This lecture and the first part have some interesting discussion of biology. They are from a couple years ago and are somewhat dated, but provide a very good overview of some of the interesting aspects of genes. The thing that I found to be really interesting was the fact that in any progeny there is a small set of SNPs which are carried along to all progeny and since we are talking about the product of 20 random numbers in the range between 1 and about 24 billion ( 3 billion base pairs x two duplicate sets ( in 26 chromosomes ) x 4 possible bases ), the likelihood of that specific product is unique in small populations like the humans. [ When rereading this I wondered about the possibility that every cell in my body could have an identifiable parentage due to the same transcription variations, kind of spooky and possibly a useful observation]
It would not be useful in plotting an evolutionary tree from single cells, as less complex organisms are parsimonious in what is retained as it affects their rate of replication and thus their representation in a competitive population. It could provide a very specific parentage profile of mammals as they do incorporate "junk DNA" as they are not subject to the same time frame competitive effects. It would provide some advantage if deleted, but, as a result, the differentiation and evolution would be stunted and they would eventually fall to new successful mutations in the broader population.
The action of considering the subject leads me to some interesting projections that might not occur to others with a different skill set. As a programmer I see patterns and code when I look at anything, as well as vectors, equations, images, and extensions by combinatorics with other sciences.
Genetic selection is already taking place to reduce the risk of debilitating inherited disease, but everything has an up and down side in many dimensions. I could think of one fairly quickly. If a specific very good feature was selected and a less favorable excluded, it could be that the "better" strain has a greater tendency to easily transform to a lethal form while a "normal" strain might be more likely to mutate into an even more advantageous outcome. Or the weaker strain has survived because of some cyclic biological risk which is hidden in the ridiculously complex genome of the world bacterial background.
Playing games with mommy nature is always a risk as she plays for keeps and she has her favorite marbles and isn't afraid to use them. She always wins, even if you do too.
All in all, about 123,247.85 times more informative than Bill Nye the science guy, also less jumping around, mugging to the camera, and parodies of Max Headroom.