PDA

View Full Version : Splicing?



amlptj
06-28-2010, 11:22 PM
I dont know if anyone has seen the newest movie splice, but well curently i'm writting a book that unfourtunitly deals with that stuff. (if only i could write faster)

Anyway i'm a chem major and have taken a bunch of bio classes but was wondering if such things like mixing human genes and animal ones were possible today. Given you have the best scientific equipment in the world and you werent restricted by any laws. IS it possible in real life? If so what are its limitations, challages and such that would prevent from making a live human hybrid thing. Please real life stuff only.

Chris P
06-28-2010, 11:31 PM
There are many animal models for expressing human genes, such as mice expressing the receptor for human polio virus: http://users.rcn.com/jkimball.ma.ultranet/BiologyPages/T/TransgenicAnimals.html

As for chimeras, expressing other animal parts, I don't think that's been done yet. I tried to read this Wikipedia article, but it's over my head: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chimera_%28genetics%29

I almost mentioned the mouse growing the human ear, but that was a hoax/misrepresentation: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vacanti_mouse Glad I did my homework!

OneWriter
06-28-2010, 11:41 PM
Sorry, I was being a goof. Lab mice and other lab animals have been engineered that can express human genes. The other way around is not ethically possible, just because there's no such thing like lab humans.... not the ones that stay in a cage and reproduce fast enough to create a new breed, anyways. I have an interesting article in pdf, PM me if you're interested.

ETA: BTW, your title is confusing. What exactly do you want to do? Do you have human DNA and want to modify the RNA splicing? Do you want human DNA to express animal traits? Do you want several DNAs in one individual?

GeorgeK
06-29-2010, 01:25 AM
Possible? yes, but terribly expensive and time consuming, and not all that accurate yet. I haven't seen the movie, but the trailer looks like a rehash of "Species".

kaitiepaige17
06-29-2010, 01:28 AM
I saw the movie, but it didn't go too much in the "how we did it" aspect.

OneWriter
06-29-2010, 02:00 AM
Possible? yes, but terribly expensive and time consuming, and not all that accurate yet.

Technically, it's been done already. Any xenograft, if successful, creates a human-animal hybrid. That's why I was asking the OP just exactly what it's the intent, here. Starting from lab animals, many things have been done, including human/rat chimeras. But they are not humans, they are animals with human DNA in them.

Drachen Jager
06-29-2010, 02:36 AM
There have been a lot of animal/human hybrids created for medical science.

My wife once worked with mice that had jellyfish genes to make their brains glow under black light (don't ask!).

Completely possible, expensive, hard and the results are often unpredictable but totally plausible. If it's near future and you want some material for conversation fodder make sure to look up Henrietta Lacks, or read the book, "The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks". Anybody who's done cellular research on humans knows HeLa cells.

OneWriter
06-29-2010, 02:50 AM
There have been a lot of animal/human hybrids created for medical science.

My wife once worked with mice that had jellyfish genes to make their brains glow under black light (don't ask!).

Completely possible, expensive, hard and the results are often unpredictable but totally plausible. If it's near future and you want some material for conversation fodder make sure to look up Henrietta Lacks, or read the book, "The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks". Anybody who's done cellular research on humans knows HeLa cells.

HeLa cells are fascinating!! Nothing to do with hybrids, though.... They are human cancer cells, grafted from Henrietta, that are still alive even though she died in 1951. As long as they are kept at physiological temperature and they are fed, the HeLa cell line will never die. It takes cancer to become immortal. Except it kills you.

MAP
06-29-2010, 03:45 AM
You need to look into transgenic mice. A lot has been done to the genes of mice, including putting in genes of other species, which theoretically can be done to humans. Although I don't know of any actual scientific experiments being done on humans because society tends to frown on that.

The limitations and challenges of doing this to mice will probably be the same as doing this to humans. It at least will give you a realistic place to extrapolate from.

Good luck.

amlptj
06-29-2010, 08:17 PM
Thanks everyone. Yeah i'm looking for people (in todays world not restricted by laws or ethics) who are doing experiments to make a human with animal traits, ex: glowing, calmoflage, venom, maybe wings ( although that's pushing it a little.) ect... Even a human animal hybrid would work but its pretty much the same thing. So thanks for the info if you comeup with anything else it would be a great help!

OneWriter
06-29-2010, 11:54 PM
Those movies make you think that the genetic code is a computer keyboard and you can just program it and create whatever you want. What they don't tell you is that we share 90+% genetic stuff with a rat and what makes us different is not the genes but how we express them. You can splice, cut, paste, stitch, but it's the expression that you have to alter. So far they've been able to put human genes in lab animals and make them express certain proteins. But for example we have the same genes that regulate the shape and number of bones of our limbs, but clearly express them into legs and arms, and rats and other animals express them in paws.

MAP
06-30-2010, 09:33 AM
I don't think anyone anywhere has admitted to putting animal genes into a human embryo, but human genes have been put into all kinds of organisms.

One writer is very wise, listen to her.

We already have very similar genes that make up parts in other animals. It is when and how long certain genes are expressed during development that make animals different (like fins instead of arms). Watch the documentary "What Darwin Didn't Know." It will explain this, and it is really fascinating.

sunandshadow
06-30-2010, 09:52 AM
I was just reading that microbiologists succeeded at synthesizing the entire genetic code of a bacteria from computer data and the raw materials of rna. I don't think they currently have the ability to physically build a bacterial cell to stick the rna into and have a completely synthesized lifeform. But nanomachine technology gets better every year, might be only 10 or 20 years away.

On the other hand, putting cat dna and human dna in a blender and getting a cat person is nonsense. You probably wouldn't even get a cell capable of keeping itself alive, much less of going through the whole developmental process to form a body with all working organs, metabolism, digestion, etc. To make a cat person you'd have to know exactly what every gene in both animals did, then have a sophisticated computer program to model the affect of any substitution on the developmental process and adult creature. Maybe with some trial and error you could make a human whose spine developed into a tail rather than remaining as an internal tailbone. Who knows whether the resultant person would have any muscular control over that tail, because presumably you would be keeping a human brain, and we have no idea whether the human brain has the latent ability to control a tail.

amlptj
06-30-2010, 08:33 PM
I believe we share 90% of our genetic code with all animals on earth which is how they were able to make a pig glow by inserting trates of a jellyfish.

Now i dont know whats its called but i watched a thing on discovery about trying to make a dinosour. To do so the scientist discovered they could minipulate certian genes in chicken enbros to express trates that were in a frozen unused state that only still exsisted because of past ansestors.

Considering like OneWriter said one could tap into a gene and get it to express something different that either the human already had or by inserting forgin genes from another orgainsim theortically it would be possible to create a thing(after many trials and errors) that expressed something unhuman. Right?

OneWriter
06-30-2010, 08:58 PM
Problem: over 90% of the DNA is non-coding and we don't know what the heck it's for.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noncoding_DNA

Bottom line: with your poetic license you can do just about what you want. In reality? Ugh. We've done bacteria, we've done viruses. Those are easy. Mother Nature is rather complex and it's good for us that She is. Remember Dolly? They thought they had found a way of cloning. Turns out, Dolly aged just like her clone, except she was much younger. Personally, I believe Mother Nature can outsmart us all. Already has. Sorry for being cynical.

BTW: when one starts tapping into these things there's so many ways things could go wrong, you could write a million sci-fi thrillers. Don't even need all those special effects they have in the movie. Now I better shut up, for the rest, you'll have to wait until my book comes out. :D

GeorgeK
07-01-2010, 03:25 PM
You are forgetting the italian monkeymen developed, (no that implies that they worked for their intended purpose), bred during Moussolini's reighn.


I don't think anyone anywhere has admitted to putting animal genes into a human embryo, but human genes have been put into all kinds of organisms.
.

shaldna
07-01-2010, 03:43 PM
there's alot of gene work going on where humans can be treated with animal genes for certain purposes. however, it's not exactly a phsical hybrid like the Fly or anything.