Thanks for being so patronizing. I understand and considered everything you just said and even know a good deal of ‘what people do and why.’ I also amassed this knowledge by learning as I go, which is what I am attempting now. Being this harsh does not help anything. I understand the biology of what I am doing, I understand basic workflow and even recently learned how quite a few nextgen sequencing methods work. Yes, I understand the sequences are not on a single string, also aware many 20-mers will not be unique. No, I am not an expert with bioinformatics tools- yet. I am a quick study- I will learn bioinformatics and every other tool I need, whether people want to help or not, but help would be nice. People could certainly expect me to return the favor.
There is a very specific reason why the 99% similarity will not be good enough, you just decided to tear into me instead of inquiring further on what my main idea is about. If you are any indIcation of this community, I will take my questions elsewhere. The thing is, everyone has to start somewhere. I am going back for my PhD soon, I had an idea I want to vet out and see if I can make it my project. I did run my idea by one of the chairs at MD Anderson and she and her postfellow liked it and said I should go back to school and see if I can leverage for my PhD work.
To be certain, I am not re-inventing the wheel, but I have been kicked in the gut by people like you enough. Instead of offering genuine help by pointing me in the right direction, you want to preempt the idea entirely. Sometimes people learn through trying, even if you think they are going the wrong direction. Sometimes people might even surprise you. I realize how arrogant it must be to think I could possibly have an idea no one has thought of, but how do you think innovation happens? How far would we get if everyone had the same mentality of ‘if it’s such a great idea then why hasn’t anyone done it?’ Or ‘Good contributions cannot come from outside the field’. I have considered this and I still want to try to vet my idea as far as possible. Maybe my idea bears passing resemblence to something others have tried in your mind, but I am taking an incrementally different approach which could make all the difference.
So thanks for your feedback, here’s a little of my own. If you think an idea ( also helps if you ask questions to know what the whole idea is) is flawed, point out a specific reason. Vague and condescending feedback helps no one. The chair I ran my idea by could have had the exact same reaction. She was well aware of how my education and experience paled in comparison to hers and could have torn my idea to shreds. Instead she listened curiously, thought about it, had a few questions, listened to my answers- and said yeah that might work, run with it!
Do you have a reference genome for this organism? If so, why not perform variant calling and compare the results?
That’s a good idea and I considered that too.
Unfortunately, the application I had in mind only works on a per-individual basis. The typical approach I've seen others do is derive drug targets based on genes found across an entire population. This idea is definitely in the personalized care category. Even the small variations between different individuals would throw things off. That's part of the reason I want to run this little script. I already know the variation between individuals in a population is too much, but the genome of cells within a person may be too similar, which would make the idea unworkable. It would be nice to vet the idea computationally first before trying any wet work.