Jun Posted October 7, 2007 Share Posted October 7, 2007 Scientist has made synthetic chromosome · Breakthrough could combat global warming Sunday October 7 2007 Craig Venter, the controversial DNA researcher involved in the race to decipher the human genetic code, has built a synthetic chromosome out of laboratory chemicals and is poised to announce the creation of the first new artificial life form on Earth. The announcement, which is expected within weeks and could come as early as Monday at the annual meeting of his scientific institute in San Diego, California, will herald a giant leap forward in the development of designer genomes. It is certain to provoke heated debate about the ethics of creating new species and could unlock the door to new energy sources and techniques to combat global warming. Mr Venter told the Guardian he thought this landmark would be "a very important philosophical step in the history of our species. We are going from reading our genetic code to the ability to write it. That gives us the hypothetical ability to do things never contemplated before". The Guardian can reveal that a team of 20 top scientists assembled by Mr Venter, led by the Nobel laureate Hamilton Smith, has already constructed a synthetic chromosome, a feat of virtuoso bio-engineering never previously achieved. Using lab-made chemicals, they have painstakingly stitched together a chromosome that is 381 genes long and contains 580,000 base pairs of genetic code. The DNA sequence is based on the bacterium Mycoplasma genitalium which the team pared down to the bare essentials needed to support life, removing a fifth of its genetic make-up. The wholly synthetically reconstructed chromosome, which the team have christened Mycoplasma laboratorium, has been watermarked with inks for easy recognition. It is then transplanted into a living bacterial cell and in the final stage of the process it is expected to take control of the cell and in effect become a new life form. The team of scientists has already successfully transplanted the genome of one type of bacterium into the cell of another, effectively changing the cell's species. Mr Venter said he was "100% confident" the same technique would work for the artificially created chromosome. The new life form will depend for its ability to replicate itself and metabolise on the molecular machinery of the cell into which it has been injected, and in that sense it will not be a wholly synthetic life form. However, its DNA will be artificial, and it is the DNA that controls the cell and is credited with being the building block of life. Mr Venter said he had carried out an ethical review before completing the experiment. "We feel that this is good science," he said. He has further heightened the controversy surrounding his potential breakthrough by applying for a patent for the synthetic bacterium. Pat Mooney, director of a Canadian bioethics organisation, ETC group, said the move was an enormous challenge to society to debate the risks involved. "Governments, and society in general, is way behind the ball. This is a wake-up call - what does it mean to create new life forms in a test-tube?" He said Mr Venter was creating a "chassis on which you could build almost anything. It could be a contribution to humanity such as new drugs or a huge threat to humanity such as bio-weapons". Mr Venter believes designer genomes have enormous positive potential if properly regulated. In the long-term, he hopes they could lead to alternative energy sources previously unthinkable. Bacteria could be created, he speculates, that could help mop up excessive carbon dioxide, thus contributing to the solution to global warming, or produce fuels such as butane or propane made entirely from sugar. "We are not afraid to take on things that are important just because they stimulate thinking," he said. "We are dealing in big ideas. We are trying to create a new value system for life. When dealing at this scale, you can't expect everybody to be happy." http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2007/oct...s.climatechange Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amanda Posted October 9, 2007 Share Posted October 9, 2007 Great article Jun! Thanks for sharing it! I'm no molecular scientist by any means, however, even though I can't really fathom what this synthetic DNA really is... this really fascinates me. I had been reading a long while back about abiogenesis where I believe they had artificially produce self replicating polypeptide chains, which I think is a step to mRNA, which I understand is a precursor to DNA. If we're able to produce the ability to fabricate life and its DNA... what new world will that unfold? Wow... I can't even imagine! I'd like to believe we'd be able to regenerate new body parts, eliminate things like Autism and Down's Syndrome, etc... I hope to hear more about this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jubilant Posted October 9, 2007 Share Posted October 9, 2007 After reading that article in the news the other day, I couldn't help but think of yet another instance in where *intelligent* beings create something for the common good that will more then likely turn out very, very badly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
perianwalsh Posted October 10, 2007 Share Posted October 10, 2007 i hope i will not met my identical in the future..... btw i still have trouble with the difference between clone and the one mention above.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HuaiDan Posted October 10, 2007 Share Posted October 10, 2007 A clone is made from an exact copy of an existing genome. This is reverse engineering an entirely new genome. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vigile Posted October 10, 2007 Share Posted October 10, 2007 After reading that article in the news the other day, I couldn't help but think of yet another instance in where *intelligent* beings create something for the common good that will more then likely turn out very, very badly. Oh, I don't know. Splitting the atom was certainly a Pandora's box issue, but overall scientists seem to have a pretty good record for improving conditions rather than releasing potential bio-causts on the world. As long as the DoD doesn't figure out a devious use for the technology, hopefully a way will be found to make the future more interesting and diverse. I've been reading a few quips recently about how the first person to live to be 150 is already 60 years old. Since the average life expectancy has already doubled in a century, this doesn't seem too unreasonable. It seems we live in exciting times as far as technological breakthroughs are concerned. Everytime I consider the inanity of the man on the street I turn around and am impressed by the heights that other humans have already acheived. It seems there is a broadening of distribution of knowledge occuring before our eyes. Most of humanity is still interested in who won the latest football game while a handful of intellectuall elites are figuring out how to produce life and who knows what's next? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts