Slashdot Mirror
Scientists Build a Smarter Rat
destinyland writes "Scientists have engineered a more intelligent rat, with three times the memory length of today's smartest rats. Reseachers bred transgenic over-expression of the NR2B gene, which increased communication between the rat's memory synapses. Activating a crucial brain receptor for just a fraction of a second longer produces a dramatic effect on memory, as proven by the rat's longer memories of the path through a maze."
"Flowers for Algernon" was the first association that popped up from the depths of my mind...
We need this about as much as we need a much stronger more deadly flu virus.
When rats are vermin and carry disease, why make them even better a survival? or are they scientists thinking that if they get clever enough they'll start writing software for a living?
Seeing these posts is like listing to Monty Python's "I Like Traffic Lights" song.
Kind of old news; the first report that NR2B overexpression improves rodent performance in some behavioral tests of learning and memory was was published in 1999. The nice thing here is that the investigators now have it working in the rat, which is a more difficult animal for transgenic studies, and a better one for behavioral work and electrophysiology.
Nevertheless, it raises an interesting question: if intelligence can be increased by something so simple as an increase in the expression of a single NMDA receptor subunit, why hasn't it already happened? Presumably, there is a selective advantage to improved learning and memory. Presumably, there is some kind of downside that balances that selective advantage. Are there other behaviors for which the rat is impaired?
The name escapes me, but I read a SF story that speculated on that. With super intelligent mice, rats, cats and dogs, the rats and cats ate the mice, the dogs ate the cats, then the really smart ones teamed up with people against the rats and other dogs.
Fair point, they'd be smart enough to realise the value of opposable thumbs. Using can openers for one thing.
If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
After all, if more memory were that simple, surely evolution would have changed that gene by itself. If it were a tradeoff, that would be much more logical.
So what did these rats lose ? Do they have gaps in long term memory ?
I'd watch out for the "no free lunch" idea holding true here too.
Due to his enhanced memory, the rat could not push her out of his mind. The memories refused to fade with time. The slightest sight or scent would cause him not just to remember his intense passion and total devotion, but also to relive it, as if she were still there with him. Moments later, as reality returned, he inevitably re-experienced that October afternoon when she left. The despair cut to the bottom of his soul in a way far more intense than the original break-up had been, as shock had initially numbed his pain. No more. His perfect memory of perfect happiness lifted him up so high, the inevitable fall came from an unimaginable height, and terminal velocity does not apply to emotions.
After enduring this torture for what seemed an eternity, he finally gave in, and resolutely marched toward the wire-framed cheese, her angelic body still vivid in his mind...
A slashdotter who didn't build his own computer is like a Jedi who didn't build his own lightsaber.
While I know that this sort of research is ultimately aimed at improving human life, for some reason I can't shake the image of a mad scientist making super-smart dogs, the experiment going awry, and an apocalyptic future of human-pitbull wars.
On that note it won't matter even if they succeed. This country is almost certain to ban it on the basis that it gives the beneficiaries an "unethical advantage" over others. After all we already have piracetam which supposedly does something similar, and that's banned.
How do you kill that which has no life?
Could be "Day of the PagBeasts", alternate title "The Fittest". I think the author was Edgar Pagborn, but it could be J.T. McIntosh. Written in the 1940's or 50's.
I read it once from a library and could never find it again. It wasn't all *that* good, but there was something compelling me to read it again for something I missed the first time. Never did find it. My guess is it never got printed in paperback, and was originally printed in Britain. Given that it had two titles I suspect that it must have had at least two separate printings. (I suppose one could have been in some magazine, but not one that I ever encountered.)
I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
Actually, I applaud you for using your user name!
Why? What could possibly go wrong?
If my karma ever drops below Excellent I will simply post a few messages saying how great the PS3 is or maybe a few about how the iPhone is so much better than any other phone, or I could just discuss how horrible Micro$oft and the Government are.