Not only is scaffolding required to maintain the structural integrity of the DNA's shape, but also the intron substrate tilts the exon into the most desirable position for splicing, and folding, too. So long as bonding thresholds are roughly met, introns can vary subtly in structural composition and still yield the same results. They are discarded because they make no chemical contribution to protein synthesis. Inclusions in introns can cause mutations by forcing different bonding angles, so the amino acid precursor may become isomeric, or completely useless and not even get processed, such as is the case for the CCR5 allele.

"Junk DNA"? "Dark matter"? Oy.

Research on this topic is interesting but the "junk DNA" term is archaic and "dark matter" is colourful language but not that enlightening (ha).

I really wish they wouldn't try to equate DNA snippets that they aren't fully sure what it does to An effect that they aren't really sure what it is.

That's like trying to compare an unknown cause to an unknown effect. Opposite things.

Any issues that I have with the whole "Dark Matter" thing in itself is a whole other story.

So non-coding DNA had been renamed 'dark matter'?

Why? Non-coding DNA is not imaginary.

guess that means - neither is "dark matter". It is just stuff we either can't see or didn't consider consequential enough to matter.

So it turns out that the sequencing element in both exons and introns can regulate the splicing process, Wang says. "We call it the splicing code, which is the information that tells the cell to splice one way or the other

So much for the evolutionary tale that the human genome consists mostly of inherited "leftover junk".
Since everything is turning out to be essential, there's now even less support for the imaginary evolution from some imagined ancestor.

Note the use of the words "code" and "information".

It would take a whole lot of stupendous miracles for one creature to morphs into another - no matter how long the time allocated for such imaginary process to occur.

If you do not agree - and most of this site's regular visitors will disagree, please bring documented observational evidence that one kind of organism can successfully morph into some completely different kind.
In other words - evolution [from one kind to another] has not been observed, ever. Period.