Slashdot Mirror


Synthetic Genome Drives Bacterial Cell

Dr. Eggman writes "Physorg.com brings us news of a synthetic genome, produced by the J. Craig Venter Institute, being used in an existing bacterial cell for the first time. Using a combination of biological hosts, the technique produces short strings of DNA by machine which are then inserted into yeast to be stitched together via DNA-repair enzymes. The medium sequences are passed into E. coli and back into yeast. After three rounds, a genome of three million base pairs was produced." (More below.) "Specifically, the genome of M. mycoides was synthesized from scratch. This synthetic genome was then inserted into the cells of a bacteria known as Mycoplasm capricolum. The result is a cell, driven by a synthetic genome, producing not the proteins of Mycoplasm capricolum, but of M. mycoides. The institute has far-reaching plans for its synthetic life program, including designing algae that can capture carbon dioxide, make new hydrocarbons for refineries, make new chemicals or food ingredients, and speed up vaccine production." The BBC has coverage of the hybrid cell as well.

5 of 174 comments (clear)

  1. Waits for... by NeutronCowboy · · Score: 4, Interesting

    ... the first fully patented life forms. I'm really curious how that would work.... let's say an egg gets a fully artificial set of chromosomes that include patented genes for fixing Thyroid diseases, preventing breast cancer, and purple hair with green skin. Let's also say that that egg develops into a regular person. Is that person property? What happens if they have kids? Do they need to pay royalties?

    I can't wait for this stuff, because it will allow for some truly awesome fixes to truly terrible diseases. But I'm also pretty sure that this will result in legal messes of epic proportions. Monsanto will be a side show compared to that.

    --
    Those who can, do. Those who can't, sue.
  2. Re:What... by bcmm · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Obvious troll, but I'll bite. How is this any different than the rampant and completely unsupervised genetic twiddling that has been happening in nature for the last few billion years?

    The genome was produced by machine (from a digital copy of a sequenced genome). Presumably, if somebody wrote a brand new genome, it could be inserted into a living organism by the same procedure.

    I guess we can now start finding out which genes are really necessary for an organism to function...

    (I am not a biologist.)

    --
    # cat /dev/mem | strings | grep -i llama
    Damn, my RAM is full of llamas.
  3. Re:Take that, IDers! by virtualXTC · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Lets not get a head of our selves here, they've only re-programmed a cell, not created artificial life. If you are looking for a fully artificial cell you should focus on what's going on in George Church's lab.

  4. Re:What... by HeckRuler · · Score: 4, Interesting

    This is funny because I just bought The Windup Girl today, which takes a future Monsanto controlled dystopian future to an extreme. A little depressing, but a good read.

    But the funny part is that Monsanto would welcome any sort of biological catastrophe, as they're the only ones that would be capable of fighting it. Kind of like how my paranoid father thinks the majority of viruses are produced by Norton and McCafee on the side just to stir up business, Monsanto could produce a better fungus to drive up business.

    Evil, malicious, and a wonton disregard for human suffering, but massively profitable.

  5. Re:Did the institute "make" it and is this "life"? by James_Duncan8181 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    "The new bacteria replicated over a billion times, producing copies that contained and were controlled by the constructed, synthetic DNA." - http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/science_and_environment/10132762.stm

    Yes, it really is life.

    --
    "To any truly impartial person, it would be obvious that I am right."