Getty Images <\/p>\n
One night a few years ago, two biologists sat in a bar in Hamburg, discussing DNA. Ewan Birney, the associate director of the European Bioinformatics Institute, and Nick Goldman, a research scientist there, were wondering how to handle the tsunami of data flooding the institute, whose job it is to maintain databases of DNA sequences, protein structures, and other biological information that scientists turn up in their researchdatabases that are growing exponentially, thanks mostly to dropping costs and increased automation. The maintenance of all this data on hard drives was pressing their budget to the breaking point. <\/p>\n
Being genomicists, they joked that DNA, which is incredibly compact, sturdy, and of course has a rather lengthy history of storing data, would be a better way to go. Joking, however, gave way to fevered napkin-scribbling, and soon, recalls Goldman, We had to order another beer, and call for more napkins to write on. <\/p>\n
Three years later, the results of that bar stool inspiration have been published in Nature, in a paper in which Birney, Goldman and their collaborators report using DNA to store a complete set of Shakespeares sonnets, a PDF of the first paper to describe DNAs double helix structure, a 26-second mp3 clip from Martin Luther King, Jr.s I Have a Dream speech, a text file of a compression algorithm, and a JPEG photograph of the institute. You may not be storing your personal data on DNA anytime soonthe process is time-consuming and expensive, and theres the small matter of needing a DNA sequencer to open the filesbut as the costs of making and sequencing DNA continue to plunge and as computer engineering approaches the limits of just how densely information can be encoded on silicon, such biological data storage be just whats needed for institutes and other organizations with massive archival needs. <\/p>\n
(MORE: Whats Holding Energy Tech Back? The Infernal Battery) <\/p>\n
To encode files in DNA, Birney and Goldman started by converting text, image, or audio data into binary code. Then, in several steps using software that Goldman wrote, they converted that into A, T, G, or C code, which stand for the four DNA bases. Working from that string of letters, they drew up the blueprints for thousands of pieces of DNA , each containing a snippet of a file, and sent their designs to Agilent Technologies, which manufactures custom DNA for biologists. Agilent sent back the completed DNA fragmentsjust a smidge of white dust in the bottom of a plastic tube, Goldman recalls. To open the files, the team used a standard DNA sequencer, a process that took about 2 weeks. They then used Goldmans software to reassemble the sequenced DNA into coherent, readable files. With the exception of two small gaps in the DNA, the sonnets, photo, speech, PDF, and text file re-emerged from the white dust almost completely unscathed. After the scientists performed a little repair work, all of the informationabout 739 KB worthwas retrieved with 100% accuracy. <\/p>\n
The fidelity is impressive, and DNA, when kept in a cold, dry, dark place, can stay intact for thousands of years. But how long would you have to want to store something for this process to be cheaper than using archival magnetic tape, which needs to be replaced every 5 years but is still the current gold standard, thanks to its low power demands compared to hard drives or other storage technologies? Birney and Goldman calculate that if you wanted to put a file in storage today and have it last for at least 600 years, DNA would be cheaper than re-recording the data to fresh magnetic tape every half-decade or so, a process that would have to be repeated 120 times over the six-century span. <\/p>\n
(MORE: The Internet of Things: Hardware With a Side of Software) <\/p>\n
Goldman speculates that if the price of making and sequencing DNA continues to fall at current rates, commercial services that store data in DNA might spring up around 50 years from now. You would email documents and photographs and stuff that were valuable to you and your family [tothe DNA storage company],and maybe a day later or a week later, they would ship you back a little bit of DNA, says Goldman. You could stick it in the fridge or bury it in the garden or they would store it. And they can guarantee it will be there a hundred thousand years later. <\/p>\n
Birney and Goldman are not the only genomicists who have realized the data-storage potential of DNA. In September 2012, genomicists George Church, Yuan Gao, and Sriram Kosuri published a short description of a similar system in Science. The Nature team stored slightly more data, and Goldman avoided one of the sources of error in the Science paperstrings of repeated bases that DNA sequencers have trouble handlingby adjusting the way his software converts the information into A, T, G, and C. But on the whole, the ideas are similar, and represent a big step forward from earlier, smaller studies. <\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
The rest is here: Getty Images One night a few years ago, two biologists sat in a bar in Hamburg, discussing DNA. Continue reading
\nIs DNA the Future of Data Storage?<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"