tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8480427453110572235.post882448422777143843..comments2008-04-29T21:50:09.310+10:00Danielhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07276690118219000204noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8480427453110572235.post-24457289617855618352008-04-29T21:50:00.000+10:002008-04-29T21:50:00.000+10:00Hi g,<BR/><BR/>Cool, I hadn't thought of that. I guess the first step would be a full proteomic work-up on the HapMap lymphoblast cell lines - I wonder if someone's working on this already? Proteomic technology is still pretty immature, but even with current systems I'm sure you could get some seriously useful results by combining SNP, CNV, transcript and protein data-sets.Danielhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07276690118219000204noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8480427453110572235.post-21952897044493642072008-04-28T04:55:00.000+10:002008-04-28T04:55:00.000+10:00nice post. I think that another important impact of improving proteomics technologies is that we'll see GWAS mapping proteins levels in humans. This is starting to happen in Yeast (<A HREF="http://www.nature.com/ng/journal/v39/n11/abs/ng.2007.22.html;jsessionid=CCDF2261876B6D3C867C4A77544108A0" REL="nofollow">Foss et al.</A>), and so small scale studies in humans should not be too far away. This will hopefully take us one step closer to understanding the various levels between genotype and phenotype. It will be interesting to see how many of the expression QTLs affect protein levels (presumably some will be compenstated for, and so not be present at the protein level), and how many loci control post-translational aspects.Ghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05140268044719927398noreply@blogger.com