Slashdot Mirror


Genetically Engineered Silkworms Spin Spider Silk

disco_tracy writes "Silkworms have been modified to produce spider silk, creating a fabric that could be used in everything from bulletproof clothing to artificial tendons." For some reason, this is far less revolting to me than the idea of spider silk being milked out of goats.

12 of 188 comments (clear)

  1. Spider-Worm Spider-Worm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    Does whatever a spider, um...

  2. Almost there by Entropy98 · · Score: 4, Informative

    "Compared to normal spider silk, it's not as strong," said Malcolm Fraser, a scientist from the University of Notre Dame. "But we are confident that, this being our first attempt, that we will be able to tweak the system to bring the system closer to the strength of true spider silk."
    --
    windows media codec pack

    1. Re:Almost there by ultranova · · Score: 5, Funny

      Double the points if the silk worms will start catching flies instead of eating 104 kg of mulberry leaves for each kilo of silk.

      Triple the points if the worms escape, block the doors to the laboratory with unbreakable spider silk sheet, then eat the scientists.

      Quadruple them if they somehow mutate into an army of Shelobs and terrorize the general population.

      --

      Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.

  3. Spider Worms? by nofx_3 · · Score: 4, Funny

    "They're takin our jerbs!"

    -The Spider Goats

    --
    Visualize Whirled Peas
  4. Re:Cool by EdIII · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Why?

    For a lot of reasons. It's being pursued without any caution whatsoever. Look at the Nazi scientists at Monsanto. Nearly killed the Monarch butterflies and have actively researched and implemented "death codes" into their projects to protect intellectual property that should have never been granted. Technology aside, they are far more damaging than the entertainment Mafiaa to the world with their lawsuits, strong arm tactics, reduced seed diversity, and just plain extortion of farmers the world over.

    Cool technology to be sure, but the people that are involved in it certainly don't seem to have humanity's interests at heart.

    Not to mention I feel that not enough research is really conducted to determine if the GMO food they are producing is really healthy in the first place. What are the real affects to humans eating it? Animals eating it? Affect on the environment in which it is grown (Monarch Butterflies again)?

    BTW, the poster said critical of the technology, and did not indicate any level of disinterest. I am greatly interested in GMO technology, but pursued correctly and safely and absolutely without any ridiculous BS of the deathcodes being inside it..

    You don't have to be crazy or disinterested in GMO to be highly critical of companies like Monsanto. I am sure someone will claim that I am trolling, ignorant, and misinformed of GMO. Perhaps that is true. My statements regarding Monsanto though, stand on well-known facts. Just maybe, maybe, GMO might be more accepted if Monsanto had never been formed as a company.

  5. Re:Cool by PinkyGigglebrain · · Score: 4, Informative

    FYI, the Monarch butterfly report showing harm was discredited due to the concentrations of pollen placed on the milkweed. It was way more than would normally by found in the wild.

    And thank your for for the support.

    That said, here are some links you might find informative;

    Monsanto
    more Monsanto
    Yet more Monsanto (busy aren't they)
    intersting site
    Canola
    GM canola in the wild
    Possible wipe out of terrestrial plant life
    another one

    Have fun reading.

    _

  6. Opening cocoons by LongearedBat · · Score: 4, Interesting

    So, when silk worms finally do make silk as strong as spiders' silk, then will those silk moths be able to open their own cocoons?

  7. Re:Cool by amorsen · · Score: 4, Informative

    Danish studies have shown clear correlation between how well informed people are about GMO and how positive their attitude is towards it. The correlation is negative.

    --
    Finally! A year of moderation! Ready for 2019?
  8. FEH by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I am tired of the ridiculous "ten times stronger than Kevlar" or "ten times stronger than steel" and such garbage.

    For the record: Kevlar is not particularly strong, compared to other high-end materials. What it is though, is ductile - that is, absorbs a nice amount of energy while being plastically deformed. Spider silk does this even better.

    Steel can be had in strengths that vary between as low as 200 MPa (bad cast iron) to 3000 MPa (piano wire).
    Kevlar is somewhere at 800 MPa or so - stronger than regular construction steel (235-420 MPa) but weaker than hardened sheet steel (900-1300 MPa).
    The strongest material you may encounter outside of a laboratory is glass fiber, which can reach strengths of up to 5000 MPa.
    Carbon fiber is weaker (~2000 MPa) than glass fiber, but it is more rigid - which is the sought after property most of the time.
    Titanium, while having some nice properties, isn't incredibly strong either - around 1000 MPa at best.

    Even when considering density, steel usually holds its own quite well - especially when designing things that are supposed to have a certain rigidity, where steel really shines - and while exotic materials may have advantages they are never along the line of "ten times", more like "two times" at best.

    I'm a mechanical design engineer and I am really not amused when people show me their titanium golf clubs and claim that it is ten times stronger than steel an cost a hundred times more than gold, or other preposterous claims like that. Titanium is $100/kg, tops.

    1. Re:FEH by zippthorne · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Similar thing with compressed gas cylinders (specifically scuba tanks). The wall thickness is *much* thinner for a steel tank than an aluminum one of similar pressures, so for the same mass of air and you can get away with a smaller tank and/or lower pressure. The resulting vessels end up being very close to the same mass despite aluminum's on-paper advantage in strength-to-weight ratio, which is killed by the maximum outer diameter that people are comfortable with handling.

      I'm still trying to figure out why steel scuba tanks cost *more* than aluminum ones, though, looking at the spot prices for each of those metals.

      --
      Can you be Even More Awesome?!
    2. Re:FEH by IndustrialComplex · · Score: 4, Informative

      I'm still trying to figure out why steel scuba tanks cost *more* than aluminum ones, though, looking at the spot prices for each of those metals.

      Aluminum is easier to work with. Lower melting point, it's less demanding for machining, and a few other factors.

      --
      Out of modpoints but really liked a post? 1BDkF6TtmmeZ3yqXbz9yhdYVqRYnwFoXDj
  9. Re:Cool by mobby_6kl · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Studies have also shown a clear correlation between making wild claims and citing sources. The correlation is negative.