[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
Re: Ohh, do I hate to do this! (JP)
In a message dated 96-07-30 10:54:04 EDT, William Ward wrote:
>> Of course, this explanation creates all sorts of problems,
>> like if you mixed Dino-DNA and frog DNA, wouldn't you come up with
>> animals with physical characteristics of both dinosaurs and the
>> amphibian DNA donor?
You would have to have some idea of what the sequence you are using is going
to do. It's not haphazardly done or it most likely won't work.
and George Olshevsky wrote:
> You would almost certainly come up with no viable life form whatsoever!
Not necessarily! That's what gene splicing can do. Granted this is done on a
gene by gene level and generally with splicing a gene of a higher animal to
"simpler" organisms. One example is the splicing of the gene responsible for
the production of insulin in humans into a bacterial genome (thus becoming
transgenic) and voila, the bugs start mass producing insulin for humans!
Often bacteriophages, other viruses and plasmids are used to direct an
altered genome into the bacterial host which accepts and replicates the
exotic sequence. Many of our mass produced antibiotics are produced in this
way by other microbes which normally do not produce these chemicals Some of
our viral therapies including some AIDS research also use this technique.
This is of course a far cry from using recombinant techniques as was done in
JP but it is possible. We just have to have a nearly complete dino DNA
sequence (probably unlikely and may take decades to extract) and then the
genome needs to be mapped in it's entirety (another several decades) before
it could even be tried. So too would the sequences of Amphibian/Bird/ or
Reptilian DNA have to bee fairly completely known so that we would know what
sequences were needed to fill in the gaps in the Dino stuff.
Then there's the transgenic mice which grow human carttillage for replacement
of ears in humans...
Thomas R. Lipka