple users. Thus XTractor proves to be a platform for getting real-time highly accurate data along with the ability to Share and collaborate.

Sign up it’s free, and takes less than a minute. Just click here:www.xtractor.in.

addthis_url=”; addthis_title=”; addthis_pub=’jkbioinfo’;

var gaJsHost = ((“https:” == document.location.protocol) ? “https://ssl.” : “http://www.”);
document.write(unescape(“%3Cscript src='” + gaJsHost + “google-analytics.com/ga.js’ type=’text/javascript’%3E%3C/script%3E”));

var pageTracker = _gat._getTracker(“UA-2697320-3”);
pageTracker._initData();
pageTracker._trackPageview();

What makes the sequencing of Watson’s genome different from that of Venter’s?

It’s the technology. Watson’s genome was sequenced using one of the next generation sequencing technologies (454), which allows much more sequencing bang for the buck. This isn’t a $1000 genome, but it’s a step in that direction. The real value of Watson’s genome sequence is a proof of principle. This project was completed at a low cost (relative to the previous methods of sequencing genome), but with high quality. They were able to identify not only sequence variation between Watson and the reference genomes, but also structural variation. To truly realize the potentials of personal genomics, we need many more of these genomes, with the phenotypic data on the individuals.

Along with the article, Nature has published a News and Views piece on the Watson genome paper. The article takes many steps to point out that, while we are at the cusp of an era of personal genomics, there are many limitations as to what we can do with these data. Given our current knowledge, we can’t say much about Watson’s phenotype that we didn’t already know based on non-genomic information. Personal genomics needs not only data, but also ways of assigning genomic variants to particular phenotypes. At this point, we’re probably limited to advising a couple about the risks that their child will acquire a particular genetic disease based on sequencing of the mother and father’s genomes.

addthis_url=”; addthis_title=”; addthis_pub=’jkbioinfo’;

What makes the sequencing of Watson’s genome different from that of Venter’s?

It’s the technology. Watson’s genome was sequenced using one of the next generation sequencing technologies (454), which allows much more sequencing bang for the buck. This isn’t a $1000 genome, but it’s a step in that direction. The real value of Watson’s genome sequence is a proof of principle. This project was completed at a low cost (relative to the previous methods of sequencing genome), but with high quality. They were able to identify not only sequence variation between Watson and the reference genomes, but also structural variation. To truly realize the potentials of personal genomics, we need many more of these genomes, with the phenotypic data on the individuals.

Along with the article, Nature has published a News and Views piece on the Watson genome paper. The article takes many steps to point out that, while we are at the cusp of an era of personal genomics, there are many limitations as to what we can do with these data. Given our current knowledge, we can’t say much about Watson’s phenotype that we didn’t already know based on non-genomic information. Personal genomics needs not only data, but also ways of assigning genomic variants to particular phenotypes. At this point, we’re probably limited to advising a couple about the risks that their child will acquire a particular genetic disease based on sequencing of the mother and father’s genomes.

addthis_url=”; addthis_title=”; addthis_pub=’jkbioinfo’;

What makes the sequencing of Watson’s genome different from that of Venter’s?

It’s the technology. Watson’s genome was sequenced using one of the next generation sequencing technologies (454), which allows much more sequencing bang for the buck. This isn’t a $1000 genome, but it’s a step in that direction. The real value of Watson’s genome sequence is a proof of principle. This project was completed at a low cost (relative to the previous methods of sequencing genome), but with high quality. They were able to identify not only sequence variation between Watson and the reference genomes, but also structural variation. To truly realize the potentials of personal genomics, we need many more of these genomes, with the phenotypic data on the individuals.

Along with the article, Nature has published a News and Views piece on the Watson genome paper. The article takes many steps to point out that, while we are at the cusp of an era of personal genomics, there are many limitations as to what we can do with these data. Given our current knowledge, we can’t say much about Watson’s phenotype that we didn’t already know based on non-genomic information. Personal genomics needs not only data, but also ways of assigning genomic variants to particular phenotypes. At this point, we’re probably limited to advising a couple about the risks that their child will acquire a particular genetic disease based on sequencing of the mother and father’s genomes.

addthis_url=”; addthis_title=”; addthis_pub=’jkbioinfo’;