 |
|
| Science Forum Index » Astro - Seti Forum » Re - Cloned mammoth in the offing. Perhaps... |
|
Page 1 of 1 |
|
| Author |
Message |
| Bryan... |
 Posted: Wed Feb 18, 2009 11:27 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Feb 18, 11:49 am, Robert Clark <rgregorycl... at (no spam) yahoo.com> wrote:
[quote:b73517af93]On Nov 21 2008, 12:23 pm, Robert Clark <rgregorycl... at (no spam) yahoo.com
wrote:
Regenerating a Mammoth for $10 Million.
snip[/quote:b73517af93]
The idea is an interesting one - bringing back extinct species. But
the one thing these articles miss is that the accuracy of the genomic
information we have for both mammoths and neanderthals is not very
good - there is an error rate of ~1:10,000 bases; meaning there are
thousands of sequencing errors in each of the genomes. In addition,
we only have the sequence of one individual from each species; hardly
enough to bring back a stable population.
So it may be done, one day. But it'll cost far more than $10 million
- you'd be looking at about $10mil just to get 1 or 2 individuals
complete genome, error-free. Never mind cloning costs, and whatnot.
One day it'll probably be done, but for $10mil today - forget it.
Bryan |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Robert Clark... |
| Posted: Wed Feb 18, 2009 7:33 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Feb 18, 10:00 pm, "Martha Adams" <mh... at (no spam) verizon.net> wrote:
[quote:9feb24f210]"Bryan" <bryans.spam.t... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote in message
news:fde7c312-875a-48ed-bea1-24c2332c38de at (no spam) p29g2000vbn.googlegroups.com...
On Feb 18, 11:49 am, Robert Clark <rgregorycl... at (no spam) yahoo.com> wrote:> On Nov 21 2008, 12:23 pm, Robert Clark <rgregorycl... at (no spam) yahoo.com
wrote:
Regenerating a Mammoth for $10 Million.
snip
The idea is an interesting one - bringing back extinct species. But
the one thing these articles miss is that the accuracy of the genomic
information we have for both mammoths and neanderthals is not very
good - there is an error rate of ~1:10,000 bases; meaning there are
thousands of sequencing errors in each of the genomes. In addition,
we only have the sequence of one individual from each species; hardly
enough to bring back a stable population.
So it may be done, one day. But it'll cost far more than $10 million
- you'd be looking at about $10mil just to get 1 or 2 individuals
complete genome, error-free. Never mind cloning costs, and whatnot.
One day it'll probably be done, but for $10mil today - forget it.
Bryan
===================================================
$10 million may be a guess, but I'm alright with it. That is because of
how the cost has dropped to develop an individual human genome. We are
looking at an emerging technology here; and over not so very much time,
researchers will understand how the individual genome components work.
I look for them to be able to correct errors like I cna oops can see and
correct errors in text here.
*I don't know* about those people who respond to new ideas in biology
with, they say, fear and fright. I think those views are the visible
aspect of mental health issues they have. They should look at nature
some time; live on a farm of 150 acres and two horses for a few years.
Better yet, they could seek treatment.
I expect reproducing Neanderthals and mammoths and etc to be difficult
and messy, with errors, which is what you learn from. I hope to live
long enough to see some of this done.
Titeotwawki -- mha [sci.astro.seti 2009 Feb 18]
[/quote:9feb24f210]
Good points.
The report of the resurrection of a recently extinct ibex might
support the feasibility, though it is important to note the cloned
animal survived only for minutes, likely because of errors in the
genetic sequencing:
Hello again, Pyrenean ibex: Can cloning resurrect an extinct species?
Feb 3, 2009 05:07 PM in Biology
http://www.sciam.com/blog/60-second-science/post.cfm?id=pyrenean-ibex-restoring-species-fro-2009-02-03
Bob Clark |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| trigonometry1972 at (no spam) gmail.com |... |
| Posted: Wed Feb 18, 2009 10:33 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Feb 18, 9:33 pm, Robert Clark <rgregorycl... at (no spam) yahoo.com> wrote:
[quote:b733db929d]On Feb 18, 10:00 pm, "Martha Adams" <mh... at (no spam) verizon.net> wrote:
"Bryan" <bryans.spam.t... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote in message
news:fde7c312-875a-48ed-bea1-24c2332c38de at (no spam) p29g2000vbn.googlegroups.com....
On Feb 18, 11:49 am, Robert Clark <rgregorycl... at (no spam) yahoo.com> wrote:> On Nov 21 2008, 12:23 pm, Robert Clark <rgregorycl... at (no spam) yahoo.com
wrote:
Regenerating a Mammoth for $10 Million.
snip
The idea is an interesting one - bringing back extinct species. But
the one thing these articles miss is that the accuracy of the genomic
information we have for both mammoths and neanderthals is not very
good - there is an error rate of ~1:10,000 bases; meaning there are
thousands of sequencing errors in each of the genomes. In addition,
we only have the sequence of one individual from each species; hardly
enough to bring back a stable population.
So it may be done, one day. But it'll cost far more than $10 million
- you'd be looking at about $10mil just to get 1 or 2 individuals
complete genome, error-free. Never mind cloning costs, and whatnot.
One day it'll probably be done, but for $10mil today - forget it.
Bryan
==================================================
$10 million may be a guess, but I'm alright with it. That is because of
how the cost has dropped to develop an individual human genome. We are
looking at an emerging technology here; and over not so very much time,
researchers will understand how the individual genome components work.
I look for them to be able to correct errors like I cna oops can see and
correct errors in text here.
*I don't know* about those people who respond to new ideas in biology
with, they say, fear and fright. I think those views are the visible
aspect of mental health issues they have. They should look at nature
some time; live on a farm of 150 acres and two horses for a few years.
Better yet, they could seek treatment.
I expect reproducing Neanderthals and mammoths and etc to be difficult
and messy, with errors, which is what you learn from. I hope to live
long enough to see some of this done.
Titeotwawki -- mha [sci.astro.seti 2009 Feb 18]
Good points.
The report of the resurrection of a recently extinct ibex might
support the feasibility, though it is important to note the cloned
animal survived only for minutes, likely because of errors in the
genetic sequencing:
Hello again, Pyrenean ibex: Can cloning resurrect an extinct species?
Feb 3, 2009 05:07 PM in Biologyhttp://www.sciam.com/blog/60-second-science/post.cfm?id=pyrenean-ibex...
Bob Clark
[/quote:b733db929d]
Perhaps prior to "resurrecting" a species, the future genetic workers
will program a super
complete computer model to see if DNA code will generate a successful
creature.
It would also seem likely such a resurrection would involve a complete
synthetic
recreation of the chromosomes and genes basically for scratch.
And the children said, "Are we there yet?"...................Trig |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Martha Adams... |
| Posted: Wed Feb 18, 2009 11:00 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
"Bryan" <bryans.spam.trap at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote in message
news:fde7c312-875a-48ed-bea1-24c2332c38de at (no spam) p29g2000vbn.googlegroups.com...
On Feb 18, 11:49 am, Robert Clark <rgregorycl... at (no spam) yahoo.com> wrote:
[quote:b6c5f56499]On Nov 21 2008, 12:23 pm, Robert Clark <rgregorycl... at (no spam) yahoo.com
wrote:
Regenerating a Mammoth for $10 Million.
snip[/quote:b6c5f56499]
The idea is an interesting one - bringing back extinct species. But
the one thing these articles miss is that the accuracy of the genomic
information we have for both mammoths and neanderthals is not very
good - there is an error rate of ~1:10,000 bases; meaning there are
thousands of sequencing errors in each of the genomes. In addition,
we only have the sequence of one individual from each species; hardly
enough to bring back a stable population.
So it may be done, one day. But it'll cost far more than $10 million
- you'd be looking at about $10mil just to get 1 or 2 individuals
complete genome, error-free. Never mind cloning costs, and whatnot.
One day it'll probably be done, but for $10mil today - forget it.
Bryan
===================================================
$10 million may be a guess, but I'm alright with it. That is because of
how the cost has dropped to develop an individual human genome. We are
looking at an emerging technology here; and over not so very much time,
researchers will understand how the individual genome components work.
I look for them to be able to correct errors like I cna oops can see and
correct errors in text here.
*I don't know* about those people who respond to new ideas in biology
with, they say, fear and fright. I think those views are the visible
aspect of mental health issues they have. They should look at nature
some time; live on a farm of 150 acres and two horses for a few years.
Better yet, they could seek treatment.
I expect reproducing Neanderthals and mammoths and etc to be difficult
and messy, with errors, which is what you learn from. I hope to live
long enough to see some of this done.
Titeotwawki -- mha [sci.astro.seti 2009 Feb 18] |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Flo... |
| Posted: Thu Feb 19, 2009 7:40 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Feb 18, 10:00 pm, "Martha Adams" <mh... at (no spam) verizon.net> wrote:
[quote:7405494573]"Bryan" <bryans.spam.t... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote in message
news:fde7c312-875a-48ed-bea1-24c2332c38de at (no spam) p29g2000vbn.googlegroups.com...
On Feb 18, 11:49 am, Robert Clark <rgregorycl... at (no spam) yahoo.com> wrote:> On Nov 21 2008, 12:23 pm, Robert Clark <rgregorycl... at (no spam) yahoo.com
wrote:
Regenerating a Mammoth for $10 Million.
snip
The idea is an interesting one - bringing back extinct species. But
the one thing these articles miss is that the accuracy of the genomic
information we have for both mammoths and neanderthals is not very
good - there is an error rate of ~1:10,000 bases; meaning there are
thousands of sequencing errors in each of the genomes. In addition,
we only have the sequence of one individual from each species; hardly
enough to bring back a stable population.
So it may be done, one day. But it'll cost far more than $10 million
- you'd be looking at about $10mil just to get 1 or 2 individuals
complete genome, error-free. Never mind cloning costs, and whatnot.
One day it'll probably be done, but for $10mil today - forget it.
Bryan
==================================================
$10 million may be a guess, but I'm alright with it. That is because of
how the cost has dropped to develop an individual human genome. We are
looking at an emerging technology here; and over not so very much time,
researchers will understand how the individual genome components work.
I look for them to be able to correct errors like I cna oops can see and
correct errors in text here.
*I don't know* about those people who respond to new ideas in biology
with, they say, fear and fright. I think those views are the visible
aspect of mental health issues they have. They should look at nature
some time; live on a farm of 150 acres and two horses for a few years.
Better yet, they could seek treatment.
I expect reproducing Neanderthals and mammoths and etc to be difficult
and messy, with errors, which is what you learn from. I hope to live
long enough to see some of this done.
Titeotwawki -- mha [sci.astro.seti 2009 Feb 18]
[/quote:7405494573]
Alas, I wish I could live long enough to see a cloned Neanderthal and/
or mammoth, but I am afraid that is not possible. I am not morbid about
death until I think about things like this. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Martha Adams... |
| Posted: Thu Feb 19, 2009 10:17 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
<trigonometry1972 at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote in message
news:e1b139ef-c83c-41b2-aaec-fc6db4b3e78d at (no spam) v35g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
On Feb 18, 9:33 pm, Robert Clark <rgregorycl... at (no spam) yahoo.com> wrote:
[quote:437337b777]On Feb 18, 10:00 pm, "Martha Adams" <mh... at (no spam) verizon.net> wrote:
"Bryan" <bryans.spam.t... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote in message
news:fde7c312-875a-48ed-bea1-24c2332c38de at (no spam) p29g2000vbn.googlegroups.com...
On Feb 18, 11:49 am, Robert Clark <rgregorycl... at (no spam) yahoo.com> wrote:
On Nov 21 2008, 12:23 pm, Robert Clark <rgregorycl... at (no spam) yahoo.com
wrote:
Regenerating a Mammoth for $10 Million.
snip
The idea is an interesting one - bringing back extinct species. But
the one thing these articles miss is that the accuracy of the
genomic
information we have for both mammoths and neanderthals is not very
good - there is an error rate of ~1:10,000 bases; meaning there are
thousands of sequencing errors in each of the genomes. In addition,
we only have the sequence of one individual from each species;
hardly
enough to bring back a stable population.
So it may be done, one day. But it'll cost far more than $10 million
- you'd be looking at about $10mil just to get 1 or 2 individuals
complete genome, error-free. Never mind cloning costs, and whatnot.
One day it'll probably be done, but for $10mil today - forget it.
Bryan
===================================================
$10 million may be a guess, but I'm alright with it. That is because
of
how the cost has dropped to develop an individual human genome. We
are
looking at an emerging technology here; and over not so very much
time,
researchers will understand how the individual genome components
work.
I look for them to be able to correct errors like I cna oops can see
and
correct errors in text here.
*I don't know* about those people who respond to new ideas in
biology
with, they say, fear and fright. I think those views are the visible
aspect of mental health issues they have. They should look at nature
some time; live on a farm of 150 acres and two horses for a few
years.
Better yet, they could seek treatment.
I expect reproducing Neanderthals and mammoths and etc to be
difficult
and messy, with errors, which is what you learn from. I hope to live
long enough to see some of this done.
Titeotwawki -- mha [sci.astro.seti 2009 Feb 18]
Good points.
The report of the resurrection of a recently extinct ibex might
support the feasibility, though it is important to note the cloned
animal survived only for minutes, likely because of errors in the
genetic sequencing:
Hello again, Pyrenean ibex: Can cloning resurrect an extinct species?
Feb 3, 2009 05:07 PM in
Biologyhttp://www.sciam.com/blog/60-second-science/post.cfm?id=pyrenean-ibex...
Bob Clark
[/quote:437337b777]
Perhaps prior to "resurrecting" a species, the future genetic workers
will program a super
complete computer model to see if DNA code will generate a successful
creature.
It would also seem likely such a resurrection would involve a complete
synthetic
recreation of the chromosomes and genes basically for scratch.
And the children said, "Are we there yet?"...................Trig
==========================================
I see two points in the above text. The first is it illustrates the
"emerging technology" process. I doubt anyone here ever caught a ride
in a Wright flyer, or would much want to. Modern commercial aircraft
are different from that old machine, and it's evolution of the
technology that makes the difference. I'd look for the same effect in
new emerging technologies.
The second point I noticed boils down to, molecular biology seems to
have seamlessly merged into computational biology. I think "Trig"
reaches too far in his construction of this. His computational biology
model points in a necessary direction, but I think the crucial
experiment is the life experiment, and it's going to stay that way. I'd
look for a small number more of failed new ibexes; and then
....*success.*
And it's interesting to think about where, over the long run, we are
headed with this extinct-species reconstruction work. I can see it as a
step, not an end. I can see the next step beyond recovery as starting
from scratch to develop an *entirely new* life form. A living thing
with no connection to past evolution but if you track it back to its
origins, you find human made computer files and reagent bottles. Yet it
is something we can place well up in the evolutionary "tree." Such
building from scratch has already been done with viruses; but someday,
maybe we can do it with *humans* even. (Won't *that* stir up the
Religious Wrongs! However, little chance it might make them think.)
Titeotwawki -- mha [sci.astro.seti 2009 Feb 19] |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
All times are GMT - 5 Hours
The time now is Sun Mar 21, 2010 2:56 am
|
|