New Issue: Orbital Catastrophe Ahead? Read Now

DNA Sequencing on the Cheap

Optical technology advances toward the $1,000 genome

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


The exorbitant cost of deciphering a person's genome dropped sharply in 2005, from $20 million to roughly a tenth of that amount. DNA-sequencing technology using off-the-shelf equipment devised by George M. Church of Harvard Medical School and his collaborators both at Harvard and Washington University in St. Louis may help realize the federal goal of reducing that price to $1,000 by 2015, which experts say would make it practical to decode a person's genes for routine medical purposes. The build-it-yourself method (right) the Church group developed is based on combining widely available and relatively inexpensive microscopes with high-speed digital cameras.

A related technique from 454 Life Sciences in Branford, Conn., also employs cameras coupled with microscopes to sequence DNA, except this method uses a different light-emitting technology than Church. Sequencing also usually relies on bacteria to multiply copies of the DNA target; both new methods instead use a combination of beads to grab the DNA and enzymes to reproduce it. The Church group's version works roughly 20 times faster than conventional sequencing, at a cost of $140,000. 454's system has a roughly 100 times higher throughput than conventional sequencing, at a cost of about $500,000 a machine.

In contrast to these optical technologies, current gene sequencing relies on electrophoresis, in which electric fields separate molecules based on their size and charge. H. Kumar Wickramasinghe of the IBM Almaden Research Center and his colleagues have devised a technique that combines electrophoresis with an atomic force microscope, which scans a surface by running extraordinarily sharp probes across it. The invention can sort DNA fragments roughly 100,000 times faster than conventional electrophoresis, albeit only with snippets up to 40 nucleotides long. The researchers note that their work could not only help accelerate DNA sequencing but also deliver molecules onto surfaces with unprecedented control.

Charles Q. Choi is a frequent contributor to Scientific American. His work has also appeared in The New York Times, Science, Nature, Wired, and LiveScience, among others. In his spare time, he has traveled to all seven continents.

More by Charles Q. Choi
Scientific American Magazine Vol 295 Issue 6This article was published with the title “DNA Sequencing on the Cheap” in Scientific American Magazine Vol. 295 No. 6 (), p. 57
doi:10.1038/scientificamerican1206-57b

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe