I reckon there could easily be 3 versions of this, there's already two...

Check out his team's online ressources for long read songle-cell sequencing
kinnex-documentation-external.readthedocs.io/en/latest/in...

And keep an eye out for LRAA...

Bravo Yuxin et al. 🎉

C.f.
asmr.org.au/wp-content/u...

If we doubled the allocation of MRFF grants, the fund would break even after 10 years BUT there would be twice as many economic returns from biomedical research innovations, boosting GDP and Australia's highly skilled workforce.
As a reminder, the estimated long term ROI for MRFF grants is $4:$1

Asking someone how they define a gene leads to really insightful answers (at least when they respond with something beyond a protein coding sequence), but there clearly is room for refinement.

A "unit of hereditary function" is my broad definition, with 'unit' and 'function' open to interpretation

So you would define a gene by its promoter and coding sequence?
What about overlapping isoforms with partial protein sequence and different promoter/TSS?
Conversely, what about a segmental duplication/paralog with identical RNA coding sequence but different promoters?

Another case for distinct genes: polycistrons in bacteria, kinetoplastidae, and mitochondria

Analogously, is a microRNA considered a different gene to it's pre-miRNA?
A case for the affirmative: snoRNAs are clearly annotated as distinct genes form their host transcripts, which are (often) intronic regions of mRNAs

For example: pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC...