How to sequence your own DNA at home

Aurornis

I wish this had some discussion of the results. The earlier reports about this sensor and process were very mixed. It’s a cool process either way, but I’d like to know how usable the real world output can be.

whatever1

What is the accuracy in this ? Aka if I run the experiment 10 times how many differences will i get? I don’t have a physical sense on what would be a good number.

mephux

https://www.the-odin.com/whole-genome-sequencing-30x/ If you want it quick and cheap(er) - 599.00

bleepblap

> This is intended to be read by AI Fuck this

metalman

I am very impressed with the, why wait? just do it now approach to the future. which while not here, IS there.

dwa3592

This is so cool. Thanks for doing this. The fact that we have this in a palm sized object is just crazy. Also, if/when we have a similar sized device for doing CRISPR .... umm i should stop here - it's becoming the plot of Gattaca

munib_ca

> This is intended to be read by AI- please just copy and paste the URL of this and have ChatGPT walk you through it. If you have AR glasses, even better, since the AI can walk you through the whole protocol. What kind of magic is going on here, am I missing something?

TurdF3rguson

I'm too afraid I would learn something awful about myself.

__MatrixMan__

I've bee thinking about starting a company where I fish roots out of your sewer and identify the plant (by sequence if necessary) that you have to kill so your sewer doesn't collapse as soon as it otherwise would. $100 to stave off that $10000 sewer replacement for a few years would be worth it to a lot of people

armanj

one main marketing leverage of 23andMe, AncestryDNA, etc are fulfilling the curiosity of people who want to know which part of the world their genes are from. I guess that dataset should be preparatory.

joel_liu

The "non-random errors" point buried a few replies down deserves to be the headline, not a footnote. With Illumina, 10x coverage genuinely washes out errors because they're closer to independent per-read noise. With Nanopore, errors cluster at specific motifs (homopolymers, certain k-mers) due to how the pore physically reads the strand — so the same systematic mistake shows up across most of your reads at that position, and naive majority-vote consensus won't fix it. You need a basecaller/consensus model trained to correct for those specific failure modes (which is exactly what the current-gen Guppy/Dorado models try to do), not just "more depth." That distinction matters a lot for a home setup: coverage is cheap, but knowing where your specific errors are systematic vs. random is what determines whether "buy more reads" actually gets you to clinical-grade accuracy or just gives you a very confident wrong answer.

SilentM68

Reminds me of the Gloing Plant Project. I never got my glowing flower but would have settled for the instruction manual, also never created :( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glowing_Plant_project By the by, can't seen to bring up the actual site linked on this post.

purpleidea

I like the privacy conscious aspects. Apart from the obvious issue of "run it through Claude" how many of those referenced analysis tools are entirely open source or at least run locally? Would have liked to see that in the article.

KashifNY

Bringing everything to your doorstep and everything at your feet and everything near your fingertips is just what all industries are trying to accomplice. The cartoon Animation Wall-E has scenes in it where they show obese humans doing everything through a screen though notice their legs and feet and it's as if they've mutated to a point where they aren't able to walk anymore and all their transport is through a hovering chair cum bed.