Skip to main content /TECH with IDG.net
CNN.com /TECH
SERVICES
CNN TV
EDITIONS





Research in progress aided anthrax probe

fraser
Claire Fraser  


Editor's Note: CNN Access is a regular feature on CNN.com providing interviews with newsmakers from around the world.

(CNN) -- Scientists at The Institute for Genomic Research (TIGR) were already working to sequence the anthrax genome when deadly cases of inhalational anthrax were reported in the United States last fall. They used that nearly complete analysis and compared it to the anthrax that killed Robert Stevens in south Florida.

CNN Science Correspondent Ann Kellan talked with TIGR President Claire Fraser at the company headquarters in Rockville, Maryland.

KELLAN: What were you looking for in this study and what did you find?

FRASER: We used comparative genomic approaches to find all possible differences in two closely related anthrax bacterium, one of these happened to be the isolate that killed the first patient in Florida. The rationale behind doing this was to try to identify additional new markers that could potentially be used to distinguish among members of closely related isolates of the anthrax bug.

MORE STORIES
Gene research may help solve anthrax mystery 
 

The initial analysis suggested all anthrax samples sent through the U.S. mail were likely from the same source. And the challenge was to figure out what the source was. Existing methods for typing anthrax strains back in October were only providing limited information. And in undertaking this study we were looking to see if looking more broadly, across the entire anthrax genome, might further distinguish among these various isolates.

KELLAN: Were the samples closely related?

FRASER: All the isolates that were looked at in our study were representatives of what's called the Ames strain. At one point in their history it's believed all these originated from a single source, that was a dead cow in Texas in 1981. In different labs over 21 years, they have developed mutations in their DNA sequence. And these are the regions we are focusing in on, regions that are different: Because that gives us the information we need to try to distinguish one from another.

KELLAN: And eventually determine which lab it came from?

FRASER: Potentially, which lab, yes. We've not been involved in any of that work, those investigations are being conducted by the FBI, but I would anticipate that the findings from our study will be helpful in the ongoing investigation.

KELLAN: Should the primary focus be on anthrax only? What about other potentially lethal biological weapons?

FRASER: I think anthrax is one of a large number of infectious agents we should be focusing on. Because again, we don't want to be worrying about the last war, the last situation, if we are faced with a biological weapons attack in the future. It could be with smallpox, it could be with the plague bacteria, it could be with something else. But I think that one of the strengths of the approach that we've developed here, and one of the strengths in building this kind of database on infectious agents, is that it has implications far beyond biological warfare.

It could be extremely helpful in tracking outbreaks of infectious disease, irrespective of biological warfare. We may find ourselves in the future with a new strain of tuberculosis, that's highly virulent, that is drug resistant, that has some new property that hasn't been seen before. Having this kind of information available will put us in a much better position to potentially track the source of that emerging disease and also to better understand its biology.



 
 
 
 



TECHNOLOGY TOP STORIES: