Slashdot Mirror


Genetically Engineered Big-brained Mice

StefanJ writes "'Are you pondering what I'm pondering Pinky?' An item on MSNBC reports that researchers at Brigham and Women's Hospital and Harvard Medical School in Boston have produced mice with big, convoluted brains by inserting an single extra gene. I am reminded of two pieces of SF: Olaf Stapledon's novel Sirius, about a lab experiment that produces a brainy dog, and Bruce Sterling "Our Neural Chernobyl," in which the country is overrun with cunning coyotes and tribes of raccoons."

31 of 89 comments (clear)

  1. One small step for human kind..onegiantleapfordogs by Hadlock · · Score: 2, Funny

    Huzzah! Bring in the Data Dogs! Ein* rocked.

    I wouldn't mind a smarter dog...
    *From Cowboy Bebop

    --
    moox. for a new generation.
  2. Why were they killed? by TRACK-YOUR-POSITION · · Score: 3, Funny
    from MSNBC: IT IS NOT yet clear whether the mice are smarter -- they were all killed soon after birth

    Um, why did they do that? Did the scientists just give the mice an X-ray and say "OMG THESE MOUSES ARE SO FREEKIN SMART EWWWWWWW I DONT WANT SMARTY-SMART MICE SQUISH IT SQUISH IT SQUISH IT!!!!!!!!!!!" and then they all stood on top of lab chairs waiting for their spouses to squish the brainy mice, (but of course they had to settle for the building custodian)?

    Look, I'm just guessing, okay?

    1. Re:Why were they killed? by Prof_Dagoski · · Score: 4, Informative

      That's what's so frustrating about medical imaging technology. It's advanced enough to show what the brain looks like in the skull while the organism is still living, but you don't have a real good way of looking at the very fine structure without dissecting the brain. But, the things that's important to these researchers is what's happening at the cellular level. They want to know how the cells are qualitatively and quantitaively different. For that kind of analysis, they need cells, and a whole lot of 'em to get batches of cell stuff they can measure. My wife does this kind of work and it's amazing what they have to do in order to measure some of these chemicals and cell components.

    2. Re:Why were they killed? by margaret · · Score: 4, Informative

      Because imaging can't tell you things like:
      Is the beta-catenin really being overexpressed ?
      By how much?
      In which neurons?
      Has the expression of other proteins been altered too?

      To answer these kinds of questions, you need to stain thin slices of the brains or grind up the brains.

      -margaret

  3. Just imagine... by zenyu · · Score: 3, Funny


    If they gave this to a dolphin or a whale which already have larger brains than us, but presumably don't have our overabundance of the magic protein.

    Or our nearest neighbors like chimps and gorillas... Though I think it would be more interesting to give it exclusively to Bonobos, they'd probably write some interesting erotica ;)

    1. Re:Just imagine... by Danse · · Score: 2

      Exactamundo! Even if we do cause the planet to implode eventually, we had a good run. If we're really clever, we'll eventually manage to learn to control the environment well enough to fix most of the problems we've made. Either that or we'll figure out how to get the hell off this rock and make our way to another one that we can start over with. Except we'll already have a huge head start experience and technology-wise.

      --
      It's not enough to bash in heads, you've got to bash in minds. - Captain Hammer
  4. What was it's name? by EnVisiCrypt · · Score: 2

    Algernon, perhaps?

    In other news...
    A pastry factory custodian's brain was doubled in size by the insertion of an extra gene. He's reported to be in good spirits, and looks forward to a full life of intelligence and happiness.

    --


    *everything* is Orwellian to cats.
    1. Re:What was it's name? by EnVisiCrypt · · Score: 2

      I know what I was thinking of, that's why I made the reference. Geesh.

      --


      *everything* is Orwellian to cats.
    2. Re:What was it's name? by Telecommando · · Score: 2

      Well if you knew, why did you ask it as a question?
      Jeeze yourself.

      --
      Beta sux! Join the Slashcott! http://hardware.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=4760465&cid=46173047
    3. Re:What was it's name? by EnVisiCrypt · · Score: 2

      I was asking the name of the mouse from the expirement...
      It was a joke...

      --


      *everything* is Orwellian to cats.
    4. Re:What was it's name? by Rick+the+Red · · Score: 2
      Those of us who got it, got it and didn't need to reply. Those who didn't get it and replied with inane comments probably won't get it; you're wasting your bandwith trying to explain yourself to them. I'm slowly learning (ok, so I'm a slow learner -- I'm man^h^h^hstupid enough to admit my failings) not to reply to replies to my posts -- I find myself arguing when I meant to debate, but this is /.; the people here aren't interested in debate.

      --
      If all this should have a reason, we would be the last to know.
  5. Manic Mice by ThereIsNoSporkNeo · · Score: 4, Funny

    They said that the mice were "Killed soon after birth"... what they didn't say is that they were killed after leading a bloody rebellion that culminated in a tense showdown in the lab, with one of the engineered mice holding a poisoned needle to one of the researcher's throats.

    Luckily they were able to calm down the miscreant with a piece of cheese, and lured him far enough away from the researcher to turn him into a bloody splot on the (otherwise spotlessly clean linolium) floor.

    Back to you Bob.

    --
    With my dying breath, I curse Zoidberg!
  6. Yet Another Reference by disappear · · Score: 2

    The Lysenko Maze - David Grinnell - F&SF Jul '54

    A short story about hyperintelligent mice. OK, they were bred --- we didn't have DNA manipulation in '54, and for that matter the discovery of DNA was only in the near-future.

    The story's worth reading all the way through at least once.

    1. Re:Yet Another Reference by mi · · Score: 2

      Lysenko considered genetics anti-soviet and "imperialist whore". Even if DNA existed back then it wouldn't have had a chance with that monster, who held back the Soviet (and world) biology for years...

      --
      In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
  7. This only got the section page by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    This article, about a single gene that could revolutionize civilization, only got on the science section page. While an article about Perl 5.8.0 got FP. I don't think another slightly different version of Perl will change civilization as we know it.

    EDITORS: WHY ISN'T THIS FP!

    Maybe you should double-check with other editors to make sure stories are where they belong.

    1. Re:This only got the section page by Rick+the+Red · · Score: 2
      Maybe? Maybe? The editors should do a lot of things they aren't doing, but this is Slashdot so they're not interested in runing a quality news site, they're just interested in, in, in -- hell, I can't tell what the fuck they're interested in. Video games, better graphics cards for those video games, Linux, and Microsoft bashing, apparantly. Certainly not editing or any other activity that might require thought. I'm not even sure why they're called editors -- ever notice that they don't edit the stories they post?

      --
      If all this should have a reason, we would be the last to know.
    2. Re:This only got the section page by StefanJ · · Score: 2

      I agree with you on the potential impact. But I submitted it as a Science section story, and that's where they put it.

    3. Re:This only got the section page by Kredal · · Score: 2

      Actually they do. The one story that I submitted that got posted was edited all around... what they *don't* do is spellcheckign

      (yes, that was intentional)

      --
      Whoever stated that signature sizes should be limited to one hundred and twenty characters can just go ahead and kiss my
  8. Rescaled images by nucal · · Score: 3, Interesting
    In the MSNBC article, they rescaled the brain images to be about the same size - going to the original article (subscription req'd), the brains overexpressing ß-catenin look to be about twice the size of the normal ones.

    The researchers genetically altered the brain cells, but not bone growth - so I wonder whether the increased folding is a response to being crammed into a cranial cavity that is too small.

  9. Re:not such a good idea by TriciaMac · · Score: 3, Insightful

    In the early 1600's members of the church were saying much the same thing about Galileo and his support of Copernican heliocentric theory. Echoes were again heard with the introduction of Newtonian physics, and Darwin's natural selection. Throughout history people have feared and even violently supressed new ideas and methodologies that would later prove beneficial and increase our understanding of the wonderous and often mystifying universe that we live in. While I agree that new discoveries can be frightening, I don't think that we should even attempt to place limitations on the growth of the human sphere of knowledge (mostly,because we can't). We are, by nature, an inquisitive species and that trait has brought us some amazing things like computers( and there was MUCH rejoicing!), air-conditioning, antibiotics, books, Hitchhiker's Guide on compact disc, etc. At any given time in our past there were people saying," Hey, that's enough! We go much farther with all of this new-fangled learning and we are in grave danger!{Insert name of deity here} is going to punish us if we don't cut it out this instant!" The end result? We are already in a hell of our own creation where there are effective treatments for a vast number of diseases, where we have the tools to combat drought and famine, where we can accurately predict storms and the path of a hurricane, where we can communicate with loved ones across vast distances by simply pressing a few buttons, and where doomsday criers can post their warnings on the internet for all of the world to see! You see, we have always been "extremely close" to your imaginary line with our unlocking of seemingly insoluble mysteries and looking back, we find that that line was never really there.

  10. please not now by Tablizer · · Score: 3, Funny

    Oh great!

    First it was H1B's from India, Pakistan, and China. Now we have to compete with smart mice also.

    Shudduv been a dentist like Mom warned.

    1. Re:please not now by sckeener · · Score: 2

      Oh great!

      First it was H1B's from India, Pakistan, and China. Now we have to compete with smart mice also.

      Shudduv been a dentist like Mom warned.


      Sounds like someone doesn't like having his cheese moved.

      --
      "Only one thing, is impossible for god: to find any sense in any copyright law on the planet." Mark Twain
  11. eh, unlikely to be smarter by mikeee · · Score: 3, Interesting

    If such a simple mutation could make you smarter, evolution would have found already. After all, intellegence is an evolutionary advantage, just look at all the chicks us geeks get...

    Quick! Kill those mice before they build the death ray to destroy us!

    1. Re:eh, unlikely to be smarter by StefanJ · · Score: 2

      Evolution isn't flawless, or biased toward intelligence. Big brains have worked well for us, so far, but it's not a given that it is the ultimate survival solution.

      It could be that evolution DID "create" brainy mice at one point, but that the metabolic cost outweighed the advantages.

      Or: The brains might have given an advantage, but the mice didn't live long enough for it to make a difference.

    2. Re:eh, unlikely to be smarter by Rick+the+Red · · Score: 2
      Or: The larger brains might have given them an advantage, but other mutations caused them to evolve into something other than mice. Perhaps rats are desended from mice that got the big-brain gene along with some other non-mouse genes (maybe the larger brain didn't work without a larger skull to put it in, and in getting that they also got an overall larger body to go with it).

      --
      If all this should have a reason, we would be the last to know.
  12. Arthur always was a little confused about the mice by schmaltz · · Score: 4, Funny

    "Earthman, the planet you lived on was commissioned, paid for, and run by mice. It was destroyed five minutes before the completion of the purpose for which it was built, and we've got to build another one."

    Only one word registered with Arthur.

    "Mice?" he said.

    "Indeed Earthman."

    "Look, sorry - are we talking about the little white furry things with the cheese fixation and women standing on tables screaming in early sixties sit coms?"

    Slartibartfast coughed politely.

    "Earthman," he said, "it is sometimes hard to follow your mode of speech. Remember I have been asleep inside this planet of Magrathea for five million years and know little of these early sixties sit coms of which you speak. These creatures you call mice, you see, they are not quite as they appear. They are merely the protrusion into our dimension of vast hyperintelligent pan- dimensional beings. The whole business with the cheese and the squeaking is just a front."

    The old man paused, and with a sympathetic frown continued.

    "They've been experimenting on you I'm afraid."

    Arthur thought about this for a second, and then his face cleared.

    "Ah no," he said, "I see the source of the misunderstanding now. No, look you see, what happened was that we used to do experiments on them. They were often used in behavioural research, Pavlov and all that sort of stuff. So what happened was that the mice would be set all sorts of tests, learning to ring bells, run around mazes and things so that the whole nature of the learning process could be examined. From our observations of their behaviour we were able to learn all sorts of things about our own ..."

    Arthur's voice tailed off.

    "Such subtlety ..." said Slartibartfast, "one has to admire it."

    "What?" said Arthur.

    "How better to disguise their real natures, and how better to guide your thinking. Suddenly running down a maze the wrong way, eating the wrong bit of cheese, unexpectedly dropping dead of myxomatosis, - if it's finely calculated the cumulative effect is enormous."

    He paused for effect.

    "You see, Earthman, they really are particularly clever hyperintelligent pan-dimensional beings. Your planet and people have formed the matrix of an organic computer running a ten-million-year research programme ...

    "Let me tell you the whole story. It'll take a little time."

    "Time," said Arthur weakly, "is not currently one of my problems."

    --
    Big Daddy, Johnny, Burp, Aunt Zelda, Scott, Slurp, Big Momma ... where's Siggy?
  13. Pinky and the Brain by dh003i · · Score: 2

    They're Pinky and the Brain
    Pinky and the Brain:
    One is a genuis,
    The other's insane;
    They'll overthrow the earth,
    They'll rule with all their worth;
    They're Pinky,
    They're Pinky and the Brain
    Brain Brain Brain Brain
    Dun dun.

    LOL. Ok, but seriously, this is interesting. More interesting than seeing if mice can play chess or learn to read, is if this same technique can be applied on humans pre-birth, and if genetic engineering via virus-vectors could be used to apply it to the already-living (not just the unborn).

  14. Re:One small step for human kind..onegiantleapford by StefanJ · · Score: 2

    A dog smart enough to use a toilet would be a Good Thing.

    Of course, it might then also be smart enough to be a real pain in the ass.

  15. Re:of mice and men by g4dget · · Score: 2

    Come on, if you don't get it, why waste your moderation points on it? Any geek worth his salt should know that that refers to the Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galazy.

  16. From the article.. by Kredal · · Score: 2

    Mouse brains normally have a smooth surface. Human brains are all wrinkled and folded, because they are squashed into the skull.

    Squashed... is that a medical term? (:

    --
    Whoever stated that signature sizes should be limited to one hundred and twenty characters can just go ahead and kiss my
  17. Mice may have died, rather than have been killed by Guppy · · Score: 2

    "from MSNBC: IT IS NOT yet clear whether the mice are smarter -- they were all killed soon after birth"

    After taking a look around Sciene Magazine's Website, I found a quote on their Science Now which is worded a little bit differently:

    "The mice died soon after birth, so the researchers do not know how the bigger brains would affect their behavior"

    This seems to suggest that the mice weren't euthanized -- instead, the modification itself was lethal. However, I couldn't find any confirmation of this in the text of the paper itself (Also on Science's website, requires subscription, though). The gene studied here, B-catenin, is expressed in numerous tissues throughout the developmental process, so I'd be a little surprised if such a major change yielded a viable organism.