Finishing the euchromatic sequence of the human genome

The sequence of the human genome encodes the genetic instructions for human physiology, as well as rich information about human evolution. In 2001, the International Human Genome Sequencing Consortium reported a draft sequence of the euchromatic portion of the human genome. Since then, the international collaboration has worked to convert this draft into a genome sequence with high accuracy and nearly complete coverage. Here, we report the result of this finishing process. The current genome sequence (Build 35) contains 2.85 billion nucleotides interrupted by only 341 gaps. It covers ∼99% of the euchromatic genome and is accurate to an error rate of ∼1 event per 100,000 bases. Many of the remaining euchromatic gaps are associated with segmental duplications and will require focused work with new methods. The near-complete sequence, the first for a vertebrate, greatly improves the precision of biological analyses of the human genome including studies of gene number, birth and death. Notably, the human enome seems to encode only 20,000-25,000 protein-coding genes. The genome sequence reported here should serve as a firm foundation for biomedical research in the decades ahead

Measuring Implicit and Explicit Acceptability of Reinforcement Versus Punishment Interventions with Teachers Working in ABA Versus Mainstream Schools

This research aimed to develop the implicit relational assessment procedure (IRAP) as a measure of treatment acceptability and to assess teachers’ acceptability of reinforcement and punishment interventions in the presence of “good” and “bad” behaviors. Participants included 15 teachers trained in ABA (ABATs) who worked with children with developmental disabilities, and 15 teachers trained in mainstream primary education (MTs) who worked with typically developing children. On the IRAP, the ABAT group showed proreinforcement biases for all behaviors, while MTs showed a proreinforcement bias for good behavior but a propunishment bias for bad behavior. On explicit measures of acceptability, although both groups showed proreinforcement and antipunishment biases, the ABATs rated reinforcement as significantly more acceptable than the MTs; the ratings of punishment did not differ across the two groups. The research provides support for the IRAP as a measure of treatment acceptability